the next metric that comes off of EBITDA is Finance Costs. In...

the next metric that comes off of EBITDA is Finance Costs. In first half the amount was 1.74 mill. The interest on FIIG loans started in Aug, so this 2nd half is 6 months FIIG finance costs (not the 4 1/2 months of half year 1). So I upped the finance costs for the 2nd half to 2.1 mill.

So to get EPS, you simply need EBITDA minus the depreciation&amortisation minus the finance costs minus the tax.

ZEN have published full year guidance for EBITDA of 19-21 mill. So I just use 20 mill, and the EBITDA of half one was 8.89, so we go with 11.1 mill EBITDA for 2nd half. And the numbers then are

11.1 mill less 4.4 mill less 2.1 mill = 4.6 mill (pre tax) tax of 30% is 1.4 mill so yields eps total of 3.2

and if the 'average weighted shares for the year was 100 mill (the normal 98 mill full year then from middle June 40 mil shares pro rated for a couple of weeks)... we get 3.2 cents EPS for 2nd half

I know I have said numbers like 3.7 cents 2nd half and as high as 4.1 cents 2nd half; and this 3.2 cents is using conservative numbers (mid EBITDA and highish other costs); I do the numbers from time to time and adjust here and there; if the EBITDA was at the higher end, another 1 mill, you get another 1 cent per share on EPS

I dont see how the EBITDA can be at the lower end of guidance because: first half was 8.9 with NO TANAMI; 2nd half at midpoint of yearly guidance is 11.1; it really does seem to me over 4 months of Tanami does more than bump the half yearly EBITDA by 20%; so I think the midpoint of yearly guidance is too low... so the 11.1 EBITDA for 2nd half, I used in my numbers, is too low in my opinion

The first half EBITDA was 2.6 cents; so we know we are higher than that (as nothing fell off and Tanami fell on)
Using very conservative numbers for 2nd half, we get 3.2 cents
Using mid numbers I have got 3.7 cents sometimes
Using really good numbers, I got high as 4.2 cents

So for the year we can get 2.6+3.2 = 5.8
or 2.6+3.7 = 6.3
or 2.6+4.2 = 7.0

...unless I have vastly misjudged depreciation and the finance costs

...and I do note PEA runs at, and is projected over the next couple years, to be between 6 and 7 cents EPS; a steady non-growth company; ZEN is similarly currently between 6 and 7 cents EPS but a GROWTH company (so far); personally, I think PEA sold at quite a premium and I think ZEN is currently at quite a discount; Mr Market and Infrastructure Investment Funds dont agree with me; mabye ZEN needs more track record; and ZEN, to be honest, is not as diverse as PEA, so perhaps Mr Market has a high risk weighting

sadly, this current year (ending 30 June 2020) ZEN cannot grow EPS - they will grow EBITDA about 30% ($20 mill to $27 mill); but the shares grew from 98 mill to 138 mill; I 'guess' 6.5 cents EPS (using simply methods I described here); and to get 2021 numbers you just assume the 39 MW to complete in this year will apply next year; so you can grow all by 20%; in general one can project 20% revenue growth and 30% EBITDA growth over the next couple of years

...I look forward to the 5 Aug REAL numbers (not just my guesses) AND to some new PPAs with the cap raise money AND some divvies to begin releasing the frankings that are being accumulated; from now for the next 12 months will be the real storey for ZEN