bblof,My main point was to respond to the incorrect post that it...

bblof,

My main point was to respond to the incorrect post that it cost $7 mil, which was either a deliberate attempt to further manipulate SP trading or an incorrect and emotive posting which may have caused undue worry and panic by shareholders.

With respect we both need to be careful because there is information which we don't have in order to draw, the correct conclusion. I did acknolwedge anything is possible which also means you could be right, but so could I, or it could rest half way in between, which I suggest may even be more likely.

If you rework the figures on page 16, (page 17 clearly shows 3.7 mil in loans is included in Total net identifiable liabilities, which are the original Telemedcare borrowings of existing Telemedcare shareholders, which are to be paid from profits when profitable, not by STI), hence take 3.7 from the 3.9 mil under loans and borrowings gives 200 thou. If you then add this (instead of 3.9 mil), you get a positive 825 thou in net liabilities result, instead of the negative 2.1 mil as shown.

The published figures show it also included deferred income of 1.7 mil, if you then add that as well as removing the 3.7 mil above, back in to the calculation, you get a positive 4.2 mil figure ?

And if you take the deferred income into account with the cash and cash equivalents at the end of the year, (on page 17), you end up with a positive 1.7 mil figure.

Then we need to add the unkown value of sales since, (over the last 6 months) and/or any percentages of user charges recieved, less costs, before we could then accurately predict the likely outcome.

You can even play devils advocate with the statements on page 16 :

Stated contributed revenue of $280,965, add the estimated rvenue of 1.6 mil (if had for 6 months), you get 1.89 mil.

Stated contributed a loss of $1.196 mil, add the estimated loss 1.7 mil (if had for 6 months), you get 2.9 mil

2.9 mil take 1.89 mil, you end up with just over negative 1 mil ?

Then again we need to add the unknown revenue from sales and or percentage of user charges less costs to that.

It's not so simple and we know until they tell us and/or someone asks the right question at the shareholder's meeting, we can't do it accurately.

As to the rest of your disection of my post, your entitled to your opinions, but good to see that you and I basically agree on at least some points.

And if you are looking for any addition reaons over and above those already posted as to why they need to spin of Telemedcare, try the remaining 45% of existing Telemedcare Shareholder's carrying 3.7 mil in loans and because there's no profit, not receiving anything to help pay off their loans, would no doubt be a pressure issue.