AVZ Discussion 2022

[antimatter]

Calm the farm on this document.
Maybe fake.
Maybe mistranslation and/or misunderstanding.
May be simply because it's currently in Cominiere's name so the extension just states that.
May be my itchy balls.
Where did it come from anyway? Who posted it?

This is part of the 65 points MMGA counter to AVZ's 6 part recent announcement. Mud slinging shit.

 

[robface]

Might not stop AVZ moving forward but if you think those MMGA pricks and their Chinese backers are making life hard now imagine the extent of absolute shitfuckery they could come up with and execute when they have an insider giving them all the info on AVZ's operations and intentions and plans

Zijin, Cong, MMGA, Math, Eckhof, Celestin and others will never ever ever stop trying to fuck over AVZ for their own personal benefit.....ever

So we're always fucked then?.

 

[Winenut]

No troll here mate. I'm rusted on AVZ fan. Got a lot of shares riding in this and just getting a little stress that's all. No harm in thinking about every angle. I mean shit, who thought we'd be here when we bought in years and years ago?

Fair enough baz

 

[Carlos Danger]

Why is it not dated and signed?

Calm the farm on this document.
Maybe fake.
Maybe mistranslation and/or misunderstanding.
May be simply because it's currently in Cominiere's name so the extension just states that.
May be my itchy balls.
Where did it come from anyway? Who posted it?

It's legit. The dates of grant and expiry are the same in the document which are now seen on the CAMI portal. Up until recently this had Dathcom's old grant and expiry dates under Cominiere's name.

 

[Doc]

HAHA MMGA havent hired Spikerama have they? They have a counter on the website.
Is anything they do original?

 

[kron]

lmckenzie2 Hot Crapper​

576 Posts.
141
Date:19/10/23Time:18:23:27Post #:70434108
New
This is fake. You can see where words have been manipulated in the top red circle and also in the area around the signature and stamp. Nice try.

I'm hoping so. Could the irregular parts be due to the google machine translate? Either way I hope this document gets clarified sooner rather than later.

 

[Doc]

It's legit. The dates of grant and expiry are the same in the document which are now seen on the CAMI portal. Up until recently this had Dathcom's old grant and expiry dates under Cominiere's name.

View attachment 47439
View attachment 47440

Have we taken CAMI to ICC yet? Cant keep up.

 

[tonster66]

“There was a $US1 million payment,” said Mr Huljich. “I voiced very severe concerns about that and I was of the view it wasn’t right for the company and then I was presented with a section 249d notice, which made an allegation I was conflicted. So, I resigned to prevent division on the board and a fight among shareholders, as I didn’t consider that in the best interests of the company.”

Begs the question if he didn’t consider that in the best interest of the company then, why would he think it’s in the best interest of AVZ now.

Plenty of division on the board and fighting among shareholders is exactly where this is heading if mmga have their way.

I may be wrong as I am going from memory. I am sure I will be corrected.
huljick states that he resigned because the $1million payment to Maruis was not in the best interest of the company. Wasnt this $1 million figure arrived at after hurlshit had finished on the board. When he was on the board it was a much higher payment which Piper advised against?

 

[Nbaz]

Fair enough baz

Fair enough indeed. Yours and moneybags response to my question just illustrates the stress of the situation. Everyone is jumping at shadows. I was mearly thinking worst case scenario out loud to people who are much smarter and more in the know than I am

 

[wombat74]

It's legit. The dates of grant and expiry are the same in the document which are now seen on the CAMI portal. Up until recently this had Dathcom's old grant and expiry dates under Cominiere's name.

View attachment 47439
View attachment 47440

So if this is legit and 13359 is gone what's the point of the MMGA BS ? We may as well go straight to ICSID . Something fishy going on .

 

[Doc]

So if this is legit and 13359 is gone what's the point of the MMGA BS ? We may as well go straight to ICSID . Something fishy going on .

Something as potentially significant as this would warrant a response from AVZ no?

 

[Mr Inappropriate]

Worrying indeed. So the next devious play is that Cominiere forget to pay the surface rights and suddenly someone swoops in and gets the tenement a la MMCS.

Rack up another couple of court cases to unravel this next snafu.

@kron, I agree - amazing how quickly surface rights can be calculated!

I’m calling bullshit. Per the Mining Code:

• A mining lease can only be granted to the applicant i.e. Dathcom.
• The first page extends the Research Permit, yet the second page calculates the surface fees. That’s not a thing - surface fees are only applicable for an Exploitation Permit, which Cominiere does not have as evidenced by the alleged extension of the Research Permit on page 1.

It’s is a non sequitur. It’s fake IMO.

@Carlos Danger - re the CAMI portal, it has shown Cominiere as the owner of 13359 for many months now. Mupande’s handiwork, presumably.

 

[Mr Inappropriate]

I’m calling bullshit. Per the Mining Code:

• A mining lease can only be granted to the applicant i.e. Dathcom.
• The first page extends the Research Permit, yet the second page calculates the surface fees. That’s not a thing - surface fees are only applicable for an Exploitation Permit, which Cominiere does not have this as evidenced by the alleged extension of the Research Permit on page 1.

It’s is a non sequitur. It’s fake IMO.

@Carlos Danger - re the CAMI portal, it has shown Cominiere as the owner of 13359 for many months now. Mupande’s handiwork, presumably.

Mind you, I would piss myself if old mate CKK rushed to pay the fee into the listed bank account, to later discover the document was fake and the account owner was…

 

[Carlos Danger]

Worrying indeed. So the next devious play is that Cominiere forget to pay the surface rights and suddenly someone swoops in and gets the tenement a la MMCS.

Rack up another couple of court cases to unravel this next snafu.

@kron, I agree - amazing how quickly surface rights can be calculated!

Why would they need to do that?

Cominiere's plan is to form a JV with Zijin at a 76% to 24% split in Zijin's favour using the rights to 13359 they now claim to have. Which has been backed up by the MoM and new CAMI DG. The document shows the MOM justifying this by citing the Kalemie high court decision on May 3 2023 which was is in violation of the ICC emergency order preventing Cominiere terminating the Dathcom JVA.

But clearly the MoM doesn't give a fuck about the ICC. Technically under the mining code Zijin and Cominiere should have to go through the whole drilling process again and then apply for a PE as it is a new applicant but as if they won't just use our DFS numbers and have it rubber stamped by the Minister of Brown Bags. This will end with us making an out of court settlement at the ICSID with the DRC government and Zijin is going to pay for it on their behalf imo

 

[Carlos Danger]

I’m calling bullshit. Per the Mining Code:

• A mining lease can only be granted to the applicant i.e. Dathcom.
• The first page extends the Research Permit, yet the second page calculates the surface fees. That’s not a thing - surface fees are only applicable for an Exploitation Permit, which Cominiere does not have as evidenced by the alleged extension of the Research Permit on page 1.

It’s is a non sequitur. It’s fake IMO.

@Carlos Danger - re the CAMI portal, it has shown Cominiere as the owner of 13359 for many months now. Mupande’s handiwork, presumably.

The dates have definitely changed. I checked it a few weeks ago.

 

[timb89]

I’m calling bullshit. Per the Mining Code:

• A mining lease can only be granted to the applicant i.e. Dathcom.
• The first page extends the Research Permit, yet the second page calculates the surface fees. That’s not a thing - surface fees are only applicable for an Exploitation Permit, which Cominiere does not have as evidenced by the alleged extension of the Research Permit on page 1.

It’s is a non sequitur. It’s fake IMO.

@Carlos Danger - re the CAMI portal, it has shown Cominiere as the owner of 13359 for many months now. Mupande’s handiwork, presumably.

Yep. Matching doesn't isnt inductive proof. It just means the possible forgery as been matched to CAMI.

 

[Mr Inappropriate]

The dates have definitely changed. I checked it a few weeks ago.

Acknowledged - thank you.

 

[Doc]

And all this a week after AVZ was mentioned for the first time at Ministers meeting.
What a movie this will make

 

[Hodlandwin69]

I’m calling bullshit. Per the Mining Code:

• A mining lease can only be granted to the applicant i.e. Dathcom.
• The first page extends the Research Permit, yet the second page calculates the surface fees. That’s not a thing - surface fees are only applicable for an Exploitation Permit, which Cominiere does not have as evidenced by the alleged extension of the Research Permit on page 1.

It’s is a non sequitur. It’s fake IMO.

@Carlos Danger - re the CAMI portal, it has shown Cominiere as the owner of 13359 for many months now. Mupande’s handiwork, presumably.

You pay surface fees on both exploration and exploitation. It's just much less on exploration.

 

[Carlos Danger]

I’m calling bullshit. Per the Mining Code:

• A mining lease can only be granted to the applicant i.e. Dathcom.
• The first page extends the Research Permit, yet the second page calculates the surface fees. That’s not a thing - surface fees are only applicable for an Exploitation Permit, which Cominiere does not have as evidenced by the alleged extension of the Research Permit on page 1.

It’s is a non sequitur. It’s fake IMO.

@Carlos Danger - re the CAMI portal, it has shown Cominiere as the owner of 13359 for many months now. Mupande’s handiwork, presumably.

You pay surface fees on both exploration and exploitation. It's just much less on exploration.

Correct Hodl. Specifically on renewals of PR under Article 62 (a) of the mining code.