Misfits
Regular
Many here would know of Scarpa. His thoughts on it all.
14,538
Date:07/02/23Time:09:17:26Post #:66110039
Scarpa
8,730 Posts.14,538
Date:07/02/23Time:09:17:26Post #:66110039
I will be frank - this is a mess as I psoted before. This could have been totally resolved way back if the DRC government simply stepped in and it hasn't. I repeat it hasn't, and that is a fact. If corruption was the basis of how Zijin got 15% it should have just been dealt with immediately by the DRC government and said corruption has occurred and we are reversing everything today so that this gets to mining this side of 2025 - refer Post #:65456320
The fact nothing has been done, and in effect the Ann essentially say between the lines AVZ sort this out and get this to mining orelse we may take another action implies basically AVZ accept the situation to get this to mining immediately and therefore you currently have 60% and move on. Get this to mining fullstop is the message here and we are not doing anything to resolve the ownership dispute - the 15% AVZ is lost even under this announcement and basically AVZ would have to take legal action to get to 75% and that means time, again means time. I do recall the dispute around change of ownership here a while back when AVZ got the tenement which was lack of exploration effort on the part of the previous owner, so DRC wants this at mining to repeat, so Dathcom now has to get it to mining and that means the dispute on ownership has to be settled quick fast, and so IMO the only way it can be settled quick fast is for AVZ to walk away from its 75% claim. It is obvious AVZ was blindsighted by this announcement as well.
Sort it out or face the consequences is the message in Ann. Hope I am wrong, but there is minimal in this announcement that I like given the legalistic nature of it and the difficulty in understanding the legal jargon in it, but the intent is clear too me. The telling paragraphs of the announcement are the DRC comment - resolve the issue and get it to mining. The only way this will get to mining early and the legal issues go away is AVZ conceed which implied too me crime can pay in the DRC, unfortunately. This mess could have been sorted out by the DRC government - corruption can be addressed immediately if a government had the will especially when seeking to show the world DRC is open for business and sovereign risk is low. Clearly the DRC govermnment has 'words' that are not accompanied by actions.
All IMO and hope I am wrong, but after nearly a year and this I am not confident AVZ will get its 75% and the consequences of not getting this to mining appear stark IMO in this announcement.
I am sure a lot here will disagree with this post, but that is how I am reading it. In plain English AVZ should state what does the announcement actually mean to AVZ in terms of its ownership stake, and what actions can the DRC government take if mining is delayed here by ownership issues?? I recognise others have interpreted the Ann differently, so interpretations will differ based on the Ann and it is possible my interpretation is based on the fact I am quite annoyed in reading it. Time to mellow.
All IMO