AVZ Discussion 2022

[Carlos Danger]

Lets for arguments sake, say that BOD tabled an offer in March this year "We will give up the north, but you give us the south". At a time when we didn't have any traction or leverage from ICSID (other than a case being filed), and a bunch of ICC cases with no constituted tribunal or emergency rulings, what do you think the result would be? You think we'd be on our merry fucking way right now?

Could you imagine going in with nothing except the line "we are australian, we are law abiding and we developed the mine, you and the Chinese are all fucking us" and trying to negotiate this?

Even with our current legal leverage, we are in this position which is a grater wank at best. But we have a higher possibility to get what you want and even more in my view if we go through with the plan, because i'm not a pessimistic piece of shit.

No one can give you a guarantee when working in the DRC, MMGA would have implemented what you are suggesting, opening the BOD and the company to more legal issues (according to ann).

But yes, lets keep shitting on the current game plan and dream of getting 100% guarantees from the DRC to give us RD in its entirety and ceding the north to the Chinese without any leverage, that's fucking super helpful.

Do i like our current situation, fuck no. Do i want to give up the north because its high in mica, fuck no. I'm not a fan of the way it transpired, but to come out now and say, hey lets just fuck the north and settle for the south, like its been a glaring option all along is fucking delusion.

Strictly my own opinion.

But we literally gave away the north

Mining code gives zero fucks that we were tricked into submitting a waiver and so far no proof has been uncovered that shows how we were somehow meant to magically retain it

Suspension started when Nigel resigned from AJN three trading days after Zijin and Dathomir claims were revealed in the mining licence decree announcement

 

[9cardomaha]

But we literally gave away the north

Mining code gives zero fucks that we were tricked into submitting a waiver and so far no proof has been uncovered that shows how we were somehow meant to magically retain it

Suspension started when Nigel resigned from AJN three trading days after Zijin and Dathomir claims were revealed in the mining licence decree announcement

My overly dramatic response was the fact that we have never had an opportunity to say "hey just give us the south and we'll cede the north". Its definitely not from a lack of trying IMO.

Given the circumstances, we had no leverage to negotiate any sort of outcome for just the south because the north was swindled as part of some bullshit 100% guarantee that DRC gave us.

We started this fight against corruption on the back foot, now we are clawing our way back - the disharmonious bullshit that is cited by MOM had nothing to do with the north based on the correspondence. COMINIERE's letter which they sent to MOM to revoke the license was something about dividends, raising capital on ASX, opaque management.

North was only mentioned as it was relinquished without Cominiere's approval or some shit, but not the root.

Just don't want the ideas to be conflated because its not like BOD sitting on their hands looking at a deal for RD and not taking it....

 

[SilentOne]

Wombat I think the forum is a better place if you simply dont post.

You simply drain what energy I have after a full day at work.

I will congratulate you when you post something profound - till then please feel free to put your keyboard in the mincer.

Regards,

SilentOne

 

[wombat74]

Wombat I think the forum is a better place if you simply dont post.

You simply drain what energy I have after a full day at work.

I will congratulate you when you post something profound - till then please feel free to put your keyboard in the mincer.

Regards,

SilentOne

Put me on ignore mate . If what I post drains your energy ........................ I'm mean seriously? I look forward to your profound post . That's deep mate . Enlighten me.

 

[TheCount]

9minute mark stating DRC is the second worst Country to be mining in Africa and at 24 minutes acknowledges Manono as second biggest capacity but then dismisses it with the trading halt for sovereign risk reasons etc etc.

We had better get moving or these other companies will start filling the production gap…

 

[Dave Evans]

But we literally gave away the north

Mining code gives zero fucks that we were tricked into submitting a waiver and so far no proof has been uncovered that shows how we were somehow meant to magically retain it

Suspension started when Nigel resigned from AJN three trading days after Zijin and Dathomir claims were revealed in the mining licence decree announcement

I’m moving forward and trusting that DLA Piper has a thorough knowledge of the laws involved and know what they are doing.

As far as looking back goes, there are two things I remember clearly about CDL.

First, we drilled it which shows we were actively exploring the north east tenement

Secondly, at last year’s AGM when Nigel mentioned the high mica at CDL, people on this forum thought he was preparing to negotiate it away and there was outrage

I’m putting my faith in DLA Piper and keenly watching the latest updates by @9cardomaha and not wasting time and energy on bullshit. I put that energy into continuing to research information and fight the bullshit and spin being spewed out by Cominiere and Zijin

 

[Carlos Danger]

My overly dramatic response was the fact that we have never had an opportunity to say "hey just give us the south and we'll cede the north". Its definitely not from a lack of trying IMO.

Given the circumstances, we had no leverage to negotiate any sort of outcome for just the south because the north was swindled as part of some bullshit 100% guarantee that DRC gave us.

We started this fight against corruption on the back foot, now we are clawing our way back - the disharmonious bullshit that is cited by MOM had nothing to do with the north based on the correspondence. COMINIERE's letter which they sent to MOM to revoke the license was something about dividends, raising capital on ASX, opaque management.

North was only mentioned as it was relinquished without Cominiere's approval or some shit, but not the root.

Just don't want the ideas to be conflated because its not like BOD sitting on their hands looking at a deal for RD and not taking it....

Cominiere accused us of fraud

According to DLA Piper under a Société Anonyme structure we can approve the waiver with a 2/3 majority. Cominiere's arguement is that AVZ only had 60% when it was done.

We may have good legal standing but is that enough for something like this when the RCCM says we have 60%?

Quorum requirements for shareholder and board meetings in France - DLA Piper Guide to Going Global

www.dlapiperintelligence.com

Although if it is all good legally we still gave it away. Mining code says it goes back to the state for the tender process. There is no legal pathway for the applicant retaining the area. Management said it would be part of a new JV so obviously they got played by Mupande and have been trying to catch up ever since.

And I swear you said recently that offer was on the table at some point. I just got home from the gym so will have a look soon. Fair enough if not but clearly that is what Zijin, Cominiere and the key decision makers in the DRC government want. They would have signed the MoU before the AGM if they wanted us to have the north. Instead they waited to see if MMGA could deliver a 'more equitable' outcome.

 

[wombat74]

I’m moving forward and trusting that DLA Piper has a thorough knowledge of the laws involved and know what they are doing.

As far as looking back goes, there are two things I remember clearly about CDL.

First, we drilled it which shows we were actively exploring the north east tenement

Secondly, at last year’s AGM when Nigel mentioned the high mica at CDL, people on this forum thought he was preparing to negotiate it away and there was outrage

I’m putting my faith in DLA Piper and keenly watching the latest updates by @9cardomaha and not wasting time and energy on bullshit. I put that energy into continuing to research information and fight the bullshit and spin being spewed out by Cominiere and Zijin

 

[Carlos Danger]

My overly dramatic response was the fact that we have never had an opportunity to say "hey just give us the south and we'll cede the north". Its definitely not from a lack of trying IMO.

Given the circumstances, we had no leverage to negotiate any sort of outcome for just the south because the north was swindled as part of some bullshit 100% guarantee that DRC gave us.

We started this fight against corruption on the back foot, now we are clawing our way back - the disharmonious bullshit that is cited by MOM had nothing to do with the north based on the correspondence. COMINIERE's letter which they sent to MOM to revoke the license was something about dividends, raising capital on ASX, opaque management.

North was only mentioned as it was relinquished without Cominiere's approval or some shit, but not the root.

Just don't want the ideas to be conflated because its not like BOD sitting on their hands looking at a deal for RD and not taking it....

Cominiere accused us of fraud

According to DLA Piper under a Société Anonyme structure we can approve the waiver with a 2/3 majority. Cominiere's arguement is that AVZ only had 60% when it was done.

We may have good legal standing but is that enough for something like this when the RCCM says we have 60%?

View attachment 51333

Quorum requirements for shareholder and board meetings in France - DLA Piper Guide to Going Global

www.dlapiperintelligence.com

View attachment 51334

Although if it is all good legally we still gave it away. Mining code says it goes back to the state for the tender process. There is no legal pathway for the applicant retaining the area. Management said it would be part of a new JV so obviously they got played by Mupande and have been trying to catch up ever since.

And I swear you said recently that offer was on the table at some point. I just got home from the gym so will have a look soon. Fair enough if not but clearly that is what Zijin, Cominiere and the key decision makers in the DRC government want. They would have signed the MoU before the AGM if they wanted us to have the north. Instead they waited to see if MMGA could deliver a 'more equitable' outcome.

Sorry my bad you were talking about the new split not the old split

Although surely Zijin and Cominiere would bite our hands off we said give us back the middle ground and you have a deal

 

[Winenut]

With the MMGA goons out of the way (for the time being) I hope the good people of Manono, the DRC and LTSH's of AVZ can co-ordinate the very best campaign across every single platform to bring about the change that provides the absolute best outcome for all stakeholders.

Without a doubt it requires the heads of the DRC Government and all of its leaders and agencies and departments to immediately cease participating in the corruption sponsored by China and its state controlled entities like Zijin

It is as simple as that.............it is as simple as that......

The DRC and all its people deserve better than self interested, vile and corrupted individuals in power selling the future of their fellow DRC citizens out for a pittance, gold watches and trinkets to Chinese (Zijin state owned) foreign interests that will absolutely pillage the country and have it remain a colonized and impoverished nation in perpetuity

Wake up Felix

Wake up

Dream time is over

 

[Cumquat Cap]

What's CATL's next move I wonder?

Detractors are pushing the narrative they will side with Zijin etc - highly doubtful

 

[Dom1974]

What's CATL's next move I wonder?

Detractors are pushing the narrative they will side with Zijin etc - highly doubtful

Hope they do. That’ll be $20m break fee in the kitty and no need to rely on Locke.

 

[DiscoDanNZ]

What's CATL's next move I wonder?

Detractors are pushing the narrative they will side with Zijin etc - highly doubtful

One less Wang in the gangbang, who wouldn't be happy with that.

 

[Hodlandwin69]

Hope they do. That’ll be $20m break fee in the kitty and no need to rely on Locke.

Why would there be a break fee? They can just play both sides. It clear they don't care who wins, they just want the Lithium. It will be AVZ that has to break contract and will be liable for $20 mil fee

 

[9cardomaha]

Why would there be a break fee? They can just play both sides. It clear they don't care who wins, they just want the Lithium. It will be AVZ that has to break contract and will be liable for $20 mil fee

 

[taofufa]

sometime I am glad AVZ is in TH, look at how spod price is going

 

[Hodlandwin69]

Was a legit answer but ok.

Why would Cath break contract with avz and pay 20mil? They wouldn't imo. If AVZ breaks contract, they would be the ones liable to pay Cath 20 mil.

Caths TIA is with AVZ, not the Board and voting against them doesn't change anything.

Even if they support Zijin, why would they have to cancel there TIA, unless there's some conflict of interest clause which I don't know, if so I retract my statement.

 

[9cardomaha]

Was a legit answer but ok.

Why would Cath break contract with avz and pay 20mil? They wouldn't imo. If AVZ breaks contract, they would be the ones liable to pay Cath 20 mil.

Caths TIA is with AVZ, not the Board and voting against them doesn't change anything.

Even if they support Zijin, why would they have to cancel there TIA, unless there's some conflict of interest clause which I don't know, if so I retract my statement.

My ?que? was legit - you say why would CATH break contract, but then why would AVZ?

Don't think AVZ would break contract either right? your logic can be applied both ways?

We don;t like them, they don;t like us. no one wants to pay 20mil break fee, we can still get funding even if they are cunts, blah blah.

It will be AVZ that has to break contract and will be liable for $20 mil fee

Don't go conflating ideas please....

 

[Hodlandwin69]

My ?que? was legit - you say why would CATH break contract, but then why would AVZ?

Don't think AVZ would break contract either right? your logic can be applied both ways?

We don;t like them, they don;t like us. no one wants to pay 20mil break fee, we can still get funding even if they are cunts, blah blah.



Don't go conflating ideas please....

Yeh, apologies for the misunderstanding. I don't think AVZ will break contract. I was making a point to whoever I replied to originally as they were saying Cath will pay avz 20mil for contract break.