AVZ Discussion 2022

Doc · 2024-10-30T08:38:48+1100

Carlos Danger said:
I think AVZ want compensation for CDL and the DRC reckon we are no longer entitled to get paid for it because of the submission of the waiver

And neither side is willing to budge on this so negotiations keep falling apart

Only way out of this quagmire that will lead to joy jumping in the short term is for someone to buy out RD from us imo

No one’s buying RD in the short to medium term imo unless it’s Zijin. No one in their right mind would pay to get into the middle of this shit fight.
As for Locke I’d say they waiting on the judgment for the liquidation of the penalties to date. If AVZ get that granted then DRC must pay those accrued penalties to the ICSID. AVZ cannot use those funds till this runs the distance but there’s some form of security for Locke imo.

Dave Evans · 2024-10-30T08:48:54+1100

Carlos Danger said:
I think AVZ want compensation for CDL and the DRC reckon we are no longer entitled to get paid for it because of the submission of the waiver

And neither side is willing to budge on this so negotiations keep falling apart

Only way out of this quagmire that will lead to joy jumping in the short term is for someone to buy out RD from us imo

Dazmac66 said:
So this waiver is the document that was supposedly doctored by someone ticking the box that says AVZ relinquish CDL in exchange for the PE in Roche Dure?

So what are the possibilities in relation to the purported waiver?

If there was a waiver and it was agreed that AVZ could apply for a continuation of the exploration permit for the north and the DRC broke that agreement, then the waiver would be null and void.

And if there was an agreement, you would have to wonder what sort of skullduggery the DRC pulled on AVZ in the first place to force them to agree to it.

We have seen what lies they are capable of as recently as the Minister of Mines denying we had a meeting with their mining representatives and this latest staged arrest of Mills Tshibangu claiming he knew what happened to the money in escrow at Rawbank, so he could spread more disinformation about us and the IGF.

We should be compensated for CDL, we drilled there, got core assays, built Camp Colline to store equipment, house the assays, supply accommodation for Manono local workers etc.

One thing stopping us getting back the north is Cominiere and the DRC shitting themselves because they know Zijin would then sue them and that’s because Zijin played them and they were corrupt enough to take Zijin’s bribes.

DLA Piper know what happened and they obviously feel the DRC broke the law

wombat74 · 2024-10-30T09:08:26+1100

"From preliminary observations, it appears that the AVZ's claims, as formulated in the said project, are disadvantageous for the Republic where the defence team has recommended the continuation of the arbitration as long as AVZ does not diminish its ambitions."

Mute22 · 2024-10-30T09:11:48+1100

wombat74 said:
"From preliminary observations, it appears that the AVZ's claims, as formulated in the said project, are disadvantageous for the Republic where the defence team has recommended the continuation of the arbitration as long as AVZ does not diminish its ambitions."

Evil AVZ trying to obey the mining code and DRC laws to legally mine providing tax revenue to the government!

wombat74 · 2024-10-30T09:43:28+1100

Mute22 said:
Evil AVZ trying to obey the mining code and DRC laws to legally mine providing tax revenue to the government!

That's the game the DRC/China are playing . I'm all for continuing to apply pressure or going the distance if share holders are 100% guaranteed an appropriate compensation $$$ that ends up in their bank accounts . Or maybe that would be our kid's/grand kid's bank accounts .

Winenut · 2024-10-30T10:39:18+1100

BEISHA said:
We aint going mining Wino, you can be assured of that.

Locke funding vital to stay in the long game and force DRC govt hand as per Roon previous post.

imo

Yeah I agree we're not going mining

Was just looking "theoretically" at the options available to pay back Locke if funding is secured

wombat74 · 2024-10-30T12:04:27+1100

DOSSIER AVZ LIST OF THIEVES EXPOSED

BEISHA · 2024-10-30T12:30:48+1100

Dave Evans said:
So what are the possibilities in relation to the purported waiver?

If there was a waiver and it was agreed that AVZ could apply for a continuation of the exploration permit for the north and the DRC broke that agreement, then the waiver would be null and void.

And if there was an agreement, you would have to wonder what sort of skullduggery the DRC pulled on AVZ in the first place to force them to agree to it.

We have seen what lies they are capable of as recently as the Minister of Mines denying we had a meeting with their mining representatives and this latest staged arrest of Mills Tshibangu claiming he knew what happened to the money in escrow at Rawbank, so he could spread more disinformation about us and the IGF.

We should be compensated for CDL, we drilled there, got core assays, built Camp Colline to store equipment, house the assays, supply accommodation for Manono local workers etc.

One thing stopping us getting back the north is Cominiere and the DRC shitting themselves because they know Zijin would then sue them and that’s because Zijin played them and they were corrupt enough to take Zijin’s bribes.

DLA Piper know what happened and they obviously feel the DRC broke the law

In previous AGMs, Nigel confirmed that AVZ were tricked into signing a " waiver of the north "

He was vague on the detail if i remember.

This upcoming AGM, i would love to get clarification of that topic cause clearly its the stumbling block to ironing out a potential MOU that was purported.

Personally, as long as AVZ gets compensated for the exploration work done, i would be happy to relinquish CDL as long as there was a iron clad agreement that AVZ would receive the ML for RD then on sell / TO

Obviously the issue of water rights ( MPIANA MWANGA ) needs to be sorted out too.

One could argue and question why our BOD didnt come to some sort of agreement with the DRC govt about the north around when we received the ML decree if it allowed us to proceed with construction / production of RD with gusto.

I always thought and stated here on this forum that we were never going to be able to sit on CDL while concentrating our efforts on RD, always thought a JV arrangement at the very least would be necessary.

Markets hadnt priced in CDL with AVZ evaluation back in the day

Aagh hindsight.......

I certainly hope there is question time this year, long term holders are in desperate need of a update as to where matters stand.

Secret intel / whispers dont cut it.

Come May 2025, it will be 3 yrs that AVZ has been in the wilderness.

Xerof · 2024-10-30T12:51:12+1100

wombat74 said:
DOSSIER AVZ LIST OF THIEVES EXPOSED

Well, I attempted to translate this with google translate via my phone camera running over the transcript.

Seems that Jesus might have nicked it. He has a TV station, didn't get injured upon arrest, but still has not named anyone else.

Complete shambles and utter garbage

Mr_Tones83 · 2024-10-30T13:28:24+1100

Xerof said:
Well, I attempted to translate this with google translate via my phone camera running over the transcript.

Seems that Jesus might have nicked it. He has a TV station, didn't get injured upon arrest, but still has not named anyone else.

Complete shambles and utter garbage

I ran an AI transcription that was limited to first 30mins (obviously transcript isn't perfect) but once again it's literally just rambling nonsense.

Doc · 2024-10-30T14:19:08+1100

BEISHA said:
In previous AGMs, Nigel confirmed that AVZ were tricked into signing a " waiver of the north "

He was vague on the detail if i remember.

This upcoming AGM, i would love to get clarification of that topic cause clearly its the stumbling block to ironing out a potential MOU that was purported.

Personally, as long as AVZ gets compensated for the exploration work done, i would be happy to relinquish CDL as long as there was a iron clad agreement that AVZ would receive the ML for RD then on sell / TO

Obviously the issue of water rights ( MPIANA MWANGA ) needs to be sorted out too.

One could argue and question why our BOD didnt come to some sort of agreement with the DRC govt about the north around when we received the ML decree if it allowed us to proceed with construction / production of RD with gusto.

I always thought and stated here on this forum that we were never going to be able to sit on CDL while concentrating our efforts on RD, always thought a JV arrangement at the very least would be necessary.

Markets hadnt priced in CDL with AVZ evaluation back in the day

Aagh hindsight.......

View attachment 72069

I certainly hope there is question time this year, long term holders are in desperate need of a update as to where matters stand.

Secret intel / whispers dont cut it.

Come May 2025, it will be 3 yrs that AVZ has been in the wilderness.

View attachment 72068

Angry Matt Damon GIF by Saturday Night Live

j.l · 2024-10-30T14:20:39+1100

Doc said:

Perhaps we could all listen to some music at the next AGM...

Dave Evans · 2024-10-30T14:30:10+1100

BEISHA said:
In previous AGMs, Nigel confirmed that AVZ were tricked into signing a " waiver of the north "

He was vague on the detail if i remember.

This upcoming AGM, i would love to get clarification of that topic cause clearly its the stumbling block to ironing out a potential MOU that was purported.

Personally, as long as AVZ gets compensated for the exploration work done, i would be happy to relinquish CDL as long as there was a iron clad agreement that AVZ would receive the ML for RD then on sell / TO

Obviously the issue of water rights ( MPIANA MWANGA ) needs to be sorted out too.

One could argue and question why our BOD didnt come to some sort of agreement with the DRC govt about the north around when we received the ML decree if it allowed us to proceed with construction / production of RD with gusto.

I always thought and stated here on this forum that we were never going to be able to sit on CDL while concentrating our efforts on RD, always thought a JV arrangement at the very least would be necessary.

Markets hadnt priced in CDL with AVZ evaluation back in the day

Aagh hindsight.......

View attachment 72069

I certainly hope there is question time this year, long term holders are in desperate need of a update as to where matters stand.

Secret intel / whispers dont cut it.

Come May 2025, it will be 3 yrs that AVZ has been in the wilderness.

View attachment 72068

BEISHA anything with regard to the north is probably confidential and being addressed in submissions by DLA Piper. If DLA know the details and are presenting them in arbitration then that’s all I need to know.

We have had shareholders and trolls in here over time saying “why don’t they tell us this and that”. I can tell you I read one piece of of information that came from either the ICC or ICSID that @TDITD (TITS) posted here that was about 100 pages long and I bet none of the people who were complaining read the whole thing. I read it and decided there and then that all that information was best left in the lawyers hands. It’s way above the heads of most shareholders.

I think we were very lucky to have @9cardomaha information and we are very lucky to have @Carlos Danger providing information and his thoughts. AVZ have put out more announcements on what’s going on than I can remember, I read them all and believe the lies and deception Nigel has had to deal with is best left in DLA’s hands without me wanting to know every little detail. So far DLA has won every submission in the cases presented and the fact Zijin’s lawyers (Fasken) have been stalling every step of the way is unavoidable and I personally don’t expect to know all the details.

I would like to know one shareholder here who read all that information that TITS provided. Cominiere and Zijin have taken more than the original northern section so the best option we have in getting this sorted is letting the professionals deal with how we get compensated, and that means letting DLA Piper get on with the job.

There’s plenty of conjecture that shareholders and the bad actors can try and throw in, if you remember last year, one of those trying to overthrow the BOD last year constantly referred to the dispute as a “personal dispute rather than a legal dispute”. What a load of bullshit, it might be personal to shareholders and that’s why it’s personal to us, but it’s a legal dispute and as such, confidentiality applies and we have a top legal team in place.

I usually just try and stick to facts, it’s less stressful that way, especially when we know what a bunch of lying and corrupt actors AVZ has been having to deal with

Carlos Danger · 2024-10-30T19:07:15+1100

Dazmac66 said:
So this waiver is the document that was supposedly doctored by someone ticking the box that says AVZ relinquish CDL in exchange for the PE in Roche Dure?

Dave Evans said:
So what are the possibilities in relation to the purported waiver?

If there was a waiver and it was agreed that AVZ could apply for a continuation of the exploration permit for the north and the DRC broke that agreement, then the waiver would be null and void.

And if there was an agreement, you would have to wonder what sort of skullduggery the DRC pulled on AVZ in the first place to force them to agree to it.

We have seen what lies they are capable of as recently as the Minister of Mines denying we had a meeting with their mining representatives and this latest staged arrest of Mills Tshibangu claiming he knew what happened to the money in escrow at Rawbank, so he could spread more disinformation about us and the IGF.

We should be compensated for CDL, we drilled there, got core assays, built Camp Colline to store equipment, house the assays, supply accommodation for Manono local workers etc.

One thing stopping us getting back the north is Cominiere and the DRC shitting themselves because they know Zijin would then sue them and that’s because Zijin played them and they were corrupt enough to take Zijin’s bribes.

DLA Piper know what happened and they obviously feel the DRC broke the law

BEISHA said:
In previous AGMs, Nigel confirmed that AVZ were tricked into signing a " waiver of the north "

He was vague on the detail if i remember.

This upcoming AGM, i would love to get clarification of that topic cause clearly its the stumbling block to ironing out a potential MOU that was purported.

Personally, as long as AVZ gets compensated for the exploration work done, i would be happy to relinquish CDL as long as there was a iron clad agreement that AVZ would receive the ML for RD then on sell / TO

Obviously the issue of water rights ( MPIANA MWANGA ) needs to be sorted out too.

One could argue and question why our BOD didnt come to some sort of agreement with the DRC govt about the north around when we received the ML decree if it allowed us to proceed with construction / production of RD with gusto.

I always thought and stated here on this forum that we were never going to be able to sit on CDL while concentrating our efforts on RD, always thought a JV arrangement at the very least would be necessary.

Markets hadnt priced in CDL with AVZ evaluation back in the day

Aagh hindsight.......

View attachment 72069

I certainly hope there is question time this year, long term holders are in desperate need of a update as to where matters stand.

Secret intel / whispers dont cut it.

Come May 2025, it will be 3 yrs that AVZ has been in the wilderness.

View attachment 72068

The idea that someone altered the waiver by checking one box is batshit insane as the document involves the coordinates of the area being relinquished. Although that is less crazy than the Balthazar being threatened at gun point conspiracy theory.

If either of these were true and instead of being told that’s what happened AVZ failed to inform the market and wrote in their May 4th 2022 announcement ‘The Ministerial Decree excludes a portion of the land holding to the north, which will be required to be renewed under a 5-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’ then I will sign up to any class action regarding this matter due to being denied a chance to sell my shares during the three days we traded after it was released.

The original decrees by the MoM that granted us the mining licence included 00147 which was the acknowledgement of a declaration of partial renunciation of PR 13559 and 00145 for the granting of the PE for the south which outlines the coordinates of the non waived area it covers and even includes a map clearly showing both areas in question. This was accepted at the time by AVZ but under the obvious false pretence that we would retain the relinquished northern section under a PR. At the 2022 AGM when queried on the fact that we hadn’t done any drilling in the northern part of the tenement that was relinquished Nigel said ‘the northern area may need to come under a separate exploration tenement, even though that’s not the established process, we know who’s behind this (e.g. DG CAMI)’. Regarding the waiver being made ‘null and void’ it is not a contract therefore it would require a provision in the mining code legislation to invalidate it imo. But as I’ve repeatedly stated my understanding is based off information available publicly and there is a good chance that there is a missing piece of evidence or a regulation within the mining code that makes the DRC government’s position incorrect.

But that is their position and whether AVZ should be compensated for the north if we are not to receive it under a PR is the main sticking point in negotiations so far imo

Not that anyone should be fussed about the northern section. You know, because it’s infested with mica.

Winenut · 2024-10-30T19:54:13+1100

Carlos Danger said:
The idea that someone altered the waiver by checking one box is batshit insane as the document involves the coordinates of the area being relinquished. Although that is less crazy than the Balthazar being threatened at gun point conspiracy theory.

If either of these were true and instead of being told that’s what happened AVZ failed to inform the market and wrote in their May 4th 2022 announcement ‘The Ministerial Decree excludes a portion of the land holding to the north, which will be required to be renewed under a 5-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’ then I will sign up to any class action regarding this matter due to being denied a chance to sell my shares during the three days we traded after it was released.

The original decrees by the MoM that granted us the mining licence included 00147 which was the acknowledgement of a declaration of partial renunciation of PR 13559 and 00145 for the granting of the PE for the south which outlines the coordinates of the non waived area it covers and even includes a map clearly showing both areas in question. This was accepted at the time by AVZ but under the obvious false pretence that we would retain the relinquished northern section under a PR. At the 2022 AGM when queried on the fact that we hadn’t done any drilling in the northern part of the tenement that was relinquished Nigel said ‘the northern area may need to come under a separate exploration tenement, even though that’s not the established process, we know who’s behind this (e.g. DG CAMI)’. Regarding the waiver being made ‘null and void’ it is not a contract therefore it would require a provision in the mining code legislation to invalidate it imo. But as I’ve repeatedly stated my understanding is based off information available publicly and there is a good chance that there is a missing piece of evidence or a regulation within the mining code that makes the DRC government’s position incorrect.

But that is their position and whether AVZ should be compensated for the north if we are not to receive it under a PR is the main sticking point in negotiations so far imo

Not that anyone should be fussed about the northern section. You know, because it’s infested with mica.

View attachment 72099
View attachment 72100
View attachment 72101
View attachment 72102
View attachment 72103

How were you "denied a chance to sell my shares during the three days we traded after it was released"????

I don't understand what you've said there???

Did it "trade" for 3 days after the announcement???

Why could you not sell your shares if AVZ was "trading"?

Just looking for clarity maybe I read it all wrong

Carlos Danger · 2024-10-30T20:01:16+1100

Winenut said:
View attachment 72106

How were you "denied a chance to sell my shares during the three days we traded after it was released"????

I don't understand what you've said there???

Did it "trade" for 3 days after the announcement???

Why could you not sell your shares if AVZ was "trading"?

Just looking for clarity maybe I read it all wrong

I meant I would have sold if told the Dathcom waiver was altered or Balthazar was threatened at gun point rather than being told that the north was to be retained under a PR as both of those purported events would have been extremely alarming to me

But they are nonsensical fairy tales so it is not applicable imo

Winenut · 2024-10-30T20:12:19+1100

Carlos Danger said:
I meant I would have sold if told the Dathcom waiver was altered or Balthazar was threatened at gun point rather than being told that the north was to be retained under a PR as both of those purported events would have been extremely alarming to me

But they are nonsensical fairy tales so it is not applicable imo

Appreciate the quick response

Dave Evans · 2024-10-30T21:18:05+1100

Carlos Danger said:
I meant I would have sold if told the Dathcom waiver was altered or Balthazar was threatened at gun point rather than being told that the north was to be retained under a PR as both of those purported events would have been extremely alarming to me

But they are nonsensical fairy tales so it is not applicable imo

My personal view Carlos is that there was collusion, deception and manipulation by Cominiere and CAMI in the whole process of the separation of the north and south of the tenement and I believe that is an issue that DLA Piper is aware of

But I think the legal matter in question is the fact that Cominiere violated AVZ’s FROR > AVZ said we have the FROR > Cominere lied and said AVZ didn’t make an offer (you have previously showed the evidence that we did make an offer) > Cominiere went ahead and illegally sold 15% of Dathcom to Jin Cheng (for $120million less than its value)

> AVZ said that’s illegal and Jin Cheng is not a shareholder > So Cominiere said AVZ is not cooperating with the JV partners so we are terminating the JV > Cominiere seizes the project, then tells CAMI that all PR13359 is now up for grabs

> CAMI says okay, our corrupt plan is in motion, time to form that JV with Zijin and take CDL, Camp Colline and the Mpiana Mwanga power plant

Of course everything thing they colluded to do is illegal and gradually the ICC arbitration cases we are winning is adding weight to the ICSID case.

As I said before to BEISHA, I personally think the matter is best dealt with by DLA Piper in arbitration. I’ve just tried to simplify what I feel has happened, but I always appreciate your support and your more youthful and well researched commentary Carlos.

AVZ has always said they were willing to drop the arbitration and negotiate a fair settlement, but it’s the corrupt DRC officials who took bribes from Zijin that don’t want a fair settlement, so in the words of AVZ

Flekman11 · 2024-10-30T21:35:30+1100

Carlos Danger said:
Fun fact Cominiere are technically a claimant at the ICSID as they are a part of Dathcom. DRC government are the respondent.

The case is about the DRC government's failure to follow their mining code. Can you give an example of how they may lose some or all of their remaining ownership of the asset?

This isn't about assurances but a question regarding Article 60 imo

Easy

BEISHA · 2024-10-30T21:59:16+1100

Dave Evans said:
BEISHA anything with regard to the north is probably confidential and being addressed in submissions by DLA Piper. If DLA know the details and are presenting them in arbitration then that’s all I need to know.

We have had shareholders and trolls in here over time saying “why don’t they tell us this and that”. I can tell you I read one piece of of information that came from either the ICC or ICSID that @TDITD (TITS) posted here that was about 100 pages long and I bet none of the people who were complaining read the whole thing. I read it and decided there and then that all that information was best left in the lawyers hands. It’s way above the heads of most shareholders.

I think we were very lucky to have @9cardomaha information and we are very lucky to have @Carlos Danger providing information and his thoughts. AVZ have put out more announcements on what’s going on than I can remember, I read them all and believe the lies and deception Nigel has had to deal with is best left in DLA’s hands without me wanting to know every little detail. So far DLA has won every submission in the cases presented and the fact Zijin’s lawyers (Fasken) have been stalling every step of the way is unavoidable and I personally don’t expect to know all the details.

I would like to know one shareholder here who read all that information that TITS provided. Cominiere and Zijin have taken more than the original northern section so the best option we have in getting this sorted is letting the professionals deal with how we get compensated, and that means letting DLA Piper get on with the job.

There’s plenty of conjecture that shareholders and the bad actors can try and throw in, if you remember last year, one of those trying to overthrow the BOD last year constantly referred to the dispute as a “personal dispute rather than a legal dispute”. What a load of bullshit, it might be personal to shareholders and that’s why it’s personal to us, but it’s a legal dispute and as such, confidentiality applies and we have a top legal team in place.

I usually just try and stick to facts, it’s less stressful that way, especially when we know what a bunch of lying and corrupt actors AVZ has been having to deal with

First of all, i am not complaining nor do i need to know all the nitty gritty about the north, I back the BOD 100% and have complete faith in our legal team to unwind all the corruption and get us a decent result in the end......whenever that maybe.

I also understand that asking too many questions of the BOD and expecting answers in this litigeous environment we are in can enlighten our enemies too, i get all this, but AGMs are your one and only chance of the year to get some sort of insight as to where we stand outside of formal announcements, i understand why question time was not allowed last year due to the MAGA onslaught, but hoping this year may be different and revert back to the norm, cause i have a bunch of generic questions i want to ask , which only require a generic response.

I think longs have a right to know where they stand, without the BOD selling the farm in detail.

No doubt i will speak to my comrade DEBOSS prior to the AGM and have a whisper in his ear about what i can or cannot say.......

imo

AVZ Discussion 2022

Master of Quan

Regular

Top 20

Regular

Top 20

Go AVZ!

Top 20

DOSSIER AVZ LIST OF THIEVES EXPOSED​

Top 20

Biding my Time 1971

DOSSIER AVZ LIST OF THIEVES EXPOSED​

Regular

Attachments

Master of Quan

Regular

Regular

Top 20

Go AVZ!

Attachments

Top 20

Go AVZ!

Regular

Member

Attachments

Top 20

Similar threads

DOSSIER AVZ LIST OF THIEVES EXPOSED

DOSSIER AVZ LIST OF THIEVES EXPOSED