Member Info for extrader

13.5 million shares traded today, 20% of AVAP...@ 79p (vs 98-100 at time).

Oceanwood had 16.1m, per stockopedia.

A quick search brought up this :

hxxps://www.pionline.com/hedge-funds/oceanwoods-deputy-cio-start-own-firm-hedge-fund-shutters.

Seems it's closing down, and may be in a hurry....

..."Oceanwood Capital Management's Deputy CIO Julian Garcia Woods is striking out on his own, and the hedge fund he co-managed with founder Christopher Gate is shutting down.

Mr. Woods, who has been at Oceanwood since 2007, is taking a team from the firm and plans to launch CoreLane Capital Management early next year, according to Andrew Baker, head of business development at the London-based company. Oceanwood will return capital to investors while Mr. Gate, 59, is retiring, he said...."

Somebody got a bargain.

ATB

From the (regurgitated) RNS, 2 x highlights :

.." Cultivation, in Partnership with Elgo Dimitra, READY TO COMMENCE...."

But we were told to expect harvest around now, no?

.."As a result of the completion of this work, the Company can NOW proceed to its operational licence..."

so HELD hasn't got its license yet?

Someone attending the AGM might like to ask DR whether - when the apparently not-yet-started cultivation is ready for harvest - HELD can actually SELL it.

PI's have been misled, AFAICS

GLA

.."Wiggle room and wriggle room are both expressions that mean some flexibility or margin for adjustment. However, wiggle room is the more common and preferred term. Wriggle room has the advantage of alliteration, but wriggle means to squirm or twist, while wiggle means to move back and forth. Therefore, wiggle room is more accurate and widely used..."

Since we're comparing dic's, mine was Bing......

;->

Hi Jiving,

I'm not very clued-up on HR matters and have never been in a position where these things were relevant to me personally, alas

From rooting around a bit this morning, I've got the flwg bits that may give some perspective :

(1) From the GEMD accounts, CE's other company (which, like ZIOC, he founded and where he's CEO), which is trading profitably, but not wonderfully

- his base is abt £600K, with LTIPs etc another £400K;

- his CFO is abt £ 400K, plus £ 100K;

- his NED Chair is on £ 125K, the other NEDs abt £ 50K (they don't get anything else, AFAICS)

Interestingly, GEMD says he's currently PAID £ 83K for his nonExec Chair at ZIOC......(maybe an 'oops !' moment ?)

Everyone at GEMD obvs has a lot of v public personal legal responsibility and disclosure issues (hopefully insured against) as an active public company, that don't apply to the same extent at ZIOC, I imagine.

(2) ZIOC BoD is a 2-parter, 3 x 'old ZIOC' NEDs, Elphick (founder/shareholder rep), Dines (China hand) and Velloza (mining expertise) and 2 x exGLEN , Peter Hill (head of Iron Ore marketing ) and Denis Weinstein (trader and - I think -general 'fixer'). As recent (but mission-critical) arrivals, I'd hope that Elphick would argue that they should be (well) rewarded.... but by GLEN !

ZIOC 'management' team: going back to 2019, I seem to recall that there were 3 or so - Andrew Trahar , Velloza's predecessor and A.N. Other ?

Apart from the Q re Elphick (is he paid or not?), I see that Mitch 984 has raised the Q of whether AT (at least) is or has been paid in shares 'in lieu of salary'.

(3) Then there's the Q how much 'deferred salary' vs how much 'success fee', for want of a better word.

I'm sure there's an internal memo somewhere that sets out everyone's expectations !...and maybe even rights....?

(4) With his 80m shares, Elphick's interests aren't aligned with the others, who AFAICS have few shares : they'll be interested in maximising, he (unless he's v generous to himself), will be considering the dilution effect on those 80m...

Dines apparently has 630K shares, Velloza 214K.

(5) Same concern (dilution) applies even more to GLEN, with its 286m......

(6) Then there's the Q about the structure of any deal and whether those affected have (or want to have) any future role in the Project's development. Depending on how far in discussions they are (if at all) that might have a bearing on what they negotiate.

(7) They're leaving themselves lots of wiggle room, as I highlighted earlier .." As of today, discussions with management continue and a resolution is expected to be reached IMMINENTLY through the issue of shares in consideration of PART of this deferred consideration...."

Note the caps !

I guess we'll find out (something) soon enough!

E&OE, ATB and GLA

Worth a read.

Talks about risk on appeal of BUR re-involving YPF (see the Venezuela/CITGO issue); the potential co-mingling of sovereign and commercial; Cristina Kirchner having to hire a private jet rather than risk the Presidential one, incidentally including the UAE (an offshore - cough!- banking centre) and the Seychelles (double cough!), the latter not on her official itinerary..

Lots of other detail for the aficionado...

Google is your friend !

Hi Jiving,

I'm not very clued-up on HR matters and have never been in a position where these things were relevant to me personally, alas ;-

.."Looking ahead, Kropz expects to stay in operational existence until at least December next year..."

That doesn't exactly inspire much confidence, does it?

PS I don't think you're adding value here...other than (maybe) entertainment.

Interesting snippet ex-Bahrain, from a source new to me (and can't find out much about it).

hxxps://nationalsecuritynews.com/2023/09/us-bahrain-seek-to-build-on-historic-pact-to-help-peace-across-the-middle-east/

Dated 2 weeks ago, Bahrain’s Prime Minister is expected to visit the Pentagon next week, putting the seal on a historic and far-reaching security and economic pact agreed between the two nations.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Prime Minister Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa signed a Comprehensive Security Integration and Prosperity Agreement, which spans “defense and security to emerging technology, trade, and investment,” according to the State Department.

and goes on to say

.."The agreement is seen as an opportunity to integrate the region’s air and missile defense systems and increase “maritime domain awareness,” according to a White House fact sheet..."

Harbinger of things to come- cf Kenya.....?

ATB

Rosatom (seriously!) was mentioned a few months back

https://www.enerdata.net/publications/daily-energy-news/russias-rosatom-plans-develop-500-mw-hydro-capacity-congo.html

Their local rep is Jean Yves Ollivier, this article is worth a read

https://nationalsecuritynews.com/2023/06/ramaphosas-peace-initiative-with-ukraine-is-organized-by-a-french-businessman-partnered-with-rosatom/

He seem to be on good terms with the Chinese, too.

.."In a recent interview with the Financial Times, Ollivier not only confirmed that he represents the nuclear interest of Russia in Africa, but also claims that he is now leading a new joint venture between Rosatom and the Atomic Energy Agency of China to market the export of nuclear technology jointly to developing countries. .."

A new 'scramble for Africa' ?

Interesting twist, for sure.

ATB

The reason being that they'll want to have these share awards disclosed asap , to be ratified /approved at the AGM in November, before any serious negotiations get underway.

IMO

This indeed suggests that they're getting serious :

.."The Company continues to review the costs of its operational activities with a view to conserving its cash resources. As part of such review, and in order to preserve the cash position of the Company, it has been agreed with the Directors (since January 2019) and Management (since September 2019) that fees previously deferred would be reviewed. As of today, discussions with management continue and a resolution is expected to be reached IMMINENTLY through the issue of shares in consideration of PART of this deferred consideration...."

At a guess.

Maybe we should open a (second) book - apart from the shareprice one - as to how many shares will be issued to Directors and Management...

;->

ATB

The first action will probably be this :

.."The Company continues to review the costs of its operational activities with a view to conserving its cash resources. As part of such review, and in order to preserve the cash position of the Company, it has been agreed with the Directors (since January 2019) and Management (since September 2019) that fees previously deferred would be reviewed. As of today, discussions with management continue and a resolution is expected to be reached IMMINENTLY through the issue of shares in consideration of PART of this deferred consideration...."

At a guess.

Maybe we should open a (second) book - apart from the shareprice one - as to how many shares will be issued to Directors and Management...

;->

ATB

No cash burn worries, because of the TAG facility?

Think again :

Well, NOT funded, actually

.."On 30 June 2023, the Company issued a draw down notice to TAG under the amended TAG Unsecured Working Facility for the full GBP800,000 available. As at 30 June 2023, no funds had been received from TAG in respect of this facility, however subsequent to 30 June 2023, and prior to the release of these unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements, TAG had provided GBP245,000 of the GBP800,000 that had been drawn down by the Company..."

Gotta run - literally.

GL

PP-FCC left Brazzaville this morning, back to Cascais (Portugues fleshpot).

29 Sep 2023 Brazzaville (BZV) Cascais (CAT) (PPFCC) — 08:00 — 14:58

Estimated departure 08:10

Must have taken a long time to load all that iron ore.

GLA and ATB

No worries.

PP-FCC left Brazzaville this morning, back to Cascais (Portugues fleshpot).

29 Sep 2023 Brazzaville (BZV) Cascais (CAT) (PPFCC) — 08:00 — 14:58

Estimated departure 08:10

Must have taken a long time to load all that iron ore.

GLA and ATB

..and says BUR's request to start enforcement within 30 days is unreasonable.

(1) Says 30 day order is too quick

(2) Would generate unnecessary and chaotic litigation

(3) Says BUR hasn't identified any eligible assets in the US

(4) If BUR WAS able to attach, would be very difficult to unwind/reverse if Argentine appeal were successful

(5) Quotes precedents in what it says are similar cases, BUT of smaller magnitude

(6) Reminds Court of quantum (20% of Argentine 2023 budget); and

(7) Says BUR's argument for speed is based on the (false!) premise that Argentina 'has no intention to pay'.*

*I'm not sure how THAT concluding argument stacks up against the stated intention at the outset to appeal (AND without bond), but there you go....

AIUI

What is it with (mis-managed) Latin American national oilco's ? These two, PeMex, PetroBras, etc....

Fascinating article in today's FT - 'How Venezuela lost CITGO'

https://www.ft.com/content/6f0f7b92-e6dc-45d1-b065-58acf314e8a9

with some interesting 'compare and contrast' for Argentina/YPF.

CITGO is a chain of gas stations and 7th largest oil refiner in the US, owned by the Venezuelan Government (but - crucially - originally managed om an arm's length basis) and engineered to process its 'heavy' oil.

It is shortly being auctioned off to pay off Venezuela government creditors.

The company’s market value is roughly one-seventh of the country’s gross domestic product, and its annual profits are greater than the amount Venezuela spends on food imports in a year.

Given Citgo’s sheer size and its potential for helping Venezuela out of crisis, one would expect the country’s leaders to be doing everything possible to avoid losing it . . . right?

Think again. This is Venezuelan politics, after all. Rather than trying to stop the sale of Citgo, the country’s duelling political factions prefer to devote their energies to blaming each other for the impending loss.

There then follows a detailed explanation of how the US-supported interim government (prev.opposition) was able to compromise the hitherto separate legal entities of the state and the corporate entity and allow previously un(der)secured creditors access to the corporate asset.

.." a large share of creditors successfully argued that the Venezuelan government was using Citgo for its own purposes. In legalese, they showed that PDVSA was an alter ego (literally, “another self”) of Venezuela. Once you do that, limited liability goes out the window, and a creditor has free rein to claim the assets of a firm owned by the debtor."

Oops!

Article concludes

.."For years, Venezuelans have put their confidence in the prospects for democratic change to bring an end to the Maduro regime’s rampant corruption and abuses. But in many cases where the opposition has managed funds, accusations of mismanagement, corruption and cronyism have emerged. It is not surprising that political outsiders who played no role in the opposition’s interim government are currently leading in polling for upcoming presidential elections.

Maduro and the opposition could have agreed on a joint strategy to negotiate with creditors and safeguard Citgo. In contrast, they used their control over the nation’s assets for their own political and personal gain, leading Venezuela to lose an important source of revenue sorely needed to address its economic and humanitarian emergency. Venezuelans were once again left to foot the bill for the country’s destructive political conflict."

If Argentina appeals the Preska verdict and pleads poverty when asked to provide a bond, one hopes it'll be given short shrift.

ATB

Thanks for this insight, Mr M.

Re 3

.." Finally, Securitization of Argentina’s Cash Payments. If Argentina chooses to negotiate cash payments over a designated timeframe, Burford Capital has the capacity to facilitate the securitization of Argentina's anticipated future cash flows and offer these assets to the market. This option would enable Burford to receive the entire awarded amount in advance and shift the liquidity risk associated with Argentina to interested investors..."

I'm reminded of a situation that I was alerted to in the 80's/90's when Nigerian Govt. Par 6.25% Bonds were trading at under 40c on the $.

Apparently about 40% of the bonds were then in the hands of 'well-connected' Nigerians themselves, who were in a position to - ahem - prioritise any available cashflow towards payments falling due on this particular instrument. So the credit risk , whilst still there, wasn't as great as it might otherwise seem.

And so it proved to be : I held for several years a $ bond investment yielding nearly 16% income and eventually sold out at slightly over 60c , for a further 50% capital gain. Happy days!

Nearer to home, a similar situation arose - exceptionally- with the UK's Royal Bank of Scotland US$ Prefs in the post GFC meltdown.

Bottom line : I wouldn't be surprised if a BUR securitization of Argentina Cash Payments attracted a healthy core of 'informed ' overseas money from Argentinians themselves.

.."As Argentina has been renegotiating its US$65 billion debt with foreign creditors, it is also grappling with the fact that up to six times that amount [ie US$ 390Bn] is believed to be held by its citizens and companies offshore..."

https://www.occrp.org/en/blog/12826-argentina-confronts-its-multi-billion-dollar-offshore-wealth-problem

It may stick in the craw that the 'exploiters' would thereby get yet another chance to exploit the long-suffering population, but that's a separate conversation.

ATB

ATB

.."Wonder what leverage JC and TJ put over the bouffant Pinocchio to get such a good deal..."

If you look at the timing, just post (self-inflicted?) de-listing ; delays in /absence of material newsflow; upcoming AGM; need for working capital, etc, TF was probably pushing against an open door, AFAICS .

TF's mates at Parzival effected an intro and the rest is history.

Or it should be.

TF's website shows them still as 'acquired by Supply@ME Capital'.....so maybe there's another wrinkle or two still to come.

ATB

Savvy, savvy,

Pls consider :

.."Let's look at the facts here:

1- 4.5m loans obtained

NOT CORRECT : FACE VALUE OF SHARES WAS AROUND £3M AND LOANCO'S TYPICALLY HAVE A 30% SHRINKAGE MARGIN (SO AS TO 'DE-RISK'...), SO 1AF2 WILL HAVE GOT MAYBE £2M NET.

2- 5.8b shares given as security and which can be traded (putting at risk shareholders investment)

YOU CAN SEE THE RISK TO SYME SHAREHOLDERS, YET AZ COULDN'T? AND HELPFULLY INCLUDED THIS UNUSUAL FLEXIBILITY/

3- loans not used

BUT, BUT, BUT...AZ STATED REASON FOR SEEKING LOANS WAS'TO ENABLE TAG TO PROVIDE INDIRECT SECURITY FOR A SYME IM' (PROACTIVE INTERVIEW). DID HE TELL A PORKIE?

4- shares sold immediately so loan companies can de-risk

NONSENSE : THE S/P ROSE ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER LOAN DRAWDOWN/SHARES PLEDGED, GIVEN A BIG BOOST BY A LOT OF POSITIVE NEWSFLOW, MOST OF WAS IN THE PIPELINE/WORKS AND KNOWN TO AZ.

WITH MORE SECURITY, THERE'S NO NEED TO DE-RISK, IF ANYTHING, MOST LENDERS WOULD BE HAPPY TO LEND MORE...AND MOST BORROWERS TO TAKE IT, ESP. IF TO AID SYME'S IM EFFORTS...

5- MMs bought at an agreed price (illegal)

MM'S DON'T TAKE POSITIONS, USUALLY. THEY'RE HAPPY TO SOURCE - ONCE THEY'VE SEEN THERE'S DEMAND.THEY'RE USUALLY SMART ENOUGH NOT TO BREAK THE LAW IN WHAT WOULD BE AN EASILY CHECKABLE WAY.

YOU'RE MAKING THINGS TOO COMPLICATED

6- third party bought shares hence 1300% rise. Helped recruit and lock in new shareholders

AGAIN, YOU'RE MAKING THINGS TOO COMPLICATED, THE NEWSFLOW (AND SHARE RAMPERS, YOU KNOW WHO THEY ARE - OR SHOULD BY NOW) DREW IN THE TRADERS AND NAIVE PI'S, THE REST THEY LEFT TO FOMO.

etc, etc

.."How did the loan companies KNOW they could de-risk and buy back the shares below or around the price sold?.."

BECAUSE 6 MONTHS AFTER THE EVENT AZ REVEALED THAT THE LOANS INCLUDED A PREPAYMENT OPTION AND THE RIGHT TO RETURN SECURITY EITHER IN SHARES OR CASH (HELPFULLY SPECIFYING THE RELEVANT SHARE PRICE).

It's not that complicated. The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

Google : 'Occam's razor'

HTH and GL