Further to my post where we are witnessing strange accounting...

Further to my post where we are witnessing strange accounting practices of including one off capital cost items in AISC operating expenses to scare the casual observer into believing we have the highest AISC cost in the region. We now have a $3m spend on exploration on Trident. Why? We are now a mining company and there is already sufficient JORC for a DFS. So why not just start using the money to shift ore to Plutonic under the Mining approval for Small Mining Operations obtained last quarter to reduce AISC and improve production?

Why would you use $14.2m ($6m+$8.2m) of raised and organic funds to pay out existing borrowings and equipment finance leases?

“Then we have multiple legal disputes of Vango Mining and Superior Gold were settled”?. I only know of one legal dispute and that was the Appeal against Zuleika. Does this imply that that the ZAG case has been settled? SGI had no legal disputes, other than VAN which went away by default on acquisition. Could it be CYL self-imposed modus operandi incurring legal costs in not paying combined creditors on time to the point of ‘winding up notices’ being issued be the cause? How much was expended?

What we do know is that A TOTAL OF $69M was spent in 3 Months to December 2023! Spending money like a drunken sailor on shore leave. Which maybe OK if we had more detail and that all expenditure had the appropriate accounting methodology applied and that next quarter would have a significant AISC reduction and production improvements but alas nothing on forward operations hence the BS barometer in me is smelling a rat.The ambiguous communication from James appears IMO to be accentuating (deliberately promoting) the bad and downplaying the good by paying off ‘good’ debt and using unusual accounting methods to blow out operating expenses. I will place a call into James and let you know if he replies. At this stage I am an unhappy 'Karen'!