Hi Rupert - how's that wet sponge from last year? Still no stock...

Hi Rupert - how's that wet sponge from last year? Still no stock held, huh?

Thanks for disagreeing with my Point 6, where you suggest the Dutchess facility is not a magic pudding. You provided some numbers:

17,898 - 28 February 2011
19,666 - 31 October 2011
19,736 - 31 December 2011.

It is important that we ALL get some clarity on this, so I have invested some time (again) to review the story myself. Your quoted numbers were not explained well, but after a while I eventually decoded your confusing 'riddle'. You have taken these numbers as $ amounts from some of the regular monthly Appendix 4C announcements. To explain with the latest Dec 2011 one just released. Section 3 of the Appendix covers 'Financing facilities available', and 3.1 shows 'Loan facilities' as your 19,736. But if you check the column headings, on the left this is the amount available x $A'000 - so your 19,736 is actually $19.736M. But there is two columns, the right one is Amount used x $A'000 - which is also $19.736M. Hmmm. So Amt available and Amt used are both the same $19.736M. Nobody actually spent $19.736M in December, and your numbers have been increasing steadily i.e. cumulative over the 10 month period you illustrated. My understanding is this figure is actually referring to a category of loan 'facilities' (like the form says) including convertible notes and stuff, which do accumulate and are simply reported to the ASX in this particular double slot of Appendix 4C documents.

On the other hand, Dutchess is an equity line of credit, which is a different animal to the aforesaid 'loan facilities' slot. As previously noted elsewhere, Dutchess has some $19M or $20M of funds still available. Further, I understand that the Dutchess funds are not listed in these Appendix 4C documents, nor are they required to be, as they are not 'entities admitted on the basis of commitments'. Note this is nothing special with MST at all - it is normal procedures for any listed Company with access to a similar equity line of credit, that it would not appear in an Appendix 4C.

OK - BOTTOM LINE is that your interesting numbers are IRRELEVANT in that they have nothing /zero/zilch to do with Dutchess. Therefore Point 6 in my previous post remains valid. i.e.

6. Meanwhile, I believe the Company can calmly use the Dutchess facility (albeit then creating new dilution) as backup to stay alive until contracts are achieved. I believe the Company has another $19M or so available as required with this facility. If someone has more informed (not pub talk) advice on this, then please comment.

An accountant may shed more light on the way I have described this, but it remains my understanding. Meanwhile, Dutchess may not be a magic pudding, but they will certainly be a continuing factor in keeping us afloat.

At this time, I can only echo the occasional sentiments of meetooaswell - "what a ride" - it ain't over yet!