AVZ Discussion 2022

[Xerof]

@obe wan

With respect and for clarity, I read Francks tweet as a demand for action, rather than a statement of fact on what our favourite DG might have agreed to do. Is that how you see it?

 

[Xerof]

On yet another matter, I note Hujlich still has 5m unvested PF’s @ balance date. If these have been cancelled, I would expect to see a note to the accounts post BD. If they remain valid, I’m pissed off

 

[obe wan]

Anyone understand, 8 ii, *50% relinquishment off*.

Yes , apparently that was the case / expected a number of months ago , but it came through as 100% when the extension was granted around mid this year

 

[cruiser51]

I would be happy to pick you up from the airport mate in the KIA

 

[Helios]

Yes , apparently that was the case / expected a number of months ago , but it came through as 100% when the extension was granted around mid this year

View attachment 17752

Thanks Xerof and Obe wan, still not 100% clear, but nothing is atm.

 

[cruiser51]

 

[cruiser51]

Mining Cadastre: Chantal Bashizi wins over the Council of State and finally takes up her duties as CEO Monday, May 31

The new director general of the Mining Cadastre, Mrs. Chantal Bashizi, martyred for several months by the Council of State, will finally have access to her Mining Cadastre offices. She was officially notified of her appointment by the Minister of Mines on Friday, May 28.

The handover and recovery ceremony between her and the outgoing general manager will take place on Monday, May 31 at the general management of the Mining Cadastre.

JOHN TSHINGOMBE LUKUSA


Btw that was 31 May 2021

 

[Der Geist]

No mention in the full year report of a director being charged and convicted of an offence involving a jail sentence. Anyone else think that's strange?

The mumbo jumbo of lawyers placed it in the ‘turbo’ option of *limbo* back in May. Hence why I had dozens of questions which few appreciated at the time. Later, the company in it’s various channels, looks to have corrected and clarified that original May semantic mumbo

(anyone who wants to attack this view better do it with a polite question)

But it is true to say the ‘matters’ have affected progress with Congolese cooperation, probably since August 2021 roughly. Is it true then AVZ liaised with ASIC since that time.

Definitely AVZ shareholders need trading back on line with all sorted before AGM.

For another AGM to pass without shareholders quizzing is to gift someone who likes to control AGMs too much, doesn’t like too many sharp questions, essentially a pass to avoid scrutiny.

Is it possible that AVZ could have avoided this delay if COVID lockdowns hadn’t thwarted ease of travel and face to face contact with the right Congolese?

I don’t know. probably not. Perhaps the IGF report would publically surface the Dathcom issues because it didn’t look like AVZ was going public with it till early May necessitated it

 

[Winenut]

And there’s me thinking your a Perth boy ????
View attachment 17745

Clearly I am ....

 

[Samus]

Christ I've had enough political intrigue out of the DRC to last two lifetimes.
Can anyone be bothered watching the brief on the council minutes and tell us if anything of merit occurred?

 

[Winenut]

Thanks Xerof and Obe wan, still not 100% clear, but nothing is atm.

@Helios

My assessment is as follows

Costs associated with Tenements that are expected to be exploited are carried forward as an asset in the Balance Sheet until such time as the tenements are producing revenue (at which point I suspect the costs would then be progressively written off against that revenue by some appropriate methodology and in an appropriate timeframe)

AVZ have made an assessment on the costs it is carrying forward for tenements PR4029 and PR4030 and believes it can no longer carry those costs forward and have expensed a portion in the current financial year of $643,339 (costs written off/expensed through the the Profit and Loss)
Effectively they have assessed they are not going to be able to recoup that portion of costs in future years through revenue producing activities and therefore must be written off in the current financial year

That's the technical side of it

The question that is not answered (and what you probably want to know) is "WHY" on assessment this year has this portion of the costs associated with the tenements of $643,339 been written off?

There may be a number of reasons (part of the tenements have been re-assessed and are unlikely to be productive in the future, the company is abandoning plans to develop part of the area etc etc etc )

Going by other comments it may appear plausible that the size of the tenements 4029 and 4030 have potentially been changed

If in fact the case is that the tenements are now smaller in size then AVZ would have to proportionately write off some of the carried forward costs in the year that it happens (eg if the tenements were reduced in size by say 25% then one might logically expect 25% of the carried forward costs would need to be written off)

That example is probably a bit simplistic but you get the idea

So in summary going by what others have provided and what I've gleaned from the report I too suspect there has been a change in the boundaries for 4029 and 4030 and this has triggered the associated write off of a portion of the carried forward costs related to those tenements in the current financial year

Would definitely like to know the explicit reason(s) for the write-down of the asset and the methodology used to calculated the final $ value of the amount expensed through the P&L

Hope that helps a bit

Cheers
Nut

 

[JAG]

View attachment 17757

View attachment 17758


View attachment 17759

@Helios

My assessment is as follows

Costs associated with Tenements that are expected to be exploited are carried forward as an asset in the Balance Sheet until such time as the tenements are producing revenue (at which point I suspect the costs would then be progressively written off against that revenue by some appropriate methodology and in an appropriate timeframe)

AVZ have made an assessment on the costs it is carrying forward for tenements PR4029 and PR4030 and believes it can no longer carry those costs forward and have expensed a portion in the current financial year of $643,339 (costs written off/expensed through the the Profit and Loss)
Effectively they have assessed they are not going to be able to recoup that portion of costs in future years through revenue producing activities and therefore must be written off in the current financial year

That's the technical side of it

The question that is not answered (and what you probably want to know) is "WHY" on assessment this year has this portion of the costs associated with the tenements of $643,339 been written off?

There may be a number of reasons (part of the tenements have been re-assessed and are unlikely to be productive in the future, the company is abandoning plans to develop part of the area etc etc etc )

Going by other comments it may appear plausible that the size of the tenements 4029 and 4030 have potentially been changed

If in fact the case is that the tenements are now smaller in size then AVZ would have to proportionately write off some of the carried forward costs in the year that it happens (eg if the tenements were reduced in size by say 25% then one might logically expect 25% of the carried forward costs would need to be written off)

That example is probably a bit simplistic but you get the idea

So in summary going by what others have provided and what I've gleaned from the report I too suspect there has been a change in the boundaries for 4029 and 4030 and this has triggered the associated write off of a portion of the carried forward costs related to those tenements in the current financial year

Would definitely like to know the explicit reason(s) for the write-down of the asset and the methodology used to calculated the final $ value of the amount expensed through the P&L

Hope that helps a bit

Cheers
Nut

You need to get back on the turps mate, that post was way too sensible

 

[Xerof]

You need to get back on the turps mate, that post was way too sensible

I too was about to say that

 

[Nellie17]

G'day Cruiser,

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see the renegotiation of the Cath deal - just saying!

Cheers
Nells.

All in my opinion only -

The Cath extension announcement creates alot more questions than the simple delay of it all.
In my opinion maybe Cath are not to concerned about the percentage (24%) of the mine, but are more interested in the guarantee of supply of the product. So maybe they are willing to renegotiate?

With other parties reportedly now showing strong interest such as the Americans amongst others, maybe management is renegotiating the % owned in the Cath deal in return for guaranteed products. And then the leftover %, onsold to a new partner for a much better deal for our company!

I also don't think this extension should
have to much of a bearing on when the ML is issued, as long as the $$ are in order!

Things definitely feel as though they are getting bigger & bigger, but YES everyone, we need this fu.king licence!!

Just saying.

Have a good weekend all,
Cheers,
Nells

 

[Samus]

I too was about to say that

I was going to say Wino for ceo! and get this project moving.
I think there was reference to the paperwork in the agm announcement.

 

[cruiser51]

Christ I've had enough political intrigue out of the DRC to last two lifetimes.
Can anyone be bothered watching the brief on the council minutes and tell us if anything of merit occurred?

At 19.32 they talk about the Battery Council (CCB), I understand all is still in draft. (I prefer draft over canned )

Further they are going to build footbridges at the airport for people with reduced mobility.

To be continued.

 

[Samus]

At 19.32 they talk about the Battery Council (CCB), I understand all is still in draft. (I prefer draft over canned )

Further they are going to build footbridges at the airport for people with reduced mobility.

To be continued.

Cheers cruiser I must have wasted a day of my life watching this religiously every Saturday for the past 12 + months.
Good to have the weekend off

 

[Winenut]

You need to get back on the turps mate, that post was way too sensible

I too was about to say that

I know, I know....

I read my own post and it bored the shit out of me

 

[Retrobyte]

While on the subject, a quick shout out to the man with the shrunken head and

Vidiye Tshimanga
Jean-Felix Mupande
Samreen Kumandan, Raidel Perez
Cyndor Tumbular, Aisha Smith
Laura-Jane Cornish, Sabrina Tab
Jean-Tite Oloumoussie, Nicola Siyo
Kudakwashe Tsingano, Patricia Kazaka
Annemarie Roodbol

shareholders who don’t like being fucked up the arse by them

I googled Sabrina Tab and I think if she asked me nicely I might let her

 

[Carlos Danger]

I was going to say Wino for ceo! and get this project moving.
I think there was reference to the paperwork in the agm announcement.

It was nominations for a director. If we all get behind one candidate there is a slim chance of getting someone from this forum on the board. Worth a shot imo.

I vote Wino or Wombat.