With respect, your general approach is incorrect. You're getting certain concepts confused, which is knotting things up for you.
I'll walk you through it.
Firstly, my AU$20m ($19.5m) cash sales estimate for the Sept quarter is only for the two shipments that actually occurred during the Sept quarter. Tomorrow's shipment is not included because the shipment hasn't even left port yet. The cash for that will only be received this (Dec) quarter and so it cannot and will not be reported for the Sept quarter. Remember, this is a cash flow report we are talking about, not an accrual-based P&L. Cash in a cash flow report is only reported in the quarter that it is actually received (duh). You cannot turn back the clock.
Secondly, the recent $28.2m CR included an additional amount of ~$7m that was used for working capital. The CR split was something like this: $20m debt repayment + ~$7m for working capital + ~$1.2m CR costs. You need to add that ~$7m for working capital into to cash mix. The $20m is irrelevant, as you know, because it was used for debt repayment.
This summary will hopefully help clear it up:
1
Opening Cash Balance:
$26.6m
2
plus Cash Sales Receipts:
$19.5m (my modeling. not difficult.)
3
plus Working Capital CR proceeds:
~$7m
4
Sub-total:
$58.1m
5
less Implied Quarterly Cash Expenditure:
$32.9m
6
Closing Cash Balance:
$20.2m
You can see from this table that although the cash balance showed a net change of -$6.4m for the quarter, it contained several additions and subtractions, which also were part of the equation.
By describing the cash burn as ~$13.4m (comprising $6.4m lower closing cash balance + ~$7m equity top-up from the CR) the point I was making was that the business (for the Sept quarter) spent ~$13.4m more than it earned in the course of conducting normal activities.
You have shown that you understand the $6.4m reduction in the closing balancing, which is good. Now ask yourself what the closing cash balance would have been if the additional ~$7m working capital top-up from the CR had not been available. Answer: the closing cash balance would have been $13.2m, which is a $13.4m worse cash position than at the beginning of the quarter. A self-sustaining business should not require capital top-ups. It should be able to sustain itself from the income it generates. However, we live in a complex world and if you need another $7m to keep the doors open during a difficult ramp-up period, then you raise additional capital.
The "cash burn" is the rate at which a company uses up it's cash reserves - wherever they have come from (including capital top-ups). It is not the total cash expenditure, which is estimated to have been somewhere around the $33m mark for the Sept quarter. They're two different things and mixing them up is what I think was causing you problems in understanding what is going on.
Finally, wrt to the hedging: read the announcement again. The SFA with MBL was restructured on 2 September (i.e. after the July and August shipments!). The adjustment to the hedge book could only occur after 2 September (i.e. only after the restructuring of the debt), which means that the July and August shipments would have already been bound by the existing hedging arrangements at that time. Why? Because July and August come before September (duh)!
Strictly speaking, they cannot defer the hedging "as they please", as you suggest. They have deferred their hedge book by 12 months with MBL's blessing/sanctioning pursuant to the revised loan repayment terms. This helps PAN out right now because they will be able to take advantage of higher prices for all of their sales over the next 12 months (i.e. unconstrained by hedging at lower prices). That's a good thing for a cash-starved company in ramp-up phase. Just understand that there are no free lunches and kicking the hedging can down the road defers a potential revenue millstone (around neck) until a later time. How that pans out (pun unintended) will depend on where Ni prices are when the hedge book goes live again from Sept, 2020 onwards. That's a discussion for another time.
(20min delay)