Alright just sharing some more of my spitballing / speculation.
When I'm working with dates I always like to map things out visually on planners/calendars/timelines.
Here is my rough record of events / future assumptions for our current direction. (don't quote me on exact dates)
I am running on the assumption that IF there is a deal, it will be sorted prior to the ICSID.
Doing so:
- has huge value to DRC for changing their images as a corrupt country that's bad for business (key to US invovement)
- has huge value to potential buyers as every step more that AVZ fights secures their own position and raises the buy-in required for new parties
- pre-empts any deal with with CATH
I am also running on the assumption:
- that now US interest is public and serious deals are being considered, there is some time pressure to preempt a counter proposal from the Chinese
- RIO and Kobold both have already done their due-diligence on the resource and are thoroughly aware of its potential.
- Any deal would require an EGM, and despite time pressures 4 weeks notice is still appropriate.
- There needs to be at least a week or 2 after the EGM to actually finalise and sign an agreement.
- Even if an agreement were close, the board would not agree to 'postpone' any hearings, because they know they would be roasted alive by shareholders.
View attachment 81997
So, this is what the key events over the past/future couple of months look like on a timeline.
For me, we are entering into the period where IF there were a serious offer, I would expect it to be made.
It's not direct, but it roughly lines up with the mysterious "10th of April" so I wonder if that had something to do with the BoD imposing a timeline to enter serious discussions?
The hopeful part of me would speculate that the board has already been talking numbers with these parties.
News stories about a deal between DRC and US being 'close' would also suggest this. Even if they haven't yet made an offer, I'm sure Kobold et al know what they would need to offer to get this over the line, and are proceeding based on that being viable.
Again, all just my rough workings-out because I like to see these things visually but I thought I'd share it here.
Has it been 3 decades already? It feels like a long time but not sure it's been that long yet?
The problem may be that if Felix caves to US wanting all of Manono, then the Chinese may come for him.Sure sure sure 'national security' is important. But your missing the bigger picture even from your own quote.
What's more important to Trump right now than national security?
> Sticking it to China.
Based on what AVZ Minerals stated at 14 March 2025 and parties showed interest in the resource in the recent days I think it is (for sure - as there is no proof on the table) not totally clear why focus is on how much AVZ need to be valued for a so called fair asset deal ...
AVZ stated there " ... representatives of AVZ recently travelled to the US with a view to raising funds to support its endeavours to secure and develop the Manono Lithium Project including via a long-term commitment in respect to its share of the mineral offtake ... "
I read here they are confident in receiving confirmation via ICC and ICSID but will not of course looking for parties to sell their majority percentage to a high bidder. Funding the project is different then selling your asset and raising funds is a clear message at this point I guess. (Would be interesting to know in which pos. they trying to raise funds ... AVZ, AVZI, Dathcom ... ). Anyhow I'm not that sure we'll see a buyout based on this statement.
(Fun fact - they are not mentioning it there as the former "Manono Lithium and Tin Project". This could indicate that funds are exclusively reserved for their Lithium resource - JMO).
View attachment 82028 --> 31 January 2024
Not sure I got your point correct but this sounds like apple and orange ... selling my asset and have nothing to do with its further progress or raising funds to participate with them together in developing this project is not the same, isn't it?What's wanting to develop the mine got to do with actually developing the mine?
No matter, the journalist is on point with some pertinent analysis of the situation.
=> Dodd-Frank's Section 1502 ... Tin+Tantalum from Manono would fall under this as conflict materials."3Ts" ... tungsten, tantalum, tin ..... DRC Launches Strategic Plan to Secure 3T Minerals Amid Regional Smuggling Concerns --> "Manono Lithium and Tin Project" or just "The Manono Lithium Project"
still 1How many Indo wives you got over there ?
still 1
Quality over quantity.... unless you are AVZ with the highest quantity and second highest quality.You'll be able to afford 4 soon
That sounds more like a threat than a compliment.You'll be able to afford 4 soon