Joshcar, I think that Kevin has said it all. All manner of...

Joshcar, I think that Kevin has said it all. All manner of things here are strange:
* placement premium price;
* companies established just 3 days prior to the placement being made (most lawyers can't even get things done that quickly!!!);
* no previous company background, history or connection, existing or historically so;
* a $5m investment which was the subject of a written agreement (details not disclosed other than about there being a board seat, upcoming - yet seemingly at the Company's direction, not at the investor's direction);
* now the largest single shareholder and nothing is known about him at all;
* as the largest single shareholder (arguably, twice the size of Hackett's commitment), yet seemingly being denied a board seat for at least 2+ months - no other cornerstone would ever do this, if this was at arm's length;
* asset backgrounds and checks don't seem to stack up as in supporting a free float commitment of $5m (which usually points to a substantially higher "real" amount);
* talked on 7/9 about investing in the JVs, yet semeingly is now privy to something that hasn't been disclosed under the continuous disclosure obligations;
* has shares as the largest, single shareholder (just under the takeover threshold limit, at the pre-issue position of 18.8%), yet as a cornerstone investor, none of the shares have been escrowed (so they are free to be sold any day, now);
* effectively creating a 15.6% (near on a 1/6) share overhang on the expanded capital base which, on current trading conditions (historically dating back through 2017) would have taken the Company back to at least in order to dispose of them all (ie: according to the orderly machinations of the market);
* amounts to a commitment which is meant to be for strategic purposes yet, quite apart from cash rushing out the door (at an accelerated rate during SepQ which, in all practical terms, ends at COB today), has not been announced in (*) almost 3 months since the strategy update /release, or (*) almost 1 month since the cornerstone investor came on board;
* which, with every passing day, looks more and more like a shoring up of cash, a catch-up on working capital, and significant payouts to TAU (accrued to the BS as at 30/6/17).

In most other companies, such a cornerstone commitment would have been ushered in with glowing commentary and a clearly laid out approach to tomorrow in order to garner support, shoulder confidence, and promote uptrending, but not here. Hence the dubious reasons as to what exactly is going on just like the ghost like past announcements of Lian He, Lencia, the absence of announcement concerning China, and the less than venerable roll out of product to WOW stores (patchy, trial based, sporadically based rather than comprehensively covered, restricted to several regional areas, and not looking all that good for the future, if indeed, it ever was). Pity then those happy, smiling cows that Peter craves for especially with that stuffed cow protest that that pizzeria in Adelaide is making. With the way in which Peter & co are doing things, there might soon be more cows off to the sale yards. After all, that might be the largest individual $ segment of the business given that CDC's production and output continues to deteriorate, quite literally wasting away.

The projected operational CF commitments for SepQ were $5.702M as against JunQ actuals of $5.599M. With JunQ collections of $5.824M, this represented operational cashflow of $225K in JunQ, largely buoyed up by the stockpiling of costs through and into the SepQ.

What is clear however is that the Company went backwards during 2H17.

Real sales (ie: not computed changes in biological value) totaled $23.6M for F17 compared to $12.86M at H17. The 2H17 real revenue contribution was therefore $10.74M. Measured in context, F17 receipts totaled $26.05M whilst the H17 customer receipts were $15.05M. The 2H17 customer receipts contribution was therefore $11M, on 2H17 operational costs of $10.918M.

Considered further, at Jun16, receivables totaled $3.607M. They reduced in H17 to $2.453M, and in 2H17, to $2.428M.

According then to the accounts (not quite balancing), receivables fell YoY by $1.179M whilst customer receipts totaled $26.05M. All being equal then, the real revenue should have been at least $24.87M yet came in at $23.6M, for an as yet unexplained variation of $1.27M.

Considered in another way, if real revenue for the year was $23.605M and if the open and closing Receivables' balances were $3.607M and $2.428M, respectively, then customer collections for the year should have been $24.784M (before allowing for any bad debts, etc). Actual customer collections for the year came in at $26.046M, so again there is this unexplained variance of $1.262M (circa, the same as above).

But for that extra collection in of $1.262M (circa) during the year, the Company would have ended up with ending cash of ~$300,000.

Yet despite all this, the Company has also continued to maintain its pretence regarding the Camperdown zoned industrial land (which settled in early March 2017 yet according to n2 of AR17 has not yet been settled or finalised):
-----
"Contractual commitments As announced to ASX on 19 December 2016, the company has conditionally contracted to purchase industrial zoned land for $260,000 (2016: $nil) through its subsidiary Camperdown Dairy Park Trust."

So, given that Mr Morrell appears to be so very good at picking things and in spotting a bargain, so therefore having an eye to a good, strategic investment, maybe, just maybe, he has the answers (so therefore can come forward and explain them) for these several discrepancies, to name but just a few. There are more.

That however is the reason why the cash injection ha snow occurred because the real drain remains on in earnest with SepQ customer receipts buoyed up by the Jun17 ending Receivables, but without there being any real, magnetic increase in generated product sales during SepQ. In other words, the Company (although this is still working its way through the Balance Sheet) has started running out of money, as the replenishment rate has fallen either to breakeven (cash wise) or below this, on a recurring basis, not however counting in investing and financial cashflows.

Morrell's dollars therefore went to working capital, shoring up the position so that TAU, Jimminy Cricket (or whatever) and Hackett could all be paid, as the accrued balances at Jun30 both confirm and reinforce. Happy, smiling cows, they may be, but as revenue /earning propositions, they need to revolt on their masters. Viva La Cow Revolution!!!!