Member Info for JulianM

Perroverde. Picking up on your post of 1st Feb, Vast were in poor shape even at the time the deal was agreed but I suppose BOD were taken in by AP's rhetoric in terms of BP about to become profitable,which it still is not of course.Perhaps BOD had doubts but took the view that the free carry meant nothing to lose as long as GEM would allow a replacement partner in the event of Vast backing out.As to our next partner I would have thought that to get the best terms we need another company which is very dependent on the expertise of JC in particular. De Beers would not ,be so maybe although a very big name they might not be the best option.
Anyway ,very low volume at present as we await the next announcement .Fingers crossed that it is as positive as we hope for on one of the several excellent projects in which BOD are involved.

No mention in paperwork from Vast today and looking back at the RNS of 23rd August, when the deal was announced ,as far as we have been made aware, many conditions have not been met eg regulatory approvals finance so I wonder where we are up to

No mention so is it a dead duck as far as Vast is concerned?

I find this aspect somewhat intriguing and wonder how this proposal came about.Perhaps 2 possibilities;

1 Purchasers indicate they are only interested in purchasing the subsidiary.If so why? Despite the cash positive position of AMC is there any "baggage" that they don't want to acquire.

2 AMC indicate that only the subsidiary is for sale.Again,if so why? Other than a distribution do the BOD have other plans for the sale proceeds .If not are there any tax advantages in disposing only of the subsidiary and then distributing the sale proceeds or simply winding up AMC. If a distribution takes place by way of a special dividend I assume this would be subject to income tax which I ,personally, would not be too happy about.

I would welcome the thoughts of anyone with more knowledge than I have on these matters

Many thanks Perroverde. All very positive and reassuring. Future looks good.

With or without Vast as a partner Itacon?

Well if they are the low volume suggests that they are only disposing of a small percentage of the 29m shares acquired.More likely that they will sell into any rise and the conversion could have been made so as to be in a position to do this when the rise occurs,which hopefully will be in the near future.Anyway agree that it gives a useful top up opportunity.
Had hoped to go to the AGM had to change my plans.Full report from anyone who does attend would be much appreciated

Yes TDT and for all we know at present they could have been buying heavily yesterday in particular,taking them beyond 6%

Now that would be the best outcome Geng. Potential sale of only the subsidiary leaves a number of unanswered questions and it could well be that the markets are taking this on board, hence an sp well below 7p

Good point FD Sale of only a subsidiary does give the BOD a number of options so no guarantee of a distribution unless of course shareholders make this a condition of approving the sale

Just one I would guess and one that is going to have to be acceptable to the Russian Authorities so maybe Russian or Chinese as the most likely.

Potentially interested party is merely the term used in the press which is quite loose.Being in discussions with a potential purchaser to sell has a firmer ring to it in my opinion

I agree CBS. This situation is entirely different.Another bonus to the bod is the 30m options at 1.75 they awarded themselves in 2020 .Nice return at 7 p

I am thinking of going.Would love to meet JC ,assuming he is there of course

After bombarding us with posts for a few days, he appears to have disappeared ,no doubt having sold out at a good profit.Very successful trader who will return if he gets back in at a lower level and resume the excessive ramping.

Would be amazed if Vast pulled anything out of the hat but I also think that if Atlas were about to take any drastic action they would not have bothered with a conversion of such a small percentage of what they are owed

but the market has not realised it.Quote from John Teeling in the annual report.And from the lack of reaction to an excellent RNS last week realisation has still not dawned. Surely only a matter of time though.

I am a LTH and whilst very optomistic am keeping an eye on the covid situation in Mongolia which MB did mention is a risk factor as far as future plans are concerned.At present all borders are closed and the only entry point is Chinggis Khan Airport.A new covid wave,presumably omicron, is underway and until that subsides nothing much is going to change but all being well this will happen before the drilling season starts so that by then there will be more freedom of movement

What I wonder is just how much revenue will be produced if we do end up with a commercial mine twice the size of Marsfontein, for example with similar grades.Looking at the publication Marsfontein Diamond Mine a case study by Keith Scott,total revenue was some $235m over a couple of years production but I do not know how diamond prices in 1998 to 2000 compare with today.Of course we may never get as far as that because the decision of the company may be to sell up which then begs the question what could be the selling price.?With your knowledge and insight perhaps you can comment TBTT

Well,well Mr P is back.Incessant posting until he sells but in fairness he usually ends up in profit, so I will view his presence as a good omen