Originally posted by Silent-Bubbles
You mean all this :- All in the matter of course I'm afraid . And you will find that most of the wordings are stock standard and a requirement by both ASIC and Corporations law as well as being compliant with Australian Accounting Standards. It would not be unusual to find these sorts of statements across the board in many Audit Reports of most ' Specie ' or in fact what used to be ' no liability ' traded companies.
For VIC shareholders , I would at least take comfort in the fact that these ' material ' maters have been looked at from this perspective. Furthermore, I do not see why this should in anyway effect VIC's ability to raise additional funds to pursue the end objectives in exploring it's tenement prospects into the future. Unless of course the ASX does not want it to , and continues with the structural damage it is causing in VIC's future abilities to do what in fact ' specie ' exploration companies actually do - and that is raise equity from shareholders to explore their land holdings.
Material Uncertainty Related to Going Concern
' We draw attention to Note 1b in the financial report which indicates that the Consolidated Entity incurred a net loss of $3,002,429 during the year ended 30 June 2018. As stated in Note 1b, these events or conditions, along with other matters as set forth in Note 1b, indicate that a
material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Consolidated Entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. Our opinion is not modified in this respect of this matter '
Acquisition of Cobalt Prospecting Pty Ltd
During the year, the Consolidated Entity completed its acquisition of Cobalt Prospecting Pty Ltd via cash consideration and the issue of shares. As disclosed in note 10, the transaction was accounted for as an asset acquisition with a deemed consideration of $10,957,142, respectively. This was a key audit matter due to:
- The size of the transaction having a pervasive impact on the financial statements; and
- The complexity in identifying the elements of consideration and the judgement applied by the Consolidated Entity in determining its fair value
Procedures performed as part of our assessment of the transaction to determine if the appropriate accounting treatment was applied, included:
- Review of signed contractual agreements relating to the acquisition and understanding the key terms and conditions of the transaction;
- Critically evaluating the accounting treatment in accordance with the relevant Australian Accounting Standards;
- Assessment of the calculation of the deemed consideration with underlying information inputs including share price at grant date with the terms of the acquisition agreement;
- Evaluating the acquisition date balance sheet of the acquiree with reference to the acquisition agreement and supporting documentation;
- Evaluating the key assumptions used to value the consideration paid, which included 142,857,143 performance shares including the probability of the performance milestones being met as disclosed in note 10 of the financial statements;
- Assessing the adequacy of the disclosures in note 10 of the financial statements.
Exploration and evaluation expenditure
As disclosed in note 10 to the financial statements, as at 30 June 2018, the Consolidated Entity’s capitalised exploration and evaluation expenditure was carried at $12,218,338. The recognition and recoverability of the exploration and evaluation expenditure was considered a key audit matter due to:
- The carrying value represents a significant asset of the Consolidated Entity, we considered it necessary to assess whether facts and circumstances existed to suggest the carrying amount of this asset may exceed the recoverable amount; and
- Determining whether impairment indicators exist involves significant judgement by management
Our audit procedures included but were not limited to:
- Assessing management’s determination of its areas of interest for consistency with the definition in AASB 6 Exploration and Evaluation of Mineral Resources (“AASB 6”clear.png;
- Assessing the Consolidated Entity’s rights to tenure for a sample of tenements;
- Testing the Consolidated Entity’s additions to capitalised exploration costs for the year by evaluating a sample of recorded expenditure for consistency to underlying records, the capitalisation requirements of the Consolidated Entity’s accounting policy and the requirements of AASB 6;
- By testing the status of the Consolidated Entity’s tenure and planned future activities, reading board minutes and enquiries with management we assessed each area of interest for one or more of the following circumstances that may indicate impairment of the capitalised exploration costs:
- The licenses for the rights to explore expiring in the near future or are not expected to be renewed;
- Substantive expenditure for further exploration in the area of interest is not budgeted or planned;
- Decision or intent by the Consolidated Entity to discontinue activities in the specific area of interest due to lack of commercially viable quantities of resources; and
- Data indicating that, although a development in the specific area is likely to proceed, the carrying amount of the exploration asset is unlikely to be recorded in full from successful development or sale.
Well thanks Silent Bubbles for your dedication to the cause. I am pleased to see that you have picked up on at least one of the main details there about the "Material Uncertainty Related to Going Concern" True the comment : -
material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Consolidated Entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. Our opinion is not modified in this respect of this matter ' is a comment that appears in a few ARs but it is not one that should either be seen as normal for a speccie nor brushed under the carpet by any self respecting company.
Much of the other material that you reproduce has its place but tends to be a bit of a smoke screen for what could , IMHO, a more significant issue.
Let us investigate the timeline of events here.
7th September announcement of a Trading Halt ... to be sorted by 11th Sept.
11th September announcement seeking a suspension from Official Quotation because of project acquisition and CR news to come
14th September announcement of Voluntary Suspension Extension request to 21st September.
21st September announcement of Voluntary Suspension Extension request to 28st September.
26th September Annual report signed off !!!!!!!!!!!
28th September announcement of Voluntary Suspension Extension request to 5th October
5th October announcement of Voluntary Suspension Extension request to 19th October
Now if the AR was signed off on the 26th September what information was given to the auditor to convince the auditor that the company was going to be able to do the necessary capital raising to keep the company running for 12 months even though the company had been in a trading halt from the 7th September and had had several extension requests lodged to supposedly sort out a project acquisition and a capital raise.
Doesn't the fact that this has continued to drag on raise questions about how viable the company really is at the very least. It could raise even more serious questions IMHO. A ticking time bomb and not so silent.
