PDF here
When Nut ups the pressure on the board .....they deliver...
Given they refused to answer the very specific question about conflict of interest they should be disqualified. Maybe that's still to comeFat Tail nominees should be disqualified from the board election process for dishonesty in the application, being of character that will bring disrepute to the company and having relations to adversaries that are causing harm and financial impact to AVZ.
doesn't fill me with confidence this media release....
I guess it show's we're getting closer to resolution but it's hard to be enthusiatic when you've got lines like this
View attachment 47809
Me thinks a deal has been reluctantly struck by Nigel
Grab um by the nutsWhen Nut ups the pressure on the board .....they deliver...![]()
That caught my eye too. It could be as simple as AVZ agreeing NOT to pursue financial remedies for administrative malfeasance as stipulated by law or JV agreement.I guess it show's we're getting closer to resolution but it's hard to be enthusiatic when you've got lines like this
View attachment 47809
I don't think these fucktards ever had intent of showing up at the AGM, as they know they won't get voted in. The whole game plan is to undermine our current in country efforts and delay the finalization of the MoU and that sounds like exactly what they've done.So AVZ are saying that not only is this MMGA utter crap, in fact they are hurting us on the ground and delaying progress.
Honestly, the 3 stooges can fuck right off. Does someone nominating for BoD have to be present an a AGM? I might just have to make the trip over
Compromise of legal rights but not compromise of mining rights?That caught my eye too. It could be as simple as AVZ agreeing NOT to pursue financial remedies for administrative malfeasance as stipulated by law or JV agreement.
I think we just let this go and see what it looks like when announced.
Compromise of legal rights but not compromise of mining rights?
That caught my eye too. It could be as simple as AVZ agreeing NOT to pursue financial remedies for administrative malfeasance as stipulated by law or JV agreement.
I think we just let this go and see what it looks like when announced.
Compromise of legal rights but not compromise of mining rights?
Key word significant imoThat could be anything, from giving up part of a tenement, paying a bit extra, increase of DRC ownership, to not claiming damages due to delay.
One thing is for sure. The MMGA kunts have offered more a chucked a spanner in the works.
I'd be surprised if the DRC doesn't wait until at least the AGM to see if they get in now before agreeing to anything.
Significant =Key word significant imo
Fair question - it could be mining rights or legal remedies we’ve compromised on.Compromise of legal rights but not compromise of mining rights?
Be interesting to see what that means…Fair question - it could be mining rights or legal remedies we’ve compromised on.