AVZ Discussion 2022

[Azzler]

Sorry to disagree. Locke has AVZ and all subsidiaries and assets as security. If AVZ can not pay back, Locke could for example sell the stake in Dathcom. Zijin would be the majority shareholder of Dathcom. And everyone has seen how quickly Zijin is getting approvals and permits. By whatever means they apply, they get the paperwork. And with AVZ out who should question it or bring it to court/ arbitration. But maybe I misread it. I am not a native English speaker

Your line of thinking is completely wrong. And I suspect you're just a troll.

All lenders need security.
If we can't get our asset back to sell, then the asset is of no value to Locke.
If we get our asset back to sell, then we have the money to pay back Locke.
If we then decided to be jerks and not pay Locke back, then they have legal recourse to secure what has been put down as security.

So fuck off troll.

 

[PhatCatz]

Sorry to disagree. Locke has AVZ and all subsidiaries and assets as security. If AVZ can not pay back, Locke could for example sell the stake in Dathcom. Zijin would be the majority shareholder of Dathcom. And everyone has seen how quickly Zijin is getting approvals and permits. By whatever means they apply, they get the paperwork. And with AVZ out who should question it or bring it to court/ arbitration. But maybe I misread it. I am not a native English speaker

That’s where my head has been and the biggest concern of mine. They just sell assets to the Chinese as a fire sale. After all they’ve only put up a small sum and they’d make that back easy with a sell off. They aren’t in the business of mining.

But that is an issue for a future date. We live another two years and I hope the BOD are working behind the scenes to secure additional funding from somewhere else. Unsure how though if all of the assets are already given up to Locke.

 

[Hudnut]

Re: ICSID periodic fees

I understand that at this stage neither AVZ nor the DRC has paid its periodic ICSID fees, and as a result the case is suspended (temporarily).

While AVZ may have previously been short of funds, I am guessing that the DRC's motive in not paying is a clumsy attempt to stall the proceedings and ultimately get them cancelled. Typical DRC shitfuckery, which I hope back-fires big time.

So what sort of costs are we looking at?

ICSID charges an administrative fee of US$52,000/annum for its arbitration and conciliation services, which is typically divided equally between the parties. Therefore AVZ and the DRC each pay US$26,000 annually.

While this fee covers the ICSID's administrative services throughout the duration of the proceedings, ICSID also charges US$200/hr for staff services in mediation and fact-finding proceedings, plus additional charges for specific case-related expenses such as transcripts and interpretation.

On face value these fees seem reasonable, and even if AVZ needs to pay the DRC’s share in order to get proceedings back on track, it is a small price to pay in the broader picture of the billions at stake.

Cheers

F

I thought someone reported that at the AGM and surrounding conversations, Nige said we were going to pay the DRC's ICSID fees to keep things moving.

 

[Juba1845]

Your line of thinking is completely wrong. And I suspect you're just a troll.

All lenders need security.
If we can't get our asset back to sell, then the asset is of no value to Locke.
If we get our asset back to sell, then we have the money to pay back Locke.
If we then decided to be jerks and not pay Locke back, then they have legal recourse to secure what has been put down as security.

So fuck off troll.

This is incorrect . The likely outcome if no settlement is the DRC through Chinese money will pay Locke to have all legal proceedings dropped, then legitimately take control of all Manono both north and south . Did Nigel explain to share holders what happens if legal proceedings are still ongoing come December 2026 or if AVZ win and compensation takes years ? Surely this is an incentive for continued delays . Nigel should have negotiated a longer contract . December 2028 .

 

[j.l]

I thought someone reported that at the AGM and surrounding conversations, Nige said we were going to pay the DRC's ICSID fees to keep things moving.

Correct.

Well, that's certainly my understanding of what Nigel said at the AGM - i.e. AVZ now has the funds and will pay 'both sides' of the security fee ASAP. Not sure how long that will take or what that means in terms of delays incurred by 'slipping down the queue' at ICSID (if there is such a concept), but it is what it is.

I do wonder what other delay tricks Fasken and DRC have left up their sleeve but presumably we'll see them all used over time.

Hopefully DLA Piper identified such potential events via risk assessment and have factored them into the budget and timelines agreed with AVZ and Locke.

 

[Flight996]

I thought someone reported that at the AGM and surrounding conversations, Nige said we were going to pay the DRC's ICSID fees to keep things moving.

Yes, and I am simply pointing out the actual costs involved, and that paying them a small price to pay in order to side-step the DRC's shitfuckery.

Cheers
F

 

[Goldenboy]

Re: ICSID periodic fees

I understand that at this stage neither AVZ nor the DRC has paid its periodic ICSID fees, and as a result the case is suspended (temporarily).

While AVZ may have previously been short of funds, I am guessing that the DRC's motive in not paying is a clumsy attempt to stall the proceedings and ultimately get them cancelled. Typical DRC shitfuckery, which I hope back-fires big time.

So what sort of costs are we looking at?

ICSID charges an administrative fee of US$52,000/annum for its arbitration and conciliation services, which is typically divided equally between the parties. Therefore AVZ and the DRC each pay US$26,000 annually.

While this fee covers the ICSID's administrative services throughout the duration of the proceedings, ICSID also charges US$200/hr for staff services in mediation and fact-finding proceedings, plus additional charges for specific case-related expenses such as transcripts and interpretation.

On face value these fees seem reasonable, and even if AVZ needs to pay the DRC’s share in order to get proceedings back on track, it is a small price to pay in the broader picture of the billions at stake.

Cheers

F

I think the figure I heard from the info session was around $450 K ( each ).....I stand to be corrected

 

[TheCount]

Your line of thinking is completely wrong. And I suspect you're just a troll.

All lenders need security.
If we can't get our asset back to sell, then the asset is of no value to Locke.
If we get our asset back to sell, then we have the money to pay back Locke.
If we then decided to be jerks and not pay Locke back, then they have legal recourse to secure what has been put down as security.

So fuck off troll.

Edit: "fuck off Shane".

 

[Goldenboy]

This is incorrect . The likely outcome if no settlement is the DRC through Chinese money will pay Locke to have all legal proceedings dropped, then legitimately take control of all Manono both north and south . Did Nigel explain to share holders what happens if legal proceedings are still ongoing come December 2026 or if AVZ win and compensation takes years ? Surely this is an incentive for continued delays . Nigel should have negotiated a longer contract . December 2028 .

We won't get to that stage .....The DRC needs the lithium out of the ground. When they see that they can't win then the negotiations start . The DRC has let Zigin go ahead so that the DRC is then getting royalties and taxes on two fronts and not only on one front (AVZ)....we get compensation for the north and everyone prospers ( my take on the future from all the snippets of info )

 

[Flight996]

I think the figure I heard from the info session was around $450 K ( each ).....I stand to be corrected

Wow, I will recheck my information sources, which are Perplexity.AI and Google Gemini.

In retrospect, the figures that both sources quote seem low in the scheme of things. I wonder if there are not other fees, which have not been taken into account. I will recheck.

 

[Flight996]

Thank you for pointing out the clear under-quoting in my original post. It seems that neither search took into account a whole range of costs in addition to periodic costs. My bad.

Here is a list of the main fees and charges applicable to an ICSID arbitration:

1. Registration fee: US$25,000 (non-refundable) payable upon filing a request for arbitration
2. Administrative charge: US$52,000 per year, typically divided equally between parties
3. Tribunal costs: On average US$882,668.19, with a median of US$875,907.97
4. Arbitrator fees: US$500 per hour for work performed in connection with the proceeding
5. Secretary attendance fee: US$200 per hour when the Tribunal Secretary attends meetings
6. Remote hearing hosting: US$2,500 per day
7. In-person hearing facilities: US$4,000 per day for use of a hearing room and breakout/deliberation rooms at ICSID's Washington, D.C. center
8. Travel expenses: Reimbursement for travel and subsistence expenses of the Secretary for meetings held away from ICSID's seat
9. Arbitrator travel fees: Hourly fee for travel time to attend hearings, sessions, and meetings, plus per diem allowances and travel expense reimbursements
10. Party costs: On average, US$5,619,261.74 for claimants and US$4,954,461.27 for respondents (including legal fees and other expenses)

Note that actual costs can vary significantly depending on the complexity and duration of the case

My sincere apologies, and I will delete the original erroneous post.

 

[cruiser51]

Edit: "fuck off Shane".

How many aliases is Shane using this time?
He must realise by now nobody gives a fuk about what he dribbles on X under his magnitude names.

There seems to be an increase of irregular emerged regulars, every time something positive is around the corner trying to give their negative opinions, which are pretty funny if you attended the AGM. it really means they know SFA.
So in other words, it is highly likely a good sign to see the fukwits pop up.

 

[Retrobyte]

Wow, I will recheck my information sources, which are Perplexity.AI and Google Gemini.

This guy also relied on AI .... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14144285/Tesla-DFO-control-crash-SUV-Homebush.html

 

[Winenut]

This guy also relied on AI .... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14144285/Tesla-DFO-control-crash-SUV-Homebush.html

Might filter picked up some possible harmful content on that page Retro

Just so others are aware

 

[Largus Averta]

Wow, I will recheck my information sources, which are Perplexity.AI and Google Gemini.

In retrospect, the figures that both sources quote seem low in the scheme of things. I wonder if there are not other fees, which have not been taken into account. I will recheck.

Don't rely on AI. The sentences it spits out are only statistically probable arrangements of words that should match your query according to their algorithm and what it trained on.

It doesn't really fact check anything.

The sooner people realise this the better. If you use it for general well known bullshit, it will probably be OK, because those word combinations are common. If you want specifics (think of accurate hands with 5 fingers), then it's going to take work to prod it to get that, and that will corrupt the answer anyway, because you led it there.

It's not a search engine, though it shares similarities, it's a language learning model.

 

[Flight996]

Don't rely on AI. The sentences it spits out are only statistically probable arrangements of words that should match your query according to their algorithm and what it trained on.

It doesn't really fact check anything.

The sooner people realise this the better. If you use it for general well known bullshit, it will probably be OK, because those word combinations are common. If you want specifics (think of accurate hands with 5 fingers), then it's going to take work to prod it to get that, and that will corrupt the answer anyway, because you led it there.

Well that explains why I regularly need both AI assistants to re-do their responses due to blatantly incorrect or inadequate information, or its just made-up fantasy bullshit. Pretty much the same issue when I ask the wife why our transaction account is empty.

 

[Azzler]

This is incorrect . The likely outcome if no settlement is the DRC through Chinese money will pay Locke to have all legal proceedings dropped, then legitimately take control of all Manono both north and south . Did Nigel explain to share holders what happens if legal proceedings are still ongoing come December 2026 or if AVZ win and compensation takes years ? Surely this is an incentive for continued delays . Nigel should have negotiated a longer contract . December 2028 .

Wrong and dumb.
Another HC fly?

 

[Pokok]

Might filter picked up some possible harmful content on that page Retro

View attachment 73760

Just so others are aware

I have been told I have no filter ,

 

[Pokok]

That’s where my head has been and the biggest concern of mine. They just sell assets to the Chinese as a fire sale. After all they’ve only put up a small sum and they’d make that back easy with a sell off. They aren’t in the business of mining.

But that is an issue for a future date. We live another two years and I hope the BOD are working behind the scenes to secure additional funding from somewhere else. Unsure how though if all of the assets are already given up to Locke.

So you and Lopu are in some sort of relationship , just asking

 

[Dazmac66]

Thank you for pointing out the clear under-quoting in my original post. It seems that neither search took into account a whole range of costs in addition to periodic costs. My bad.

Here is a list of the main fees and charges applicable to an ICSID arbitration:

1. Registration fee: US$25,000 (non-refundable) payable upon filing a request for arbitration
2. Administrative charge: US$52,000 per year, typically divided equally between parties
3. Tribunal costs: On average US$882,668.19, with a median of US$875,907.97
4. Arbitrator fees: US$500 per hour for work performed in connection with the proceeding
5. Secretary attendance fee: US$200 per hour when the Tribunal Secretary attends meetings
6. Remote hearing hosting: US$2,500 per day
7. In-person hearing facilities: US$4,000 per day for use of a hearing room and breakout/deliberation rooms at ICSID's Washington, D.C. center
8. Travel expenses: Reimbursement for travel and subsistence expenses of the Secretary for meetings held away from ICSID's seat
9. Arbitrator travel fees: Hourly fee for travel time to attend hearings, sessions, and meetings, plus per diem allowances and travel expense reimbursements
10. Party costs: On average, US$5,619,261.74 for claimants and US$4,954,461.27 for respondents (including legal fees and other expenses)

Note that actual costs can vary significantly depending on the complexity and duration of the case

My sincere apologies, and I will delete the original erroneous post.

Fuck me! That price list looks like a shopping list for snacks at a government meeting in Kinshasa!