Adam Davidson, CEO of Trident Royalties, discusses offtake milestones and catalysts to boost FY24. Watch the video 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.
director shareholding jan 20th so dont expect news for 30 days tho it may drop insider trading thing (17days to go)
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/PFP/directorpdmr-shareholding-l6wtpgu2p99eti4.html
Sooooooo sloooooooow
wow thats some read so they had a moz general with 15% share holding and they diluted his ass.....well that was f@cking silly
tho it does seem to me tho im no legal expert that the moz court stuff was badly handeled by the general and co and may not be vaild but as i said im no lawyer
All,
Thanks for all the information posted, very informative.
Oldschool321,
Thanks for your reply. You appear to be more informed than myself and suggest the case is complex. I was coming from the naive point of view in that we had a U.K. High Court judgement in our favour and then it was a matter of investigating the transfer of the license.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comments relating to the U.K. Government and Bellingham, I was convinced with his posts in Government and contacts we could get a resolution, also agree that the Mozambique Courts were swayed with the shadow of Veloso looming large.
My thoughts are still that we can get the license back as if we go down the BIT route and win doesn’t the process allow/enforce for the original asset to be returned ?
This very well might take several years but on the other hand the Mozambique Government needs to take a good long look at itself and decide whether itself, the courts and the mining ministry have acted legally, within it’s own and international laws and without any outside influence, Veloso.
If the Mozambique Government thinks it has acted legally along with the courts and mining ministry then defend itself otherwise it is in it’s own interest to come to an agreement with Pathfinder U.K. before all the potential dirty washing gets aired for everyone to see.
Stay safe and positive
Adamsky
ive wondered why the person with the license doesnt by out pathfinder surely that would be the cheapest option?
2 million mcap buy us out there no problem.....
I would have thought that whoever emerges with the license will move to reset the clock to year one with 25 to go.
somehow my post never appeared:
been buying here. people have said value if it goes wrong vs if it goes right, and I agree. Was in around 0.54 initially then just under doubled holding today at 0.5. reassured by ceo buying otherwise i'd have waited given their cash burn
been buying here. people have said value if it goes wrong vs if it goes right, and I agree. Was in around 0.54 initially then just under doubled holding today at 0.5. reassured by ceo buying otherwise i'd have waited given their cash burn
It’s a long wait for an answer which is unknown. I agree PFP will never mine that land ever, compensation is the outcome here I can’t see anything else likely apart from obviously we could end up with nothing
FreeBuffet, I agree with your findings regarding jurisdiction of the English contracts. I does beggar belief the Mozambique Supreme Courts rejected the judgement but probably influenced by the Veloso Fear Factor - let's face it, he was and probably still is a very powerful man. He was head of their secret service/police/army for many years. And it is Mozambique. What I find appalling is the shear lack of support from the UK govt. Mozambique is a member of the British Commonwealth and the UK govt openly promotes inward investment . Quite galling and to be honest shame on Sir Henry Bellingham for doing nothing or achieving nothing on that front while in office as Chairman of PFP. We all had high hopes after his appointment and all he appears to have done is draw fees and free shares. Not a great legacy in my humble opinion.
OS321 .... I posted this back in August... " ... Perhaps this has been seen before but on a re-read after some time the validity of the English courts jurisdiction to the case seems quite compelling. 3 of the 4 agreements apparently stated English court jurisdiction. Maybe too much time has passed and an agreed settlement is best for PI's, it may be this lingering threat that keeps all parties at the table.
https://www.oeclaw.co.uk/news/view/pathfinder-minerals-plc-v-veloso?keyword=pathfinder ..... ". This link states " ..... The primary issues in the case concerned the validity and effect of four agreements (all of which were expressly or impliedly governed by English law) pursuant to which Pathfinder had acquired 99.99% of the shares ....... ". I recall, apologies for being vague, some surprise at the time that the English Court jurisdiction was clear in 3 (expressly) of the four 4 but absent (impliedly ?) in the 4th. Whether this was a mistake or an oversight it appears possibly to be the chink in the armour that was exploited in pinching the license and allowing the Mozambique courts to assume some jurisdiction. I'm not legally trained but perhaps this " ... expressly or impliedly .... " will be the root of much debate in the BIT.
Previously I've questioned why the licence holder has not started to develop the site, 10 years of the license have now passed. I'm not suggesting that the following is the primary reason but surfing the Moz Gov portal I found this ( https://www.portaldogoverno.gov.mz/por/Empresas/Licenciamentos/Actividade-Mineira/Descricao-Geral ) " ..... The exercise of mining activity without title or authorization is an offense punishable by a fine ranging from 5 to 100 million depending on the severity of the specific case, seizure of the extracted product and confiscation of the equipment used. ... ". Made me chuckle if nothing else.
I must beg to differ a little with your assertion Adamsky that this is not complex. Although the London judgement found unequivocally in favour of PFP ownership and that the transfer was made unlawfully, the Mozambique Supreme Court failed to uphold that judgement. The Moz Govt will be guided by their own courts findings and not that of a foreign court. I am afraid this does make the BIT claim very complex indeed. As for timing - who knows. This is very much a share for the back book. Some have held since 2011 so what is another 4 or 5 years. What is going to be interesting is the eventual settlement amount i.e. the damages suffered, it could be very material indeed. We won't see the license back, that I am sure of. We will eventually see a financial recompense as long as the law firms involved don't grab it all AND of course the PFP board manage to keep the lights on long enough to see it through. DYOR. GLA