Member Info for Dave85

...this morning, ree - seems a transforming company, and quickly apparently, had to use several limit buys.

AIMO ATB

Just noticed that Patagonia gold (PGDC.TSXV) is now available to buy on the ii platform. Enquired couple months ago after getting a no go online and was told their international custodian would not allow purchase due to stock being designated a ‘low priced stock’. Bought in this afternoon finally, after thinking research would not even get chance of being fruitful. Just FYI as some seem still to be looking in here occasionally. Lnd looking cheap too so did a bit of av down recently.

AIMO ATB

Happy to add to my holding here under 2p (59085 @ 1.9386) km after km of drill results from an area of increasing global attention much anticipated. Its been very slow here admittedly but just got a feeling some have been using the time to accumulate prior to a sp moving catalyst. This years drill campaign, with back drop of Cu spot move, hiking cycle end and major investment and activity in nw zambia and surrounding regions could be it?

ATB

.. yesterday, interesting people taking stakes in such a small entity. Long term hold anticipated.

GLA

15:06 - “Kamesian brothers”? sounds like Shmazian…rather than Kamesian…or is there both?

https://www.smh.com.au/business/entrepreneur-behind-austrian-mining-boom-20110526-1f6aj.html

east coast lithium apparently awaiting listing after being passed about thru various entities for years, currently residing in eur.asx

https://stockhead.com.au/resources/european-lithium-steps-closer-to-nasdaq-listing-alongside-us10m-investment-facility/

and noricums, now - safe pair of hands from 24secs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-W8LH6R1Qw

….network of people involved with assets (acquired when unwanted/not widely known/insufficiently explored) that sometimes multi bag stocks under the right conditions.

Im into jay recently, looks very cheap all things considered and better conditions maybe arriving.

AIMO ATB

Valeura now my sixth ever 10 bagger, been a near 3 year hiatus (04/01/21) for these in my accounts, very much welcome in present market, thats for sure. Sold minor percentage of holding today at 4.1CAD to lock in some actualised gains but like the way its looking and don't hold much other oil and gas - with crcl next largest related holding so sticking around to see if they look like getting up towards that 100k per day sometime next couple of yrs.

Stuck the proceeds into omi.tsxv at 0.045 (for my ref)

AIMO ATB

Https://twitter.com/CruxInvestor/status/1709504783801888951

From 10 mins

MS doesn't think hzm follows with koniambo, just one man's opinion but he does know what he is talking about.

He thinks specy risk buy dowm here or wait to see the finance first. Less certain cf some opnions ive read last few days.

Just FYI

AIMO ATB

Worth the wait, happy days. Looking forward to the drill results starting to roll in, observing the info flow (granularity and regularity) from aa to arcm relative to other situations in pf will be interesting (2/5 directors bodes well?).

ATB

ATB

2 of 2

As I pointed out at the time even without finding anything and just dropping the cut off grade would increase the Jorc substantially, and some cut off reduction appeared and still does appear fully justifiable due to the coincident movement in POC. It is not for mgmt to control what drill results will be, they should maximise the chances of getting good drill results, that comes from aiming in the right (in the opinion of the top professionals) place and drilling plenty, he brought in a great team and did plenty of work funded by the £5.5m to give it a really good go, imo. Again understand some things said in the midst now may seem exuberant but some people who choose to do these things with their time wouldn’t unless they had such passion and optimism.

There is still great prospectivity imo at BR and the Jorc as it stands has only increased the leverage to copper price the deposit seems to demonstrate, much information has been gathered and knowledge put to use including money spent, in some ways this adds to the base value of the licence irrespective of anything further occurring.

Manica income backstops the intrinsic value of xtr beyond that of most other aim juniors and with the gold price threatening a quarterly breakout and other macro themes potentially soonish redefining the importance of existing capital relative to annual income I feel at 11m mcap or so xtr is now certainly a good place to restart adding to the pf, being not only focused on natural resources – something, even as far as the eye can see, seems irreplaceable by tech and ai and increasing in demand (because of them in fact) but specifically copper and gold, the greening leverage and the cross inflationary/deflationary cycle LT store of value. Xtr is indirectly a gold producer and has a mcap of c.11m, (dcf valuations are applicable and exposed to a comod on the verge of a potential breakout to aths). With potential for kakuya Cu production at some point in the not too distant future chucked in on top.

AIMO ATB

1 of 2

First purchase of xtr for a while for me 100,085 at 1.33p, not been following this bb much for quite some time but looking back over the last year or so generally my thoughts include…

Rns 19/04/21 placed 98,214,286 shares to raise £5.5m at £0.056 which was a per share value that the xtr sp had last visited 13/03/2017 (prior to the introduction of BR to the company (which, at the time, on this bb was met with considerable criticism from some)). For much of the intervening period £5.5m was more than or close to the entire mcap of xtr. There was also the visibility of raising the same again at 8.5p if drilling success had warranted such positivity. The drilling results never quite seemed to live up to the market expectation created after the first deep hole that in hindsight really seems to have hit the sweet spot and the copper and wider junior market faded slowly from a point soon after the placing up until relatively recently.

I can quite understand how some are now frustrated looking and listening back on the enthusiasm and proclamations made from several angles. It was an opportunity, the general bounce from the covid crash the general copper price move the move in mining juniors and the great hit on first drill, an opportunity that was justifiably taken, imo. That £5.5m and the potential of the same again relative to where the company had been for years before (admittedly the never ending and repeated mis predicted wait for FB manica production etc was painful for many myself included), gave xtr holders a real chance to find something at RC that could have transformed the company.

AIMO

6/6

Post period there is the paper exercise of application/submission of explo permit renewal and ML, together with continuing environ permit for H&G and drilling at kanye – noting that, firstly the total drilled meterage at kanye was less than that completed at H&G and almost all (reading the experiences of Giyani arguably it ‘should’ have been all) drilling was RC (and relatively shallower) as such will have been likely cheaper per m compounding the factors likely means much lower burn on the post period drilling activities of bzt.

More broadly the constant cash burn is likely majority composed of directors fees (lncl salary and consultancy) which seem in aggregate to amount to approx. £175k per year so £14.5k per month (30/06/22 annual report).

Looking in the round at approx. £924k minus say, average cash burn of £60k per month for the last 9 months arrives at £384K currently, which is not much admittedly.

Secondly, and adding the context, that bzt appear to have decided not to have raised £300K at multiples to current price (the sanderson fixed price cln drawdown faciltiy) around oct/nov 22 as I highlighted (my post 30/11/22) soon after the apparent window for such action had closed, suggests to me there is other, more fiduciarily responsible, visibility of funding, beyond a share placing (especially one at around the current sp). One ‘reason’ for some of what I have said, obviously, is that there is in fact a placing or some form of share issuance event approaching.

AIMO ATB

5/6

Posts that still appear from that morning, include this from someone who used to appear on the bzt website as a substantial holder, apparently…

“I was pleased to see that RNS this morning. While it will take time generate cash for the company, I welcome it with guarded optimism - the retention of 20% without having to pay out anything in exploration/feasibility studies is a big plus for me as the deal gives actual value to the asset as well as ongoing income from it -so we may be able to raise cash against it?”

“so we may be able to raise cash against it?” hmm, Im not clued up on such things tbh.

Another from a lth included “We are in the best position in our history - de risked, project funded and retained carried interest” this remember, is before the renewal of the mpsa, the update and substantial increase in the Jorc mre, copper and golds recent positive price action/relative sentiment, and up turn in sentiment towards the Philippines generally as a jurisdiction.

In comparison, todays comments are of interest to me.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/midweek-takeaway-with-colin-bird-executive-chairman/id1593750832?i=1000604931234 (from 24:00mins).

Re cash: as that very thing (budget) was most recently highlighted by CB as “tight” (in above linked podcast), I read a recent post here that a raise was soon due based on…

“289k cash, 228k retained from fallout from caerus, 450k from the drawdown facility, minus 120k from funding mankayan. 847k roughly, not taking into account G&A costs. It’s only a rough guess, but I think a raise will be needed soon”.

These figures do appear broadly correct but I see £15k and £18.75k raised via warrant exercise on 07/07/22 and 11/08/22 respectively. I also note the spend on mankayan appears to be £77k rather than 120k (rns 26/10/22) and broadly disagree that a raise will be needed soon for two reasons.

Firstly, the burn rate in the post period should be lower considering the relative activities the company is undertaking - 31/12/21 to 30/06/22 cash at bank reduction appears £439k (despite income of cash of £250k from the drawdown and £19k from warrant exercise) so (£439+£269)/12 or £118k per month. This included; visit to cyprus, an all parties technical visit, diamond drilling (and related assaying/testing) and ML work (inclu scoping study work (likely most but not all)) at H&G also the start of but not finish of the H&G enviro permit application, the kanye trenching, channel sampling and soil sampling also appears to be included.

AIMO

4/6

Nutshell - seems to me the value of bzt’s stake in idmi immediately following transaction (as of now as far as we are informed) ‘should’ (the market is the market) be above not only the valuations released in the 01/03/23 rns but also above the figures I posted here 23/03/23. Im left wondering (from my vantage point as outlined here - perhaps an incorrectly interpreted one) why the bzt rns 01/03/23 displayed the discounted value of bzt’s idmi shares rather than one on a similar basis to my own valuation, or even the value of the idmi shares inclusive of a ‘premium for control’, and further why no comment in relation to any of this appeared on this bb. Of course, the rns was factually correct within the extremely narrowly defined confines presented - in that the values were those derived from the “Valuation in Independent Expert's Report” and “No. of Consideration Shares to be issued to Bezant” but the extraneous (to those narrowly defined confines) context appears both lacking as well as relatively more relevant to bzt holders at the time, imo.

As always this is purely my take (opinion) on what I see that has been released, Im no expert in these things and don’t intend to insinuate anything, but am simply recording my thought process and decision making for future review and to a lesser extent gauging readers/posters thought intentions etc, after all it cant only be mee who’s interested in the path mankayan is taking. I see the asset value as incremental, not as zero pre ipo and 100% determined via ipo terms, post ipo, it seems previously highly successful natural resource entrepreneurs to do, they are lumping in their own funds.

Btw, this week marks the 200 week anniversary of the weekly low close (28/05/19) in the bzt sp prior to the announcement of the potential 80% disposal of Mank to MMIH (07/10/19). I remember that morning, preopen just myself and Dshox posted comment (possibily sage too but cant remember and cant check), I remember I said something like 20% will be an awful lot to keep, hmm. Having recently navigated back to those days the posts have been removed/deleted.

First post visible now is “everything can rise one day ...............just one day” at 08:30 from mannnan.

From the time https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/904254/bezant-resources-secures-funding-deal-for-its-mankayan-copper-project-904254.html , now unavailable designated as private.

AIMO

3/6

When considering the statements on pg 63/182 of the bdo document - section 13.4…

“As outlined in Section 4, if the Proposed Transaction is approved then Bezant will hold an interest of 26.36% in IDM International”

Along with

“Bezant’s control of IDM International following the Proposed Transaction will be significant when compared to all other shareholders. Following the Proposed Transaction, Bezant will become the largest shareholder of IDM International and its relevant interest will enable it to unilaterally block special resolutions (including schemes of arrangement). Bezant’s relevant interest will also provide them with significant influence over ordinary resolutions. Therefore, in our opinion, while Bezant will be able to significantly influence the activities of IDM International, it will not be able to exercise a similar level of control as if it held 100% of IDM International.”

…Imo, there is a stronger case that bzt’s shareholding of idmi shares immediately following transaction ‘should’ have a valuation premium applied to it rather than as the bzt 01/03/23 rns (on some level (at least to the casual reader)) seems to indicate, via the £ value of the idmi stake displayed in the table, an inbuilt discount to the base asset value in relation to the valmin calculation by sahara (said discount being one of 26% in the low case, 23% in the preferred and 20% in the high).

My valuation stated 23/03/23 was based on the valmin work along with bzt’s idmi stake and negated the minority discount of 20-26%, I did not go as far as applying the apparently appropriate “appropriate premium for control to be between 25% and 35%” which would have added to the section of my 23/01/23 2/4 post…

“the low, preferred, and high figures as of the completion of SPA (potentially tomorrow morning) would appear to stand at £3.528m, £7.057m and £10.599m respectively or on a per share basis at £0.000693 (0.0693p) (6.6% above close at 0.065p), £0.00138 (0.138p) (112.3% above close at 0.065p) and £0.00208 (0.208p) (220% above close at 0.065p) respectively.”

…>£880k to the low bdo value using the low end of the range of the ‘premium for control’ deemed appropriate, whilst adding >£3.7m to the high valuation using the high end of the ‘premium for control’ (35%). Although as discussed above a relatively modest stake valuation reduction should likely be applied due to extra 3,050,000 shares that I apparently wrongly assumed to be included in the 73m odd figure bzt provided on 01/03/23 via rns.

AIMO

2/6

“Following the Proposed Transaction, Shareholders will hold a minority interest in IDM International due to the dilutionary impact from the issue of the Consideration Shares and shares to ManagementCo. A minority interest is an interest in a company that is not significant enough for the holder to have an individual influence in the operations and value of that company. The Sum-of-Parts price per share derived above reflects the value of a controlling interest in the Company. In order to value an IDM International share on a minority interest basis, we have applied a minority interest discount. A minority interest discount is the inverse of a premium for control and is calculated using the formula 1- (1÷ (1 + control premium)). As discussed in Appendix 3, we consider an appropriate control premium for IDM International to be in the range of 25% to 35%, giving a minority interest discount in the range of 20% to 26%”

Firstly this appears to me to be referring to, and applicable to, the existing (pre transaction) holders of idmi shares, bzt cannot be, at any stage - such an entity.

Also specifically in relation to

“As discussed in Appendix 3, we consider an appropriate control premium for IDM International to be in the range of 25% to 35%, giving a minority interest discount in the range of 20% to 26%”

Immediately following the transaction, presumably a relevant period from an existing bzt shareholders point of view, bzt would appear to have been holding 26.37% of idmi (as far as we have been informed). In consideration of this “giving a minority interest discount in the range of 20% to 26%” appears not to be relevant or applicable to bzt’s stake immediately following the transaction.

Appendix 3 includes a table on pg 74-75/182 which is referred to as follows “The table above indicates that the long-term average control premium by acquirers of ASX-listed gold and copper companies” is “46.12%.”

It continues...

“we noted that control premiums appeared to be positively skewed by outliers” so as “the median often represents a superior measure of central tendency compared to the mean. We note that the median announced control premium over the assessed 52 period was approximately 41.63% for ASX-listed gold and copper companies.”

It continues…

“We consider an appropriate control premium to be on the lower end of historical averages to reflect IDM International’s illiquidity, small size, current financial position, geopolitical risk and exploration phase.”

“Based on the above, we consider an appropriate premium for control to be between 25% and 35%”.

For the avoidance of doubt remembering the following statement - “A minority interest discount is the inverse of a premium for control”.

AIMO

1/6

Now the spa has passed and should complete in the next week or so there were two areas of discrepancy which I identified at some point in my posts of 23/03/23 and expected to have been of interest to this bb. No comments were made in regards to either, as said I don’t post ‘for comment’ generally but the level of engagement does provide certain indications that I have found informative previously.

Discrepancy 1

“The fact it appears some 6m 0.2aud strike options remain outstanding points to a likely further dilution of bzt to approx 24.37% ((19,381,054/79,526,590)*100)…”

Appears that this should be

The fact it appears (from the wording in the bzt rns) some 6m 0.2aud strike options remain outstanding…

However in the bdo doc it states the diluted number of issued shares will be 82,526,590 (which likely indicates the post-transaction bzt-stated idmi shares in issue figure of 73,526,650 does not in fact include the early exercised options – numbering 3,050,000 (as assumed in my 23/03/23 3/4 post - as they stated “have been exercised early”), and hence in actuality, some 6m 0.2aud options may remain outstanding, but some 9,050,000 shares (including potential shares) remain highly likely to be added to the shares in issue figure and therefore…

…points to a likely further dilution of bzt to approx 23.47% ((19,381,054/82,576,560)*100)…”

Nut shell - bzt rns 01/03/23 states - post transaction shares in issue will be 73,526,560 but ‘bdo doc’ table on pg 60/182 states - adjusted soi post transaction will be 82,576,560, and since 82,576,560 – 73,526,560 = 9,050,000 which is the exact number of options on issue (pg 58/182 note a) “As all the 9,050,000 options on issue” it seems I was wrong to use bzt rns 01/03/23 post transaction shares in issue number of 73,526,560 as my starting point for calculation of dilutive effect of remaining unexercised 6m options.

Discrepancy 2

The rest of the discrepancy which has not been discussed in this bb (for whatever reason) between my low, preferred and high value of bzts idmi shares and those presented in the table in the 01/03/23 bzt rns (which is far more substantial in comparison to the one discussed above) stems from the inclusion of the ‘minority interest discount’ outlined in section 11.1.6 of the bdo doc, which states…

AIMO

4/4

Re H&G - calculating the CuEq grade x meters (on a basis of 9k usd/t Cu, 1.8k usd/oz Au and 24 usd/oz Ag), of intercepts for the 159 intercepts I found drilled by takoradi in the following releases and averaging them gave me a figure of 11, for example an intercept of 10m at 1.1%Cu would create this result via 10m x 1.1% = 11, this is an average intersection hope wide over a 2.7km strike, what bzt drilled recently is extra over and further strike extensions in the order of 9km just at hope are postulated backed by geophys, licence wise Ive been following the goings on re deep south res’ Haib project and orange river and it appears the environ in country is on the up which is a relief. Similar calculations for other projects of companies on aim exploring for copper has compared favourably for H&G given bzt’s current mcap.

14/05/07 https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20070514/pdf/312fp57dj4pfsh.pdf

24/05/07 https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20070524/pdf/312m850scz71qz.pdf

30/01/09 https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20090130/pdf/31fskltxbtlcn0.pdf

https://www.mining.com/deep-south-resources-prospects-improve-in-battle-for-haib-copper-project-licence-in-namibia/

https://investigations.namibian.com.na/the-n50m-lithium-mine-heist/

For extra info…eg the interesting cost of takoradi’s nimrod aquistion (28/04/06) vs what bzt paid for their chunk of virgo (so far at least) considering what takoradi achieved. Others are 19/09/06, 14/11/06 and 29/11/07, Im left wondering how much of the sub cut off (0.75% OP & 1% UG) intercepts (maybe what is non light blue on the cross sections (only scanned them for now) would potentially be economic today and how much disseminated (sub seafloor) mineralisation is waiting to be added to a jorc on hope and adjacent deposits, looking at the satellite, maybe can even see the transform faults described in the killick paper around Vendome? Here is the shaft… https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@-23.5693182,15.2576124,204m/data=!3m1!1e3

https://www.bing.com/search?q=takoradi+limited+asx&cvid=3439678173af44b99a0350cb2b19d802&aqs=edge.2.69i57j0l5j46l2j69i65.3569j0j9&FORM=ANAB01&PC=HCTS

https://www.mme.gov.na/files/publications/db2_Killick_Matchless%20Belt.pdf

Also https://finfeed.com/small-caps/mining/experienced-virgo-resources-team-sets-sight-near-term-copper-drilling/

Takoradi ceased… https://www.smh.com.au/business/holidays-cut-into-takoradi-accounts-20110529-1fark.html I narrowly avoided what would have most likely ended in a loss at wti so am aware of similarities/proximities and hope this vehicle turns out better then they did.

https://investegate.co.uk/Index.aspx?searchtype=3&words=wti

AIMO ATB

3/4

The fact it appears some 6m 0.2aud strike options remain outstanding points to a likely further dilution of bzt to approx 24.37% ((19,381,054/79,526,590)*100)…

Pg34 of ‘notice doc - “As all the 9,050,000 options on issue have an exercise price of $0.20 each, they would be exercised under each of the valuation scenarios considered, generating a total of $1.81 million in cash for the Company”, since 07/02/23 apparently - rns 01/03/23 - “Subsequent to the signing of the SPA holders of 3,050,000 IDM International options expiring at differing dates in 2024 and 2026 with an exercise price of A$0.20 per share issued to investors who previously subscribed for IDM International shares at A$0.10 per share have been exercised early for A$610,000 (approx. GBP348,000) so that IDM International currently has 47,097,850 shares in issue and after the Proposed Transaction will have 73,526,560 shares in issue”

… means it is likely prudent to apply a stake of 24.37% making the low, preferred and high, pre option exercise to 100% CM (as is), implied value - £3.262m, £6.518m, and £9.796m respectively, or on a per share basis at 0.064p, 0.128p and 0.192p respectively.

Just some opinions on the material that’s been released but seemingly (for some reason) not discussed on this bb, could easily have miscalculated or misinterpreted (and accept assumptions are required) the info and happy to see any applicable corrections posted.

Above event occurring, near coincident with (literally as I type) the JX/TSX chart has the ratio piercing the 200DMA (50 and 100DMA’s already rising) to the upside something that last occurred (after protracted period below at least) on the 07/05/20 and appears to have been followed by a period of 6 to 12 months of multibagging sp increases in aim junior miners a plenty.

AIMO

2/4

Over 8 months after the expiry date of jun 2022, if spa passes tonight 24/03/23 (“Upon the IDM International shareholders approving the Proposed Transaction at the IDM Shareholders Meeting all conditions in relation to the SPA will have been met”- bzt rns prose), idm mankayan will be held 100% by idm international and idm mankayan as of now already holds 100% of asean - a 40% holder of CM with option (previously stipulated as expiring 30 jun 2022 but referred to in the 01/03/23 rns (containing ‘notice’ doc dated 07/02/23) in the present tense) to acquire remaining 60% of CM (to achieve 100% mankayan project) therefore reasonable to infer the option has again been extended, no new terms mentioned so again reasonable to assume - ‘as is’, i.e. for ‘minimal consideration’.

Also within 01/03/23 rns “ Bezant's holding of 19,381,054 IDM International shares (the "Consideration Shares") will be diluted from 27.5% to 26.36% of IDM International.”

And

On pg31 of the linked ‘notice’ document a range of valuations in USD for the 100% idm intnational ownership of CM (should it be achieved (apparently for ‘minimal consideration’)) of a low of 25.7m a preferred value of 51.4m and an upper value of 77.2m usd.

It is important to stress these valuations were via the internationally recognised valmin code method and were derived by independent third party sahara as of the effective date of 27/12/22 (value of mankayan as it stands (or stood very recently)). Should this 100% mankayan project ownership be achieved whilst bzt still hold 26.36% the implied value of bzt’s stake would be (fx 0.8138 usd to 1 gbp) low of £5.513m, preferred of £11.026m and high of £16.561m. Even before this exercise of the option i.e assuming the 64% interest in CM (mank project) the low, preferred, and high figures as of the completion of SPA (potentially tomorrow morning) would appear to stand at £3.528m, £7.057m and £10.599m respectively or on a per share basis at £0.000693 (0.0693p) (6.6% above close at 0.065p), £0.00138 (0.138p) (112.3% above close at 0.065p) and £0.00208 (0.208p) (220% above close at 0.065p) respectively.

Interesting to see CLA local backer move to 'binding' just the other day too.

AIMO

1/4

Apparently idmi meeting is tonight so that was higher in my thoughts today compared to H&G...

https://investegate.co.uk/tanzania-gold-plc--bzt-/rns/acquisition/200706150802234261Y/

rns 15/06/07… “today signed contracts to acquire the entire issued share
capital of Asean, a 40 per cent. shareholder in Crescent Mining” (CM) “and Development
Corporation ('Crescent'), a Filipino company (the 'Acquisition'). Asean also
holds a conditional option, expiring in October 2009, to acquire the remaining
60 per cent. of Crescent for minimal consideration”

2007 - Bzt acquire asean a 40% holder of CM with option expiring oct 2009 to acquire remaining 60% of CM (to achieve 100% mankayan project) for “minimal consideration”

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/BZT/proposed-disposal-of-80-of-mankayan-project-5mdduibvf1rtwba.html

rns 07/10/19… “Asean Copper holds a 40 per cent. shareholding in Crescent Mining and Development Corporation ("CMDC"), which is incorporated in the Philippines and is the sole holder of Mineral Production Sharing Agreement No. 057-96-CAR (the "MPSA") in respect of the Mankayan Project. Asean Copper also holds a 40 per cent. shareholding in Bezant Holdings Inc., which is incorporated in the Philippines and holds the balancing 60 per cent. interest in CMDC, and has an option (scheduled to expire on 30 June 2022) to acquire the balancing 60 per cent. of Bezant Holdings Inc. (together, the "Asean Copper Ownership Structure").”

2019 - years after the expiry date of oct 2009 Bzt holds (prior to disposal to mmih) asean a 40% holder of CM with option expiring 30 jun 2022 to acquire remaining 60% of CM (to achieve 100% mankayan project) ‘conditional option’ has been extended, not informed of (or I cannot locate/ have not located) terms so reasonable to assume ‘as is’, i.e. for ‘minimal consideration’.

https://www.advancedshare.com.au/assets/documents/IDM_NOM_2023_EGM.pdf

rns (pg7 ‘notice’ doc linked within rns) 01/03/23… “Asean holds an aggregate 64% interest in Crescent through a direct 40% shareholding and a further 24% interest through its 40% interest in Bezant Holdings Inc (BHI) (an entity incorporated in the Philippines) which has a 60% interest in Crescent. Asean has an option to acquire BHI’s 60% interest in Crescent. If the option were ultimately exercised, Asean would hold 100% of the issued share capital of Crescent and therefore have a 100% interest in the Project.”

AIMO