AVZ Discussion 2022

[Retrobyte]

Shane getting very upset, can only mean good news right?

I don't visit X much these days but went for a look. The number of posts from Shane in such a short period of time prove he is blatantly triggered by the surprise events of the past week. Most of his posts seem to be written the same way David Bowie wrote Diamond Dogs ....

 

[Dhuboy]

Zijin selling up in Aus - seen the writing on the wall?

Minerals 260 has executed binding documentation to acquire 100% of the Bullabulling Gold
Project from Norton Gold Fields Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Zijin Mining Group Co., Ltd.

 

[Winenut]

Anyone out there know the % holdings in CATH between Mr Pei and CATL??

CATH is jointly owned by both but I'm not sure of %'s

Any help appreciated

Cheers
Nut

 

[Dazmac66]

Anyone out there know the % holdings in CATH between Mr Pei and CATL??

CATH is jointly owned by both but I'm not sure of %'s

Any help appreciated

Cheers
Nut

I think someone said it was 50/50. Don't quote me.

 

[Winenut]

I think someone said it was 50/50. Don't quote me.

Could be right

I've seen it come up a few times described as "jointly owned"

I never necessarily thought that would be 50/50

 

[Winenut]

Does this make sense to anyone?

If I've rooted this one let me know....if you can be bothered

 

[Winenut]

I'm just trying to keep my head straight on "ownership and control" issues in the whole deal

 

[Hodlandwin69]

Chuck in AVZ Power, and the other lot for fun

 

[Flight996]

Anyone out there know the % holdings in CATH between Mr Pei and CATL??

CATH is jointly owned by both but I'm not sure of %'s

Any help appreciated

Cheers
Nut

I asked the same question a couple of days ago, but got no response. I asked two AI websites for their interpretation, and this is the consensus:

CATH's joint ownership is neither a traditional joint venture nor a partnership. It is a collaborative ownership arrangement between Mr. Pei Zhenhua and CATL (my bold).

I understand that 50/50 can be inferred, but it is not expressly stated anywhere that I can find.

Cheers
F

 

[Winenut]

I asked the same question a couple of days ago, but got no response. I asked two AI websites for their interpretation, and this is the consensus:

CATH's joint ownership is neither a traditional joint venture nor a partnership. It is a collaborative ownership arrangement between Mr. Pei Zhenhua and CATL (my bold).

I understand that 50/50 can be inferred, but it is not expressly stated anywhere that I can find.

Cheers
F

pretty much what I came to

The 50/50 is just what i'm running with now in the absence of any better info

 

[Winenut]

I asked the same question a couple of days ago, but got no response. I asked two AI websites for their interpretation, and this is the consensus:

CATH's joint ownership is neither a traditional joint venture nor a partnership. It is a collaborative ownership arrangement between Mr. Pei Zhenhua and CATL (my bold).

I understand that 50/50 can be inferred, but it is not expressly stated anywhere that I can find.

Cheers
F

For the exercise it doesn't matter "too" much at the moment

Nevertheless understanding who has real control in CATH does tell us who has real control in the decision making concerning its interest and holding in GLH

 

[Xerof]

Chuck in AVZ Power, and the other lot for fun

Yes, important. No mention of which ones, but you’d expect Power, and those logistics companies to be moved under GLH

 

[Xerof]

For the exercise it doesn't matter "too" much at the moment

Nevertheless understanding who has real control in CATH does tell us who has real control in the decision making concerning its interest and holding in GLH

Ask Shane, he’s great at discovering things on Chinese websites

 

[Frank]

x.com

x.com

 

[Hudnut]

I had the same thought. Settlement paid to AVZ by direct payment, let them work through the courts to get their undeserved tax. We could make a killing on the interest in the 32 years it takes go through the ICSID.

We could always offer to negotiate an MOU for it.....

 

[cruiser51]

Ask Shane, he’s great at discovering things on Chinese websites

Shane is out of the picture, Shane is still stuck in 2018.
It hasn't clicked with him yet that it is 2025.

 

[Remark]

Shane is out of the picture, Shane is still stuck in 2018.
It hasn't clicked with him yet that it is 2025.

Classic, I hope Shane lurks here, it sucks to be you Shane

 

[j.l]

Shane is out of the picture, Shane is still stuck in 2018.
It hasn't clicked with him yet that it is 2025.

I'm stuck in 5th April 2022.
Share price was at or near its all time high.
My wife told me to sell.
I held.
Now my wife keeps taking me back to that date.

 

[j.l]

Spodumene concentrate price turning a bit?

 

[whales]

My plums have morphed into avocados, and they are ripening by the hour

and to @whales PAZBOZ, I had missed your input over on the crapper, but here you have been all the time. Should have guessed with whales as your nick. I think we traded whale memes in days gone by

Interesting post on hotcrapper, surprised no one picked it up.
ZIJIN OUT ?
I tend to agree with Carlos that 13359 will be split so that Zijin can mine the northern portion but you never know the DRC may cancel the illegal mining licence given to Manono Lithium in favor of a battery hub.

Amovatio​

155 Posts.
1,675
Date:14/01/25Time:13:49:36Post #:77398366

Guys,
There is nothing in the announcement which suggests AVZ has dropped the litigation because of negotiations with the DRC. What was stated is that AVZ has a revised JV and new funding arrangement with CATH and no longer needs to draw upon the Locke Litigation funding facility.

Lets not forget who is funding and running the DRC's legal process. The corrupt Zijin Mining Group and its lawyers who have been collaboratively working with Cominiere. This bunch of criminals don't get a seat at the negotiation table with CATH, AVZ and the DRC Govt.

The restructured partnership with CATH is the window for the DRC to accelerate the development of the Manono project as well as validate AVZ's legal claims and strategy. The DRC wants to build the Mine and get this into production in 2026. This new arrangement is the only way of achieving this. The Litigation process will delay this indefinitely and be enormously costly to the DRC along with the ongoing demise in their reputation.

Also, to cancel the Arbitration process would be to allow Cominiere and the DRC to walk away without any penalties being imposed. At the very least the $Millions they owe us should be an integral part of any negotiation up and until the final date (target date Feb 7) by which the fees are required to be paid for the ICSID Tribunal hearing, scheduled for June.

The Pre completion funding agreement stipulates the Drawdowns are scheduled by end of January. This is for the Litigation process. AVZ and CATH are committed to moving forward with this process if this is needed to get action to take place. The completion of the drawdowns is scheduled in December 2026 as part of the funding agreement. This is firmly stated. There is no compromise on this strategy.
So the fines which have been increasing each day on the DRC, and now amount to in excess of $70M are not going to be