AVZ Discussion 2022

[Carlos Danger]

I wanted to address your recent criticism towards the board and express my disagreement. In my opinion, the board has performed admirably, especially considering the challenges we are currently facing. It's often easy to criticize from the sidelines without fully understanding the intricacies of their responsibilities and the effort they put in.

I would like to point out that if you truly believe there are better individuals suited for the board, you could have potentially pursued a board position yourself. However, I understand that board memberships come with their own set of difficulties and pressures, which might not be apparent to everyone.

Considering the significant amount of stress and uncertainty the board has undoubtedly endured, I firmly stand by my support for their efforts. I believe they have consistently strived to represent the best interests of all our shareholders.

Ultimately, if you find fault with the current board members, I wonder if you would prefer an alternative, such as MMGA, representing the shareholders instead?

Its easier to throw stones.

SilentOne

It's not a game of be happy with management or you're on MMGA's side. I will vote yes for remuneration to stop criticism of the board by our enemies post AGM but management specifically talked about 3 month reviews and cost cutting if no ML soon at last years AGM.

The auditor of the financial reports has brought attention to the material uncertainty of our ability to continue as an entity. Criticism of spending by management especially giving themselves personal cash bonuses without tangible outcomes is part of being a responsible shareholder.

 

[Hodlandwin69]

Everyone keeps saying we should vote XYZ to block the 3 cunts, and some are saying the board secretly want us to vote people in to block the 3 cunts. But if the board really wanted, they could have just filled the board to 9 so there wouldn't be any spots to fill, just re-elections.
People are crazy conspiracy theorists. (Unless I'm wrong and they can only add 3 people a year without shareholders approval, then I retract my statement)

Vote as the board are saying. No need to waste more money on more board members than required, and no need to add more opinions in the board. We need unification.

 

[GD4]

Everyone keeps saying we should vote XYZ to block the 3 cunts, and some are saying the board secretly want us to vote people in to block the 3 cunts. But if the board really wanted, they could have just filled the board to 9 so there wouldn't be any spots to fill, just re-elections.
People are crazy conspiracy theorists. (Unless I'm wrong and they can only add 3 people a year without shareholders approval, then I retract my statement)

Vote as the board are saying. No need to waste more money on more board members than required, and no need to add more opinions in the board. We need unification.

Everyone keeps saying we should vote XYZ to block the 3 cunts, and some are saying the board secretly want us to vote people in to block the 3 cunts. But if the board really wanted, they could have just filled the board to 9 so there wouldn't be any spots to fill, just re-elections.
People are crazy conspiracy theorists. (Unless I'm wrong and they can only add 3 people a year without shareholders approval, then I retract my statement)

Vote as the board are saying. No need to waste more money on more board members than required, and no need to add more opinions in the board. We need unification.

"But if the board really wanted, they could have just filled the board to 9 so there wouldn't be any spots to fill, just re-elections."

With respect I'm not sure that is right, otherwise the BOD would have done just that, and put in 9 directors instead of facing this uncertantity and actively having to tell us to vote against the Fat Tail nominees. There was obviously a legal reason as to why they couldn't put the 9 directors in.

The way Deboss says to vote makes absolute sense, if you get 2 people in, any 2 people for that matter prior to getting to the Fat Tail nomiees, then they can't get in.

And how much is that going to cost I am only guessing, but I don't think it would be much and it protects our BOD if the Fat Tail nominees don't get in.

What happens if you vote no for everyone as you have suggested and the you get down to the Fat Tail nomiees and then they are voted in. Then the Chinese/ disgruntled holders will have showed there hand and may potentially vote against the 5 BOD nominees. Then we have 2 current BOD members and 2 new Fat Tail members as our new board.

Really not thinking that's what the BOD would want. I think BOD have to be seen as impartial but I think they would be a lot happier if the shareholder nominees got in over the Fat Tail nominees. For me it doesn't make sense to vote any other way, why give the Fat Tail nominees any chance of getting in.

If the BOD decides that the 2 new shareholders are not a good fit then the BOD still has a majority vote so no harm done.

All the best

GLTAH

 

[Doc]

"But if the board really wanted, they could have just filled the board to 9 so there wouldn't be any spots to fill, just re-elections."

With respect I'm not sure that is right, otherwise the BOD would have done just that, and put in 9 directors instead of facing this uncertantity and actively having to tell us to vote against the Fat Tail nominees. There was obviously a legal reason as to why they couldn't put the 9 directors in.

The way Deboss says to vote makes absolute sense, if you get 2 people in, any 2 people for that matter prior to getting to the Fat Tail nomiees, then they can't get in.

And how much is that going to cost I am only guessing, but I don't think it would be much and it protects our BOD if the Fat Tail nominees don't get in.

What happens if you vote no for everyone as you have suggested and the you get down to the Fat Tail nomiees and then they are voted in. Then the Chinese/ disgruntled holders will have showed there hand and may potentially vote against the 5 BOD nominees. Then we have 2 current BOD members and 2 new Fat Tail members as our new board.

Really not thinking that's what the BOD would want. I think BOD have to be seen as impartial but I think they would be a lot happier if the shareholder nominees got in over the Fat Tail nominees. For me it doesn't make sense to vote any other way, why give the Fat Tail nominees any chance of getting in.

If the BOD decides that the 2 new shareholders are not a good fit then the BOD still has a majority vote so no harm done.

All the best

GLTAH

If Fat Tail and Co have enough votes to vote themselves in then dont they have enough to block anyone else from getting in?

 

[Rediah]

I thought I submitted my vote when I followed the "Click Here" link on AVZ's email.

But that was not the case,

1) AT WORK I clicked on "Click Here", (Ignore the name, they got it wrong, its backwards for some reason)

2) I entered the secret code, my postcode, and clicked on I am not Katy Perry.

3) I then filled the form for "Set Resolution" and clicked on next to "Confirm" and next to "Submit" and I thought it was done.

But that was NOT the case, as at no stage the website asked me to to enter my credential BEFORE starting the "Set Resolution".

So when I came HOME, I clicked on "Click Here" and went through the same exercise, and on the final step it said, "proxy Voting Form Submitted" could be because my home pc was already signed on for Automic, I dont know?

I then went to Automic website and logged in and verified that indeed it has gone through.

So if you guys dont mind, when you get time, log-onto your Automic account, and verify you have done your part, because I certainly didnt at my first go and in my mind I thought MMGA was done and dusted.

 

[Panther22]

View attachment 48259
After reassessing my previous votes.....I decided to change my vote for both the Hadley brothers....3 and 5 and our current board.
It makes sense to me, if we all vote the Hadley brothers in, there is not much chance that the 3 Zijin puppets will make it.....
Any thoughts welcome...

I have altered my votes to include YES for Hadley brothers.

 

[Hudnut]

Just do what the BOD say for fuck sake

The BoD haven't been in control of things for 2 years. Why start now?

Or to put it less churlishly, we can make up our own minds how to vote with OUR shares.

Frankly, I've received more information and seen better decision making from this forum than I ever have from the BoD.

(Thanks to those hard workers. You know who you are.)

 

[BRICK]

I gotta say, resolution 1 to me is far less aggravating than what I’m reading on the MMGA twitter page tonight.

Gloating about scoring our contact details from the company as if it’s some big moral victory on our behalf.

It makes me really fucking angry that those rat fucks with their smug faces are trying to fuck us all over.

 

[Stockinvesting]

The BoD haven't been in control of things for 2 years. Why start now?

Or to put it less churlishly, we can make up our own minds how to vote with OUR shares.

Frankly, I've received more information and seen better decision making from this forum than I ever have from the BoD.

(Thanks to those hard workers. You know who you are.)

No, you're obviously right mate.
We should totally ignore the BOD recommendations and vote how some anonymous fucker, know it all, FUCKWIT, on a social media site tells you vote.

Way to go Einstein

Jesus help us.

Exactly what MMGA want.

Use ya fucking brain FFS.

 

[Hudnut]

No, you're obviously right mate.
We should totally ignore the BOD recommendations and vote how some anonymous fucker, know it all, FUCKWIT, on a social media site tells you vote.

Way to go Einstein

Jesus help us.

Exactly what MMGA want.

Use ya fucking brain FFS.

If people always voted the way BoDs wanted them to, they've all have remuneration packages in the Billions of dollars and they'd never be held to account.

I vote the way I want to, with MY shares.

I also acknowledged that I've receive more info from this forum than I've received from MY BoD, which is true.

I didn't vote for MMGA.
You don't know how I've voted.
I also haven't voted the way others on this site have specified.
I voted the BoD recommendations for everything except resolution 1.

Of course, you can vote at the direction of the BoD that fucked up estimating the chicanery in the DRC (which they are supposed to be experts in), and put us in suspension for over a year without telling us WTF is going on.
That's YOUR right, and good on you.

I hope the BoD pull us out of the fire, but I'm not going to reward them for the current outcome.
At the last AGM they treated us like something they scraped off their shoes, and now they want us to rubber stamp more money for them.

The saying is DYOR. Well, I've MMOD (Made my own decisions).

A little less sarcasm and personal attack, and a bit more respectful discussion and thought, please.

 

[CHB]

I thought I submitted my vote when I followed the "Click Here" link on AVZ's email.

But that was not the case,

1) AT WORK I clicked on "Click Here", (Ignore the name, they got it wrong, its backwards for some reason)

View attachment 48267

2) I entered the secret code, my postcode, and clicked on I am not Katy Perry.

View attachment 48268

3) I then filled the form for "Set Resolution" and clicked on next to "Confirm" and next to "Submit" and I thought it was done.
View attachment 48270
But that was NOT the case, as at no stage the website asked me to to enter my credential BEFORE starting the "Set Resolution".

So when I came HOME, I clicked on "Click Here" and went through the same exercise, and on the final step it said, "proxy Voting Form Submitted" could be because my home pc was already signed on for Automic, I dont know?

View attachment 48271

I then went to Automic website and logged in and verified that indeed it has gone through.

View attachment 48273

So if you guys dont mind, when you get time, log-onto your Automic account, and verify you have done your part, because I certainly didnt at my first go and in my mind I thought MMGA was done and dusted.

Interesting, I'll have to double-check mine

 

[Hudnut]

....... and vote how some anonymous fucker, know it all,......, on a social media site tells you vote.

And you are who, exactly?

 

[Dom1974]

Board has remained impartial with their recommendations and only endorsed 18-22.

As mentioned by others here, by voting the Hadley brothers in (3 and 5), they automatically kick out MMGA if they get enough votes. Hadley brothers have 33m combined, well known to Deboss and would not have a majority with any Board decisions if they’re elected anyway.

Makes perfect sense to nominate these guys to kick out the MMGA muppets. Eliminates the MMGA risk full stop. Do hope everyone considers this scenario.

 

[Stockinvesting]

And you are who, exactly?

Light bulb moment.....

Congrats.

 

[DiscoDanNZ]

I gotta say, resolution 1 to me is far less aggravating than what I’m reading on the MMGA twitter page tonight.

Gloating about scoring our contact details from the company as if it’s some big moral victory on our behalf.

It makes me really fucking angry that those rat fucks with their smug faces are trying to fuck us all over.

I wouldn't be too concerned about their social media presence, we seem to have them under control. The one retweet will be Lars who I imagine IRL is very much like Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs.

 

[Winenut]

Voting for "anyone" above the MMGA muppets potentially kicks them out

Just sayin'

Number of shares held by the nominees as noted only indicates the number held "directly in the nominees own name"........not in trusts, not in family members names, not in private companies, not in other structures or arrangements for tax purposes etc

BUT!!!!!

Bottom line vote HARD against ANY MMGA goon as the Board has indicated because they are simply Chinese backed self interested fucking crooks

 

[Samus]

I'd be absolutely dumbstruck if rat tail have enough votes to accomplish anything.
It's a stupid fucking clown show distracting shareholders from the real issues we're facing at the moment, as intended no doubt.


1/ #MinesRDC Mystery on #MANONOLITHIUM !
1. #Zijin buys 15% of #DATHCOM .
2. @IgfRdc judges the sale illegal, the case goes to court.
3. ZIJIN asks @adelekayinda01 to have the North-East part of PR13359 in exchange for the ILLEGAL 33,400,000 $US

4. The Chinese FORCE #COMINIERE the creation of a JV (Article dated 05/16/23).
5. The @CadastreMinier announces the division of PR13359 and creates A15775.
6. ZIJIN announces the creation of MANONO LITHIUM in the North-East part.

8. The #CAMI notifies on its portal the ownership of PR15775 to MANONO LUTHIUM. WHO: why are it the Chinese who seem to decide on the management of our mining sector? Why this silence of @MinMinesRDC of @minportefeuille and even the #COMINIERE on Mano Lithium ?

 

[Dazmac66]

Struth! Our Kiki Kienge has a fair set of plums. His outing of the truth about these corrupt parasites must put him in danger of retribution. I take my hat off to this man.

 

[Cumquat Cap]

I definitely voted for the Hadley brothers. Way more skin in the game then any of our Directors and Aussie blokes I’ve met at the AGM. Anyone have any idea the % of Chinese large holders in the top 20? They’re our main risk as far as mmga as well as the funds who have been illiquid for too long. Fuck me dead

 

[Winenut]

Struth! Our Kiki Kienge has a fair set of plums. His outing of the truth about these corrupt parasites must put him in danger of retribution. I take my hat off to this man.

Kiki and Jonnno are both legends...IMO