Member Info for breaktwister

i give up on this dog now, my view is that we have been de-frauded. why do i say this? because the facts are that mma have not earned 51% of the project. they only earned an option to obtain a 51% stake if they sign-up to spend a further $20m on phase 2. an option, that is all they earned with their p1 spend, and the option should have been exercised within 90 days of p1 completion, which would have been by january 2023, a full year ago.

if they do not wish to spend a further 20m then they have nothing. they walk away and omi retains 100% of the anza licence, which is in fact the case today.

i am now severely ****ed off but do not have the time or energy to sue omi despite shareholders having a very strong case. ******* outright fraud in front of everyones face. an utter disgrace.

I am still highly suspicious that OMI mgt can get a good deal for Option 4 (MMA walks away and OMI retains 100% of the project). This Option was always there, MMA can stop at the end of Phase 1 with no further costs or obligations. Quite why they would instead pay $2m to do nothing is quite baffling to me, unless they want to press OMI for some type of exit payoff? MMA have earned nothing unless they enter into P2 but I see from the presentation (and previous correspondence from OMI) that OMI does not see things this way.

So what is it going to take for them to clear off?

What did we miss? I was in late work meetings so could not join.

Capital is flowing into mining stocks since the Fed pivot notification yesterday. Of course, not OMI.

On 13x normal volume. Sounds impressive until you realise normal volume is practically dead, avg 6k shares traded per day.

"I think we all agree that us getting back control is the best outcome", so the "we" is OMI and MMA but I would be much happier if he did not caveat this with the words "I think". At this stage you would hope he would KNOW that this is what is being worked on, as he goes on to say "question of how and what the details are" which has been the case all year surely so what progress has been made really?

I do not think MMA are going to simply give the project back, which would be the best outcome as others have reported OMI has investors waiting for a piece of Anza if it becomes available, however, OMI in the driving seat with MMA paying the bills would be an excellent result. If they can also come up with a drill plan to start in 2024, then this will re-rate.

To provide some balance, while I have made my views clear on how this has been managed, I accept that there is more than one way to skin a cat, in fact it is likely that there will be some resolution of Azna in Q1 for the simple fact that even the most passive poodle must bite if he has no other option, OMI must start pressing MMA for SOME movement, in particular as fundraising is needed , which to me it is unthinkable that Brad would come with cap out without any movement at all on Anza. But who knows, he seems to have a brassneck regarding shareholders and the market, pity he does not have that attititude when it is so desperately needed towards our JV "partners".

I'll repeat again the legal argument mainly for those new here but also since DrR asked "how can they win". The case is simple, the P1 expenditure plus $2m cash payment simply give MMA a right to enter into a new JV vehicle under which they would own 51% of the Anza project, with further rights and obligations to be contained in the T&C of a new JV company. Critically, this option to enter P2 must be exercised within 90 days of P1 ending, by way of creation of the new JV company AND START OF P2. Simply paying the $2m does NOT give MMA a lifetime option to sit on Anza and do nothing, to the contrary, the licence is 100% owned by OMI and the P2 option has now expired so OMI should absolutely be pressuring MMA to get a bloody move on or get out. They have massive leverage and have refused to use it.

As I have posted before, I bet OMI have made some kind of representation to MMA that they would waive the 90 day term, which would be extremely dumb without putting a new term in place, but we will never know the inner communications, all we can see is the result, a contract breach which our board is unwilling to do anything about and which has cratered the share price.

"How can they win against two giant multi billion $ companies, who have paid there way in regards to spenditure until the middle of next year". Firstly, a uncorrupt court of law is a humbling equaliser, it does not matter who has the deeper pockets as long as the litigation fees can be paid then it all revolves around the rights and responsibilities that are in writing, and the actions of the participants.

Secondly, you are correct in that MMA have nearly a full year of carryforward costs I believe, which does not start until P2 starts. This makes every week of delay in starting P2 a further hammerblow to a small company that relies on positive newsflow/drill results.

And I bet the ongoing "care and maintenance" costs will be added to MMA carry-forward sum, and Brad and Louis the poodles will say "of course", however, according to the contract only P1 costs can be carried forward and P1 ended in September 2022! Who wants to bet that Brad and Louis ignore this very important fact also, to the detrement of OMI shareholders and to the benefit of MMA, odd that.

I should sell out tbh, it is not worth the ongoing anger caused in thinking of the stupidity, cowardice, or corruption on display here.

I stand corrected then, was just a suspicion since he said something odd about "you cannot put legally binding timelines in a contract as they could be impacted by external changes to government etc" which is incorrect and strangely that appears to be the position of OMI, to ignore contract terms because of external factors. No, I said it before and will say it again, a force majeure event would mean that an alternative has to be put in place, and ofc we are still stuck here with no new date set.

I'll go ahead and make my suspicions public, but I suspect AGEOS was Brad. Reason is that he had shared expert level geo insights previously, claimed to be a CEO who had experience dealing with JV contracts, but also displayed a serious lack of legal understanding of said contracts. Just like our man Brad. Also, he disappeared when the share price began to crash and questions were being asked of OMI BoD dereliction of duty.

This is just my opinion, I cannot prove any of it, but I don't think AGEOS will be back.

Impec, no mate, sorry, but there would be NO need for litigation, all that was needed was for OMI to put their foot down and tell our partners that there is no allowance in the time-boxed contract for the project to be put on "care and maintenance".

MMA would have been faced with a decision that if they do not progress OMI will end the agreement and retain 100% of the licence rights, as permitted due to failure to enter P2.

Now, this may trigger litigation from MMA, but not necessarily, they could just accept that they need to progress.

This should have all been hammered out with MMA as soon as they said "care and maintenance" but Brad the poodle did nothing and is happy to just let MMA do nothing while shareholders lose. At least then, if MMA had refused to budge based on a deadline set by OMI back in February we could stop all the other project nonsense and keep remaining funds for litigation if MMA decided to go that route. We could have entered into another JV with terms that our new JV partner will assist in defending litigation from MMA for example, which we would win as the contract is clear that P1 to P2 is 90 days.

Jackbal, not only resolve, but a drill plan recommencement date. If they indeed announce a P2 with MMA without a drilling plan, is the market expected to just accept their word that drilling will commence "soon"? I don't think so. His only hope at saving face, and his career (nobody wants to be remembered as a clown) is to get Anza JV back up and running with MMA, or cancel the whole thing and we find other JV partners. I advised them of these two very clear choices as soon as the "care and maintenence" RNS come out, when was that February? And they have chosen to do nothing, now the cash is running out. So stupid of them not to set a deadline for MMA entry into P2, in fact it is so stupid that one might think they take orders from MMA regardless of shareholder impact.

What does all of this geology mean ultimately, we had the exact same excitment at Anza. Brad is obviously a geo through and through and not qualified to be a CEO. The geology does not matter when OMI does not have the willingness to stand firm when JV partners screw us. Remember, a 90 day contract term for P1 to P2 transition is being ignored without any "force majuere" RNS, now over one year with no movement and no deadline set either.

Anyone who invested here on the basis of the Anza Exploration Agreement with MMA has been defrauded imo.

Https://archive.ph/1p7PC

New hot place to do business? Not that it matters for OMI if they are going to ignore contracts and let JV partners do whatever da hell they like against shareholders interests.

Just noticed that IG are not accepting new SB positions in OMI. Not sure when they placed this restriction but I know they used to allow it.

Surely Brad is not so arrogant to think that he can come to the market with cap out for a new JV without a resolution to the very damaging limbo that he permitted to occur on the flagship project? Surely?

I don't follow, "closer to the end than the beginning" means that a resolution is expected "soon". Whatever that may be.

I don't think Brad would have been signing us up to Nigera, knowing that a raise will be needed in 2024, if he was not confident of an Anza resolution. But, his actions have surprised me in the past so I am not going to guess. I am holding for Anza or bust at this point.

Interesting wording here "negotiations continued with Monte Aguila on the shareholders agreement which will govern the new mining company to be owned 51% by Monte Agulia and 49% by Orosur" , the language here "which WILL" indicates a certainty. I would need to watch the recent interview again (I would rather have my nails pulled out tbh), but did Brad not say that the new company had already been registered, so it seems that all that remains is minor detail before formally annoucing the new JV and plan for Phase 2?

Who knows at this point, we are either going to 10x from here or lose it all.

Jackbal, all very valid questions which is why I raised the matter to the FCA. Contract clearly states 90 days and yet no official RNS to give formal explanation why they have ignored this. Their official explanation was "MMA C&M" which is a default of the agreement. Poor mistake by MMA to think they they are in control this this extend, a competant BoD woudl say "thanks for your default, we are walking away with our 100% owned asset".