AVZ Discussion 2022

[Hodlandwin69]

For those not fluent in legalese:

The updates on July 31, 2025, in the ICSID arbitration case AVZ vs DRC, indicate two significant procedural developments initiated by the Respondent (Democratic Republic of Congo):

1. "The Respondent files observations on the Claimants’ request for provisional measures."
– This means that the DRC has submitted its formal response or commentary on the Claimants’ earlier request for provisional measures (filed on June 24, 2025). Provisional measures are temporary orders requested to preserve the parties' rights or prevent harm during the arbitration process (e.g., freezing assets, halting certain actions).


2. "The Respondent files a request for security for costs."
– This indicates that the DRC is asking the Tribunal to order AVZ (the Claimants) to provide financial security (e.g., a bank guarantee or payment into escrow). This is typically requested when the Respondent is concerned that the Claimants may not be able to pay legal costs if they lose the case. It's a protective step often seen in investor-state disputes.

Together, these filings show the DRC is actively defending itself by:

Challenging the Claimants' provisional requests, and

Seeking financial assurances in case it prevails and is awarded legal costs.

 

[hedrox]

So here we go....welcome to the bidding war! Kobold Mining, other American company, CATH, Zijin or RIO TINTO.....
all with big deep pockets.....PAY UP OR GO HOME
AVZ holds the Aces...show us the money and we walk the talk

 

[FatCatz]

Kobold may have opened itself up to legal battle. If they honestly tried to neglect AVZ position as the rightful owner of the Manono deposit and backstories way via the DRC government. It has provided AVZ with a huge lever for fair value. We could take the company to Court in a similar manner that’s currently playing out in the ISCID.

12 bucks to drop all cases. IMO.

 

[cruiser51]

For those not fluent in legalese:

The updates on July 31, 2025, in the ICSID arbitration case AVZ vs DRC, indicate two significant procedural developments initiated by the Respondent (Democratic Republic of Congo):

1. "The Respondent files observations on the Claimants’ request for provisional measures."
– This means that the DRC has submitted its formal response or commentary on the Claimants’ earlier request for provisional measures (filed on June 24, 2025). Provisional measures are temporary orders requested to preserve the parties' rights or prevent harm during the arbitration process (e.g., freezing assets, halting certain actions).


2. "The Respondent files a request for security for costs."
– This indicates that the DRC is asking the Tribunal to order AVZ (the Claimants) to provide financial security (e.g., a bank guarantee or payment into escrow). This is typically requested when the Respondent is concerned that the Claimants may not be able to pay legal costs if they lose the case. It's a protective step often seen in investor-state disputes.

Together, these filings show the DRC is actively defending itself by:

Challenging the Claimants' provisional requests, and

Seeking financial assurances in case it prevails and is awarded legal costs.

For those not fluent in legalese:

The updates on July 31, 2025, in the ICSID arbitration case AVZ vs DRC, indicate two significant procedural developments initiated by the Respondent (Democratic Republic of Congo):

1. "The Respondent files observations on the Claimants’ request for provisional measures."
– This means that the DRC has submitted its formal response or commentary on the Claimants’ earlier request for provisional measures (filed on June 24, 2025). Provisional measures are temporary orders requested to preserve the parties' rights or prevent harm during the arbitration process (e.g., freezing assets, halting certain actions).


2. "The Respondent files a request for security for costs."
– This indicates that the DRC is asking the Tribunal to order AVZ (the Claimants) to provide financial security (e.g., a bank guarantee or payment into escrow). This is typically requested when the Respondent is concerned that the Claimants may not be able to pay legal costs if they lose the case. It's a protective step often seen in investor-state disputes.

Together, these filings show the DRC is actively defending itself by:

Challenging the Claimants' provisional requests, and

Seeking financial assurances in case it prevails and is awarded legal costs.

This is the normal stalling tactics from the DRC team, they have ignored ICSID instructions, they are refusing to pay a fine imposed by the ICC.

One could ask why now asking for security and the response could be "The moment you stop ignoring ICSID instructions we will take note of your concerns".

With their behaviour, they are not in a position to make extra demands.

 

[Hodlandwin69]

So here we go....welcome to the bidding war! Kobold Mining, other American company, CATH, Zijin or RIO TINTO.....
all with big deep pockets.....PAY UP OR GO HOME
AVZ holds the Aces...show us the money and we walk the talk

View attachment 89256

The way I interpret the current DRC/USA comments, the article and Nigel's comments is that AVZ sell it to the Highest US bidder or continue Arbitration with funding from Cath. I don't think the DRC will allow Cath or a Chinese entity to have Roche Dure as they need to US Commerical agreement

 

[zeeko]

Just a quick note of thanks and appreciation to those who take the time to share their knowledge, expertise, and information here. I have little experience in investment and stocks so have stayed out of the conversation in the 5+ years since buying into AVZ, but have found the research and interpretations posted here quite helpful. It's been quite the saga, which it appears is approaching fruition, and am looking forward to George Clooney's performance in the series.

I will also note that as a shareholder, I've been dismayed at how some seem to consider themselves as spokespeople for the shareholder base and espouse racist, defamatory, entitled, and hateful remarks here and across other platforms. While some of these values are often spoken the loudest, I would hope others agree that they do not best represent those of the larger AVZ shareholder base.

 

[tolate]

FLIGHT SAID

Despite its carefully worded motherhood statements and virtue-signalling bullshit about fair value, it seems that KoBold's fair value is merely a euphemism for ripping off 21,000 investors simply because it is rich and powerful.
KoBold is foolish to risk losing the lithium prize of the century.


Gee a bit confused now ONE minute, KOBOLD US AVZ saviour and going to PAY BILLIONS for AVZ as stated by other S H..!
Now these certain posters S H, have changed their TUNE...LMAO...!
NOW They approve of ZIJIN and the CHINESE taking over the whole project...imo...OMG

Thanks FLIGHT for your outlook...!...imo

 

[BEISHA]

Hit a nerve by...exactly proving my point???



Quick, all the tards aboard the Dave Evan's short bus to the private thread where all the "good info" is



View attachment 89189

 

[BEISHA]

Hey fuckwit, where have I stated that I deserve “VIP Treatment” you fucking clown?!

Maybe if you took half a second to read my last couple of posts, you’d have an understanding of where I’m coming from but of course you don’t cause you’re one of those low IQ old fucks with your head squarely up your arse… Hope you understand.. Peanut!

Where is the decency and respect in that post ?

Double standards 101.

You should of been more involved in the chats to gain a bit of trust.

Too risky to include randoms from this thread now........its been invaded by scum.

 

[BEISHA]

And that, my friend, is how these cunts get rich. Squeeze the life out of everyone else beneath them and short change the little guy.

 

[BEISHA]

 

[tolate]

Speculation is just that...!!!!
Until AVZ support any sort of offer ,stop jumping up and down..!!..lol
AVZ have asked for a price, no one has stepped up to the PLATE..imo

 

[Doc]

 

[Ashlee]

Just a quick note of thanks and appreciation to those who take the time to share their knowledge, expertise, and information here. I have little experience in investment and stocks so have stayed out of the conversation in the 5+ years since buying into AVZ, but have found the research and interpretations posted here quite helpful. It's been quite the saga, which it appears is approaching fruition, and am looking forward to George Clooney's performance in the series.

I will also note that as a shareholder, I've been dismayed at how some seem to consider themselves as spokespeople for the shareholder base and espouse racist, defamatory, entitled, and hateful remarks here and across other platforms. While some of these values are often spoken the loudest, I would hope others agree that they do not best represent those of the larger AVZ shareholder base.

Together with sexist.