Member Info for Laverda

Woah guys you all seem to have got this wrong.

The newly created company which sits under Kodal UK mining has not yet received the transfer of licence.

The existing company with licence is currently still under Future Minerals Sarl which is 100% under Kodal Minerals. Therefore Hainan have no part of this.

Hainan absolutely amazingly has allowed Kodal to start using their 100m dollars to construct the mine, even though currently Kodal 100% own the asset.

To stop Kodal selling the mine out of the existing company they have set up complex legal terms - a trust I believe.

Also if for some reason the licence never transferred to the new company within two years Hainan can make a claim.

However the licence will transfer it is very unlikely this will happen.

So basically today Kodal 100% own the mine and have a 100m dollars available to construct it.

Once the licence transfers Kodal have 49% and no debt, Hainan have 51% and the government get 10% of revenue but no liability etc.

If for any reason the licence never transferred and we were left with 100% of the mine, guess what Hainan would like their 100m dollars back.

Hourly= Horult

Hourly, quote of the week.

BFD, it is interesting when they chat to each other, on other shares where they think we do not hear, what they think was a brilliant success.

Some of the most divvy posts get pure adoration it is funny to read.

I suppose if they are barred from posting in the Sun comments and other places one by one they end up in odd places probably on mumsnet or something arguing about nappies.

Bright as a blackout.

Agree Daz. Can't even replay my posts correctly never mind an RNS.

So guys the huge risk that we all missed is that if the mine does not transfer it remains 100% ours and there is no JV. The terrible situation is if we spend the 100m dollars and build the mine, with Hainan's 100m dollars I might add, is that within 2 years they can make a claim not exceeding 100m dollars.

I for the life of me have no idea how we would repay that with a 125,000 tonne per year lithium mine.

You better all help us out here with some ideas because we are all stumped.

Here's another thought, I wonder how Hainan was going to recover their money from the JV, I bet they never thought that one out either.

Badomen to the rescue 🛟

Also George it must be said that this should be read in conjunction with other communications via all sources from Kodal including interviews and press statements and other RNS releases. That is the main, but not sole source, all of them link with each other. Every future funding RNS as an example is an extension of the first release.

It is a bit like that card game happy families, you have to remember where each part is. Unfortunately often the most important pieces are small comments or short answers to questions that at the time did not appear overly significant.

I have learnt if Bernard makes any comment it is usually significant.

It is also highly visible using that discussion as an example, the two most important factors are completely missing.

It should have been, if a genuine investor along the lines of, if the licence for some reason did not transfer, the mine remains 100% Kodals. However Kodal could have spent all of the 100m dollars, clearly Hainan would have lost their share of the mine and their 100m dollars.

So Kodal would 100% own a completed mine. Am I reading that correctly and how would Hainan in this unlikely scenario recover their money?

But of course they follow the line of repayment in this scenario as if there was no gain. As if Kodal were paying some sort of penalty for nothing received.

Definitely an ever returning troll. Jonny will be back under his normal moniker soon.

I also see two other stock boards which are having an identical discussion about individuals using multiple identies and disrupting stock discussions.

The stock boards should communicate with each other to see if it is anything more than unhealthy individuals.

Many of the names of old mentioned.

Agree Merc, it does have a ring of Jonny about it, not very bright and repetitive.

Another Jonny moniker filtered.

Number 8 will appear soon.

Basically Roman if the licence did not transfer the mine is effectively 100% Kodal minerals. Hainan would be cut out of the deal. Kodal can still use Hainan's 100m dollars to develop and bring the mine into production but must repay the 100m dollars within two years.

It was only done this way so that the mine build could get started.

As George said earlier, ironically that outcome is likely to be better for us - but it will not happen.

Hainan would still get their offtake of 20%.

The mine also cannot be sold during this time without Hainan's agreement.

In a nutshell so Kodal could neither run away with Hainan's 100m dollars or sell the mine for a second time.

Quite reasonable.

Hello George, regards to you too.

Still a great place to be.

Badomen, regarding 'warranties and indemnities' clearly you are quoting Kodal so you know where the information is.

However as normal you missed the rest, deemed in trust, two years etc' you can find it but clearly do not understand it.

One other slight issue Badomen in your theory the cost of the construction of the mine is not 100m dollars.

Abdomen, JV, NPV, Jorc BFS mean anything to you?

Nope? I guessed not.

Badomen but it states nowhere that Hainan's purchase was based on cost of construction, nowhere. Please provide a link if you have this information.

Badomen, point to the information from Hainan that confirms what you state they based their purchase upon, because from this side it all looks like more of your fiction. Complete garbage.

Hi Paul, George is a nice guy and long term Kod investor.

I was not particularly referring to any one individual. The negative posters, who clearly have an agenda, always ask other board members to justify themselves, I am simply saying turn it around, if they have a view justify it with facts or figures.

So if for instance the value is all built in, clearly Cannacord, Bernard and Hainan made a mistake so inform us where the error is and so.

Put the onus on them to justify their erratic and incorrect posts instead.

100notout and similar posters I agree.

But rather than disagree with us, the negative rhetoric posters should simply explain where Bernard has gone wrong with his net asset value calculations.

Where Hainan went wrong with their acquisition calculations.

Finally where Cannacord made errors when valuing the post Hainan JV net asset value.

The market rarely if ever trades at Net Asset Value, so all investors here fully understand that. But understanding where the above companies all went wrong in their calculations would certainly be of interest to us.

Daz, I think at pottery class

https://www.frontgate.com/medium-mica-prancer-figure/holiday-decor/home-decor/554491