Member Info for Laverda

Just enjoy these final stages for the first plant.

Hainan have done their calculations and the open pit mine is more than capable of supplying the DMS plant at the rate of production which accumulated our stockpile.

The first crushing unit works.

Should be a steady flow of news post New Year.

Elcobble interesting situation that one in Ghana, this brings into question who this organisation is and who funds them

https://eiti.org/our-mission

Sounds admirable - on the surface...

Yes 2025 is looking great.

But I also liked those efficiency figures and calculations from Hainan for supplying the plant, little gems from a mining company like that are almost as good as another RNS.

As I previously typed it also shows how they view the mine, calculations and efficiency levels from a massive and extremely experienced mining company.

Good for us and Steve and his team - reassurance.

Https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3292309/chinese-lithium-firm-reaches-milestone-mali-mine-project-despite-strict-new-rules?module=perpetual_scroll_0&pgtype=article

Excellent Onlyking, we can see how a mining company focuses on different metrics to investors, interesting.

Their comments on the plant will be really interesting once operational.

Painless, lol yes, hopefully before the end.

Painless, if you suffer from paranoia, you are not alone.

Surin, yes and all positive.

The government paying in installments was interesting, not seen that anywhere else.

Gold at Nielle is our independence.

No link to Hainan and no link to Mali.

They never read easily these interim results.

The majority of information is to the 30th September 2024 as are the figures.

However they also have to communicate that they are at a different stage today as the report is historic.

I think releasing value for shareholders from Nielle is important.

It is also noteworthy that all the Mali mining codes currently featuring heavily, 2012, 2019 and 2023 want exploration and exploitation licences worked, so really there should be some activity on Fatou.

The graphs do not show the ask price or the small amount of availability on a narrow spread.

Asllan, Ganfeng have not argued they have settled.

If you move away from the gutter/Jack & Jill press and read everything from the consultant and mining org etc on the 2019 code at the time of release it is definitely not a case of if you were on the previous code nothing affects you, not one serious outlet wrote that.

Furthermore according to investors in Leo, they were going to move and sell thousands of tonnes of ore as 'samples' on the 2012 licence.

We were told to avoid tax gold ore was being moved on the 2012 licences.

Like I say if you read the licence releases and not the Mickey Mouse press, you will find it difficult to see how a company involved in those things can be so confident.

PS remember the consultants only focus on tiny parts of the mining licence, not in its entirety. It is a very large piece of legislation with spin offs from it.

Big companies could drag something like this out for years in court.

Onlyking that data is worth tens of millions of dollars, maybe a just in case bit of security?

Cool the lithium frenzy down a bit?

Surin, interesting not one case.

However what all British politicians when rattling sabres about offshore havens never tell the public is that there is no such thing as an offshore tax haven unless it is recognised by the UK government.

Which is why some other country's tax havens aren't used by British people and companies.

Wow Surin, they have a history.

Good find. Currently they are negotiating resettlement of whole communities in another third World area, not really a good sign to that government.

Those old days have gone and these countries aren't as third world as they used to be. No wonder Barrick s share price is back on a similar level to nine years ago.

Asllan, the 2023 code was not retrospectively applied to Kodal, not from what Bernard said.

Also my gripe is with the shockingly poor mining journalism, from journals which are supposed to be expert in their field.

For instance the 2019 code had a facility to move to the 2019 code within 12 months and retain some of the benefits of the previous 2012 code.

The journals reported what wider Africa, trading groups and what consultants to the mining industry were saying, it was so well covered at that time (when we moved to the 2019 code) for people like me I could grasp a lot of the basics.

Now, as that article points out, instead of analysing all of the detail of the code it uses simple rubbish like junta and derogatory statements about the country, when the code actually looks decent and fair for a country which has an established mining industry, second in the World in gold.

Exactly Compo.

PS, also of those six only two are talking arbitration.

They have a lot to lose big companies built on third worlds.

Totally disagree Asllan, why in the second largest gold producing country in the World are there are only six companies which interpreted the mining codes differently to the rest of the companies?

What in the 2012 or 2019 mining codes enables large movement of ore?

Many parts of the 2019 code were retrospectively applied no matter which code a company remained on according to mining consultants, how are you sure that these 6 companies did not misinterpret the 2019 code?

Personally I think they are making a big mistake, probably hoping to drag everything out for years to keep a hold of half a billion as long as possible.

I don't think it is good for the rest of the international companies and it is interesting that yet again it is French Canadian disagreements. France is dire with its old empire, look at the mess they created in Vietnam and America ended up linked to it.

Https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/12/17/malis-gold-mining-disputes-and-the-fight-for-economic-justice