Ann: Quarterly Report and Appendix 4C, page-84

Mate, I have been out of things for a while as I spent far too long on here... from memory things were changing to incorporate AASB 9... @Christos12 probably knows more, as I think APT were also being cheeky with the way they record bad debts.

But because this business barely turns its book more than twice per year, anyhow, so the variance from transaction volume to Book isn't that material... however note, that the double debt expense is still pushing $17m, which is pretty close to 1.8% of annual Transaction volume... I take the actual write off value with a grain of salt, because as @street talk alluded to  the realised bad debts from Q1 are literally pertaining to the book, as it was 200 days earlier, and because the business added nearly $150m of receivables in that period, the true bad debt percentage is far higher.

The last set of financials I paid any attention to, where as below, highlighting an F19F EBITDA that is still negative - However you are inferring the revenue may be $10m higher than that... so it maybe borderline positive based on that, but still not profitable at the bottom line.