Member Info for onsolidground

*Any Privatisation Agenda" should have read *Any Nationalisation Agenda*

Testing week. Have a decent weekend.

*decimation* of mining communities

Ultimately JohnNth should things persist operations could ultimately be scaled right down to Nil production and care and maintenance only with minimal staff retained solely for that purpose, and all others temporarily? laid off.

Nil corporate tax receipts for Ukraine, massive knock on effects for anciliary suppliers of equipment and services who would instantly feel the impact and also the decimated of mining communities.

This is the 3rd largest exporter of Iron ore pellets IN THE WORLD stating this amongst the identified consequences.

"the termination of any future investments by Ferrexpo in Ukraine"

The last 2 days have made things pretty clear in that:

1. Any Privatisation Agenda stands to cost the Government of Ukraine an awful lot of money in Compensation to Swiss and UK investors. Just look at those investment FXPO numbers for only the 3 years of the conflict.

2. Persist with the suspension of VAT Receipts and its going to have numerous dire knock on effects as listed.

My gut says it's probably got to the point where Diplomats and Politicians from Switzerland, the UK and Ukraine need to interject and get involved. It's crossed so many red lines and gone way beyond just targeting the Oligarch concerned with sanctions. Whether they do or not is the million dollar question.

Can't help but think this is not only ill-timed and not fully considered but Real bad publicity which will only deter investment into Ukraine post conflict. Fuller comment and the impact. Other competitor mining companies worldwide will see these RNS's.

"Ferrexpo is making significant investments in the economy and society of Ukraine, especially during a time of war. The suspension of VAT refunds is creating serious stress for our business at a time when we are already facing many other challenges. The monthly VAT refund is a significant contribution to the company, and if it is not received, it will have an even greater impact on the business and all its stakeholders. Ferrexpo calls on the Ministry of Finance and the State Tax Service of Ukraine to take urgent and effective measures to restore VAT refunds," commented Lucio Genovese, Chairman of the Board of Directors.

The company notes that without a VAT refund, Ferrexpo will be forced to significantly reduce the scale of its business to only 25% of full production capacity. This will have immediate consequences, including: job losses and the use of Ukrainian railways and ports, a threat to the economic and social structure of local communities, the termination of any future investments by Ferrexpo in Ukraine, and a reduction in tax contributions by at least 50% for the Poltava region and Ukraine as a whole.

Ferrexpo is one of the largest industrial companies in Ukraine and an important element of the local, regional and national economy. This contribution becomes even more significant during the war, as Ferrexpo continues to operate.

Since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Ferrexpo has invested over $2 billion in the Ukrainian economy. Namely, it has continued to provide jobs for 8,000 employees, paid over $150 million in wages, paid over $1.8 billion to suppliers of goods and services, and over $300 million in taxes and royalties. Over $300 million has been invested in capital expenditures to support and modernize mining and processing enterprises.

Ferrexpo calls on the Ministry of Finance and the State Tax Service of Ukraine to take urgent and effective measures to restore VAT refunds and stop the risks to the availability of livelihoods, fiscal and social contributions at this critical period in Ukraine's history.

"Instead of forcing Ferrexpo's business to shrink, authorities should facilitate the growth of the business so that it can increase its contributions to Ukraine," the company said in a statement."

https://espreso.tv/news-ukrainski-podatkovi-organi-prizupinili-povernennya-pdv-kompanii-ferrexpo

Dragged back in the latter part of the afternoon.

Somebody doesn't want it going too much higher at the moment.

It's all very Q!! Shhhh

Going good guns now.

Indeed a slow burner.

Good Contract announcement this morning but I thought they could have put some colour on the numbers.

Alex I think is playing shrewd with these now, not giving too much away and then totting them all up come next updates.

Given the huge rises in water bills I'm interested to see what the next few months bring on Water company contracts.

Pearls I'm happy to be proved wrong but there is nothing guaranteeing that all Funds that need to will be queuing up to buy Monday on first days of FTSE250 inclusion.

Virtually all of the last entrants were at one point down nearly 20%. I think one that JG68 mentioned was one of those.

Those funds just need to wait for a down day. Furthermore they aim to profit so some might hold but then again they might also trade and they may also hedge positions with CFD's as they are after all professional investors.

I agree though that it does seem to being held where it is at the moment. That's not a bad thing as it is holding stable.

Can't be far off the bottom now

Just need it to hold steady into the next ISA year and allowance.

Will we see £3.00? That's the question.

Bravo and more of the same today.

Thanks Wafty.

Just reminding everyone objectively without and no taking sides that there is a developing peace process ongoing at the same time. Just updating.

Said enough for today in any case so have a good evening.

Worth just keeping this at the forefront of your mind.

Article 6 from "the Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of Ukraine for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments" 1993. Similar existing for Swiss Investors.

"ARTICLE 6

Expropriation

(1) Investments of investors of either Contracting Party SHALL NOT BE NATIONALISED, EXPROPRIATED OR SUBJECTED TO MEASURES HAVING EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO NATIONALISATION OR EXPROPRIATION (hereinafter referred to as "expropriation") in the territory of the other Contracting Party except for a public purpose related to the internal needs of that Party on a non-discriminatory basis AND AGAINST PROMPT, ADEQUATE AND EFFECTIVE COMPENSATION.

Such Compensation shall amount to the genuine value of the investment expropriated immediately before the expropriation or before the impending expropriation became public knowledge, whichever is the earlier, shall include interest at a normal commercial rate until the date of payment, shall, be made without delay, be effectively realizable and be freely transferable. The investor affected shall have a right, under the law of the Contracting Party making the expropriation, to prompt review, by a judicial or other independent authority of that Party, of his or its case and of the valuation of his or its investment in accordance with the principles set out in this paragraph."

Nothing wrong with differing opinions and GL with your investments.

You are perfectly entitled to your own view Stock Watching and I only offer my opinion predominantly around the 49.5% of Poltava but also aware of the numerous instances of further "Expropriation" mentioned in todays RNS and which may all be subject to individual arbitration. To be fair it's backed by facts in black and white, off the references given by FXPO today and I don't think they are embarking down this route without sound high level Legal Advice. Todays RNS has been written by someone highly conversant in International and Commercial Law.

These Bilateral Trade Agreements "BIT" agreements are created as reciprocal agreements to encourage investment into either country and in this case Investor Protections are clearly written into the agreement and specifically against Nationalisation or Expropriation. The dispute resolution procedure is also clearly written into the agreement. This is what will ultimately govern any final decision. Uutside Ukraine and with a panel with an Independent chair. So there might be some merit in what you say about taking things outside Ukraine to get a fair hearing.

This is exactly the route Tullow Oil went down, and won, in a Tax dispute with the Ghanian Government when they sought arbitration at the International Chamber of Commerce (one of the options available to FXPO btw), when the Ghanian Government tried to change the terms of initial Production Agreements which were also signed and behind enticing investment into the country in the first place. That judgement got them off $320M in an Tax bill liability which they had were landed with. They also have 2 further cases pending and progressing down the same route should they not be resolved by negotiation first.

FXPO's case is different in detail but essentially similar in that you have the Bilateral Trade agreement instead of the Production Agreement, duly signed and which governed and encouraged investment into the country. Here specifically - to FXPO's benefit - this bilateral trade agreement clearly and specifically contains provisions against "Nationalisation" and Expropriation" and also pertinently adds full compensation and redress for any such effects. Then undeniably you have Ukraine openly stating they are nationalising 49.5% of the Poltava mine and corporation rights. This is a flagrant breach of the agreement. Other case cited in the RNS re arrest of rail carriages, arrest of managers, $16M bail monies having to be paid, freezing of assets etc all similarly appear further breaches of the same agreement.

For me the Notice now puts FXPO on the offensive and hits the Ukranian Government with the reality a) they are breaching international agreements and b) severe financial penalty attached. Negotiate or it goes outside Ukraine for judgement and financial compensation. More Notices to come imo.

Sorry to be boring and back to the Staged Ceasefire and Peace negotiations. Call made after the prisoner exchange I believe.

'We are very much on track,' Trump says after 'very good' call with Zelenskyy

Donald Trump has said "we are very much on track" after a "very good" call with the Ukrainian president.

"Just completed a very good telephone call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine," he said.

It lasted approximately one hour, the president said.

"Much of the discussion was based on the call made yesterday with President Putin in order to align both Russia and Ukraine in terms of their requests and needs," Trump said.

"We are very much on track."

He also said he would ask the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and his national security adviser, Mike Waltz, "to give an accurate description of the points discussed".

"That statement will be put out shortly," Trump added.

Worked it out myself through reading the UK / Ukraine "BIT" but it does explain the process FXPO have just initiated in black and white at the foot of the RNS. (The part most people miss and in fairness I did)

Upside in reading the specific sections of the BIT itself is that it is backed up for full protection and compensation against any effects of Expropriation / Nationalisation under the agreement, and several on here will have immediately felt the consequential large dip in the share price on the day the first State Bureau of Investigation communication was released from about 110p to sub 70p.

But this mornings RNS is formally stating the BIT agreements provide recourse to full compensation. As things stand that dip presently would probably amounts to around £400M compensation needing paid to investors - plus then interest on top. Furthermore - go ahead and fully nationalise if you wish. That would then probably cost you around £1 Billion compensation.

The RNS points it out in detail that the first communication on the State Bureau of Investigation website clearly mentions "nationalisation" so it's within the terms of "BIT". Here's the post title from that day so nobody can be in any doubt. "SBI initiates nationalization of assets and corporate rights of PrJSC "Poltava Mining and Processing Plant" That's not a press article its actually from The State Bureau of Investigation of Ukraine.

Definitely no legal expert on all of this but balanced enough to weigh things up objectively for myself and my view only would be that based on just the above any defence would be pretty slim to non-existent. FXPO actually stand a very good chance of winning at arbitration and gaining full compensation for its investors. Should it come to that.

Worth spending some time reading up in fine detail everything associated with todays 2nd RNS.

Not surprised its recovering a bit now. On balance and what with Ceasefires and a Peace Plan progressing arguably it should probably have risen and never have fallen.

Looks like FXPO have commenced a formal procedure to contest what many have seen as not only an erroneous decision on Poltavo in the first place , but which now also seems to breach Bilateral agreements and with sanction and compensation written into the agreement. Initiated by the serving of the Notice mentioned in the RNS. 3 months period to negotiate or it goes outside Ukraine by the looks of things. I also personally expect an appeal to a higher court than the Distrcit court that made the decision in the interim.

The full previous document is probably worth a read but here is the relevant section.

"ARTICLE 8

Settlement of Disputes between an Investor and a Host State

(1) Disputes between an investor of one Contracting Party and the other Contracting Party concerning an obligation of the latter under this Agreement in relation to an investment of the former which have not been amicably settled, shall, AFTER A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS FROM WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF A CLAIM, be submitted to international arbitration if the investor concerned so wishes.

(2) Where the dispute is referred to international arbitration, the investor and the Contracting Party concerned in the dispute may agree to refer the dispute either to:

(a) the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (having regard to the provisions, where applicable, of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of other States, opened for signature at Washington DC on 18 March 19651 and the Additional Facility for the Administration of Conciliation, Arbitration and Fact-Finding Proceedings); or

(b) the Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce; or

(c) an international arbitrator or ad hoc arbitration tribunal to be appointed by a special agreement or established under the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

If after a period of three months from written notification of the claim there is no agreement to one of the above alternative procedures, the dispute shall at the request in writing of the investor concerned be submitted to arbitration under the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law as then in force. The

parties to the dispute may agree in writing to modify these Rules."

Laters as they say.

Handy maybe to park this link in your Favourites or in a word document for what it says and it also makes mention of the ICC and other international bodies for resolution..

https://treaties.fcdo.gov.uk/data/Library2/pdf/1993-TS0024.pdf

Article 6(1) of the UK / Ukraine BIT.

Thinking specifically here about the supposed nationalisation of the 49.5% in Poltava mine. Will everyone therefore be entitled under the BIT bilateral protections to be compensated off what the FXPO share price was just prior to the announcement - circa 110p?

"ARTICLE 6

Expropriation

(1) Investments of investors of either Contracting Party shall not be nationalised, expropriated or subjected to measures having effect equivalent to nationalisation or expropriation (hereinafter referred to as "expropriation") in the territory of the other Contracting Party except for a public purpose related to the internal needs of that Party on a non-discriminatory basis and against prompt, adequate and effective compensation. Such Compensation shall amount to the genuine value of the investment expropriated immediately before the expropriation or before the impending expropriation became public knowledge, whichever is the earlier, shall include interest at a normal commercial

rate until the date of payment, shall, be made without delay, be effectively realizable and be freely transferable. The investor affected shall have a right, under the law of the Contracting Party making the expropriation, to prompt review, by a judicial or other independent authority of that Party, of his or its case and of the valuation of his or its investment in accordance with the principles set out in this paragraph.

From the accompanying print at the bottom of the RNS.

The agreements in place even pre-date what I had alluded to also covered in the newest UK / Ukraine Bit.

"About the UK-Ukraine BIT and the Swiss-Ukraine BIT

Ukraine has entered into a number of international investment agreements, including with the UK (the 1993 Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of Ukraine for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments or the UK-Ukraine BIT) and Switzerland (the 1995 Agreement between the Swiss Confederation and Ukraine on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments or the Swiss-Ukraine BIT). The UK-Ukraine BIT and the Swiss-Ukraine BIT impose a number of obligations on Ukraine as to the standard of treatment to be afforded to protected investments made by UK and Swiss investors respectively in Ukraine. These include (among others): (i) the obligation to accord fair and equitable treatment to investments (Article 2(2) of the UK-Ukraine BIT and Article 4(2) of the Swiss-Ukraine BIT, (ii) the obligation not to impair by unreasonable or discriminatory measures the management, maintenance, use, enjoyment or disposal of investments (Article 2(2) of the UK-Ukraine BIT and Article 4(1) of the Swiss-Ukraine BIT, and (iii) the obligation not to nationalise or expropriate investments except in certain limited circumstances (which include payment of prompt, adequate and effective compensation) (Article 6(1) of the UK-Ukraine BIT and Article 6(1) of the Swiss-Ukraine BIT).

Will delve for my own interest a bit later when I've had a chance to enjoy the sun.