cashflow, page-9

My take - Not going to mention names but will answer each:

Yes INT did disclose Debtors and creditors but that was not the 4C that was an explanatory note so it did not form part and you need other figures that they dont give to make a rational conclusion. what has happened to stock , What projects are due for implementation and have they a forward plan of installation.

The forward view is difficult and the change I think they refer to is that we are building a revenue base which is monthly or quarterly so if you are going to be charging end users you cannot charge them outside of the way they would be charged by other suppliers so electricity is quarterly, internet is monthly. We are changing the basis of our revenue stream as before we had a focus on equipment sales which drove the equipment turnover now I would assume we are focusing on landing long term contracts. thats what I take it to mean but they should have explained it.

I dont see this as positive but I do see it as something they should have anticipated better and I do think that personally their financial guidance looks suspect. When you embark on a company changing strategy your FD should be reworking a model to anticipate the changing future and develop a model this is 18 months into this change and IMO their financial anticipation looks to be very weak. They anticipated that they could not repay the note - hogwash this arrived as a result of not anticipating cash flows correctly. Had to let 3 people go only because IMO they did not have a good financial model to anticipate these events.

Overall I had thought that something could cause a hick-up as this is not a straight line but the guys going to the AGM will have to explore very deeply how they predict a 50% growth and at least $9m turnover. It could be logical because they have a forward plan that will deliver that the equipment will go into sales in projects you need to know when these will be delivered. This is crucial to where we are headed.