AVZ Discussion 2022

[Doc]

Strong voting block there Doc and good on you and your crew

If the MMGA stooges/puppets have enough votes I think you're right ...it's really difficult

Just like you I am super wary of "who are these AVZ SH nominees and what are they all about?"

That's why over the last few weeks I went to all the other shareholders and independent sources and resources that I know and trust to understand what is best going forward?

From that I determined the Hadley's were in fact important in protecting the interests of genuine AVZ shareholders and achieving the broader AVZ aims and goals for a lithium mine in Manono and supporting the broader DRC population

Quite simply the Hadleys do this by being aligned to and supportive of the current board and ensuring influences like MMGA simply don't get a foot in the door

Realistically I don't think it's practical at this point in time for all the other "non-endorsed" nominees to pull their nomination.......just a logistic reality for all concerned

Notwithstanding that fact I think all of those shareholders are incredibly genuine and have been motivated to nominate themselves in the best interests of all AVZ shareholders and the broader Manono and DRC community

Really proud there are so many passionate and active AVZ shareholders that's for sure

IMO voting for the Hadleys can actually strengthen the board right now and into the future, provide a united and powerful team and ensure the best outcome for all shareholders and genuine stakeholders whilst also ensuring MMGA and corrupt foreign interests are diminished in their influence both here and abroad

Did you actually speak to the Hadleys or just everyone else?

 

[Azzler]

The way I see it voting for the Hadley's won't stop MMGA getting on the board. Nominees are considered in order. So if Hadley's and MMGA both somehow get up they will fill the 5 vacant board seats and the rules say the rest of the nominees will be considered defeated.

If the no vacancy rule doesn't apply because we are not being asked to vote on it then there is a max of 9 and voting for the Hadley's will leave the 5 endorsed board nominees to potentially fight over the 2 possible seats remaining if they win their votes due to our max of 9 in the constitution. It will be the 2 highest votes out of the 5 that get the seats if that occurs.

But I'm still not 100% sure if this will apply or if we have max of 7 or 9

For the bod seats there are 2 existing / 5 vacant / 2 possible

Without the Hadley's if max 9 then we can still get 6 current bod / 3 MMGA

or if max 7 then 4 current bod / 3 MMGA

With Hadley's best we can do if max 9 is 4 current bod / 2 Hadley's / 3 MMGA

or if max 7 then 2 current bod / 2 Hadley's / 3 MMGA

Happy to be corrected. And again I don't think it really matters because either MMGA have the numbers for a 3 - 2 win or they're not getting a single seat imo

You're right in that none of it matters and it's all down to who has the numbers to win votes.

If MMGA have the numbers, then no other noms will get in ,so voting for the Hadleys or anyone else is meaningless.
If WE have the numbers, then no MMGA people will get in.
Worse though is what if people vote in the hadleys, and as well at least 1 or more other non endorsed noms get in.
Then the board can't elect the 3 recently appointed board members because they get last preference.
So you could block the board chosen candidates.

And respectfully @Winenut , I hear what you're claiming, but no one is able to provide details about how they will do as you claim re. protecting us.
I see a logical fallicy.

If there was a vulnerability present by not having the maximum number of directors (9), then the BoD would plug that vulnerability with board memeber they would research and interview themselves.
They could search high and low and get creative to invent skill gaps that needed filling if it was a case of needing to justify the new board members.

To think that shareholders have to force vote in 2 people that no one but a handful of people know, to protect AVZ because the BoD are incapable of plugging this vulnerability themselves is utterly absurd IMO.

I'd strongly recommend everyone NOT to vote for any non endorsed candidates.

 

[Doc]

The Hadley's are only a defence against MMGA if the bod endorsed candidates are considered BEFORE the shareholder candidates and the no vacancy rule doesn't apply so we have a max of 9

So 18 - 22 THEN 2 - 17 with the 2 possible extra seats available

That way the 5 bod endorsed candidates fill the vacant seats first and then the Hadley's become a defence against MMGA taking the possible last 2 seats due to the no vacancy rule not being voted on. But even then they would both need a higher % than all the MMGA candidates.

This was the entire point of the additional candidates

Otherwise if the rules as stated in the AGM notice and supplementary booklet are correct and candidates are considered IN ORDER so 2 - 22 to fill the vacancies then the Hadley's will potentially be taking seats away from the bod endorsed candidates if MMGA win with a max of 7 or 9 or if MMGA don't win and the no vacancy rule does apply and we have a max of 7

It would be pretty awkward if we do have a max of 7 and MMGA lose but the Hadley's win and are considered before the bod endorsed candidates and we end up with 5 current bod and 2 Hadley's instead of 7 current bod for no reason

Obviously if the Hadley's and MMGA both win but the 5 bod endorsed candidates all lose then the Hadley's would stop MMGA getting control as long as they vote with the 2 remaining current bod but that is by far the least likely outcome and the possibility of them taking seats away from the bod endorsed candidates is far more likely than that scenario

We really need final clarity on the candidates order consideration and whether the no vacancy rule applies to know for sure if the Hadley's are useful but the instructions provided so far are pretty clear. Although seeing as management thought there were 2 vacant seats rather than 5 I'm not sure if anyone really fucking knows how this works.

I propose we have a vote on amending the AVZ constitution at next year's AGM to spell out exactly how the board seats are decided

View attachment 48810
View attachment 48811

This is the crux of my concern. What if by voting the Hadleys in we leave some of the endorsed out? I’d be pretty annoyed to be honest

 

[Sparrowhawk12]

Some great posting re why to vote for the BOD-endorsed 5 &/or the Hadleys 2 - important but not CRITICAL, IMO.

It is critical we encourage all SH to vote for the "BOD 5" (+ Hadley 2 if you want) and against the MMGA 3, to ensure we defeat MMGA. If MMGA get 50+% of votes for them & against the rest, AND if No Vacancy rule applies, then MMGA can rule the BOD 3-2 and ruin AVZ.

With 2 weeks to go to vote, can I please encourage you to contact all SH in every way (SM, Ph, in person) & get them to vote ASAP by 20/11 along the lines of For BoD 18-22 and Against MMGA 9 10 17 ... with minor variations if you wish. Please get on the hustings.

I've started posting on X / twitter per below & will get to HC & FB over the weekend. Feel free to copy & improve.

X/Twitter (280 char) :
For Best ROI get all $AVZ SH to Vote FOR 1, 18-22 by 20/11 AGM & Against rest.
AVZ ICSID case forces DRC-AVZ win-win deal ASAP. If MMGA 9,10,17 get on BoD, will drop ICSID, sell Manono cheap to China who bribes DRC & MMGA @AusEmbZim @dfat @Treasury_AU @asx Avzminerals.com.au

 

[TDITD]

The main thing is voting MMGA out.

The Ann clearly states 5 vacant positions are being voted on (four times alone in the picture Carlos posted above). Which needs further investigation because we can have a maximum of 9 so why are AVZ stating only 7 are to be voted on. We need clarity on this.

I'm certainly not up for an attempt for the chinese to get a mole on the BOD after potentially losing their MMGA play. If we end up going to ICSID we really dont need another mole.

 

[Samus]

Meanwhile Kebeya continues to taunt shareholders:

Groups, Plant 1, dismantling the turbine !... keep barking!

A bark, Cominiere advances! Here the dismantling of the mobile part of Group 4, Central 2

 

[Azzler]

Remember this shill account?
Have a close look at the writing style, remind you of anyone?

I won't even say it but here's a clue, "Risk Assessment".

This guy is creepy as fuck, I wonder if he was the psycho that talked to those podcast guys.

 

[Carlos Danger]

Have a close look at the writing style, remind you of anyone?

I won't even say it but here's a clue, "Risk Assessment".

This guy is creepy as fuck, I wonder if he was the psycho that talked to those podcast guys.

Of course the fruit loop was Mrs Geist's baby boy lmao

 

[BRICK]

Meanwhile Kebeya continues to taunt shareholders:

Groups, Plant 1, dismantling the turbine !... keep barking!

A bark, Cominiere advances! Here the dismantling of the mobile part of Group 4, Central 2

Those turbines looked fucked.

Can’t just replace the turbines as the intakes and housings are probably rooted as well.

Also, the lagoon looked pretty silted up. Takes ages to clean them out.

Be interesting to see a condition report if anyone has seen?

 

[Hodlandwin69]

If the Hadleys were legit, and they get elected and MMGA don't, they should resign immediately to show how loyal and Nobel they really are.

 

[robface]

Wouldn't mind a bit more clarity on that for sure

Thank you for posting

Not American official....pretty simple

Might no longer be AVZ consultant because contract has finished?

Wouldn't mind a bit more clarity on that for sure

Thank you for posting

Not American official....pretty simple

Might no longer be AVZ consultant because contract has finished?

Definitely happy to follow up on that

Cheers

Tweeted Mining licence will be released soon, arranged meeting with President?
Or was that only after ICSID got his attention.
Unwilling/unable to comment further for AVZ support.

 

[Remark]

Those turbines looked fucked.

Can’t just replace the turbines as the intakes and housings are probably rooted as well.

Also, the lagoon looked pretty silted up. Takes ages to clean them out.

Be interesting to see a condition report if anyone has seen?

They're just collecting scrap metal for sale IMO.

 

[Scoota30]

Meanwhile Kebeya continues to taunt shareholders:

Groups, Plant 1, dismantling the turbine !... keep barking!

A bark, Cominiere advances! Here the dismantling of the mobile part of Group 4, Central 2

I'm still finding it quite interesting that this hasn't been addressed in an official company announcement. Fair enough we are fighting all the detractors who are using brown paper bags to illegally change tenement ownership etc. But to see them actually on the ground working on the hydro plant

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the emergency injunction against comineire due this week was just in regard to the Dathcom JVA which is seperate to this MoU with the dept. Of hydro/energy.

Do we have a sneaky trick up our hand? Are we okay with them starting to pull everything apart? Are we maybe having issues with the Gov Dept?

It is very frustrating to see him taunting and barking on X.

 

[TDITD]

I'm still finding it quite interesting that this hasn't been addressed in an official company announcement. Fair enough we are fighting all the detractors who are using brown paper bags to illegally change tenement ownership etc. But to see them actually on the ground working on the hydro plant

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the emergency injunction against comineire due this week was just in regard to the Dathcom JVA which is seperate to this MoU with the dept. Of hydro/energy.

Do we have a sneaky trick up our hand? Are we okay with them starting to pull everything apart? Are we maybe having issues with the Gov Dept?

It is very frustrating to see him taunting and barking on X.

All that account has ever done is taunt.
You can see the frustrations from him come through sometimes in his tweets. Frustrations that we are not taking the bait and wholesale abusing them all. For some reason industrial scale corruption is fine with the top-brass but not hurty words

 

[BRICK]

I'm still finding it quite interesting that this hasn't been addressed in an official company announcement. Fair enough we are fighting all the detractors who are using brown paper bags to illegally change tenement ownership etc. But to see them actually on the ground working on the hydro plant

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the emergency injunction against comineire due this week was just in regard to the Dathcom JVA which is seperate to this MoU with the dept. Of hydro/energy.

Do we have a sneaky trick up our hand? Are we okay with them starting to pull everything apart? Are we maybe having issues with the Gov Dept?

It is very frustrating to see him taunting and barking on X.

Well we have been flogging the cunt pretty heaviliy and rightly so. Hopefully his actions will bring him undone.

Most of the works appear to be preliminaries low-cost, earthworks and manual labour with a few excavators and some hammers. They look like they are taking advantage of the dry season which is April to October

This also could be a seperate package before refurbishment contracotrs arrive, who, may be FIFO - well would need to be.

If they are upgrading to 6 turbines, rebuilding penstocks, the race, installing new turbines and then upgrading/replacing the 85ks of powerlines and substations, then the work to date accounts for next to.... "fuck all" Im aslo not seeing any equipment in the background of any of these images that tell me refurb crews are onsite.

 

[Samus]

All that account has ever done is taunt.
You can see the frustrations from him come through sometimes in his tweets. Frustrations that we are not taking the bait and wholesale abusing them all. For some reason industrial scale corruption is fine with the top-brass but not hurty words

After seeing Kebeya get up at the recent conference and start abusing Serge I'm pretty confident this account is actually him.
The great thing about it is that he can be taunted enough to repeatedly incriminate and make a public idiot of himself.
Extremely unprofessional, even if it isn't him and simply one of his booze buddies they shouldn't be engaging with and taunting minor shareholders on such a public and widely used platform.

 

[BEISHA]

I'm still finding it quite interesting that this hasn't been addressed in an official company announcement. Fair enough we are fighting all the detractors who are using brown paper bags to illegally change tenement ownership etc. But to see them actually on the ground working on the hydro plant

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the emergency injunction against comineire due this week was just in regard to the Dathcom JVA which is seperate to this MoU with the dept. Of hydro/energy.

Do we have a sneaky trick up our hand? Are we okay with them starting to pull everything apart? Are we maybe having issues with the Gov Dept?

It is very frustrating to see him taunting and barking on X.

Are we okay with them starting to pull everything apart?

I have no problem, the hydro plant looks like it needs to be completely gutted and replaced, including the ceiling, happy for Cominiere to do the grunt work at their expense, then once the MOU is settled, toss the arseholes...

AVZ takes over and MHPGA ( make hydro plant great again )....

Definitely a question to ask BOD at AGM.............status quo please.!!

imo

 

[investinvest]

The Hadley's are only a defence against MMGA if the bod endorsed candidates are considered BEFORE the shareholder candidates and the no vacancy rule doesn't apply so we have a max of 9

So 18 - 22 THEN 2 - 17 with the 2 possible extra seats available

That way the 5 bod endorsed candidates fill the vacant seats first and then the Hadley's become a defence against MMGA taking the possible last 2 seats due to the no vacancy rule not being voted on. But even then they would both need a higher % than all the MMGA candidates.

This was the entire point of the additional candidates

Otherwise if the rules as stated in the AGM notice and supplementary booklet are correct and candidates are considered IN ORDER so 2 - 22 to fill the vacancies then the Hadley's will potentially be taking seats away from the bod endorsed candidates if MMGA win with a max of 7 or 9 or if MMGA don't win and the no vacancy rule does apply and we have a max of 7

It would be pretty awkward if we do have a max of 7 and MMGA lose but the Hadley's win and are considered before the bod endorsed candidates and we end up with 5 current bod and 2 Hadley's instead of 7 current bod for no reason

Obviously if the Hadley's and MMGA both win but the 5 bod endorsed candidates all lose then the Hadley's would stop MMGA getting control as long as they vote with the 2 remaining current bod but that is by far the least likely outcome and the possibility of them taking seats away from the bod endorsed candidates is far more likely than that scenario

We really need final clarity on the candidates order consideration and whether the no vacancy rule applies to know for sure if the Hadley's are useful but the instructions provided so far are pretty clear. Although seeing as management thought there were 2 vacant seats rather than 5 I'm not sure if anyone really fucking knows how this works.

I propose we have a vote on amending the AVZ constitution at next year's AGM to spell out exactly how the board seats are decided

View attachment 48810
View attachment 48811

Correct. Voting for any of the non-endorsed SHs only increases the risk of endorsed BOD not getting elected, due to sequence of voting. Plus higher salary expenses in a company that actually needs to tighten belts instead. If we already have a problem with paying bonuses to current BOD, then surely we will have a problem with paying new salaries for new faces with unknown benefit/roles for the company.

DYOR IMO

 

[Louweeza]

Afternoon All,

Quick question… I’m unable to make it to the AGM… any idea if we will be able to zoom in like last year? Thanks!