Ann: Appendix 4E and Financial Statements, page-24

Bear in mind my comments are coming from someone NOT familiar with this section of the market (net commerce). Just my opinion based on general business sense.

But all I have heard above and in other comments is revenue, revenue, gross profit, revenue. Comparing revenue to MC is a pointless exercise if costs are not under control.

The financial statements are a basket case. This is why the SP fell. Cash burn is low because they have not been paying suppliers hence the blowout of current payables to $31million. Companies can decide to pay or not pay suppliers as it suits them and make their cashflow statement change accordingly so I would take that figure with a grain of salt.

How can you say "Funding is now irrelevant, and cash burn is extremely low ($1.1m last qtr?)". Funding is a massive deal. Having the auditors insist on putting in the comment about working capital is a BIG deal that would not be done lightly and is a sign that things are not all that rosy and to still call the company a going concern is done on the basis that further funding is available.

Revenue is up and they are trying to turn costs around, and I reckon this could all still work out very nicely especially with VIP shop on board so I'm looking for a re-entry point. But right now on the face of it it looks bad. Revenue and gross profit mean nothing if you are hemorrhaging cash on admin. As I said the only reason cash burn didn't look bad is that they haven't paid suppliers (payables up $5m from June 2014).

SP has fallen from a basic look at the financials. I am shocked people bought at 19c today. But long term they could still be on a winner. The issue is how long will it take them to turn the cash around enough to be able to survive without needing ongoing funding?