If there are now audios of the illegal selling of Cominiere's assets to Zijin that weren't available before then the NSA has entered the chat imo
Agree - I did’t think I had suggested otherwise.The licence is awarded to Dathcom, not AVZ.
Biden whispers to Felix, "just leave it with me big fella, I'll get my boys and girls on it"!. Let's hope so.If there are now audios of the illegal selling of Cominiere's assets to Zijin that weren't available before then the NSA has entered the chat imo
View attachment 25885
If there are now audios of the illegal selling of Cominiere's assets to Zijin that weren't available before then the NSA has entered the chat imo
View attachment 25885
Everything the light touches is your kingdom snow whiteBiden whispers to Felix, "just leave it with me big fella, I'll get my boys and girls on it"!. Let's hope so.
As I’ve posted here previously Manono is a massive and strategically important asset. There is zero chance that the governments of the US and China are simply watching from the sidelines.
An excellent recite of the AGM mate......and totally agree.The smaller percentage to CATL is to maintain control
Think back to when Zijin, the AFR and their lemmings on Twitter were all gloating that no one would have control. Do you really think they would do all their bullshit to get 15% just to have the awarding of the ML to Dathcom fall apart?
AVZ management have stated numerous times that ownership isn't the problem with getting the licence. It's 100% about Mupande and AJN's attempt to rat fuck us out of CDL.
Remember CAMI looked at ownership before deciding to approve the application as part of the favourable opinion process. Also the Minister of Mines wouldn't have awarded us the ML for RD that management initially accepted if ownership was an issue imo
From the AGM:
What happened after ML Decree, spurious yet we’re in suspension. What’s the main issue for ML – is it Dathomir, is Zijin ICC arbitration 15, dispute with exploration rights?
A: Lot of players in vogue here in country, lot of hatchet jobs being done – President had a bad view from being ill advised by detractors (e.g. we hadn’t done anything, didn’t have money experience, and were speculators). Detractors continuing, but slowly slowly we’re working to remove the blocks.
We knew Chinese would have a crack, but we did not expect parts of DRC government to be in on it?
A: Nor did we - “we thought it was gambit by Chinese groups to get project cheapest way. We weren’t aware it was also elements of the government complicit. We can’t go into it, but rest assured those people are being turned over within meetings with real information is being shared, and people put on the spot.
Collusion between all those 3 – namely Zijin, Jin Cheng, CAMI?
A: That would be astute thought
Issue that a portion of mines directorate said we hadn’t done the work on the northern tenement area, and shouldn’t get the north?
A: That’s not within the mining code. So 13359 should be retained in its entirety – however 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)
What about AJN having a crack
A: “their premise is that we’ve returned the northern tenement to government. We haven’t. Draw a conclusion out of that”.
Interview NF mentioned once mentioned once decree issued 10 day period before Court could issue the licence. What happened?
A: This was a misunderstanding. As soon as your documentation was in order and issued, this talk of periods was regarding the ministerial decree. Other steps in way of ML – CAMI have held up the invoicing, illegally in our view.
View attachment 25873
View attachment 25874
View attachment 25875
It's the applicant for the ML that needs 51% so Dathcom has that imoAn excellent recite of the AGM mate......and totally agree.
Look , all i was trying to convey was, surely AVZ / DATHCOM have to come to a agreement with CATH regards to interim reduction of their 24% before the ML is awarded, assuming also that the full permit 13559 is granted too .
Cause as it currently stands....
AVZ = 36%, CATH = 24%, DRC / COM = 25%
( DATHOMIR 15% is in dispute with ICC )
( PRE EMPTION 15% is in dispute with ICC too, but not a stumbling block for ML )
CATH needs to agree to 9% interest in the short term to allow AVZ / Dathcom = 51% to operate RD.
CATH / JV agreement was extended to 31/12/22, we are due for a update on that.
Will it be another extension, or could it be confirmation that CATH is happy for 24% to be reduced to 9%, whilst ICC arbitration plays out ?
imo
Agree - I did’t think I had suggested otherwise.
Yep and Dathcom has a confirmed 60% by the IGFView attachment 25905
What I am saying is that it is Dathcom that is the applicant and would require 51%.
AVZI holds 75% of Dathcom. 60% of which is irrevocable as confirmed by the IGF report.Yep and Dathcom has a confirmed 60% by the IGF
Lol, this shit show is fucking my mind, i was writing those previous posts with the assumption that AVZ / DATHCOM had inked a deal with CATH, but of course they havnt, so AVZ DATHCOM at this stage has 60%...... control not a issue for ML as you rightly state.It's the applicant for the ML that needs 51% so Dathcom has that imo
Under no circumstances can management allow us to go under 51%. I have full confidence that they will make sure that is the end result. Otherwise the other partners will vote against us and bully us into selling our stake to them by making sure we never see dividends.
Perhaps it was my use of the word “we” that caused the confusion. It‘s all good - we are in violent agreement.View attachment 25905
What I am saying is that it is Dathcom that is the applicant and would require 51%.
Yeah it is confusing. I studied accounting and finance so have a bit of an advantage with this stuff.Lol, this shit show is fucking my mind, i was writing those previous posts with the assumption that AVZ / DATHCOM had inked a deal with CATH, but of course they havnt, so AVZ DATHCOM at this stage has 60%...... control not a issue for ML as you rightly state.
So just a matter of Cath happy to come to terms for 9% in the interim............or we find a alternative JV ( possibly US.....my preference all along )
Sorry, my bad.................
View attachment 25907
View attachment 25908
Hi BeishaCATH needs to agree to 9% interest in the short term to allow AVZ / Dathcom = 51% to operate RD.
CATH / JV agreement was extended to 31/12/22, we are due for a update on that.
Will it be another extension, or could it be confirmation that CATH is happy for 24% to be reduced to 9%, whilst ICC arbitration plays out ?
Yes , agree.Hi Beisha
The only issue I see in the 9% scenario is that of sufficient funding to build the mine and its infrastructure. The ML is dependent on a number of pre-conditions, including evidence of sufficient operating funds.
If CATH agreed to 9%, rather than 24% CAPEX funding then AVZ receives 15% less cash for CAPEX. There needs to be a top-up from somewhere.
I can only guess that AVZ could get another equity funder, or maybe consider another bargain basement CR (and again leave its retail shareholders with little but dilution). That would be as welcome as Mr Putin at a Ukranian wedding.
Cheers
F
Hi Beisha
The only issue I see in the 9% scenario is that of sufficient funding to build the mine and its infrastructure. The ML is dependent on a number of pre-conditions, including evidence of sufficient operating funds.
If CATH agreed to 9%, rather than 24% CAPEX funding then AVZ receives 15% less cash for CAPEX. There needs to be a top-up from somewhere.
I can only guess that AVZ could get another equity funder, or maybe consider another bargain basement CR (and again leave its retail shareholders with little but dilution). That would be as welcome as Mr Putin at a Ukranian wedding.
Cheers
F
Finance in Dathcom's name most likely. With whoever ends up with the 'disputed' percentage obligated to assume the debt / pay it off. AVZ can act as the guarantor as we control Dathcom and are most likely to end up with the 15% from Dathomir before then selling it to CATL.Yes , agree.
If i remember , other posters mentioned CATH could possibly pay a "pre - payment " for goods rendered ?
CR is definitely another option as you mentioned, but more dilution.
What about bank finance ?
imo
Hi CarlosFinance in Dathcom's name most likely. With whoever ends up with the 'disputed' percentage obligated to assume the debt / pay it off. AVZ can act as the guarantor as we control Dathcom and are most likely to end up with the 15% from Dathomir before then selling it to CATL.
I assume something like this is already in place for the 15% from Cominiere which AVZ has so far never owned. Doing it this way would come with a premium but the project's numbers make it easily doable imo
I'm sure management will pick the best funding option available to themHi Carlos
I am unsure about Dathcon or AVZ getting debt financing over a tenement that remains in dispute, despite its compelling economics and quality of its resource base. You know what international bankers are like. They need you to prove your project don't need finance in order to get finance...and then they screw you over.
I still think a CR remains a viable option, providing there is a SPP attached. If the board thinks it can screw over its retail shareholders yet again, it will have significantly underestimated the level of disquiet over its performance.
Cheers
F