I am not sure what you mean here do you mean with the cash...

I am not sure what you mean here do you mean with the cash injection from the placement they will be cash break even , if so I would agree however if you feel the project is cash flow break even on its own I would disagree the reasons being :

I disagree as I can not calculate  that Sept quart will be "cash break even " , based on poster purplejam's post on the "what a coup' thread of 17000 oz to 3 Oct , less the 4093 oz in the previous quarter the total prodn for the Sept Quarter would be around 12k ozs.

Considering the company at nameplate expects to produce 25K oz a quarter at an operating cost of $931 an oz (Mintrex assessment  from feasibility study ) and they only produced less than half of name plate (12k oz)  that would make their  operating cost an oz North of $A1800 an oz which is higher than the current gold price or their contracted gold price (from memory ) .

Also that does not take into account the current strip ratio is over 16 to 1, so even if mining cost per tonne is priced on a scaled rate with the contractor  so only $1.50 a tonne initially  (due to an initial shallow  sub 2% average ramp pit angle /waste rock dump angle  ) that is still $25.50 a tonne  in mined ore cost against a LOM cost of $19.03 cost a tonne ($496 an oz) 

Hopefully the Dec quart is break even or better for the project on its own right , a friend with connections with a well regarded institutional investor  has told me the main issue here is the short life of mine , to me that is not an issue due to the rate the company is finding new discoveries there are about 10 targets all with economic intercepts,  just check  pages 14 and 15 of last presentation  plus there are some other old mines not even mentioned close by ie Warda Warra Mine .