Although Shine is only adopting AASB 15 from Jan 18 forward, I believe Shine has been using a similar standard of accounting in which you can only book WIP as revenue once a contract containing an agreement of price and scope of work has been agreed upon, among other factors.
I'll quote some relevant sections that should make it clear that a business like Shine will be carrying the cost of performing a certain amount of work that under accounting rules they are not allowed to claim as Revenue (yet).
...
As a result of the above, I believe Expenses on the Income Statement relate more directly with the WIP billed as Revenue than the yearly "actual expenses", which's purpose would more closely align with the cashflow statement. Both Income and Expenses on the Comprehensive Statement are more or less theoretical figures but this forms the basis of how they calculate their statutory profitability, very similar to how accounting "tricks" can be used to amoritise costs, when in reality we are all aware that costs affect cashflow differently.
And if you compare all of the figures particularly on the 2017 annual report you should see that Shine's Revenue is largely similar enough to Cash Receipts to be believable, where as Cash Expenses on the Cashflow Statement are higher than Expenses on the Comprehensive Statement by roughly $12-13mil. Thus, a $12-13mil expense is unaccounted for on the Comprehensive Statement and I believe that relates to generating new Revenue which cannot yet be recognized according to accounting rules as Revenue. But this work being performed will appear on the Comprehensive Statement as both Revenue and a corresponding Expense the moment it can be legally converted, and then later be recognized as a Cash Receipt.
I hope I've been able to explain without rambling too much.
(20min delay)
