They borrowed $3m ($2m long term or non current + $1m short term...

They borrowed $3m ($2m long term or non current + $1m short term or current debt)
This may sound bad if a company had to borrow to cover mundane buisiness activities because of insuufficient working capital , but this is not the case because even with negative operating cash flow , RFT had very robust working capital with cash >$4m without borrowing & is more than able to cover "ordinary" business expenses.
In other words , RFT borrowed (mostly long term debt ) when IT DID NOT HAVE TO , which in my view indicates expected increased business activities.
Moreover , it is heartening to see RFT able to borrow....It is almost impossible for small businesses to access bank finance.
Also of note , this is the 1st time ever that RFT decided to borrow for a reason not related to property finance.
RFT has come a long way from an outfit with negative asset backing , carrying the stigma of going concern a few years ago to a robust business that the banks are happy to lend to.