Member Info for breaktwister

I do not share that view Karl. There was an article posted on this thread showing that Agnico has been recently trumpting their plans for "environmentally friendly" approach at Anza or such-like. Why would they do that, or indeed pay $1m to finalise Phase 1, if they intend to walk away? No, this is them showing OMI who is boss and as Brad has admitted trying to change the JV terms in their favour. Perhaps they want to drive shareprice down then offer to buy OMI for a pittance which would give them 100% control of Anza, remember MMA (and likely Agnico as Newmont seem to to be at arms length) got the results and choose what they share. First results at Pep were awesome then they drill the wrong way into dirt??? No, Anza is a beast and Agnico and squeezing OMI either to buy them out or to get better JV terms.

I have put OMI on notice, they have 3 days to acknowledge the complaints and 8 weeks to resolve. Summary below:

Complaint 1: OMI has obtained investment from the AIM marketplace on the basis of a time-boxed exploration agreement with MMA. MMA have not adhered to the agreed timeline and this has caused significant fall in valuation of OMI shares. OMI have to date taken no or inadequate action to rectify the situation.

Solution of this complaint may take the form of either:

a) Exiting the Exploration Agreement as non-fulfilled in accordance with permitted T&C of the agreement

b) Beginning Phase 2 of the agreement.

Complaint 2: There appears to be no mechanism for which AIM private shareholders, who as a collective are the majority shareholders, can vote on appointments or dismissal to/from the Orosur

Board of Directors.

Solution of the complaint is to call an Emergency General meeting to ratify appointees to all Director and above positions and ensure a mechanism whereby private shareholders votes are collected and counted.

What exactly has changed in the last 6-9 months? Nothing it seems. Brad says Newmont have other fish to fry and as such are leaving Agnico to deal with Anza and Agnico are playing hardball to try and change terms in their favour, no doubt "care and maintenance" is part of their hardball strategy. So our CEO bends over and takes it and "suggests that OMI take back control of the project"? WDF, OMI are 100% holders of the goddamn licences, the timelimit has passed, the correct responsive is to tell Agnico to f'ing DO ONE.

Total lack of awareness of the legal position, complete lack of business acumen, who make this clown a CEO, and more importantly how can we get rid of him?

I'll ask again to see if anyone here has any view on the matter, but at what point does it become fraudulent to raise funds from the market on the basis of a time-boxed JV, then when JV partners do not keep to the contractual timeframe simply do nothing? To me this is fraudulent. OMI should be walking away from this unfulfilled JV. I emailed SP Angel about these concerns but did not get a response. I will begin further escalations to AIM/FCA regulators in September.

Chicken, that is a very interesting find, thank you for sharing.

I have raised my concerns with SP Angels. No idea what to expect as it is the first time I have had to contact a Nomad.

I am going to give these clowns until September to create a way forward. Sept will be a full year since P1 ended.

PIs have invested millions into this company based on JV terms which stated 90 day transition time.

At what point does it become fraudulent to allow our JV partners to do what they like contrary to this agreement? I think there is a criminal case to answer here. These clowns are NOT entitled to screw PI shareholders to keep a minority shareholder happy.

Jackbal, it is dereliction of duty. The 90 day transition time is very clear but is being ignored by both parties. There is no force majuere reason why the term should cease to exist, and the only reason I can see is that it suits MMA to wait before committing to P2. Something stinks that Brad/Louis do not do the right thing by their shareholders and put a new deadline around the transition period.

This is why I will particiate my holdings to any action to remove the board. To kenji's post about nominee account I dgaf about that, I am the shareholder and if I want to take shareholder action my broker will have to post me out a share certificate in my name if I so decide.

Very nice for them to be gifted a non-expiring option for Anza while OMI holders may be looking at a PM breakout without participating in any upside. I invested in OMI based on a contractual timeline for Anza which our mgt are now simply ignoring. MMA can take as much time as they like to see how the political situation, or PM prices, play out. All in their favor of course while OMI shareholders nurse losses.

Beanie Babies were also a store of value, until they weren't.

DrR, not easy but that is why a CEO gets paid a the big bucks as he has difficult decisions to make. Our "partners" have decimated our share price and are acting outside the spirit of the agreement with their C&M annoucement. Does a CEO let them do this with no consequence while his stock is decimated? No, and it is irrelevant the size of these "partners" or that one of them has a shareholding, I would rather OMI walk away from this toxic deal and have Newmount dump their 15%, at least we will have Anza and be free to progress it with a new JV.

Jackbal, I am up for this and will contribute in terms of percentage shareholding, funding and/or advise, but I cannot lead the effort. My email is my username at hotmail dot com.

We will need bharg I am sure.

Chicken, time = dilution at an already very low mcap. The plan was for a free ride over 4 years more drilling to a PEA which the project would be well defined in terms of resource which should have seen at LEAST a 10x mcap from here. This would then have allowed a capital raise at much higher prices to progress other projects. No, the issue of time is why I want Brad and Louis gone.

I am furious that Brad just accepts that bigger miners have slow "glacial" bureucracy. Well, they would not be so slow if Brad called them and said that they have one month to start P2 or OMI walk away from the deal entirely. I can tell you right now that a decision would come very quickly in that event.

Jackbal, that is interesting thank you. I reckon we could do the same here. Is the 5% rule applicable to AIM?

"will come to a resolution soon, we hope"

"quite comfortable that it is getting nearer to the end than the biginning of how that moves forward"

I wonder what makes him so "comfortable" when his shareholders are the opposite?

*cannot or will not I should say

LW, no need for OMI to force legal action, OMI are 100% owners of the licences at present and should be acting like it. By completing P1 MMA earned an option to enter into P2 within 90 days. Strictly speaking their option has expired but for some bizarre reason OMI mgt are applying stupid amounts of goodwill to the detriment of shareholders.

OMI has massive leverage and are fully entitled to put a deadline on MMA decision, and if they fail to meet the deadline OMI can walk away with 100%. All this would take is one letter setting a date for P2 to start, or some other exit deal made, but our joke mgt cannot apply the correct strategy.

Again you are incorrect to state that your original incorrect analysis means that there is no point in having a contract? No, but having mgt who refuse to execute a clearly defined contract to the detrement of their shareholders is a significant issue, mgt should resign/be removed.

Jackbal "because the sale of the option of $2m gives them 51% control". No, this is incorrect analysis. The option to enter into P2 was secured back in Sept upon completion of P1. The $2m payment is part of the P2 planning, that and the creation of a new JV company. As the 90 timeline was broken significantly, OMI should have only accepted the $2m upon condition that P2 starts within a defined period. We are now 10 MONTHS after P1 completion. We are shareholders have been absolutely shafted and both Brad and Louis should apologise, resign or we vote them out at the earliest.

Does anyone know how shareholders can call for an emergency AGM?

DrR, I have and invited him to call me which he has not done so. Fingers in ears regarding my advice.