AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
Dijon101
Regular
Mr.Hackenbacker73
Emerged
Might pay to white out your details
Lets just get the ML . That is what matters .
Cumquat Cap
Regular
MMGA marketing is shit, they do raise obvious points about cashburn (which creates a divide between management and shareholders as they refuse to pay themselves less while we starve) - but they do not provide any tangible steps in place to have mining license issued. They also state they are winners which we all know Peter Huljich is anything but (anl + fail et al). Time for management to execute
Carlos Danger
Top 20
How did they get your contact information?
Was there a decision in the register case in the WA supreme court?
If not they have acquired it through you providing it or illegally
Azzler
Top 20
Hey I used to live in Glenbrook, I miss it, highschool years!
Last edited:
TheCount
Regular
Dijon101
Regular
FUCK ZIJIN!!
What matters is getting the ML without rewarding these corrupt lowlife fucks.
You don't negotiate with crooks.
Mr.Hackenbacker73
Emerged
Shit didnt think of that, anyway not to concerned. I am a long term holder and have met some on here at the road show last year.
I don't know how they got my info, I haven't registered anywhere or done anything different. I went out the front to bring the bins in and the post man handed it to me.
I met some of you at the sydney roadshow last year, I have no interest in these muppets getting on the board.
Mr.Hackenbacker73
Emerged
Hey Azzler we love Glenbrook, our kids like the schools and sport etc..Hey I used to live in Glenbrook, I miss it, highschool years!
By any chance was the postman Chinese ?
9cardomaha
Regular
Transcript which is mentioned in ann is for the entire hearing process - ICC chairman statement should still be the crux of this, whereby the ICC chair provides guidance on what is needed in the post-hearing brief to facilitate the arbitrator to make his decision.
From my understanding, the post-hearing brief can only be a page or so, where parties can add context to testimony which is highlighted by the Chair as ambiguous or needing more context.
Transcript signing process is just a formality to confirm that the stenographer has recorded everything verbatim without misinterpreting the oral testimonies of witnesses - excessive back and forths for minor edits like 'a' and 'an' is frowned upon by the ICC.
So i'm going to double down on my jurisdiction verdict timeline of 'BEFORE first week of November'.
The part about the arbitrator setting a procedural timeline is worrying, but my thoughts are that we might have been legally forced to include this as it is a possibility for further hearings on the main part of the case 'abuse of majority shareholder position by AVZ' - let's hope it doesn't get to that because we get a ruling in our favour.
I take solace in the fact that a company update on the procedural timeline does include the possibility of something like 'the arbitrator has decided that no further procedures are required due to our successful jurisdictional challenge. Zijin can fuck right off'.
Edit: existence of transcript has been confirmed, chairman statement is part of this so fingers crossed we can get a look at what the fuck happened (the case is PUBLIC afterall)
From my understanding, the post-hearing brief can only be a page or so, where parties can add context to testimony which is highlighted by the Chair as ambiguous or needing more context.
Transcript signing process is just a formality to confirm that the stenographer has recorded everything verbatim without misinterpreting the oral testimonies of witnesses - excessive back and forths for minor edits like 'a' and 'an' is frowned upon by the ICC.
So i'm going to double down on my jurisdiction verdict timeline of 'BEFORE first week of November'.
The part about the arbitrator setting a procedural timeline is worrying, but my thoughts are that we might have been legally forced to include this as it is a possibility for further hearings on the main part of the case 'abuse of majority shareholder position by AVZ' - let's hope it doesn't get to that because we get a ruling in our favour.
I take solace in the fact that a company update on the procedural timeline does include the possibility of something like 'the arbitrator has decided that no further procedures are required due to our successful jurisdictional challenge. Zijin can fuck right off'.
Edit: existence of transcript has been confirmed, chairman statement is part of this so fingers crossed we can get a look at what the fuck happened (the case is PUBLIC afterall)
Sammy_da_Smile
Regular
Any dates on when this was posted that you can see mate?
Azzler
Top 20
Some thoughts in the MMGS bullshit. (If it's real and not a ploy)
There's legit concern that they have insto backing, particularly the rather large chinese insto's on AVZ's register.
Though they're far from 50% of shareholders, it appears if people don't vote then they're counted as abstaining.
I take this to mean if there are 10 shareholders, but only 2 votes yes, 1 votes no, and 7 dont vote, then it's counted as a pass for the yes motion because it outweighs the no votes.
That is opposed to viewing the yes vote as only 20% of shareholders and therefore not passing.
Correct me if I'm wrong about that.
So taking that into consideration, and knowing AVZ's share register has an unusually large portion of retail holders...
How many retail do you think actually vote on motions? My guess is not very many, it's probably bottom draw stocks for many, barely aware of what's going on.
And that means if they have insto backing, their yes votes hold a hell of a lot more power that it first appears.
However, them seeking this mass mailout to sell themselves to retail means they likely do not have the support they need.
And It may even go against them.
It might alert the not so alert holders to the situation, and if they decide to ask around or look on twitter, they'll quickly realise the treachery that is at work, and might then be motivated to actively vote against the motion, where by they otherwise may not have voted at all.
I also believe our management will do a similar mass mailout in response to give their side of the story. They should be easily exposed.
Again prompting retail to vote no where they might not have otherwise.
Anyway, all these musings are just in regards to if they even had a hope in hell of succeeding in the first place, but let's certainly not get complacent here.
VOTE: FUCK NO !
MAKE SURE YOU VOTE !
TELL EVERYONE !
And as eluded to before, there are other moves being made to thwart this attempt so it may not ever get a chance.
There's legit concern that they have insto backing, particularly the rather large chinese insto's on AVZ's register.
Though they're far from 50% of shareholders, it appears if people don't vote then they're counted as abstaining.
I take this to mean if there are 10 shareholders, but only 2 votes yes, 1 votes no, and 7 dont vote, then it's counted as a pass for the yes motion because it outweighs the no votes.
That is opposed to viewing the yes vote as only 20% of shareholders and therefore not passing.
Correct me if I'm wrong about that.
So taking that into consideration, and knowing AVZ's share register has an unusually large portion of retail holders...
How many retail do you think actually vote on motions? My guess is not very many, it's probably bottom draw stocks for many, barely aware of what's going on.
And that means if they have insto backing, their yes votes hold a hell of a lot more power that it first appears.
However, them seeking this mass mailout to sell themselves to retail means they likely do not have the support they need.
And It may even go against them.
It might alert the not so alert holders to the situation, and if they decide to ask around or look on twitter, they'll quickly realise the treachery that is at work, and might then be motivated to actively vote against the motion, where by they otherwise may not have voted at all.
I also believe our management will do a similar mass mailout in response to give their side of the story. They should be easily exposed.
Again prompting retail to vote no where they might not have otherwise.
Anyway, all these musings are just in regards to if they even had a hope in hell of succeeding in the first place, but let's certainly not get complacent here.
VOTE: FUCK NO !
MAKE SURE YOU VOTE !
TELL EVERYONE !
And as eluded to before, there are other moves being made to thwart this attempt so it may not ever get a chance.
Similar threads
