Cumquat Cap
Regular
I thought the jurisdictional grounds pertained to Jin Chen not being a party to the JV and as such, couldn't bring forward an ICC challenge? Really doesn't matter just out of curiosity - Silence is deafening currently
AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
The Fox
Regular
Investments by Zebra Holdings have ranged from $3m to $400. They have had a few exists along the way also. Where they fit, hard to say at this stage.
Zebra Holdings and Investments - Investments, Portfolio & Company Exits
Zebra Holdings and Investments is an investment holding company.
9cardomaha
Regular
the DOBs for the two DRC fellas at the end are the same too. not sure if its a clerical error at the RCCM or what, but its what i was given so there it is. If rumours of Zijin being out were formulated from this document then at least there was some evidence to back it up. But i got similar confirmations on Zijin being out of Dathcom through some deal (not sure what the deal is) - so its not as simple as the bird made it out to be.
I don't believe Zijin were forced/kicked out, but there was a deal for this 15%.
Same source that has provided me with other documentation including previous AVZ and Cominiere/Dathomir correspondence, old RCCM documents and more. Previous calls have mostly panned out as stated but it is the DRC so who fucking knows.
Not a stickler for details in the DRC maybe, but yeah, for all things AVZ i am also eating my fair share of salt. My aim is not to sway you to believe one thing or another, just to provide what I have.
Eitherway the document doesn't do anything in our hands, those with greater knowledge and decision making power could use it or try and verify it then give us an Ann. Who knows. Better than nothing, and in my book, i'm still sticking by my call that they are out, returning the 15% for a deal with the DRC on something else.
Further to this, the return of 15% also indicates that Cominiere doesn't have the power to terminate JVA nor does it have power to reallocate Manono to itself or other parties, and ultimately Dathcom still holds PR13359. Otherwise the return of 15% in Dathcom by Zijin doesn't have any weight in bargaining for other deals.
Take it or leave it, I will return to caveating my messages with this - forgot this time because i got swept up in the hype so apologies.
9cardomaha
Regular
The argument is that the RCCM was updated under invalid grounds. The only way a new party can be included into Dathcom and registered through RCCM is by holding a Dathcom AGM.
AVZ wasn't invited, Cominiere and Dathomir got a proxy or something and passed the resolution on Zijin (Jincheng). Prior to this AVZ was already communicating with Cominiere about RFOR and how they can't sell to Zijin - we also provided our superior offer.
That is where AVZ's jurisdictional challenge comes into it. I'm sure ZJ are using the RCCM document from 2021 as evidence to prove they are a member, but that's only the outcome - the process is more important, similar to what is going on right now with the potential 'return of 15% by Zijin'.
If they are out wouldn't they have informed the ICC to cancel the hearing set for July 3rd ?
Xerof
Have a Cigar 1975
And just for the record, in case it was overlooked, the old RCCM doc has the old jailbird Athanase as rep for C, the new one has that silly prick Celestin.
I presume this is a requested 'extract' from the database, validated by some official at RCCM. Clearly, accuracy is not their first language
I presume this is a requested 'extract' from the database, validated by some official at RCCM. Clearly, accuracy is not their first language
Absolutely spot on.
Processes need to be both transparent and legal. Unfortunately, there are so many deals in this two-year clusterfuck that are neither transparent nor legal.
A negotiated settlement ahead of ICC arbitrations has always been my bet, and recent events have not changed my view.
Cheers
F
9cardomaha
Regular
This is a point of contention at the moment - its only presumed that they'd have to drop the case. But legal issues are relative in time. Given the bullshit that Zijin are able to come up with, does logic really seem to be the best way to analyze the current situation?
Parties can launch or continue fighting legal claims well into the future. Claiming that 'WHILE WE WERE JV MEMBERS' blah blah blah. The case doesn't instantly get dropped - what i am assuming is that DLA might use the current situation to boost claims of corruption, and try and get the case dismissed.
No where in my mind are Zijin going to just go 'well herp we fucked up, we are sorry, let us withdraw our bullshit claims'. To believe this would be the course of events is, STRICTLY IN MY OPINION, fucking niave.
Hi 9cardomaha
Re: The only way a new party can be included into Dathcom and registered through RCCM is by holding a Dathcom AGM.
I am wondering if the removal of a partner, by whatever means, also requires a Dathcom meeting in order to formalise and ratify the new structure.
It's not unreasonable to assume that Dathcom held an out-of-sessions meeting to formalise Jin Cheng's exit, and get the new partnership registered through RCCM.
Cheers
F
The shitty
affair has been going on from the moment Zijin was shown AVZ's DFS and drilling results. Mate, there's ALWAYS something shifty going on. It's the D fucking R fucking C after all.
Last edited:
9cardomaha
Regular
I believe it should be the same for any update to the registry - inclusion or exiting.
Dathcom meeting minutes would be available if they had gathered to ratify the change. But i think the JV is quite dysfunctional at the moment so doubt that it happened.
But just as the 2021 RCCM inclusion was done without proper process, i'm assuming they just bypassed the formalities and go do what they want - This action should also be in breach of the ICC Emergency Injunction.
Let's assume Zijin is out .
And returned the 15% .
The compensation case included Comminiere and Zijin are together at the ICC case for lost revenue.
How can this proceed now if Comminiere has been returned the 15% but is requested to transfer to another DRC mining company as Franck suggested.
Certainly hope they are out .
Fishy indeed .
You missed one fucking!
No I get it. All fair points. Appreciate your efforts.
This document has been around for 8 days . AVZ BoD know share holders have a photo copy . If it is rubbish they will remain silent . Otherwise something has to give . With respect to 9cardomaha's point , I don't see why the ICC case in a few weeks will go ahead if the 15% has been surrendered . That to me will be the indicator whether this is another false flag . At least it's not too long wait to find out .
Not necessarily. I agree with 9Card that even if Zijin have returned the 15%, it wasn't done unwillingly. There was no doubt a deal done. However this doesn't need to be a deal on some other unrelated benefit they can get from DRC, it could still be part of some for now unseen strategy regarding Manono. I just don't see then giving up at this point. The prize is too large and the cost relatively small - legal fees and some potential reputational risk. So if this were the case, they may not cancel their ICC cases which could fit into their previous delayance strategy.
Or who knows, they could see the initial case as a way to gain understanding of the evidence against them and cominiere, to better prepare their support for Cominiere's subsequent ICC case, after which in case of a win they can then raise the issue of the 15%.
All speculation and conjecture, I just don't think that Zijin and Cominiere have given up on the Manono gambit - despite the damages claims.
Similar threads
