Captamazing
Firstly, I wasn’t ignoring you, I just happened upon your post tonight.
You seem to be implying that I have been impolite. I thought I had been very restrained actually. Critical sure, why not when the production figure that was quoted was 2 or 3 times overstated and no attempt has been made to substantiate it, but not impolite.
You appear to do a good job of accurately recording production figures from the company announcements but with all due respect you really don’t have much a of a grasp when it comes to using same.
The simplest way to show the production level is by referring to the chart in the last announcement. It shows 147,000 crts were produced in 10 months. The first 2 months of production were very poor and there was only about 6,000 crts produced in that time (I have scaled this off the chart). If we subtract 6,000 from 147,000 to get 141,000 then divide by 8 (months) we get an average of 17,625crts/m during a period of fairly consistent production. The plant operates for 23 days a month so if we divide 17,625 by 23 we get a daily rate of 766 crts. Multiply this by 5 to get a weekly figure of 3,831crts. Since then however the plant has doubled production to approximately 3,000 crts/wk now. So we need to add approx 1,500 to that figure ie, 3,831 + 1,500 gives current production of approx 5,331 crts/wk which I am sorry to say is a long, long way from your weekly figure of 7,116 crts and even further away from high of 8,993 crts/wk.
5,331 crts/wk will give approx 266,550 crts pa (allowing 2 weeks for holidays/maintenance)
At the risk of sounding impolite it's really not important what you choose to believe because it is the facts that are important. The above paragraph sets out what those facts are.
Happy to be corrected if any errors. IMO
Expand