Ann: Asset Impairment Flagged , page-16

The impairment charge is not relevant to cashflow, so should not be having any effect on the SP unless:

1. the value of the company's assets are relevant to its debt arrangements and may trigger a higher interest rate or (in the worst case) bring forward repayment obligations (which would guarantee a capital raising);

2. as has been noted, it highlights the company's inability to bring the mine online and get production up to nameplate capacity in a reasonable time (not directly related to POS and the resultant impairment, but I suspect that if the mine had been in PRODUCTION Phase instead of COMMISSIONING Phase, and had been producing at nameplate capacity for 12 months, then the write-down would not have been so severe).

It also has the effect of delaying the company being able to pay franked dividends.

As for the SP, POS and value of AUD has certainly helped, but in the harsh light of day, we're still confronted with the company needing to produce at over 200koz per month for 5 months in a row in order to *maybe* build a case for a short further deferral of its December debt payment and avoid a capex. And this is against the background of the mine never having produced even 140koz in any month since it started operating.