The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register 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.
Logic2 in answer to your questions some thoughts here, but clearly I'm on the sidelines now the Company know the latest etc..
So to your question about the Veloso's, as announced yes I think they were very keen and see no reason why they still aren't to conclude something. In theory it's rationale for all parties to want a solution, it's been nearly 8 years of nothing which doesn't help anyone. However the two shareholders are very different parties with possibly very different agendas.
AFG might help, but all evidence indicated to me that continuing to use them wasn't a professional way to move forward. Once you can't trust people it's should be time to move on but some people are very good at pulling the wool over others eyes.
Addressing some of the nonsense from HChanster who is in touch with Richard Jennings by the looks of it a lot of what has been posted there is either untrue or shows a complete lack of understanding as to what is actually going on.
What for example has Hong Kong really got to do with anything, if you knew anything about AFG or the situation you'd know virtually nothing. It's like saying that just because you have a registered office in London you must know someone else in London.
I've no idea why you have mentioned Nick Trew, what's he got to do with anything, all we have both wanted is a resolution for shareholders. If in any doubt I have in black and white clear evidence of false invoicing and a document we were told was fraudulent being produced and in my view this was probably the tip of the iceberg.
It's obvious I failed because the Company didn't get the licence back under my watch so thanks for stating the obvious, however equally I can't force a Board to do what I believed was the right thing can I so if it's going off the rails you need to get off the train.
OK here are some useful insights: (1) Despite the UK High Court ruling, it should be clear to everyone by now there is NO chance of the Licence (s) being "returned" via the Moz Courts . The matter can only be resolved via negotiation and it will cost money to acquire the Licence (s) - they will not be handed back on a silver platter (2) AFG has already delivered to PFP more than one Term Sheet, the first was delivered months ago - only the PFP Board can tell you why the Terms Sheet(s) were not accepted? (3) rumour has it, the Chinese have done a deal with Cavaco and Cavaco confirmed this in an email he circulated to certain individuals (including the regulator), many months back (4) PFP have been unable to verify this although, again, rumour has it that the Chinese are about to declare their hand (5) AFG, being a Hong Kong registered entity, is the only one in the room with any relationship with the Chinese (see 7 below), (6) Mr van Niekerk is the only one in the room with a relationship with the Veloso's (7) The Chinese in question hold all their interest Moz mining interests via a Hong Kong entity, thus AFG having at least some relationship given it to is based in Hong Kong (8) If the Chinese have already transacted with Cavaco, it provides the reason for the talk around negotiations having only been around 50%, being the Veloso's interest - although the Term Sheets were always conditional upon 100% of the LIcence(s) (9) If the Chinese declare their hand as expected, then I would guess a deal will be put to PFP very soon (10) You must ignore all the bull**** being spewed by SRB and Nick Trew - collectively, they know less than ZERO and are both bitter, twisted and deluded former CEO"s who were simply way out of their depth. The whole idea that SRB "left" is complete and utter nonsense as is the whole "uncovering fraud" rubbish - they are a pathetic attempt to hide his abject failure!
Logic...spot on!
As I posted the other day, we get there's bad blood between the two of you, but this is not the place to air it in public. As two people far more connected with the company than most of us on here, we need your constructive comments and information, not playground spats about bets!
SRB, you have obviously had a frustrating time during your period with the company and I do genuinely appreciate your reply.
You will have a greater understanding of the project then most of not all shareholders will. How do you think this deal can be concluded? Is it correct that the veloso family want to conclude a deal as has been alluded? If not AFG then how is the deal concluded and what timescales can we expect? I would rather use this board to ask genuine questions from people that obviously understand the company as all shareholders just want a conclusion to this long running saga.
Well Logic2 you should be very interested "in your bet with Richie" as you put it because people should be held to account for their actions. Actions speak louder than words. So when they claim to be one thing and turn out to be another doesn't that information help all concerned to form an opinion or is it best left untold so people only hear the nice positive parts where the largest shareholder drives his own agenda and everything is rosey?
You are right in that as CEO I felt my main role was to advance and to protect shareholders interests but when you realise that you can't do this and the people around you are blind to the truth then you can't help any longer. I've spent my career sniffing out BS, fraud and other nonsense and this had it in spades, I needed a strong board and had a weak one. I never want to be somewhere where I can't add value or I don't trust the people around me. Nothing was forgotten in what we said, there was no mention of the other partner as they weren't being talked to but my strategy was that this was absolutely the next step but it never happened. The information I was being fed was limited and increasingly I became more and more concerned about AFG via Heine van Niekerk ever delivering. I hope to be proved wrong still but so far I haven't been, all goals/timelines etc. sailed by with little happening and almost no flow of information and with all the antics going on I had little faith shareholders would be delivered with a fair and timely solution, they've been working for the Company for nearly 18 months now on something that was supposed to take months. I've not seen much to give me any increasing comfort that things will change but hopefully the new Directors who are I think well intending can deliver a cracking deal asap but if that AFG contract is renewed I fear we're in for the long haul and all going to be disappointed.
SRB- As a shareholder I have no interest in your bet with Richie, this is between you and him so please keep it that way. The constant bickering is not good for the company and therefore not good for us as shareholders.
Are you suggesting that when you were CEO you were only negotiating for half of the license while at the same time doing public interviews suggesting a deal would be concluded “this side of the summer”. I take it you meant that a deal with the veloso family would be concluded? Did you forget to mention at the time that you were not talking to the other partner in the license? Not the best strategy to conclude a deal I would suggest, which was after all your role as CEO acting on behalf of the shareholders?
Longandwrong, I obviously can't speak for the Company as to where they are now etc., but when I was involved the Company, via AFG, had in effect an agreed position with the Veloso family which was announced but as you say they are only half of the issue. There wasn't any position agreed or even contact with Cavaco but maybe that has recently changed but this caused me concern as you can imagine as as others have pointed out you need to get back 100% of the licence and anything less will be unfinanceable and therefore unconcludeable. No contact ever seem to be made once there was a position with the Veloso family to move onto the other shareholder to join him into the proposal but hopefully that has all changed now or they have a very good plan if not!
I posted here once, literally once, and straight away Richard challenged me to a bet (I'm not even a shareholder FFS). Think it was £200 but we will never know now as he has clearly asked LSE to delete all posts relating to his bets. It was clear to me at the time this was bullying tactics but I didn't rise to it. I just thought; if I wanted to take a bet on PFP then I'd just buy shares. Anyway, your bet with Richard will never be honoured as you know. But it stands as testimony to his character. I think his intention is to create a lot of useless noise on this forum and then drown out any dissenting voices.
On another issue, I find it strange that some of the share holders on this forum are not using the opportunity to engage with you in a more constructive way. You clearly have seen 'under the hood' of this company and met the key players. If I was a share holder I would be very interested in your view but I suspect most people are happy to live in ignorance rather than hear the distasteful truth.
I don't know what is happening to half the posts that appear to have been deleted but I'm certainly not requesting it, I'm more than happy for the facts to aired if Richard seems to want to although he does like fiction.
I'm more than happy to address in details any of the accusation Richard has been throwing around, as you'd expected there is no context and often limited if no truth in what he's being saying about me, at all times I did what I believed was in shareholders interest, did I get everything right, no, would I have one things differently, with the benefit of hindsight yes. However as Richard well knows because I wouldn't let him bully the Company into doing some of the things he wanted, I was always trying to do what was right for shareholders, and by that I mean all shareholder not just the largest or large shareholders. To the point where I was so very unhappy with what I uncovered and other people's actions I had little choice but to leave given the support being given to those who I considered up to no good. I warned about this in the first quarter of 2019 as Richard knows and because he and others wouldn't take any action, which he's entitled to do, we are where we are today. I take no pride in being right as shareholders are suffering as am I but someone needs to listen and sort this out asap. I hope with the changes to the Board this might be possible as it was entirely dysfunctional when I was there but you also have to be very careful about overtly large shareholders who only act for themselves.
So let's move onto the bet then which Richard is now trying to alter. Richard as we all know loves throwing bets out there, he's done it on numerous forums to many people and in private too. He's tried to make all sorts of bets with me in the past. Why does he do this, in my view he must think it shows some sort of power or assumed wisdom that he must be right because he's prepared to make a bet and put his money on the line. However we now know he isn't, he's demonstrated in our bet where there can only be one winner that he isn't that man of his word and trustworthy and so pious as he always claims, he's actually sanctimonious and totally hypocritical.
I didn't want the bet, he was the one that threw it out to me. Again he probably did it as some power play because he of course is always right! Either he would win or I would win, there is no draw possible. You also can't change the bet after the event as now seems to be the case. He made the bet, we agreed the terms which I was very clear on to ensure clarity and then we waited to see who would win. I hoped for shareholders he would win but as I suspected the end of September arrived and I had won the bet.
He's now not honouring it, as I've said before that tells you everything you need to know. He can try to change it after the event as much as he wants, £500 to some animal charity etc., but a bet is a bet, you word is your word, or not as the case mayb
You lost the bet Jennings. Pay the man what you owe him.
It’s one grand. Anyone could let that go. Not exactly life-changing.
I like Richie, don’t know Scott, but they’ve both come across as a right old pair of handbag-swinging drama queens lately.
What is it about AIM that seems to encourage this kind of behaviour? Everyone knows what I’m talking about, I’m sure..
Giving to charity sounds a lot better than continuing to argue about what I presume was a tongue in cheek bet and using it to discredit Richie.(thats how it comes across reading back) and its really of no interest or relevance regarding my investment into Pathfinder which is the only reason I am on here.
Ive heard enough about the bet so hope this is the end of it, would rather talk about the big gamble, bet, punt which is pathfinder!
Does anyone have any useful insights to where we think this is going and what the Bod are currently doing to keep things going in a positive direction?
I imagine that doesn't sound like much of a compromise to a guy who believe's he's won a £1000 bet fair and square lol
Seconded, as per my posts last night.