Not sure if you have your wires crossed on this one sushi, which...

Not sure if you have your wires crossed on this one sushi, which as a results would justify your negative view.

Read below ELK contribution (which Den will provide funding for) is 6m, lets say 10m to account for contingencies.

you may need to re-cut your numbers based on this crucial assumption which you have mis-interpreted.

Happy to be corrected.

"It is important to highlight that ELK is fully funded to first oil mainly due to DNR funding the first
US$28.5m and providing funding for the second phase Capex of $US34.3m which ELK may elect to
utilise by paying back DNR through a cost recovery arrangement. In addition, DNR will sole own the
CO2 processing plant and CO2 supply pipeline (total gross Capex of $US53m) and charge the Grieve
project a tariff for utilising these facilities over the life of the project which significantly reduces the
gross Capex ELK is required to contribute to from US$100m to $US47m.
By excluding the DNR owned CO2 processing plant and CO2 supply pipeline (total gross Capex of
$US53m) from the upfront Capex, our estimates indicate ELK would only need to utilise US$6.5m of
the second phase Capex which would be provided by DNR and repaid by cost recovery. Our
modelling estimates these costs would be recovered within one year of production.