I would like to preface this that IMO splitting hairs over how...

I would like to preface this that IMO splitting hairs over how many hundreds of millions of dollars profit is a good position to be in in any case.

Just for context, I think the comparison should be taken in terms of the current time and at equal points in time in the future. Also I think some would point out that there will indeed be some amount of the capex which is covered by production and not a debt facility or external capital injection.
Also assuming there is only carbonate equivalent lithium then discount costs for potash production in the capex entirely as this is a separate operation attached to the same plant.
Is the Mt Cat capex figure shown the current outstanding debt or the calculated total capex?
Just needs clarification because if there is less actual current debt in Mt Cat then this would need to be factored into the future projections of where the company might be. The last I've seen there was something like a US$10M debt facility and AU$40M cash on hand for Mt Cat. Basically already in front.

So really the comparison on GXY side going into the future unless there is more debt I have not accounted for is:
SDV complete with assumption around US$220M debt (about 60% of $370M) and producing say 20kT/a and ramp up from there
Mt Cat complete with no debt and assumption around 20kT/a
Ignoring James Bay for this comparison

GXY total US$220M debt to be repaid, producing 40kT/a with production costs as follows, assuming no efficiency gains in any quarter and costs remain about the same as the most recent data:
Mt Cattlin at say $9M per month
SDV at say $5.7M per month (assuming $3,400 /T and production at 20kT/a)
and James Bay on top of that.

Happy days.

GLTA