AVZ Discussion 2022

[MoneyBags1348]

Here’s a question…..

If AVZ had received ML for the whole of 13359, 75% not disputed, was still trading and we are 6-12 months into the build phase and the info in my previous post was announced to the market…..

What would the SP be trading at now?

I would think the numbers around the $15 to 20 billion Chilla, so for me $5 to $6 with sharp increases coming at stages when construction completed PLS plant under construction and production is increased…. Did I mention the possibility of each new core assay showing more high grade pegmatites

If we were in a JV with CATH and possibly CMOC construction time and CAPEX both cut by 40% so sticking with the same share price

@Azzler don’t get caught up in the hysteria and desperate attempts by trolls trying to sow doubt at every turn

 

[Juba1845]

Preamble... I am a meta proton squim with the mental approximation of a mutode....
However...
I would suggest that your preposition of AVZ with a ML be fantasy.
All we can have is what we have, and if we have NO ML, then we have what we have, and no projection of things we do not have may pose reality upon things we do have... Fair enough?

ML or no ML, sale price is what we can get... what someone is willing to pay. ML or no ML, possibly no ML.

"Possibly no ML". So what is it then ? A minute ago you were saying AVZ have sold . Get off the bong buddy. You fools have trouble sticking to your own made up narrative. If you are going to make up stuff best stay sober .

 

[MoneyBags1348]

Final comments….

The DRC won’t want the ICSID arbitration to go ahead and would rather an agreement or compromise with AVZ be reached

The DRC still has the power to award the ML to AVZ (majority holder in Dathcom)

AVZ hold a legal advantage over the DRC in the upcoming ICSID, plus the DRC legal team is weak with one of their French lawyers recently exposed for corruption

Everyone knows all this, my own opinion on all this is that the ML will be granted

All you other shareholders form your own opinion but be aware there are trolls, short sellers and other corrupt entities from CAMI (Mupande), Cominiere (Celestin Kibeya), AJN (Klaus Jerkoff) TTX (Eric Allard) and others here and on other forums taking advantage and trying to exploit the the fact that shareholders here can be vulnerable to their deceit and lies

To be honest I think the big players know they are fucked and it’s the short sellers that are posting all the lies on forums

 

[WPM60]

few

I note you’re quite the film buff mate. In particular you often post the scene from goodfellas with Ray Liotta getting the windup from joe Pesci. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fine film but can I recommend another Scorsese film which also features De niro, The King of Comedy, seems a bit more apt

 

[cruiser51]

Crankin' it a few notches there in the recent posts @Azzler

Interesting to see how this will all pan out in the galactic battle against Juba the Hutt

View attachment 40539

Make that Juba the kuntt please

 

[bloke383]

Yes any sale of AVZ only asset will need to be put to shareholder vote for approval.

AVZ can be in negotiations for a sale of its major asset without disclosure to shareholders due to commercial in confidence negotiations…. But ultimately if a mutual agreement is reached with a prospective purchaser…..conditions will be attached to the sale that requires shareholders voting in favour.

It looks like 90% of the vote is required IF it ever comes to a vote on a sale/take over ?

The Allens handbook on takeovers in Australia - Takeover bids

In general terms, a takeover bid involves a bidder making individual purchase offers at a specified bid price to all holders of securities in an ASX-listed Australian company or trust.

content.allens.com.au

• the bidder is entitled to compulsory acquisition if it obtains a relevant interest in at least 90% of the target securities (and has acquired at least 75% of the securities it offered to acquire).

Considering this is a world class deposit that will probably dictate future market prices , I don't think offering a price just surpassing share price all time highs ($1.30 / $5 billion approx) will suffice . Wouldn't there be a larger than 10% block (that can see the true value) even if you just take into consideration the holders that attended the roadshows (including the larger TSE holders) plus the BOD ? An offer of $10 billion shouldn't even be entertained when you look at the likes of LTRs $6.25 billion current market cap
As far as I'm concerned , AVZ still holds the upper hand . If any of the protagonists had a killer blow , they would have used it by now . All they have are stalling tactics . Bullying and lies won't cut it at the ICC & ICSID . AVZ should continue as they are , & not give an inch . We haven't done anything wrong . I can guarantee that the locals of Manono & people of the DRC will be a lot better off if China is not allowed to gain control

 

[Dazmac66]

It looks like 90% of the vote is required IF it ever comes to a vote on a sale/take over ?

The Allens handbook on takeovers in Australia - Takeover bids

In general terms, a takeover bid involves a bidder making individual purchase offers at a specified bid price to all holders of securities in an ASX-listed Australian company or trust.

content.allens.com.au

• the bidder is entitled to compulsory acquisition if it obtains a relevant interest in at least 90% of the target securities (and has acquired at least 75% of the securities it offered to acquire).

Considering this is a world class deposit that will probably dictate future market prices , I don't think offering a price just surpassing share price all time highs ($1.30 / $5 billion approx) will suffice . Wouldn't there be a larger than 10% block (that can see the true value) even if you just take into consideration the holders that attended the roadshows (including the larger TSE holders) plus the BOD ? An offer of $10 billion shouldn't even be entertained when you look at the likes of LTRs $6.25 billion current market cap
As far as I'm concerned , AVZ still holds the upper hand . If any of the protagonists had a killer blow , they would have used it by now . All they have are stalling tactics . Bullying and lies won't cut it at the ICC & ICSID . AVZ should continue as they are , & not give an inch . We haven't done anything wrong . I can guarantee that the locals of Manono & people of the DRC will be a lot better off if China is not allowed to gain control

The best post I have read in a long time. Many thanks for your logical and clearly articulated thoughts.

 

[The Fox]

Yes any sale of AVZ only asset will need to be put to shareholder vote for approval.

AVZ can be in negotiations for a sale of its major asset without disclosure to shareholders due to commercial in confidence negotiations…. But ultimately if a mutual agreement is reached with a prospective purchaser…..conditions will be attached to the sale that requires shareholders voting in favour.

Hey Chilla,

That's interesting.

Shares held in a locally registered company in the DRC (Dathcom) by wholly owned subsidiary of AVZ Minerals Ltd (AVZ International Pty Ltd) needs AVZ Minerals (ASX) shareholders to approval to sell shares in Dathcom or assign PR rights held by Dathcom to a third party.

No to mention the extensions around PR 13559 are held by AVZ Minerals Congo Sarlu.

Not sure about that mate, can't seem to find confirmation of your assumption in the ASX listing rules, can you point me in the right direction please?

 

[UpTheDuff]

A TO would be preferable to an asset sale, but ok

FIRB.

 

[The Fox]

It looks like 90% of the vote is required IF it ever comes to a vote on a sale/take over ?

The Allens handbook on takeovers in Australia - Takeover bids

In general terms, a takeover bid involves a bidder making individual purchase offers at a specified bid price to all holders of securities in an ASX-listed Australian company or trust.

content.allens.com.au

• the bidder is entitled to compulsory acquisition if it obtains a relevant interest in at least 90% of the target securities (and has acquired at least 75% of the securities it offered to acquire).

Considering this is a world class deposit that will probably dictate future market prices , I don't think offering a price just surpassing share price all time highs ($1.30 / $5 billion approx) will suffice . Wouldn't there be a larger than 10% block (that can see the true value) even if you just take into consideration the holders that attended the roadshows (including the larger TSE holders) plus the BOD ? An offer of $10 billion shouldn't even be entertained when you look at the likes of LTRs $6.25 billion current market cap
As far as I'm concerned , AVZ still holds the upper hand . If any of the protagonists had a killer blow , they would have used it by now . All they have are stalling tactics . Bullying and lies won't cut it at the ICC & ICSID . AVZ should continue as they are , & not give an inch . We haven't done anything wrong . I can guarantee that the locals of Manono & people of the DRC will be a lot better off if China is not allowed to gain control

Great link, thanks for sharing. If we were talking an AVZ (ASX) takeover, this information is spot on.

I've assumed as per my previous posts an asset sale by one of AVZ Minerals Ltd wholly owned subsidiaries.

I would love to see an AVZ Minerals Ltd take over offer announcement, however I think that is far less likely than an asset sale as described IMO.

Anyway, no point prophesying too much, announcements on the actual path forward won't be too far away.

Cheers The Fox

 

[UpTheDuff]

From what I've heard. I'm content. Not happy, not sad.

Just want to exit and move on with my life.

 

[Chilla]

Hey Chilla,

That's interesting.

Shares held in a locally registered company in the DRC (Dathcom) by wholly owned subsidiary of AVZ Minerals Ltd (AVZ International Pty Ltd) needs AVZ Minerals (ASX) shareholders to approval to sell shares in Dathcom or assign PR rights held by Dathcom to a third party.

No to mention the extensions around PR 13559 are held by AVZ Minerals Congo Sarlu.

Not sure about that mate, can't seem to find confirmation of your assumption in the ASX listing rules, can you point me in the right direction please?

It will be a requirement in AVZ’s charter as part of being a ASX listed entity and ASIC registration. Listed entities can’t dispose of a significant asset, which in this case is AVZ’s only asset, without majority shareholder approval. They will likely need to call an EGM With explanatory statements and BoD recommendations and reasons why they seek shareholders to vote on whether or not they agree to a sale of the Dathcom shareholding or a complete sale of AVZI, which is the holding subsidiary of the DRC assets.

 

[Chilla]

Under ASX compliance it's not avz’s only asset ; tenements 4029 & 4030 would still float AVZs project boat...these two tenements are also considered assets / projects

13359 is 99.9999% of AVZ’s asset value….so it’s the major value of AVZ and will definitely require shareholders approval to divest.

 

[TDITD]

It looks like 90% of the vote is required IF it ever comes to a vote on a sale/take over ?

The Allens handbook on takeovers in Australia - Takeover bids

In general terms, a takeover bid involves a bidder making individual purchase offers at a specified bid price to all holders of securities in an ASX-listed Australian company or trust.

content.allens.com.au

• the bidder is entitled to compulsory acquisition if it obtains a relevant interest in at least 90% of the target securities (and has acquired at least 75% of the securities it offered to acquire).

Considering this is a world class deposit that will probably dictate future market prices , I don't think offering a price just surpassing share price all time highs ($1.30 / $5 billion approx) will suffice . Wouldn't there be a larger than 10% block (that can see the true value) even if you just take into consideration the holders that attended the roadshows (including the larger TSE holders) plus the BOD ? An offer of $10 billion shouldn't even be entertained when you look at the likes of LTRs $6.25 billion current market cap
As far as I'm concerned , AVZ still holds the upper hand . If any of the protagonists had a killer blow , they would have used it by now . All they have are stalling tactics . Bullying and lies won't cut it at the ICC & ICSID . AVZ should continue as they are , & not give an inch . We haven't done anything wrong . I can guarantee that the locals of Manono & people of the DRC will be a lot better off if China is not allowed to gain control

Excellent post !!!

AVZ hold the upper hand here so why on earth budge an inch. We win at ICSID simple.

This isn't a negotiation in good faith anymore, they fucked that up a long time ago.

A bunch of Dicks, assholes and pussies

 

[Chilla]

Pretty sure operational decisions (ex company sale ) are with the board @Chilla, personally I haven't come across ASX listing rules which state that sale of their major project needs shareholders approval ; happy to be proved wrong

Will definitely require shareholders approval. Would you be happy for the BoD to make an operational decision to sell the asset for $1 without you as a shareholder having a say? And that’s not $1 per share….but $1 as total consideration. In your view the BoD would be able to make that decision on your behalf as an operational decision…. Can’t happen.

 

[The Fox]

It will be a requirement in AVZ’s charter as part of being a ASX listed entity and ASIC registration. Listed entities can’t dispose of a significant asset, which in this case is AVZ’s only asset, without majority shareholder approval. They will likely need to call an EGM With explanatory statements and BoD recommendations and reasons why they seek shareholders to vote on whether or not they agree to a sale of the Dathcom shareholding or a complete sale of AVZI, which is the holding subsidiary of the DRC assets.

Fair enough. I've read the companies Constitution (I assume this is what you are referring to as the Charter). Seems Directors have the ability to sell the major asset subject only to listing rules and Corporations Act of course.

I wonder how the ASX listing rules specifically come into play for AVZ Minerals Ltd or its subsidiary in the sale of a major asset should AVZ not resume trading again? Just a thought.

Cheers

 

[Chilla]

Fair enough. I've read the companies Constitution (I assume this is what you are referring to as the Charter). Seems Directors have the ability to sell the major asset subject only to listing rules and Corporations Act of course.

I wonder how the ASX listing rules specifically come into play for AVZ Minerals Ltd or its subsidiary in the sale of a major asset should AVZ not resume trading again? Just a thought.

Cheers

Look at the sale of 24% to CATH for what’s required.

Edit I just checked the Cath proposal and the 24% didn’t request shareholders approval.

 

[Azzler]

Vote or not, everyone votes get us the fuck out of here $$$$$$$$

 

[Winenut]

I note you’re quite the film buff mate. In particular you often post the scene from goodfellas with Ray Liotta getting the windup from joe Pesci. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fine film but can I recommend another Scorsese film which also features De niro, The King of Comedy, seems a bit more apt

You're watching me too closely chief

I don't remember a fucking thing you've posted....

 

[WPM60]

fucking

Nor me you.

Just sayin’