The delay puts the opening as much as six months or more behind its original timeline.

Star Group said costs could potentially increase on the $3.6 billion bill, but would not specify by how much. However, it was unlikely to be significant because 90 per cent of the project was under a fixed contract.

Star chief executive Matt Bekier said there were delays caused by Covid and weather and now the supply chain issues.

“The original expectation was that we would be starting to open up Queen’s Wharf from late this calendar year. Six months ago, we announced we were looking at an opening in the first half. Now we are saying it looks like an opening towards the end of the first half,” Bekier told In Queensland.

“The project is progressing, the fit out has commenced … but there is pressure on time that we are experiencing and the weather hasn’t been favourable and Covid hasn’t helped and now supply chain is coming in. There are a lot of factors that are heading into the picture.”

The delay was part of a “live conversation with the builder now” in terms of whether it will be a few months or a few weeks.

“There is a little bit of give and take that would allow us to open up pieces of it earlier but we have to make sure they are the right pieces,” he said.

“We are essentially operating on a fixed cost contract. Ninety per cent is on fixed costs so the regime that then covers any changes to that is quite prescribed. There are different opinions on what’s in and what’s out, but it’s not like a blank canvas. There will be discussions between us and the builders.

“At this point I’m not worried about the cost position.”

He said the company was excited about the project but would have liked it to have been done earlier and cheaper.

“The pieces that are coming together are looking very good. We are now around 16 to 18 months away from opening so there is now a lot of practical work that is going to go into how does the opening work, which restaurant goes first, how do we train the right staff.

“We have a three-month window in which we can operate both sites in parallel so how do we move equipment from one site to the next site.

“All of that requires planning and we need to bring the regulator along to make sure everything is done with the appropriate level of governance. I’m largely focused on the opening of the property itself. I continue to be very excited by the project.”

The company also announced a loss of $74 million for the December half .

About two-thirds of the gross floor area had been built and restoration of heritage buildings had started.

Its Brisbane operations generated a normalised EBITDA of $29 million for the half year and while revenue was down 11 per cent because of shutdowns and restrictions, non-gaming revenue was up 10 per cent. Operating costs also blew out 20 per cent because of higher activity levels and Covid costs.

The Gold Coast operations had an EBITDA of $26 million and showed strong growth in peak periods. Non-gaming revenue was up 35 per cent.

Group revenue was $580 million and the company described the Queensland performance as stable with strong pre-sales of its Gold Coast Tower 2.