Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. 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.
I wish I could understand the whole coherent argument...I, Like you, feel violated when I have been (yet again) sold a (golden) pup.
...
Surin, no invest or deal is without risk, nor can all risks ever be eliminated, however, in terms of Hainian and control, you will have a counterbalancing effect at play.
Any increase in risk from say controlling stakes and thus views, must be levelled with the risks of not having them involved at all.
Example being, without their funding money, there would be no DMS (although of course a different funder might have appeared, but its not a given the deal would have been any different).
In terms of possible future takeovers, again, always a risk, but the caveat is for me I'd rather be in a company that someone else wants to takeover than one no one wants to go near and by proxy it usually means your doing well.
In terms of Mali as an entity, the risk levels are no more than ever before, if anything, potentially less so (according to BA today at least). The risk here however is imo a bonus as if there was none, none of us holders could prob have ever brought in at decent prices as no risk locations or companies usually aint small cap.
In terms of the offtake. It feels correct to me and likely always the plan. Hainian put in circa 100 mil plus. There due diligence would have highlighted Suays offtake stake before they funded us, thus Im sure they always had there eye on 100% offtake, and thats not bad for us either as its a customer for all of our product at market prices. There was nothing concrete that said Suay would buy there 80% worth month on month and if they refused ever, we would have to find other customers.
End of the day the money is only made because of the sales and knowing you can sell 100% of your product is a great thing. Its that which will assist our figures.
Daz, thats how I see it...but as I say Fosun/Hainan are in the driving seat.
I don't mind if Kod get a fair deal
Fosun is security against `Sovereign Risk'
Surin
Only messing ultimately your reading to much into the offtake sale. Clarity has been had now. Clearly fosun who is the power house got hold of suay and said oi what price to take it all, KMUK will have it
Thats how i see it pal
Accionista. Good post, but all the more reason for B.A to clarify. He did say the new off-take with Hainan was for three years, intimating Kodal Minerals has some control
Sorry you feel that Daz...have always read your posts with respect
I though the presentation was good. Only after the event and todays RNS did my brain seem to process the risks...I wish I was more clever/anticipatory to have asked these questions. Sorry.
surin your full of ****e.
As we don't know what is in the binding contract between Kodal Minerals and Xinmao (Hainan Mining) for the JV KMUK, here an informative writing from a attorneys website:
The most important thing any business needs, whether it’s a 50/50 or 51/49 agreement is a written, legally binding contract that limits the power of either party. Clauses can include:
Creating a pay or profit-sharing arrangement
No owner can be fired or demoted without good cause
Outlining the responsibilities of both parties
The majority can’t sell the business unless it’s to the minority shareholder
By having a contract in place, both parties are protected and their rights are assured.
https://www.kirkkirklaw.com/legal-resources/should-you-enter-into-a-51-49-operating-agreement/
Why didn’t you ask him today Surin ? He was really concise and answered lots and lots of questions with regards to a take over and the Mali government and security issues and the joint venture that both companies seemed to be very happy with . Did you ask him Surin ? Because today he had an open question and answers session for everybody .
Bernard Aylward (got the surname right) did not address the issue...he presented it as a positive but...but.. but did not explain why. Anybody wan to explain?
I dont see Mali government as any new risk- that we always knew. However, todays announcement makes me think and worry about domination over KODs discovered resource
No it doesn't.
...That might explain why I think Suay Chin are selling...and accepted (in reality) a paltry sum for giving up all (not some) of their off-take rights.
Mali government.
Now Hainan have 100% off-take, what is to stop them changing the terms from KMUK (which they control and have majority right)...Seems to me Hainan can do anything they want? They do not have to play fair (UK and US companies dont play fair...playing fair is not capitalism!). Equally Chinese/china companies/institutions are involved in regime competition...as are western companies...
Bernard needs to provide the re-assurances on this issue.