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.
It wasn't clear to me in the RNS or in the interview whether the courts still intend to make a ruling if an agreement is not reached before the date of any extension they may or may not have recently granted. I presume they have set a new date, and I presume @Kiran knows this date, so why didn't he tell us? Too close? Didn't want to froth the market? Expects a settlement before this date?
We know the original ruling date was intended to be the end of June, so I would have thought a 10-14 day extension would not be out of the question, but obviously it could be longer.
Interestingly these timescales might correlate with the April timeline leading up to a decision and with recent events in our court case, but it would mean that the decision to allow more time was likely not taken this week - and if this is the case, why were we not alerted sooner?
https://esaj.tjsp.jus.br/cpopg/show.do?processo.codigo=2S000I22C0000&processo.foro=100
April timeline:
===[
4/7/2020 Decision
4/6/2020 Joined Petition
4/3/2020 Joined Petition
4/2/2020 Request for Summons of the Joint Liquidator
4/1/2020 Conclusions for Decision
4/1/2020 Conclusions for Judgment
]===
That's nearly a week from "Conclusion for Decision" to "Decision"
July timeline:
===[
07/08/2020 Joined Petition
07/07/2020 Joined Petition
07/05/2020 Conclusions for Decision
07/03/2020 Petition Waiver of Mandate / Attached Charge
07/02/2020 Attached Petition
06/30/2020 Request for Summons of the Joint Liquidator
]===
So it could be any time really, sometime next week seems likely if an out of court agreement isn't reached beforehand. And if @Kiran does know the potential ruling date, then he appears to think it's possible that announcement of first shipment might occur before then - or an out of court settlement might occur first.
I do wonder if he purposefully extrudes ambiguity to give us something to talk about! ;-) Only joking @Kiran :-)
In summary: news soon? I'm refraining from using imminent. For now! LoL
Ob.
@Obs - I have a follow up question. Could they have put out the vox interview without a RNS? Or do they need to update the market with a RNS as the interview contained new information (That court hasn't ruled on the annulment as the previous RNS said end of month) and I assume the interview was pre-recorded (My understanding from reading the posts here is it was recorded last week).
Appreciate any clarification..
how many times did he say he didn’t know what would come first... shipping or settlement...
I see no ships!!!
they have 9 days left to do a deal"if not a new date for a court judgment will be set, but don't take my word for it,
@maddog - is this a new update? Any links?
l looking in my crystal ball and it said judgment day in 9 days but knowing our luck it could be 9 months, l try the tea leaves to morrow" and see what l get,
Just a small positive? Banco Santander are donating 20 respirators to Municipalities in Amapa province.
Waldez Goes, Governer said of the expansion of the bank in the Province " This is important as we have a
bustling economy in these Municipalities. It is beneficial for the population and the institution".
Still feel the Court decision will be in favour of Dev for economic and political reasons to revitalise this area
of Northern Amapa and secure badly needed local employment.
Hitonto - are you some sort of wierd ramping powerhouse ????
This was all meant to be done with by the end of last month.
@Cause "Could they have put out the vox interview without a RNS?" I think you are on to something with that line of thinking. It is quite possible, and in fact likely IMHO, that the interview was given before the RNS was written as there was no mention of the RNS in the interview that I recall (@Barksy?), and before the interview could be cleared for release it was deemed market sensitive information that the courts hadn't ruled yet - as we had previously indicated this would happen by the end of June - which necessitated a very short RNS to state this. That explains a lot - news imminent? :-)))
Incidentally, iron ore prices closed 1-2% up last night. ;-)
Ob.
13:08...As announced...
Can the courts grant an extension without ruling on it?
If they had ruled on it, wouldn't the decision be 'extension granted'?
The RNS states that they haven't ruled...
"Further to the announcement made on the 16 June 2020, at this point, the commercial court of São Paulo has not made a ruling concerning DEV Mineração S.A's ("DEV") petition to annul the secured creditors' liens and charges over the Amapá Iron Ore Project ("Amapá Project")."
Just wondering if anyone has asked for an extension or is it back to...."the court 'might' rule".
read every file 3 times like l did the answer is there,
Your probably looking at a different case file ;-)
What / where is the link?
look for your self because as you say l am a liar,
Christ, bit early for snipping. Come on dog, give us your lead and make life easier. Please.
joe/ its in the small print clue
LinkedIn post yesterday also stated no ruling yet
.... and continued negotiations
Dog, I rely on you and you opposites to help me form an opinion. I seriously don't have time to dig. (no I don't spend my money on board comments, I find it more reliable to flip a coin)
I’m tempting to sell my EUA and top up here. This is still very undervalued.