Rainbow Rare Earths Phalaborwa project shaping up to be one of the lowest cost producers globally. 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.
If BPPM JORC were a condition for T1, then the timelines originally set out would all have had to be very different. The idea is a red herring.
The idea of a secret asset ready to give instant cash (and still more that this is a condition of T1) is an invention.
Has anyone here ever dealt with corporate legal paperwork, particularly as regards senior debt provision at a value in millions? I've spoken to people who have. This stuff runs to hundreds, if not thousands, of pages.
In this case, we know that there are multiple complex contracts - some linked, some individual - across multiple parties in multiple jurisdictions: Vast, Atlas, SSGI and Mercuria, with lawyers in UK, Romania, Zimbabwe and Switzerland.
I don't like the waiting any more than anyone else, and I have no idea whether or not we need to soak up a placing on the way, though we will if we have to. But we don't need to fill the waiting with bogeymen.
Patience, IMO, though it is indeed frustrating.
Spot on Sandy.
Remember this statement from the last RNS and it will clearly guide you to where VAST is heading:
"We enter 2020 in a far stronger position than at any time in the Company’s history. We are resourced to place BPPM into production in the near future and we are well placed to execute our Zimbabwe diamond strategy as soon as the agreement with ZCDC is concluded, a process that we believe will be concluded shortly."
Andrew Prelea
Sandy - as someone who has completed senior debt funding facilities you’re spot on with this comment.
BP JORC will not be a CP for T1 drawdown. That’s obvious for anyone who can be bothered to read the 2 Jan RNS
Daz: you miss the point. This is about the *complexity* of the deal, and hence why it takes time.
ORT: thanks. I quite agree about the obviousness of it if the RNS is carefully read.
It's been 6 weeks of cold commissioning when are we actually going to be mining for resources and when are we likely to receive funds from Zimbabwe diamonds. What's holding it all up many will have bought on the timescales given but havent been met... gla?
Dazbrad - so you don’t think Vast have submitted a drawdown request in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Bond Issuance Deed...
I’m sorry Daz but that’s ridiculous. You don’t submit a drawdown request that for instance would only satisfy the ‘procedure’ T&Cs but not the actual CPs for drawdown to complete.
The statement is all encompassing And doesn’t carve out certain T&Cs e.g. form of drawdown request.
Sure lawyers on both sides will be running through the CPs to ensure all have been properly satisfied. But that’s standard.
Okay, we’re not going to agree on this.
Are you currently invested?
One final point - I am not trying to hide or reveal anything. I’m reading the RNS as it’s written. Everyone is free to make their own inferences and you are clearly stating that you think Vast have been clever with their language to buy time and have only followed procedure which isn’t actually stated anywhere.
We’ll find out soon enough
gkb47: "Sandy - well correct me if I'm wrong but the terms won't have changed since they signed the original deal with Atlas. Yes it may be comoplex but that hasn't changed as far as I know since then and they were known to the parties concerned."
Actually I think there's an important to clarify. The October RNS announcing terms between Vast and Atlas concerned an agreement between those parties; but it also made clear that this was subject to agreement between Mercuria and SSGI - which quite clearly from the RNS wording had not been executed at that point:
"As stated the Deed is subject to certain specific conditions which include shareholder approval; the execution of an intercreditor and standstill agreement with Mercuria; completion of due diligence relative to each tranche; and over time completion of formalities on the Diamond Concession following grant of mining licence; and thereafter specific practical milestones on the development of the Diamond Concession up to cold commissioning of the plant."
Daz: "Sandy - You're making assumptions that this is Atlas lawyers dragging their feet, under the mask of "complexity"."
No, I'm not. I'm pointing out that the documentation is going to be intrinsically complex and substantial. I did not say or imply that anyone is dragging their feet as I don't think that assumption is necessary. However, if any party is, I would first suspect SSGI. Not that I necessarily do.
gkb47: we disagree as to the facts, and therefore, obviously, as to how to interpret the situation. That is as usual.
gkb47: thanks for the unwarranted personal attack.