Please at least get your terminology correct at least. The...

Please at least get your terminology correct at least. The financiers are happy, finance is locked in. It's the large equity portion of funding requirement SFX are struggling with .... you know about equity risk as well as I do. Never anything sensible to debate, so frustrating.

Regards the revenue-cash cost ratio, the DFS understates it significantly at today's USD FX rate. Recalculating revenue at 68c USD instead of the DFS 75c increases revenue while costs essentially stay the same in AUD. Using USD exchange rate of 67c returns a revenue-cost ratio of 2.48:1.

I am watching SFX for indications of a bottom from this failed sale shake out. Volumes have been rising and are now comfortably above 1M per day. At least one large holder wants out, using hidden liquidity and off-screen depth to unwind some/all of their position. Regardless of long term value, if a large holder wants out of an illliquid stock the only way is to push the price low enough until buyers turn up in sufficient volume. 15c was my call to friends as a bottom based solely on the market cap dipping under STA who have had similar problems getting funding in the past and face the same issue as SFX now. $35M market equity value net of cash looks cheap, but 10c looks just too cheap. 10c is an equity value of $20M which pretty uch sums up every junior with a wing and a prayer project at ground zero.

SFX needs to replace rightly stale holders with those more patient. Expectations of a deal and the value of a deal might have changed with this second disastrous effort, but the game isn't over by a long shot. Unlike many, SFX actually hold an asset of value, not a liability.