Member Info for Lucando

"As often discussed in many of Amur's presentations, the definition of a Non-Disclosure Agreement precludes the Company from discussing the existence or absence of any such NDA."

However, if no NDA is in place there were be no issue in them saying there was no NDA in place, ergo, there must be an NDA in place

 

Does anyone have any experience of how these occur?
Say AMC take on a partner now with the share price so low how would this work? It wouldnt raise much in the way of funds.

Extremely pleased with today's RNS. It has assuaged any issues I have regarding the increased share allotment and I shall now be voting for the resolutions.
To hear that the TEO is on course is essential. This removes the possibility of the licence being rescinded.
The acknowledgment that off takes are available is also extremely important and provides further reassurance that this is a goer.
My hope now is that the resolutions pass next week and shortly after it is announced that we have a major investor taking a stake as a JV partner. Time will tell but all is looking very positive from here.

This is the authority to issue 500 million shares in one go.
Each year they ask for permission to be able to release 200 million in one go without the need for shareholder approval. That has resulted in them being able to undertake the financing deals they have to date.
This time they want to increase that limit from 200 to 500 million. We are asking for clarity as to what this is needed for

Just wondering what peoples opinions are on what could happen here.
If there is a merger with another company or someone acquires us, as the RNS seems to suggest, what way do you think it would go?

Been reading the RNS again and may be coming round.
Crazytowner has said it must be something positive and the terminology used being "mergers, acquisitions or investments" under a google search shows a number of results.
I'm now coming round to thinking that someone is going to purchase a percentage of the company as a JV partner. That the share number will be increased and that this purchase will be under 30% of the company so that they do not have to then make an offer for the entire company.
Might be well off but thinking this may be a positive move after all

The reaction from the market doesnt appear to be supporting your theory. If something big was in the offing I would expect to see the price move upwards

I have 4 million and I will be voting against. From the talk on the board and if voting goes the way many are suggesting, they will maybe get 50% but doubtful on 75% for the other resolutions.
They need to release further details to clarify for me to change my mind

In your response to your first point, I already have. I do not expect a response from them. I emailed them previously and didn't hear anything back.

One example of how they are treating us is when you mention the TEO.
They recently stated this may be in jeopardy should certain situations occur, this allowed the price to plummet. They could easily have advised what they are doing to mitigate any issues with the TEO and where they are with is and what is required.
They have treated us to extended periods of radio silence. The 2018 drill results still not released.
They entered into vlie destructive funding arrangements. They cancelled the media week without any justification.
They have done nothing to arrest the decline in the SP and at times seem complicit in allowing this to happen.
I am underwater here and have no option but to hold otherwise I would sell up. Think we can at least ask for the BOD to keep us better informed

Another option is to say No until further information and detail as to how the shares are to be used is provided

That is supposition. All we have to go on is the way they have treated shareholders previously and on that basis, I would say the scenario is that they wish for the increased shares to enter into death spiral finance agreements again.
Give us more details and tell us otherwise that there are plans and what these are and I would vote for the resolutions but dont ask us to trust you as past performance has been horrific

Reading the circular again, they are asking for authority to issue 500 million by the AGM, no questions asked.
They typically ask for 200 Mill a year but because the SP has tanked this would be worthless and wouldnt cover their wages wo they need to up it to 500 Mill.
I cant see this being for anything else except salaries.
They could issue 500 million bu December and then ask to be able to issue a further 500 million at the Agm then increase shares to 3 Billion by next year.
Definitely not voting for these resolutions.

Have you read the same announcement as me?

"Such potential transactions include acquiring interests in revenue generating assets or financial instruments within the mining sector to provide the Company with a reliable source of income going forward, or where the Company will be able to add short to medium-term value."

Thats exactly what I told them via email

That's a bit naive.

I cant find this. Where did you see it?

"Such potential transactions include acquiring interests in revenue generating assets or financial instruments within the mining sector to provide the Company with a reliable source of income going forward, or where the Company will be able to add short to medium-term value."
To me, and going on past experience, that sounds like more death spiral financing

What? If they have a potential merger in the offing and can provide details of this and ask for shares then, then yes this is possible

No. I would be asking the company to come back to me when they have concrete news of a potential merger.
We have seen our value decimated by the actions of the board. They cant be trusted to act properly with a further billion shares.
Maybe if RY stood down that would entice me