AVZ Discussion 2022

[Ashlee]

A walk down memory lane 3 years ago today feels like a lifetime!

 

[Scoota30]

Why would avz withdraw from a billion dollar asset then continue drilling it for Zijin’s benefit ? We need far more clarity on this? Either someone had fucked up and cost us billions or Zijin are building a mine on someone else’s land. Zijin do not seem to care about icc or ICSID one iota

If the north had been legally conceded by AVZ and it was not spurious in nature, getting clarity from AVZ this late in the game will only benefit Zijins case in court and give all of the stooges like dudbrook and Shane more ammunition to splurge.

IMO your last sentence makes me feel like it's all a load of bollocks.

 

[Mr_Tones83]

Haven’t heard it said like this before

“While AVZ’s lawyers concede that the company gave up the northeast part of PR 13359 when it applied to transfer it to an exploitation permit, they claim that the coordinates of 15775 do not precisely match the area from which it planned to withdraw.”

Most likely written in the spin of Zijin and not worth stressing about, time will tell how it all pans out via ICC and ICSID.
Wish there were a quicker way though

 

[Cumquat Cap]

Yeah it’s all bollocks probably, just surprising Zijin so brazen and spending real money on something they don’t own. What can you do but wait and hope something good comes like a sale

 

[Azzler]

Mate it's also possible that it's more games from Zijin.
The fact they tried to pass off AVZ's drill results as their own made me think they're not willing to spend so much when it's still in doubt.
They could be fudging results, progress, all in the name of a chess game.

Or not, they do have money to burn.
But they're know to be dishonest in their business dealings.

 

[RHyNO]

Where’s management???? Golf course?

 

[Xerof]

Where’s management???? Golf course?

Out yachting

 

[cruiser51]

The Atomic OffMarket Transfer Form, just in case someone needs it...
I was searching for it after logging in to the share registry, couldn't find it there.
Found it on the Atomic website.

https://automic.com.au/forms/standard_transfer_form_no_fee.pdf

However, me thinks you will have to wait until new share certificates are issued

 

[Xerof]

Yeah it’s all bollocks probably, just surprising Zijin so brazen and spending real money on something they don’t own. What can you do but wait and hope something good comes like a sale

I noted in one article that they said they’d build access roads ‘later on’, so seemingly unprepared to invest in something that might be useful to the legal owner in due course

 

[Retrobyte]

tommy and his family

The only way Tommy will have kids is if he adopts them

 

[cruiser51]

I noted in one article that they said they’d build access roads ‘later on’, so seemingly unprepared to invest in something that might be useful to the legal owner in due course

One gets the impression the only money Zijin has been prepared to spend is on illegally putting their grubby claws on an asset and followed by destruction and obstruction and a lot of hot air.

It serves the Chinese as a nation to stop lithium mining in Manono, due to other worldwide heavy Chinese lithium investments.
They spent more money worldwide on other lithium assets than in Manono.

Just another way at looking what Zijin, a Chinese state operator, is doing.
They can't be very confident that their Manono operation is above board taking in account the lack of information on their own website.

 

[Doc]

Yeah it’s all bollocks probably, just surprising Zijin so brazen and spending real money on something they don’t own. What can you do but wait and hope something good comes like a sale

They probably thinking it’s a win win. They build a mine and then get forced to pay for it then they still have a very profitable mine ready to go or they build a mine and weasel their way out of paying for it and make unbelievable profits for the next 30 years. Pricks

 

[Samus]

May 17, 2024 10:54

Source:SMM

Zijin Mining Plans to Produce 250,000 to 300,000 Tons of Lithium Carbonate by 2028" - On May 16th, Zijin Mining released its "Five-Year Development Plan" and announced adjustments to its development goals by 2030. Among them, it proposed that by 2028, the company's lithium carbonate production will reach 250,000 to 300,000 tons per year. In recent years, the company will promote the construction of the 3Q salt lake in Argentina, the Lago Guoguo salt lake in Tibet, the first and second phase of the Hunan Xiangyuan lithium mine project, and initiate the exploration and development of the Manono lithium mine in the northeast. The "two lakes and two mines" project will make the company one of the most important lithium enterprises in the world.

market release:

https://www.zijinmining.com/upload/file/2024/05/16/193802a42c3a490fb6d2fcdb25af2969.pdf

 

[marksmann007]

May 17, 2024 10:54

Source:SMM

Zijin Mining Plans to Produce 250,000 to 300,000 Tons of Lithium Carbonate by 2028" - On May 16th, Zijin Mining released its "Five-Year Development Plan" and announced adjustments to its development goals by 2030. Among them, it proposed that by 2028, the company's lithium carbonate production will reach 250,000 to 300,000 tons per year. In recent years, the company will promote the construction of the 3Q salt lake in Argentina, the Lago Guoguo salt lake in Tibet, the first and second phase of the Hunan Xiangyuan lithium mine project, and initiate the exploration and development of the Manono lithium mine in the northeast. The "two lakes and two mines" project will make the company one of the most important lithium enterprises in the world.

market release:

https://www.zijinmining.com/upload/file/2024/05/16/193802a42c3a490fb6d2fcdb25af2969.pdf

 

[Roon]

Mate it's also possible that it's more games from Zijin.
The fact they tried to pass off AVZ's drill results as their own made me think they're not willing to spend so much when it's still in doubt.
They could be fudging results, progress, all in the name of a chess game.

Or not, they do have money to burn.
But they're know to be dishonest in their business dealings.

Of course they are likely willing to spend, their goal of developing the north and becoming a fact on the ground has been clear for ages. The number of drill rigs they've thrown at the zone and pace of activity highlights their intent to show everyone involved that they are already pushing towards mining, and are a viable and committed partner with appropriate resources behind them to complete the project, whilst AVZ sits in the doldrums suing everyone and going broke as the rest of the tenement sits dormant.

Of course there is little AVZ can currently do to progress 13359 without a license, but nonetheless Zijin's approach is a calculated one and one that may resonate with senior DRC officials already likely fed up with AVZ and the wider issue at large. Though our hands are tied, the fuckery by Zijin is likely being used to help shape perception and underpin the view we have been repeatedly told they have impressed on the DRC authorities - namely that AVZ are trying to gain a buck as speculators without any intent or capability to actually mine Manono.

I'm sure they are willing to throw a lot more cash at it quickly to cement Zijin's position on the ground, highlight the funds its sunk into the project as a means to better justify its stance that it must at the least maintain a hold over the north, and make it difficult to dislodge the company from its position. It's smart and definitely not their first rodeo of resource theft! Roads and such will likely follow on after a DFS, but we'll certainly see more work carried out unless clearer indications are provided that the authorities will renege on their delivery of this bogus license to Zijin.

however with DRC instead indicating it has no intent to comply with the interim ICSID orders, and pushing the Manono Lithium venture along towards PE, it's likely we'll see Zijin push forward as fast as possible towards developing a mine on this zone, importantly including using power from Mpiana-Mwanga, before any final ICSID award approaches (if it gets that far,). If there is any truth to us relinquishing the north, which I believe there is even though likely done through trickery, this and the approach Zijin is taking to become a fact on the ground will be used to try and secure at least this portion of Manono. It's worth the risk for them.

Very difficult situation! Not sure what more we can do to avoid the north being developed whilst we plod along through the ICC and ICSID. We've pushed these cases as a means to pressure a negotiated outcome, but there's little indication of any intent by the DRC and our opponents to bend to this pressure.

 

[Cumquat Cap]

Might be true but really unsure what you expect management to do about this besides follow legal recourse @Roon ? You still think the MMGA boys will get a better result?

 

[Roon]

Might be true but really unsure what you expect management to do about this besides follow legal recourse @Roon ? You still think the MMGA boys will get a better result?

Unfortunately I don't have any obvious solutions.

 

[SilentOne]

Of course they are likely willing to spend, their goal of developing the north and becoming a fact on the ground has been clear for ages. The number of drill rigs they've thrown at the zone and pace of activity highlights their intent to show everyone involved that they are already pushing towards mining, and are a viable and committed partner with appropriate resources behind them to complete the project, whilst AVZ sits in the doldrums suing everyone and going broke as the rest of the tenement sits dormant.

Of course there is little AVZ can currently do to progress 13359 without a license, but nonetheless Zijin's approach is a calculated one and one that may resonate with senior DRC officials already likely fed up with AVZ and the wider issue at large. Though our hands are tied, the fuckery by Zijin is likely being used to help shape perception and underpin the view we have been repeatedly told they have impressed on the DRC authorities - namely that AVZ are trying to gain a buck as speculators without any intent or capability to actually mine Manono.

I'm sure they are willing to throw a lot more cash at it quickly to cement Zijin's position on the ground, highlight the funds its sunk into the project as a means to better justify its stance that it must at the least maintain a hold over the north, and make it difficult to dislodge the company from its position. It's smart and definitely not their first rodeo of resource theft! Roads and such will likely follow on after a DFS, but we'll certainly see more work carried out unless clearer indications are provided that the authorities will renege on their delivery of this bogus license to Zijin.

however with DRC instead indicating it has no intent to comply with the interim ICSID orders, and pushing the Manono Lithium venture along towards PE, it's likely we'll see Zijin push forward as fast as possible towards developing a mine on this zone, importantly including using power from Mpiana-Mwanga, before any final ICSID award approaches (if it gets that far,). If there is any truth to us relinquishing the north, which I believe there is even though likely done through trickery, this and the approach Zijin is taking to become a fact on the ground will be used to try and secure at least this portion of Manono. It's worth the risk for them.

Very difficult situation! Not sure what more we can do to avoid the north being developed whilst we plod along through the ICC and ICSID. We've pushed these cases as a means to pressure a negotiated outcome, but there's little indication of any intent by the DRC and our opponents to bend to this pressure.

Hi Roon,

In response to your statement.

The shenanigans with what has happened in Manono still needs to be thrashed out within the purview of the ICSID/ICC. It has also been reported that there have been considerable amounts of corruption and I would question the validity on the reported split of the tenements based on this.

The DRC in my opinion are not going to risk World Bank funding in the Billions. Pakistan apparently learnt a hard lesson in this respect.

Non-compliance with an award from the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) can have several consequences, primarily because such non-compliance directly contravenes the obligations that member states have agreed to under the ICSID Convention. While the Convention itself does not specify penalties for non-compliance, there are indirect repercussions and broader implications for a state that fails to honor an ICSID award. Here are some of the potential consequences:

1. Legal and Financial Consequences:
   • Interest on Unpaid Awards: Typically, ICSID awards include provisions for interest to accrue on any unpaid sums. Thus, the financial burden on the non-compliant state can increase over time as interest accrues on the outstanding amount.
   • Enforcement in Other Jurisdictions: The aggrieved party can seek enforcement of the award in any of the countries that are signatories to the ICSID Convention. This can lead to the seizure or freezing of state assets located in foreign jurisdictions, though this is subject to international laws concerning sovereign immunity.
2. Political and Diplomatic Repercussions:
   • Strain on International Relations: Non-compliance can strain the diplomatic relations between the non-compliant state and the home country of the aggrieved investor, potentially affecting bilateral trade, investment, and political cooperation.
   • Impact on International Standing: Persistent non-compliance or disregard for international arbitration awards can tarnish a state's reputation in the international community, potentially making other countries and international investors wary of engaging with it.
3. Economic and Investment Impact:
   • Reduced Foreign Investment: A reputation for non-compliance with international arbitration awards can deter foreign investors, who may see it as a sign of legal unpredictability and a high-risk environment. This could lead to a decrease in foreign direct investment (FDI), which can be crucial for economic development.
   • Credit Rating and Borrowing Costs: International financial markets and credit rating agencies might view non-compliance as indicative of a broader governance issue, potentially leading to a downgrade in credit ratings. This can increase the cost of borrowing for the country on international markets.
4. Legal Precedents and Future Disputes:
   • Influence on Future Cases: Non-compliance might influence the proceedings and rulings of future international disputes involving the state. Arbitrators in other forums might view the state’s non-compliance as a negative factor, potentially influencing dispute resolution outcomes unfavorably against the state.

While these are not direct "penalties" in the traditional sense of punitive measures imposed by a governing body, they are significant negative consequences that can affect multiple aspects of a nation's political, economic, and legal landscape. States typically weigh these potential repercussions carefully when deciding whether to comply with an ICSID award.

I am not an expert in this area - please do your own research and much of this is an opinion based on research.

Regards,

SilentOne.

 

[Cumquat Cap]

I think everyone is ready to move on without going the distance at ICSID, will take several years and I’m not 100% certain Felix has the foresight to care what happens in 3-4 years. Need to strike a deal in whatever capacity now I think, Zijin do not care

 

[SilentOne]

Here is some research on some of the potential consequences on not complying with the ICC.

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in Paris, while not a judicial body like the International Criminal Court, plays a significant role in international business arbitration. Non-compliance with a direction by the ICC can lead to several consequences, particularly in the context of international arbitration:

1. Damage to Reputation: Businesses that fail to adhere to ICC directions may suffer reputational harm, which can impact their future dealings and partnerships.
2. Financial Penalties: The ICC can impose financial sanctions or penalties on parties that do not comply with its directives.
3. Enforcement through National Courts: The enforcement of ICC arbitration awards is generally carried out through national courts under the New York Convention, to which over 150 countries are signatories. This means that an ICC award can be enforced in any of these countries, much like a judgment from a national court.

Therefore, it is probably worth people waiting for the finalisation of both the ICSID/ICC cases. It is of course my preference that the issues are resolved amicably and beforehand. However, I am holding onto my interests with a death grip.

And may I say I have unwavering support for the Board.


Regards,

SilentOne - Do your own research