Member Info for Dustfilter

The problem is, Feeks, the deep-pocketed strategic partners and investors which Knauth and Trahar claim that RAM will attract into the project via Jumelles could have been brought into the project at ZIOC PLC level. Why not at ZIOC level so that shareholders can benefit equally? Davis and Heeney have played a blinder for themselves grabbing 87.5% largely at the expense of small investors who have waited like fools for many years. Nice work. I have little doubt that the other facilitators at ZIOC, Greymont, etc will get their quid pro quo and I suspect that this plan was brewing for much longer than we know.

And there are other concerns which I have from the past 12 months at ZIOC:

- who the heck are GIS? This mysterious entity was granted 20% of the offtake but what did ZIOC get in return? What's the quid pro quo?

- the missing TR-1 notifications which have been documented by others. WTF?

- the strange Gupta share ownership RNS where one shareholder name was magically crossed out and Gupta's name written-in. Everything is OK, nothing to see here, etc.

- the unexplained share price 'pegging' effort which we saw running up to the RAM announcement. I've never known anything like that.

- I could go on

IMHO, the big guys are not playing with a straight bat and I see no reason for their behaviour to suddenly change for the better. Shareholder trust has been largely vapourised and there is no telling what they'll do next. For this reason I decided to sell >50% of my ZIOC shares last week. Unless a major mining company comes in with a bid at ZIOC PLC level before the end of June then I reckon the upside here is quite limited for at least the next 12 months. I have some better investment options elsewhere.

Zanaga Iron Ore: 12.5% of a huge iron ore asset which doesn't pass the sniff test.

GLA

What's happening?

AI answer...

Yes, there have been cases in the UK where investors have pursued claims against Nomads (Nominated Advisers) for negligence, particularly in relation to their duties during initial public offerings and ongoing compliance. These claims often arise from alleged failures to provide adequate advice or to fulfill their regulatory responsibilities, leading to financial losses for investors.

velitorlaw.com hilldickinson.com

Legal Precedents for Investor Claims Against Nomads in the UK

Overview of Nomad Responsibilities

Nomads (Nominated Advisers) play a crucial role in the UK financial markets, particularly for companies listed on the Alternative Investment Market (AIM). They are responsible for ensuring that their clients comply with regulatory requirements and provide guidance on corporate governance.

Grounds for Negligence Claims

Investors may pursue negligence claims against Nomads if they believe that the Nomad failed to fulfill its duties, leading to financial losses. Key grounds for such claims include:

Breach of Duty: If a Nomad does not act with the care expected in their role, they may be liable.

Misrepresentation: If a Nomad provides false or misleading information that investors rely on, this could lead to a claim.

Failure to Advise: If a Nomad fails to provide necessary advice that results in investor losses, this may constitute negligence.

Relevant Case Law

While specific cases against Nomads are less common, there are precedents in related areas of financial services. For example:

Negligence in Financial Advice: Courts have recognized claims against financial advisors for failing to provide adequate advice or for misrepresenting investment risks.

Duty of Care: The legal principle of duty of care established in cases like Caparo Industries plc v. Dickman (1990) can apply to Nomads, establishing that they owe a duty to act in the best interests of their clients.

Conclusion

While there may not be a wealth of direct precedents specifically targeting Nomads for negligence, the principles of negligence and duty of care in financial services provide a framework for potential claims. Investors considering such actions should seek legal advice to assess the viability of their claims based on specific circumstances.

Thanks asp.

Does anyone know if there's a precedent for investors suing a NomAd for negligence?

If Liberum were negligent and/or asleep at the wheel in terms of steering ZIOC's BoD along the straight and narrow then surely...?

Could be an easier place to start than a BVI-domiciled entity?

It may at least get the 'legends' thinking

Last time I communicated with him it was

tomat49@gmail.com

He put up a piece earlier today but I don't know what he said. He may be able to offer practical advice on how to report facts to the relevant authorities/

FWIW Damon Heath's contact email is probably as follows:

Damon.Heath@shardcapital.com

If anyone feels the urge to forward investor displeasure to Shard, ZIOC's broker, then fill your boots.

I imagine Shard would have had full knowledge of this outrage prior to today's RNS

Thor, GLEN sold at 4p for 2 important reasons...

- everyone knew that the Zanaga asset would struggle to make progress whilst GLEN were involved with offtake and ownership

- the SP was around 4p when GLEN agreed to be bought out

The best I could find is this...

Contact Information for Liberum Capital Regarding Zanaga Iron Ore

Nominated Adviser and Corporate Broker

Company: Liberum Capital Limited

Contact Persons:

Scott Mathieson

John More

Phone Number: +44 20 3100 2000

info@panmureliberum.com

For inquiries related to Zanaga Iron Ore Company Limited, you can also reach out to:

Zanaga Iron Ore Company Limited

Investor Relations Manager: Andrew Trahar

Phone Number: +44 20 7399 1105

In fairness to TW, he's made some stock tips which cost me dearly years ago but his ability to recognise wrong-doing and/or bad stocks on AIM is probably unparalleled. But yes, things must be bad at ZIOC if he's getting involved in this way.

If anyone here has a SP subscription, would they be able to ask him if he would recommend fighting this and how?

...on share prophets

It's behind a paywall and I'm not a subscriber but he seems to be the first journo/blogger to pick the story up

Ex, I believe that Charlene was from Full Metal Jacket. A rifle or similar

Can someone please explain how 0.6g/t gold is anything other than low grade?

How are you pumpers defining low grade here? Give me the g/t number please.

In comparison, I hold shares in a company which recently intersected 1500g/t in one of their drills.

Forgive me for saying it but Appian have got the good deal here. They've unloaded a low-grade resource along with the cost of the geologist who failed to make something of it. In return, Appian received a stake in Ajax's full portfolio of projects including Eureka and others superior to this relative turd.

Appian are the smart guys. Ajax are looking increasingly like just another tin-pot project collector. Sorry.

Turd polishers are free to disagree! :-0

I think that exploring legal options would be appropriate. Anyone with such expertise/experience?

...that should read AT not AP

The more I think about this the worse it gets. In exchange for giving-up the vast majority of the project, ZIOC shareholders will still need to find a huge sum to get the project over the line in the form of debt or equity.

In exchange for this massive dilution at project level there should at least have been a free carry to production.

Shame on you AP. Shame on all of the BoD. I hope we never cross paths again.

Yes, I remember your post ATG and it's certainly resonating now.

AIM. BVI. Buyer beware.

Yes indeed, Jiving, Mr Mindich too. Surely a guy of his calibre and background would not have come onboard to be duped as we (mostly seemingly) believe we have been duped.

So I hold a small amount of hope that there's a missing piece of this puzzle which will be revealed. But it's hard to imagine how this is anything other than a dirty, greedy trick.

...I'm thinking of the names listed in the March 2025 private placement...

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/us215m-private-placement-proposed-buyback-7nebuk76fessmbb.html

What's in it for the other guys if they're not all part of this RAM outfit?

...RAMmed from behind for sure.

There. Somebody had to say it.