Star Entertainment Group's shares are taking a hit as the troubled casino company questions its ability to survive given the precarious state of its finances.
The group on Monday said it suffered a $8 million loss and its revenue fell 15 per cent to $299 million for the three months to December 31.
Star reiterated it finished the quarter with just $78 million in available cash, down from $149 million three months ago.
It was exploring options to shore up its finances, but there was no guarantee those negotiations would be successful.
"In the absence of one or more of those arrangements, there remains material uncertainty as to the group's ability to continue as a going concern," Star said in a statement.
Its directors are relying on the "safe harbour provisions" of the Corporations Act, meaning they are banking on external advice to protect them from the personal liability that would typically come from trading while insolvent.
Star said it had started a "cost-out program" - typically corporate jargon for lay-offs - targeting at least $100 million in annualised cost savings.
It said the mandatory carded play and $5000 cash limits that began at the Star Sydney on October 19 had led to a 16 per cent drop in revenue at the casino, compared to its four-week daily average.
The cash limit will drop to $1000 by August 19.
Early Monday afternoon, Star shares were the worst-performing among the ASX200, dropping 7.1 per cent to a one-week low of 13 cents.
Xingchun Wang, the mysterious Macau businessman who has spent $35 million accumulating a 6.5 per cent stake in the casino operator, has been revealed to be a coal magnate with Belgium citizenship.
The Australian Financial Review tied information Mr Wang included on ASX shareholders filings to that of a man by the same name who established Winsway Coking Coal in 2010.
Mr Wang's stake makes him the second-largest holder of SGR shares.
Billionaire publican Bruce Mathieson is the top holder, with stake of just over 10 pre cent.
Star indicated in an update last Monday Mr Wang did not have regulatory approval to buy more than 10 per cent of the company, meaning he wouldn't be able to mount a recapitalisation of it - even if he were so inclined.
