Fat chance, how exactly would they fund it? We had 99M in the...

Fat chance, how exactly would they fund it? We had 99M in the bank at end of last quarter. Perhaps less say 85M this quarter.
Any finance via debt will simply balloon our cashoutflow which at this point is already significantly more than the cash inflow. SYA is quite simply in a state of needing to prove it can operate NAL commercially. Which is largely driven by cash inflow and its ability to operate as a "going concern" entity. An until this is proven any other operations should be parked.

The largest part of going concern is being able to pay your debts if and when they fall due. You cant do that with negative cashflow. As you eventually arrive at needing either equity or debt assistance.

An granted a large part of our ability to meet the going concern concept is derived from our ability to generate income, which we cannot do atm because the commodity price has moved anywhere but north.

Which is why I keep harping on about the strategic review and why it was determined that NAL was to continue with ramp up. Without any substantiation or basis on a commodity price turn around in the short to medium term. They listed 3 reasons: staff, capital cost items reducing opex and the anticipated rise in spot price. The only one we have seen thus far is staff mouths to feed. The opex, if we are lucky this quarter and as for the last listed point but what should be the most important if SYA start thinking from a longevity perspective is the spot price. The review didnt sight/reference any data. They merely listed it as a reason. Which in any market when reporting to shareholders its utterly ridiculous.

Why are you doing what you are doing?
Lists reason a)
How have you come to reason a)s conclusion.

Shrugs shoulders......

Yes very sound, rational and professional decision making going on!