Member Info for extrader

From depeches

"Governance and accountability.

The ministers have one month to report back.

Prime Minister Anatole Collinet Makosso has invited, in a circular, government members to provide him, by the end of August, a report on the activities carried out, summaries of the results obtained, as well as the objectives achieved by each ministry during the period 2021-2025."

Talk about 'marking your own homework'!

And, maybe, it gets even more complicated/murkier:

.."Hayden Davis, the same figure behind the LIBRA memecoin scandal, has admitted involvement in launching the MELANIA token as well.

Name Role in LIBRA Role in MELANIA

Hayden Davis CEO of Kelsier Ventures, LIBRA founder Admitted to helping launch MELANIA

Kelsier Ventures Central to LIBRA’s token deployment Linked via wallet flows to MELANIA"

This may be getting 'close to home' in more ways than one.

GLA

The LIBRA Crypto Scheme refers to a high-profile memecoin scandal that erupted in Argentina in early 2025, involving political endorsements, alleged insider trading, and over $280 million in frozen assets.

What Was LIBRA Supposed to Be?

Token Name: $LIBRA, launched on the Solana blockchain on February 14, 2025.

Claimed Purpose: Marketed as a way to fund small businesses in Argentina, with promotional backing from President Javier Milei

Website: Linked to vivalalibertadproject.com, echoing Milei’s political slogan “Viva La Libertad

LIBRA’s founder, Hayden Davis, admitted in court that LIBRA was never a real investment, just a “collectible meme token” with no business plan or tokenomics.

Pump-and-Dump Allegations:

Price surged from near-zero to $5.20 within 40 minutes of Milei’s post.

Then crashed by 95%, wiping out $4.4 billion in market cap.

Founders allegedly held 70–85% of the supply, sold at peak, and triggered the collapse.

Class Action Lawsuit: Filed in New York against Kelsier Ventures, KIP Protocol, and Meteora, accusing them of market manipulation.

Key Figures:

Hayden Davis (CEO of Kelsier Ventures)

Mauricio Novelli (Argentine trader who introduced Davis to Milei)

Benjamin Chow and Julian Peh (linked to other crypto projects like MELANIA and KIP Protocol).

Political Blowback: Milei deleted his promotional posts and claimed ignorance. Critics called for impeachment

(1) Chain‑forensics firm Aletheia Labs provided evidence that a wallet tagged to Davis transferred 499 129 USDC to Kraken at 15:37 UTC on 30 January. The timestamp aligns with official Casa Rosada schedules showing Davis in a closed‑door session with President Javier Milei to “discuss decentralised technologies”. Investigators contend that the movement of funds immediately before LIBRA’s February marketing push indicates possible foreknowledge of price impact.

Judge Marina Torres has set an evidentiary hearing for 19 August, when attorneys will argue whether the frozen assets should remain under restraint pending trial. Market participants are watching closely, as the ruling may clarify how U.S. courts classify memecoins tied to high‑profile political endorsements.

(2) The first hearing was in NYC Southern District, this is in Texas. A bit of forum-shopping, perhaps?

Ironic, if so.

GLA

And the latest (I hr ago)

🔴Holders of PBI coupons in euros issued by Argentina request evidence from a Texas court in the US related to the $LIBRA case. They seek to collect a USD 1.8 billion judgement by requesting information from Hayden Davis, Gideon Davis, Charles Davis, and Kelsier Labs LLC.

The chickens are coming home to roost..

I wonder where BUR stands in the pecking order?

ATB

And, just in

🔴UK Court on Friday cleared path for enforcement of Euro GDP Warrant Judgment against Argentina. Updates award to USD 1.8 billion.

From La Nacion newspaper

https://www.lanacion.com.ar/politica/argentina-inicia-este-lunes-el-proceso-para-ingresar-al-programa-de-exencion-de-visas-de-estados-nid27072025/

..."As part of the visit [Ed.: why?] of US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem to Argentina, Javier Milei's government will begin the process of joining the Visa Waiver Programme (VWP) on Monday. If successful, the measure would allow Argentine citizens to enter the United States for tourism or business for up to 90 days without having to apply for a visa. The information was confirmed to LA NACION by government sources.

...The official is the fourth high-ranking US official to be received by Milei and joins the list of Trump administration officials to visit the country. During this period, Scott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury; Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of Health; and Alvin Holsey, head of the Southern Command, also arrived in Buenos Aires. In turn, the Argentine government sent key ministers such as Gerardo Werthein (Foreign Affairs) and Luis Petri (Interior) to Washington, where they held meetings with their counterparts or with trade authorities.

.....The connection with Milei began in April of this year, when the two met at the American Patriots Gala held at Mar-a-Lago, Trump's residence in Florida, where they were also treated as guests-of-honour.

...This may seem trivial, but the VWP is limited to Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brunei, Chile, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, the United Kingdom, the Czech Republic, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

So, from Latin America, incl heavyweights such as Brazil and Mexico, only Argentina and Chile make the 'cut'.

A small but telling gesture, it would seem..

GLA

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

.." sounds like he wants some answers about, as you say the opaque set up of the companies and the agreements..."

To be clear, I totally agree with his right to want - and get - answers to his Q's, what I find disturbing (and irritating..and damaging) is that he appears to have blurted out his concerns without bothering to go to the obvious source for answers. And even now, he seems unwilling to do so.

His comments are likely to unsettle existing and potential investors until the matter has been resolved....and he seems keen to get others involved in a 'campaign' against the co. Why? It's a classic technique used in a shorting attack (cf Muddy Waters and BUR), to get 'investor opinion' onside

This is not the behaviour of a disinterested observer.

In these cases, it's useful to ask 'cui bono?' - who benefits from MMs 'unorthodox' approach?

Well, anyone who's moved attitude from years of 'Strong buy' to 'No opinion' overnight is by definition not amongst the most committed....and MM might reasonably be taking the view that - if you're going to panic, it's best to panic first.

I probably would too- if I'd learned something from a reliable source that showed that the investment case had changed ('When circumstances change, I change my mind. What do you do? JM Keynes).

That's why I asked him.

The 'ad hominem' reply and subsequent bluster support my working thesis that he's gone from 'pumper' to 'dumper'.....and possibly even on to 'shorter'.

Given that he started this, I don't think he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Do you?

The onus is surely on him to (a) approach the company and report back (faithfully) its reply ; (b) have grok assess the counter-arguments/points I've made and report back (faithfully); and (c) the easiest: tell us what his current financial position vis a vis ZIOC is - long; none; or short.

I usually give people the benefit of the doubt, but I'm prepared to make an exception for MM in light of this bizarre, unhelpful and unnecessary drama.

ATB

.."I suggest that ZIOC Board and management should answer the direct series of questions posed in the early post/s..."

Great suggestion!

(1) Why haven't you done this already...and maybe saved everyone a lot of angst and embarrassment?

(2) Pls copy to the ZIOC board(s) what you send to management.

PS : I'm not holding my breath

PPS When in a hole, it's generally a good idea to stop digging : as things stand, you're embarrassing yourself.

HTH

For those unaware, MM has gone out on an AI driven limb, raising various alarmist (and likely actionable) allegations about misconduct by ZIOC in its dealings with GIS.

Surprisingly, it appears that he hasn't contacted the co or Nomad so far, to answer/address his concerns (if they can)...and has changed his opinion in today's posts to 'No opinion' after years of 'Strong buy'.

I've no intention of joining in what seems to be an attempt to whip up hysteria; have alerted AT as a courtesy; and would encourage anyone interested to see the thread...and make up their own mind.

GLA

The 'manufactured and (likely) irrelevant bit' is all yours, until YOU ask the co for clarification and WE ALL get to see the co's reply...

I for one have no interest in encouraging your /grok's delusion until it's been shown to have legs.

HTH

QED

I don't see why anyone should give oxygen to this (literally 'manufactured' issue) when the originator/promulgator of said 'issue' hasn't bothered /been able himself to put the allegation to the company. 'Own' your own work!

Especially when said originator has previously claimed all manner of privileged access (nudge, nudge- wink, wink).

I'm not in contact with AT these days but have sent him a brief heads up as a courtesy.

If you want me to 'deal with the issues' YOU/grok have raised, a good place to start would be by addressing my questions to grok and sharing both my Q and its A on this board. And then to post here a copy of your approach to ZIOC for comment.

What goes around comes around, MM.

Skip the ad hominem stuff and PULL YOUR OWN CHESTNUTS OUT OF THE FIRE.

HTH

I’m surprised - given your history of claim to a special relationship with management - that it hasn’t occurred to you to approach them earlier.

If - as I suspect - this turns out to be ‘much ado about nothing’, your blurting out your/grok’s suspicions on a public forum WITHOUT CHECKING FIRST WITH THE COMPANY is going to look ill-advised, at the least. That’s the charitable interpretation.

Fortunately, you have a long history of enthusiastically joining dots and breathlessly ‘making the case’ for the upside, this overnight Damascene conversion to the downside is at least temperamentally coherent, and will hopefully be taken with at least the same pinch of salt as your earlier exuberant stance. Can’t speak for the others, but I believe Elphick for one has ‘form’ as being pugnacious in protecting his rep.

You / grok might also wish to consider ZIOC’s use of the term ‘allocated’ when referring to the GIS 20%, this I would parse as indicating little more than earmarking for an MoU level agreement, to be refined, formalized and disclosed if and when things progress to ‘the short strokes’.

Right! Off to the local to see the England lassies and sink a few beers.

GLA

Now, now MM.

Suggest you ask grok to factor in

.."The terms of the GIS Offtake Agreement are IN LINE WITH Group's CURRENT MARKETING agreement with Glencore, as announced on 23 November 2022, but now provides ZIOC with the flexibility to offer marketing OR offtake rights over 80% of the Zanaga Project's iron ore production to other strategic funding partners and operators.."

That arrangement was for 100%, the GIS arrangement is for 20%, that arrangement provided for an unspecified MARKETING fee, with the RIGHT but not OBLIGATION to offtake...

I 'd be mildly interested to learn whether the 'in line' bit extends to a royalty right in event of the GIS arrangement lapsing for whatever reason.

But I'd be more interested to know who's legally/financially responsible if reliance on AI comment proves to be inaccurate or a 'hallucination'.

The historic defence used to be 'an honest opinion, honestly held', I wonder if that (either) still applies?

PS Opinion : ‘Strong Buy’ as recently as last week, 21st July.

Hi MM,

Oh dear!

-Is grok ‘hallucinating’ again, as it did with your 25 March ‘ghost’ RNS re Fahad Tamimi?

- How did you phrase your request to grok? I’ve found that A.I. will often frame its reply/ analysis to please any bias in the guidance it’s given

- Having previously touted your ‘special relationship’ with AT - most recently your ref 26 May to 2 x DMs re ‘encouraging developments on the pelletising front’ -I wonder what he’s had to say about these very serious allegations. And what has the Nomad - the obvious port of call, if you’ve had no joy with ZIOC -had to say?

- I’ve raised questions for some time re GIS’s opaque status - newco (since buy-in);interest in ‘Americas’ (7 Jun);recent emphasis on EAF (25 Jun); and the issues of ‘consideration’ and Greymont ‘generosity’, asking as recently as 6 Jul what the quid pro quo might be - and have up to now taken the view that GIS’s rights were limited to ‘marketing’, not ‘offtake ‘ per se : ‘first dibs’ I think how I characterized it….

- you/ grok must be pretty confident of your ground to make these public accusations about the various parties allegedly involved : what’s the ‘smoking gun’, which conclusively establishes wrongdoing/ collusion between the parties?

Absent which, this has all the hallmarks of a Muddy Waters -style short attack (cf their opportunistic, regulatory exploitation of opacity /‘irregularities’ at BUR) subsequently largely discredited.

-I see that your long-standing historic recommendation - ‘Strong’- has switched to ‘No opinion’. In the circumstances, I believe you should now declare your current financial interest (or lack thereof) in ZIOC.

Meanwhile, c’mon Engerland!

Tsodilo is a stranded early-stage asset that needs its own (short) link to a future theoretical longer rail line.

I referenced Ulsan because its project - which incidentally needs a rail link- has some relevance to ZIOC because it’s in C-B and by virtue of the description given of its financial structure, which may offer read-across.

ZIOC itself proposes a slurry pipeline solution, which offers less potential for ‘mission creep’ a la Simandou or Belinda.

This article, by a leading US thinktank, details the fancy footwork in the Argentina/IMF tango :

https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2025/milei-2025-between-argentinas-mid-term-elections-and-imf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterson_Institute_for_International_Economics

...."portraying urgency as patriotic necessity.

Electoral calculus: The deal is timed to shore up reserves and disinflation ahead of midterms, even if it risks overvaluation and reserve depletion.

YPF Privatization: From Asset to Albatross

Initial push: Milei floated privatizing YPF as part of a sweeping liberalization agenda, triggering a 40% surge in its NYSE-listed shares.

Strategic retreat: He later scrapped YPF from the omnibus bill, citing its role in energy security and the political difficulty of securing two-thirds Congressional approval.

Framing shift: YPF is now cast as a transitional tool, not a privatization target—allowing Milei to retain control while deflecting blame for stalled reforms.

Synthesis: Milei’s Triangular Playbook

Format is : Issue/Legacy Framing/Milei’s Reframing/Strategic Outcome

YPF Lawsuit: Breach of Contract > Criminal conspiracy by Kirchnerists = Moral high ground, political deflection.

IMF Deal: Bailout for failed state > Endorsement of reform agenda = Reserve boost, electoral optics.

YPF Privatization: Ideological privatization > Pragmatic transition tool = Retains leverage, avoids political cost.

Summary: Milei redirects the momentum of inherited liabilities to strike at his opponents and reinforce his reformist image..."

Baldrick would likely approve, AFAICS.

ATB

Could this NGO's late-stage involvement be part of a Machiavellian plot by the Milei government?

Copilot comments:

The NGO’s thesis could very well serve as a strategic political instrument for President Milei, regardless of its legal viability.

Even though Judge Preska dismissed the NGO’s motion as untimely and lacking standing, the narrative it advances—that the YPF shares were acquired through Kirchner-era corruption—has already entered the public discourse. That alone offers Milei several advantages:

If dismissed (as expected):

-The NGO’s claims still generate headlines about Peronist misconduct, especially involving Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and Axel Kicillof.

-Milei can frame the $16.1B judgment as the cost of past corruption, deflecting blame and reinforcing his anti-establishment credentials.

If unexpectedly entertained or successful:

-It could undermine the legitimacy of Burford’s claim, potentially reducing Argentina’s liability.

-Milei could claim a legal and moral victory, having exposed a “fraudulent scheme” tied to his political rivals.

Signals of Coordination

-The Milei administration has endorsed RA4ARG’s position, stating it “takes all allegations of corruption very seriously”.

-The NGO’s founder, Fernando Irazu, has said the government may now “redirect the case” using their arguments.

The timing—amid IMF negotiations, asset seizure threats, and domestic political turbulence—suggests calculated choreography.

Risk and Reward

Even if the appeal fails, the NGO’s thesis helps Milei:

-Shift the narrative from contractual breach to criminal conspiracy

-Recast the plaintiffs (Burford, Petersen) as beneficiaries of corruption

-Position himself as the clean-up president, exposing past rot

Opinion: it’s a win-win narrative weapon—legally weak, but politically potent.

Milei’s embrace of the NGO’s corruption thesis in the YPF case fits neatly into a broader triangulation strategy: he reframes inherited liabilities (like the Burford judgment or IMF debt) as the consequences of Peronist misrule, while positioning himself as the agent of moral and economic restoration.

YPF Lawsuit: From Contract Breach to Criminal Conspiracy:

Framing: Milei backs the NGO’s claim that the Eskenazis were Kirchnerist frontmen, turning a civil breach-of-contract case into a tale of corruption and fraud.

Political payoff: Even if the motion fails, it taints the opposition and reframes the $16.1B judgment as the cost of Peronist criminality, not Milei’s governance.

Narrative control: He shifts focus from Argentina’s legal obligations to the moral illegitimacy of the plaintiffs.

IMF Deal: From Bailout to Reform Catalyst

Framing: Milei presents the IMF’s $20B Extended Fund Facility as a vote of confidence in his reforms, not a rescue from crisis.

Tactical use: He bypassed Congress via decree, blaming Kirchnerist obstructionism and