So, is the bottom line of the quarterly - Hamish has thrown everything at this in terms of getting it cashflow positive, yet the cash balance would have been lower had they not done the placement!!
As Hamish says the domestic operations are not subject to the global coal prices or fx. Based on my basic read it appears the average selling price is around $150 per tonne (it is complicated by the timing of cashflow and how much "blending" coal they actually buy), the cash costs are c. $100-$105 (this includes development and production, but excludes admin, exploration and capex). Given the 10:1 strip ratio and seemingly high transport costs, this is probably sounds about right. BTW - 10:1 striping ratio for sub bituminous coal (Takitimu, Canterbury Coal) is extremely high!!
However, the all in costs including everything is c.$150. This is the number that matters. Clearly the admin costs should get spread over a larger output once/if Escarpment is ever in production, but things don't look great, particularly when Hamish says that exploration costs have been turned off.
I also note that BRL says cashflow will be negative once again next quarter!!!
I really cannot understand how Hamish and the board could have possibly bought these domestic assets, because it is pretty clear the return on investment is highly unlikely to cover the cost of capital (or even make a profit!!).
This would appear to be as good as it gets for the domestic operations and I think it is pretty clear that there will not be any cash build from these assets and more likely there will be other "one offs" which continue to use the cash. So how will they ever fund the capex and working capital for Escarpment?
BRL Price at posting:
5.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
