AVZ Discussion 2022

[Carlos Danger]

One question that keeps me thinking is why we have a never ending series of two week extensions as opposed to one month or more? The BOD would realise the constant disappointment of extensions is confidence sapping to shareholders. They must truly believe that the decision is imminent or they wouldn't put shareholders through this rollercoaster ride. It must be painfully disappointing for them having to announce these extensions every two weeks,surely we are imminently poised this week!

This is something that I can't work out either. Especially because the extensions varied in the beginning. These are the different periods that have been given.

May 11th - May 20th (9 days)
May 20th - June 1st (11 days)
June 1st - July 1st (30 days)
July 1st - July 15th (14 days)
July 15th - July 29th (14 days)
July 29th - August 15th (16 days)
August 15th - September 1st (17 days)
September 1st - September 15th (14 days)

The two periods in August with 16 and 17 days had an extra weekend so it's essentially been a 10 working day period since the start of July. The rules say it is up to the company to outline how long it expects the suspension to last.

Also says that a suspension will generally only be granted for however long the ASX considers reasonably necessary.

Requires the company to inform the market if an extension is required and to inform the market why with a new expected end date. The ASX can decide to end the suspension at anytime not just at the end of the current period.

Either management genuinely feel they are close each time like Fox has been saying or the ASX has made them move to this 10 working day extension schedule based off what they are hearing from the company.

 

[Tursty]

The above is kind of why I asked the previous question. Its pretty obvious the ownerhsip issuse are going to take a lot longer then 2 weeks to close out and if the company needs to specifiy a timeframe that they genually believe the issue behind the trading halt can be resolved, 2 week extentions lead me to believe it has nothing to do with ownership of Dathcom. It would not surprise me if its a mixture of pure uselessness from the CAMI office taking forever, or some internal political issues causing the hold up.

 

[CeckRaiseFold]

The above is kind of why I asked the previous question. Its pretty obvious the ownerhsip issuse are going to take a lot longer then 2 weeks to close out and if the company needs to specifiy a timeframe that they genually believe the issue behind the trading halt can be resolved, 2 week extentions lead me to believe it has nothing to do with ownership of Dathcom. It would not surprise me if its a mixture of pure uselessness from the CAMI office taking forever, or some internal political issues causing the hold up.

Agree, IMO it's not the much discussed ownership, definitely not the extra 15% from Cominiere, maybe the Dathomir tussle. But IMO it's funny business going on with CAMI over the extend of the ML and surface rights and carve up of Northern CDL exploration permit.
Hard to tell if company genuinely thinks it only takes a few weeks or if they piece meal this so they do not fall foul off ASX rules and get forced back to trading without any news whatsoever. Being devil's advocate for a second, the latest announcement might have been to set the current scene for an ASX forced resumption of Trade without the issue around ML or mining rights being resolved. I hate to see that happen. I just need to find some extra funds to buy more if that is the case

 

[Frank]

Installation of management bodies for the 0.3% endowment, a mission for mining companies!

The Minister of Mines of the DRC has just launched the process of setting up specialized organizations to manage the 0.3% endowment.

This is a fund levied on the gross revenue from the sale of minerals. This for the duration of one year.

This endowment must finance community development projects in the area of intervention of the mining company.

Thus, Antoinette N'Samba signed a collective mission order last week.

This concerns the members of the committee for the supervision, orientation, monitoring and control of the management of this endowment.

Indeed, this committee is composed of the Ministers of Mines and Social Affairs and their competent technical services. The delegation includes 11 people.

Among them, there is among others the Secretary General for Mines, Jacques Ramazani, the Director General of the National Promotion and Social Service Fund (FNPSS), Mrs. Alice Mirimo, is also in the game.

This delegation must go to 5 provinces for the installation of organizations managing the endowment of 0.3% of the turnover of mining companies.

These are the provinces of Kasaï-Oriental, Nord-Kivu, Haut-Uele, Haut-Katanga and Lualaba.

Mission in charge of mining companies!

However, some civil society actors in Haut-Katanga and Lualaba disapprove of the approach of the Ministry of Mines, “putting the Kinshasa delegation in charge of the mining companies”.

According to the last paragraph of the mission order, the charge for this mission is the responsibility of the companies. And the document specifies that it is COMIKA, MMG Kinsevere, Ruashi Mining, Shituru Mining, COMMUS, Kamoa, KCC, MUMI, SICOMINES and TFM for the south of the country.

Then, for the East, there is SACIM, Alphamin, Bisie Mining, Kibali Gold mining.

Gauthier Kavwamba, spokesperson for civil society in Fungurume in the province of Lualaba declares “the Congolese State pretends to be poor when it has all the means”.

Another civil society actor was more direct. “It is abnormal that a service mission for public officials is taken on by mining companies. Do the Ministries of Mines and Social Affairs have no operating costs?'' he wonders.

For this activist committed to good governance in the mining sector, the process got off to a bad start. He fears that the 0.3% endowment will further enrich individuals rather than promote local development.

Prioritize decentralization

In the meantime, the interministerial decree provides for operating costs for the supervision and orientation committee composed of the ministries of mines and that of social affairs. This is a maximum of 4% of the funds from the endowment.

And to prevent all the money from being consumed in the functioning of the supervisory committee, civil society proposes the decentralization of the process of installing specialized bodies. For example, the specifications whose processes are managed by the provincial and local authorities.

”We must put an end to the untimely missions of the national administration services on local issues.

The DRC is a highly decentralized country, “says a member of civil society in Haut-Katanga.

Allocation of the 0.3% endowment

As for the use of this fund, the mining code determines its distribution. 90% is earmarked for the exclusive financing of community development projects.

While only 10% is intended for the functioning of the organs, including 4% for that of the management committee led by the ministries of mines and that of social affairs.

As a reminder, the 0.3% endowment is one of three levers established by the revised mining code of 2018.

All aim at the contribution of mining companies to the sustainable development of local communities.

The other two levers being the mining royalty and the specifications of social responsibility.

www.mediacongo


The United States wants to strengthen its presence in the production of lithium in the DRC

An American delegation led by the senior adviser in charge of energy security of the White House, Amos Hochstein, met this Monday, September 12, the representatives of the American company based in the DRC, Peidmont Lithium, to conclude mining agreements.

The objective of this meeting, as the American embassy points out, is among other things to promote American investments for this strategic raw material that is lithium.

Moreover, underlines the head of the American delegation, these investments are the result of the improvement of the business climate in the DRC.

Which is the key to attracting more American investments that lead to beneficial, sustainable and inclusive economic development.

Note that the DRC is today one of the best destinations for lithium investments in the world because of its strategic reserves estimated at more than 440 million tons.

Located in the town of Manono, Tanganyika, the lithium mining reserves found there make this site the largest hard rock lithium deposit in the world.

Being one of the essential raw materials in the manufacture of batteries for electric vehicles, the world price of lithium has experienced exponential growth in recent years. Currently, it is trading at nearly $2400 per ton.

 

[TDITD]

Great to see another day passes. I reckon the DRC views us as living in dog years, 1 year in the DRC is 7 years in the real world.

 

[Bonsoir]

FFS I don’t mind the Yanks getting involved but when you read these snippets it’s as if Manono is up for grabs, China & USA going to have a Barney over it BUT fuck off it is taken by 6 years of hard work and investment.

I feel the rug moving under my feet, AVZ needs to be mentioned in these articles as the ones in charge.

 

[jsbuser]

That's my concern with the fluffing around on CDL. It needs to be in the exploitation permit with Roche Dure or we leave ourselves open to a snatch n'grab due to "lack of progress". Nigel need to get the CDL resource firmed up more quickly than we have been doing.

 

[CeckRaiseFold]

That's my concern with the fluffing around on CDL. It needs to be in the exploitation permit with Roche Dure or we leave ourselves open to a snatch n'grab due to "lack of progress". Nigel need to get the CDL resource firmed up more quickly than we have been doing.

I guess that's one of the reasons they have multiple rigs on site now and are slipping in some nice pictures of the cores recovered. Planting the Dathcom flag onto CDL

 

[Roller62]

I guess that's one of the reasons they have multiple rigs on site now and are slipping in some nice pictures of the cores recovered. Planting the Dathcom flag onto CDL

Fine except they are drilling RD

 

[Dazmac66]

That's my concern with the fluffing around on CDL. It needs to be in the exploitation permit with Roche Dure or we leave ourselves open to a snatch n'grab due to "lack of progress". Nigel need to get the CDL resource firmed up more quickly than we have been doing.

Surely they just need to follow the guidelines in the ming code to maintain rights.

 

[jsbuser]

That's right, RD only, and that's the concern. If DRC split the concession up, exploitation and exploration, it leaves it more open for DRC reallocation to their newest "friend" of the week, whomever that may be. Much harder to do if you have mining machinery etc going in on a business case grounded off the two deposits operating simultaneously, not just the one.

The issue will be if the concession runs under two different permits, exploitation for RD and exploration for CDL. The DRC government will have a lot of people in their ear stating that the DRC would benefit sooner if they let someone else develop CDL simultaneously with RD. AVZ are not working like they are intending to do that with minimal assessment to date.

Its not the 400mt at RD people will eye, its the equally big lump at the other end in CDL that is most vulnerable and easiest to pick off.

 

[Bonsoir]

That's right, RD only, and that's the concern. If DRC split the concession up, exploitation and exploration, it leaves it more open for DRC reallocation to their newest "friend" of the week, whomever that may be. Much harder to do if you have mining machinery etc going in on a business case grounded off the two deposits operating simultaneously, not just the one.

The issue will be if the concession runs under two different permits, exploitation for RD and exploration for CDL. The DRC government will have a lot of people in their ear stating that the DRC would benefit sooner if they let someone else develop CDL simultaneously with RD. AVZ are not working like they are intending to do that with minimal assessment to date.

Its not the 400mt at RD people will eye, its the equally big lump at the other end in CDL that is most vulnerable and easiest to pick off.

Yes and CATL have a deal for 24% of the original area for $240 mil, not half it

 

[Roller62]

That's right, RD only, and that's the concern. If DRC split the concession up, exploitation and exploration, it leaves it more open for DRC reallocation to their newest "friend" of the week, whomever that may be. Much harder to do if you have mining machinery etc going in on a business case grounded off the two deposits operating simultaneously, not just the one.

The issue will be if the concession runs under two different permits, exploitation for RD and exploration for CDL. The DRC government will have a lot of people in their ear stating that the DRC would benefit sooner if they let someone else develop CDL simultaneously with RD. AVZ are not working like they are intending to do that with minimal assessment to date.

Its not the 400mt at RD people will eye, its the equally big lump at the other end in CDL that is most vulnerable and easiest to pick off.

CAMI split 13359 up illegally.

AVZ followed the mining code but that didn't stop the tenement being split into two.

 

[CeckRaiseFold]

That's right, RD only, and that's the concern. If DRC split the concession up, exploitation and exploration, it leaves it more open for DRC reallocation to their newest "friend" of the week, whomever that may be. Much harder to do if you have mining machinery etc going in on a business case grounded off the two deposits operating simultaneously, not just the one.

The issue will be if the concession runs under two different permits, exploitation for RD and exploration for CDL. The DRC government will have a lot of people in their ear stating that the DRC would benefit sooner if they let someone else develop CDL simultaneously with RD. AVZ are not working like they are intending to do that with minimal assessment to date.

Its not the 400mt at RD people will eye, its the equally big lump at the other end in CDL that is most vulnerable and easiest to pick off.

Spot on, IMO this goes to the core of the suspension which is clarity around mining rights

 

[Xerof]

CAMI split 13359 up illegally.

AVZ followed the mining code but that didn't stop the tenement being split into two.

Has anyone ever seen a published copy of the decree from her majesty Antoinette. It would be instructive to see if the split came via MofM or CAMI, just for assurance.

 

[Xerof]

Answered my question myself

"The signing of the Ministerial Decree to award the Mining Licence to Dathcom Mining SA, in which AVZ holds a 75% interest via its wholly owned subsidiary AVZ International Pty Ltd (AVZI), is now with the Cadastre Minier (CAMI), which operate under the supervision of the Minister of Mines, to officially award the Mining Licence.

In accordance with DRC Mining Code, CAMI are required to calculate the surface rights fees payable by Dathcom and provide the Mining Licence following receipt of this payment. The Mining Licence to be issued, will cover the entirety of the Roche Dure JORC Mineral Resource (401 million tonnes at Li20 1.65%) and the Carriere de l’Este exploration target.

The Ministerial Decree excludes a portion of the land holding to the north, which will be required to be renewed under a five-year Permit de Research (PR or Exploration Licence) to Dathcom, with discussions regarding the terms of the ongoing joint venture agreement on the PR to be finalised with the DRC Government in the near future, in addition to finalising discussions for the Collaboration Development Agreement with DRC Council of Ministers to provide wide ranging support for the Manono Project."

So, M of Mines did the cutting, imo

 

[mouseflying]

Answered my question myself

"The signing of the Ministerial Decree to award the Mining Licence to Dathcom Mining SA, in which AVZ holds a 75% interest via its wholly owned subsidiary AVZ International Pty Ltd (AVZI), is now with the Cadastre Minier (CAMI), which operate under the supervision of the Minister of Mines, to officially award the Mining Licence.

In accordance with DRC Mining Code, CAMI are required to calculate the surface rights fees payable by Dathcom and provide the Mining Licence following receipt of this payment. The Mining Licence to be issued, will cover the entirety of the Roche Dure JORC Mineral Resource (401 million tonnes at Li20 1.65%) and the Carriere de l’Este exploration target.

The Ministerial Decree excludes a portion of the land holding to the north, which will be required to be renewed under a five-year Permit de Research (PR or Exploration Licence) to Dathcom, with discussions regarding the terms of the ongoing joint venture agreement on the PR to be finalised with the DRC Government in the near future, in addition to finalising discussions for the Collaboration Development Agreement with DRC Council of Ministers to provide wide ranging support for the Manono Project."

So, M of Mines did the cutting, imo

According to new mining code, this is legit or not？hope some expert here can explain.

from my understanding for this:

• For RD part - we have dilled and has DFS compeleted and satisfied all the reqirements - so they must award the ML to us.
• For CDL - we have not done anything in detail yet (detailed DFS) , so no ML.

and in order to give us the right to mining, government divided the land into 2 parts, so we can run RD part first and once we done the detailed DFS for CDL, then we can get the ML for CDL?

of course, AIMO

 

[cruiser51]

Answered my question myself

"The signing of the Ministerial Decree to award the Mining Licence to Dathcom Mining SA, in which AVZ holds a 75% interest via its wholly owned subsidiary AVZ International Pty Ltd (AVZI), is now with the Cadastre Minier (CAMI), which operate under the supervision of the Minister of Mines, to officially award the Mining Licence.

In accordance with DRC Mining Code, CAMI are required to calculate the surface rights fees payable by Dathcom and provide the Mining Licence following receipt of this payment. The Mining Licence to be issued, will cover the entirety of the Roche Dure JORC Mineral Resource (401 million tonnes at Li20 1.65%) and the Carriere de l’Este exploration target.

The Ministerial Decree excludes a portion of the land holding to the north, which will be required to be renewed under a five-year Permit de Research (PR or Exploration Licence) to Dathcom, with discussions regarding the terms of the ongoing joint venture agreement on the PR to be finalised with the DRC Government in the near future, in addition to finalising discussions for the Collaboration Development Agreement with DRC Council of Ministers to provide wide ranging support for the Manono Project."

So, M of Mines did the cutting, imo

If she did the cutting, I would be surprised she did it without being advised. If she did the cutting was it against the mining act, or was the mining act changed.
If the mining act was changed, who would want to explore in the DRC, if an exploration permit can be carved up Willy nilly, when applying for a mining license after ticking all boxes as per rules?

 

[TDITD]

Answered my question myself

"The signing of the Ministerial Decree to award the Mining Licence to Dathcom Mining SA, in which AVZ holds a 75% interest via its wholly owned subsidiary AVZ International Pty Ltd (AVZI), is now with the Cadastre Minier (CAMI), which operate under the supervision of the Minister of Mines, to officially award the Mining Licence.

In accordance with DRC Mining Code, CAMI are required to calculate the surface rights fees payable by Dathcom and provide the Mining Licence following receipt of this payment. The Mining Licence to be issued, will cover the entirety of the Roche Dure JORC Mineral Resource (401 million tonnes at Li20 1.65%) and the Carriere de l’Este exploration target.

The Ministerial Decree excludes a portion of the land holding to the north, which will be required to be renewed under a five-year Permit de Research (PR or Exploration Licence) to Dathcom, with discussions regarding the terms of the ongoing joint venture agreement on the PR to be finalised with the DRC Government in the near future, in addition to finalising discussions for the Collaboration Development Agreement with DRC Council of Ministers to provide wide ranging support for the Manono Project."

So, M of Mines did the cutting, imo

Could be MoM, she was naive/silly/corrupt enough to cut a deal with Klaus's AJN under the guise of increasing the benefit for the DRC.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ajn-...l866tHcXes87dPEAxgMyO3zSH3RQdtavPtvOwHcDgHiqz
Problem very well could be she cut to give to AJN till we said, whoa that's not how shit gets done anymore. She may have well cut it as we asked for it to be cut, she may have cut it because she wanted to feel important, it may have been an error, she may have cut it because she got pissed off about the amount of diabetes flying around an here she is sitting with a healthy BMI so she said fuck that I wanna die morbidly obese in a slum of snacks surrounded by zijin rats.

At the end of the day only thing I want cut is the line of cocaine I'll be smashing off a strippers tits in celebration that we are finally going mining.
(the likelyhood of this happening is........ah fuck it lets just say its imminent)

 

[TDITD]

According to new mining code, this is legit or not？hope some expert here can explain.

from my understanding for this:

• For RD part - we have dilled and has DFS compeleted and satisfied all the reqirements - so they must award the ML to us.
• For CDL - we have not done anything in detail yet (detailed DFS) , so no ML.

and in order to give us the right to mining, government divided the land into 2 parts, so we can run RD part first and once we done the detailed DFS for CDL, then we can get the ML for CDL?

of course, AIMO

How I'm seeing it too. So much smoke an mirrors though.
I've already looked into it and forgotten I've gone through so much dam shit, Id have another look but I just checked my pockets and it seems im fresh out of fucks to give