I would be happy myself with $200 million before deductions, which I am assessing at approx. 30%, so that makes $140 million after deductions, or about 16p per share for the pay out.
I know from friends in Tashkent, that the government will most likely pay out a "reasonable" award, which I am guessing to be under $200 million, whilst above that and they may fight, which in the end may reduce the money we get, plus lengthen the time before we receive our money. So a larger settlement may actually cause more problems than meets first glance. After waiting this long, I would rather have my money and run, rather than wait for protracted chasing after their foreign accounts.
Vlad - Thank you very much for your timely reply, I do value your opinion on many aspects of this as you have certainly put in the hard yards and seem to understand the jurisdiction more then anyone else on here.
I Understand where you are coming from and the reasoning behind the points you have raised and I guess it will come down to a number of things ... we don't fully know what the Uzbek case is, we have a little propaganda which was put out in the news in 2012 and we have our companies take on it... but as they say there are 3 sides to every story, your's, mine and the truth...
For me the reason I would not view $200m as a large award was not because of the claim amount but because Richard himself stated in so many words that they were actively seeking offers no less then $400m ... I guess as has been discussed here before this is why we have never heard of an out of court settlement as the Uzbeks probably thought it better value to go all the way to the end of the case even if they are to lose it will cost them less then the $400m that we are seeking as a minimum.
But for me that isn't to say we will get less then the $400m ... as you say the final claim was $1.2b so 30% of this amount would be the $400m that RS see's as the bottom figure... considering we have gone all the way to the wire I would imagine both sides have thought they have the greatest chance of getting the best deal from doing so.
Like yourself I do believe we will win... I just think if we were truly robbed of our mine and investors have been shafted and waited 4 years for justice for a mine that was worth many billions with chinese wanting to invest and our man being wrongly placed in prison... $200m (the chinese were going to invest close to this figure as it was for a % of what we had AND they sort a RTO) for me $200m would not be a win by any sense of the word never mind a big one I would hazard a guess that Richard himself would agree...
I am sure the Devil will be in the Detail!! Atb and cheers for the reply.
The documents submitted with their initial Claim (August 2011 document) include a claim for a minimum of $400 million, however as with most things in life, changes occur, and the final claim was for over $1.2 billion (company RNS 14 November 2012). The claim was in 2 parts, namely Khandiza and Amantaytau (AGF). Let's separate the claims. The work performed for Khandiza had been exploration and feasibility studies. A look through similar arbitration cases shows that the panels tend to award just the costs plus interest for these cases, and Oxus had anticipated that with their RNS statement "On the basis of a discounted cash flow ("DCF") quantification, the loss in respect of the Khandiza investment ranges from a high of USD 588.7 million to a low of USD 72.1 million, and as a very last alternative, on a restitution basis (i.e. upon the restoration of the Company's Khandiza investment), USD 9 million." For assessing my own investment into Oxus I believe that the restitution basis is more likely.
For AGF, the company has "claimed not lower than $480 million". A review of the previous court awards show that claims do tend to be reduced very substantially. Whilst we have good lawyers and experts ourselves, we are facing one of the top law firms in the world, who have brought in leading experts. I think we would be foolish to base our own hopes on just the Oxus statements, for that is just one side, and another very strong case undoubtedly exists for the Uzbeks due to their lawyers. MTT for instance had a very strong case against the Uzbek government, but the case fell apart on what might be called a technicality, and nothing to do with the arbitration case itself, namely that their lawyers (White and Case, the same ones as Oxus) identified that MTT had bribed an official at the start, and as bribery is illegal, even in Uzbekistan, the contract was declared null and void, and the Arbitration was therefore lost.
I personally would be very happy with $200 million, which represents a good payback for my investment. Please make your own judgement for where you would be happy.
As for your/my definition of large, let us look at a portion of cake. What may be huge to me, might be considered mere crumbs to you. It's all in the eyes of the beholder. I would consider an approximate 7 times increase in sp (before deductions) as quite large. But that's my opinion.
Could someone set me straight. People talk of how a low pay out may be detrimental etc... I look at our current market cap and see that it stands at nearly £20,000,000. Even if we got a miniscule pay out of £100,000,000 would that put us all in substantial profit?
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.