TDITD
Top 20
fuck well that's no good, if we end up losing to Zijin and Dathomir then its gonna slip right out as soon as its put in.L
Looks too big to be taken orally Frank![]()
fuck well that's no good, if we end up losing to Zijin and Dathomir then its gonna slip right out as soon as its put in.L
Looks too big to be taken orally Frank![]()
We should be ok ...you know what they say about Asian dicksfuck well that's no good, if we end up losing to Zijin and Dathomir then its gonna slip right out as soon as its put in.
Wino said he's on the mushies, so I can see why he's upset. He'll have realised the meaning of life and the secrets of the universe but still have no fucking idea what's going on at Manono!
" I never believed AVZ is staffed, experienced or capable to design , procure, construct and run the largest lithium mine and transport its product "I do believe a TO will eventually materialise, I never believed AVZ is staffed, experienced or capable to design, procure, construct and run the largest hard rock lithium mine and transport its product. But IMO the company will never be allowed to be sold wholly to a Chinese entity, it would not get through FIRB. One of large Australian miners or international consortium is more realistic. The Chinese challenges IMO all revolve around % ownership of Dathcom and the ML tenement split, not AVZ TO.
However TO will not happen until a number of things fall into place to have clarity on the value of AVZ:
1) Clarity on the ML - what is covered, is CDL included or not - how much of the asset is covered for exploitation and how much under exploration, and with who
2) Ownership - does AVZ own 51%, 66%, 75% of Dathcom or something else
3) BFS on 4.5 and 10MTpa - put it out there how much AVZ thinks the asset is worth
4) MEZ - commercial / Tax regime
5) Further Off-takes?
6) Further drilling to increase resource base?
IMO we definitely need items 1, 2 and 3 to negotiate a TO.
I have no idea which way this will go, but in your scenario Zinjin would also need to compensate AVZ for the opportunity cost of losing the 15% of project and its future income stream. That would be a sizable amount." I never believed AVZ is staffed, experienced or capable to design , procure, construct and run the largest lithium mine and transport its product "
Cant say i agree with you there, Nigel and staff have got us to the ML decree stage rather nicely despite many obstacles i am sure and have brought CATH / CATL on board to utilise their vast experience in developing mines......so bases covered as far as i am concerned.
Now i may get scorched with what i am about to say next, but if i took the emotion out and just looked at the business at hand here, if Zijin does have a claim on the snack 15%, they have a good track record of developing mines too, now obviously no one knows what goes on in the inner sanctum of AVZ / DRC negotiations, but could there be a possibility that AVZ retains 51% control, CATH 24 % , Zijin 15%, DRC 10%, with Zijin paying DRC the balance of what is owed plus a pro rata sum of money to AVZ for the development / expense already under taken ?
Dont get me wrong, i dont trust Zijin as far as i can kick the bastards and my preference is to seek the 66% if it can be achieved, but if its going to settle relations on both sides and progress construction / production , whilst foregoing the long tedious ICC route, then maybe thats an option.
IMO of course.
Correct me if i am wrong, but that extra 15% was never a given, it was to be negotiated.I have no idea which way this will go, but in your scenario Zinjin would also need to compensate AVZ for the opportunity cost of losing the 15% of project and its future income stream. That would be a sizable amount.
Cheers
F
Agree - You paint a totally feasible and practical way out of this mess and probably preferred over a TO to maximise value in the long run through to production. It also covers the required mine building and operating skills in remote areas which I do insists AVZ does not have." I never believed AVZ is staffed, experienced or capable to design , procure, construct and run the largest lithium mine and transport its product "
Cant say i agree with you there, Nigel and staff have got us to the ML decree stage rather nicely despite many obstacles i am sure and have brought CATH / CATL on board to utilise their vast experience in developing mines......so bases covered as far as i am concerned.
Now i may get scorched with what i am about to say next, but if i took the emotion out and just looked at the business at hand here, if Zijin does have a claim on the snack 15%, they have a good track record of developing mines too, now obviously no one knows what goes on in the inner sanctum of AVZ / DRC negotiations, but could there be a possibility that AVZ retains 51% control, CATH 24 % , Zijin 15%, DRC 10%, with Zijin paying DRC the balance of what is owed plus a pro rata sum of money to AVZ for the development / expense already under taken ?
Dont get me wrong, i dont trust Zijin as far as i can kick the bastards and my preference is to seek the 66% if it can be achieved, but if its going to settle relations on both sides and progress construction / production , whilst foregoing the long tedious ICC route, then maybe thats an option.
IMO of course.
" I never believed AVZ is staffed, experienced or capable to design , procure, construct and run the largest lithium mine and transport its product "
Cant say i agree with you there, Nigel and staff have got us to the ML decree stage rather nicely despite many obstacles i am sure and have brought CATH / CATL on board to utilise their vast experience in developing mines......so bases covered as far as i am concerned.
Now i may get scorched with what i am about to say next, but if i took the emotion out and just looked at the business at hand here, if Zijin does have a claim on the snack 15%, they have a good track record of developing mines too, now obviously no one knows what goes on in the inner sanctum of AVZ / DRC negotiations, but could there be a possibility that AVZ retains 51% control, CATH 24 % , Zijin 15%, DRC 10%, with Zijin paying DRC the balance of what is owed plus a pro rata sum of money to AVZ for the development / expense already under taken ?
Dont get me wrong, i dont trust Zijin as far as i can kick the bastards and my preference is to seek the 66% if it can be achieved, but if its going to settle relations on both sides and progress construction / production , whilst foregoing the long tedious ICC route, then maybe thats an option.
IMO of course
They're rare but they're not badlooking forward to the next one
![]()
Sure, but my understanding is that AVZ had first call on this 15%, and proposed US$100m against Zijin's US$33m (of which only the deposit was paid in June 2021 anyway). Based on my limited understanding of this complex issue it follows that AVZ should therefore be compensated for the opportunity cost of lost value and income.Re Correct me if i am wrong, but that extra 15% was never a given, it was to be negotiated.
"meds", hey? That translates to a glass of what, exactly? Asking for a friend...For the record I am back on my meds and have resumed normal transmissions
Also for the record it felt fantastic and cathartic to get that out of the system
Each to their own hey pones...
*Re:- John's comments and the other Frankly Frustrating part atm, as I see where,Correct me if i am wrong, but that extra 15% was never a given, it was to be negotiated.
Mr market valued AVZ as having 51% control up until the extended suspension.
Agree with you in the aspect that Zijin needs to compensate AVZ for devedlopment costs aleady spent plus an added premium of snacks for being a sneaky weasel...........
Aagh, who the fuck knows...........just gotta wait it out, meanwhile as @John25 has stated, lithium coys are turning the wheel nicely making some nice gains..
LTR 88 - 149, GLN 96 - 131, PLS 206 - 285, AKE 10 - 11.72 etc
FRUSTRATING indeed @Frank
imo
Any Clare Riesling for entree followed by any South Aussie GSM or Cab/Shiraz blend for mains"meds", hey? That translates to a glass of what, exactly? Asking for a friend...
PS - PLS targeting 1mt pa
AVZ targeting 4.5 - 10 mt pa to start
Has anyone seen the decree? Maybe the decree had issues with it?View attachment 13397
According to the pervious ann, CAMI is operate under the supervision of the minister of mines.
3 month ago, Minister of Mines has already signed the ministerial decree to award the Mining Licence.
it seems that MOM willing to give us the ML,
and why CAMI under her supervision still pending with surface right calculation?
hopefully, it can be solved asap....
Few more extensions to come is my guessIf the ML doesn't drop by Aug 15 I think it's time for NF to give us some details as to why it's taking so long for this issue to be sorted. AVZ itself said ,“We regret that the period of voluntary suspension has lasted longer than was initially intended." If it's a legal issue and must remain confidential , then say it . If it's a schedule problem ("herding cats ") , then say it . Not going to affect the SP . We are in suspension . Or does Nigel think we are so close now an explanation at this point is not necessary.