We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Thank you, EV_Bull. Reassuring.
I have completely the opposite view O&W.
It shows the deal is expected to happen soon, so they don't want to "interrupt and resume" operations and that they are wanting to continue following the JRP and allowing Geralds to ship.
"until the Debtor and the Banks Union present the agreement signed in the process" - This to me reads that an agreement is expected.
What's more, KPMG agrees with our viewpoint that shipping must continue. Then there's the fact that we're hiring a social media manager.
olderandwiser,
in the last interview KM said the final documentation is on its way to the banks, looking back to this time last year I would say we are now twelve months closer to concluding - glass half full view.
What is the real significance of a second $10mn shipping cargo? To my mind, it shows we are still as far away from a negotiated agreed deal with the banks as ever.
That said, the price didn’t jump much after the first news about the $10m shipments
If that’s the case it leaves the door open for anybody with any funds left to top up and as the information is freely available, new big players can legitimately try to get in before the price gets to high.
Will be an interesting day
Your post looks like a possibility now Observer, maybe will speak to the legal team first but that creates significant market inefficiency and opportunities to front run these announcements. The original $10m shipping appeal ruling was also found during market hours but didnt get an RNS until the next day.
Observer :
“ It occurred to me that this news might not be relayed to our BoD until Monday morning meaning an RNS might not be forthcoming until later in the day or Tuesday. It wouldn't be the first time we've learnt news from the courts before reading it in an RNS... or the second, or the third...”
The banks are ready to sign, last RNS the agreement has been circulated with the respective legal reps to review so once this is done it's dusted, so it's just a matter of time when these guys finish up, wondering if KM has been told when this would be done by and why he set the AGM at that specific time
Remember from the annoucement of the first shipment:
Operations continue at the port in preparation for the next shipment, and at the mine, security has been put in place and tailing dam maintenance has commenced.
Just one of many signs that this is very near to crossing the line,
some good posts today and views with rationale!
Thanks EV_Bull, observer842 and tomcat-14
as stated in early court proceedings the ore has always been DEVS in name only",
after paying the creditors the balance was to reinstate the mine & rail track and what is left over after costs would belongs to the new jv , have l got right or am l wrong again Tom.
with a ruling like this one… it’s basically giving a clear message and a huge incentive for the banks to complete the settlement agreement asap… otherwise the project will now just carry on through it’s course of the recovery plan… and the banks 10% reserve will be held on account… capping it at $10m also keeps us incentivised to not delay our side either…
the debtor requires authorisation to ‘continue’ shipping the stored iron ore… which will allow the company to continue it’s activities… through the sale of stored iron ore… until the company and the banks union present the agreement signed in the process…
it does definitely say ‘continue’ and not ‘start’…
i authorize the sale of the iron ore stock of the recovering company… up to $10m… with a 10% reserve for the banks…
the other 90% must therefore be going into the jrp…
it’s very pleasing to see the courts once again ruling in favour of the jrp… supporting the very reason why the brazilian jrp exists in the first instance… and confirms everything i’ve said about it all… it’s dev’s ore… ;)
20/27% of it would on signing.
Surely the additional 10m won't be coming into KDNC pockets,
Good observation @EV! I missed that. So our BoD really do have no excuse to update us first thing Monday. Even if they feel the deal is so close to being announced, perhaps later that day, they really should update with this (IMHO) material change. I'd LoL if they don't update us and the market goes into a buying frenzy and they are then forced to RNS that there is no additional $10m and the court watching speculation is mistaken. LoL. Fingers crossed it is what it appears to be! ;-)
Check the date on the decision Obs, 22nd so it's possible publishing after close Friday was requested from our side to avoid that.
It occurred to me that this news might not be relayed to our BoD until Monday morning meaning an RNS might not be forthcoming until later in the day or Tuesday. It wouldn't be the first time we've learnt news from the courts before reading it in an RNS... or the second, or the third...