I've had similar concerns about this. The distinction between...

I've had similar concerns about this. The distinction between cash held by FDV and the consolidated cash within all the holdings is an important one, because FDV can't liberate the cash from the better-off investments to capitalise the less mature ones or fund head office expenses.

However, what is also important is the rate of cash burn in the weaker holdings. Page 13 of the half yearly presentation gives a good picture of this; if we exclude the EBITDA positive holdings, the remainder of the made negative EBITDA of $1.45m on a 100% basis. Around $0.82m of this was funded directly by external parties, and of the approximate $0.62m remainder our co-owners of the negative EBITDA businesses will be assuming a share of the pain in proportion to their shares.

So it seemed to me that FDV's $4m or so cash balance held at the start of 2019 (which doesn't include cash held by its investments themselves) ought to go a reasonably long way.