Both were flagged in the review and deferred; fixing them properly
changes what the model says.
Labour
- The 0.23-0.40 USD/record line implied 44,000-63,000 THB per head per
month, far above northern Thai production rates.
- Rebuilt from headcount and wages: 13-19 direct production staff
(operators, galvanics, QC, maintenance) at loaded northern Thai rates
gives 3.7M-5.4M THB/yr, or 0.08-0.16 USD per record. Build-up shown.
- Mastering and cutting engineers excluded as title-services labour;
admin and sales moved to overheads where they belong.
- Stamper amortisation widened to 0.03-0.12 to match the in-house
marginal cost assumed elsewhere on the page.
- Direct cost total is now 1.30-2.58 USD (43-85 THB).
Operating roll-up
- The old EBITDA and operating-profit figures did not reconcile with
their own components and showed no loss case anywhere. Replaced with
a three-scenario table built from the components, each column
internally consistent, with cash overheads and depreciation separated.
- The adverse case is EBITDA-positive but does NOT cover depreciation:
operating profit -0.32M USD at 1.0M records on the low price and high
cost. The previous figures quoted 0.6-1.2M and hid this entirely.
Utilisation and price realisation decide solvency, not just upside.
- The favourable case is not credible and that is a finding about the
cost table rather than the business: 69% EBITDA margin against
industry norms of 15-25%, and 47% even at the centre. The direct cost
table counts only per-record consumables and direct payroll. Named
what is missing (indirect labour, scrap above the reject allowance,
water and effluent, inbound freight, inventory carrying, sales
commission) and marked the adverse column as the honest one until
those lines exist.
- Payback restated per scenario: never / 2.3-4.4 yr / 1.0-1.8 yr. The
old "5 to 8 years" came from the pre-correction margin.
- FX sensitivity and the utilisation bullet updated to match.
The table is a sensitivity, not a forecast, and now says so.
grabowski
caa38dcd0b