focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
No trades allowed on Hargreaves Lansdown.
"African miners to increase spending in 2015: survey http://www.mining.com/african-miners-to-increase-spending-in-2015-survey-61006/ The study, conducted between July and September 2014, notes that the most common buying method for mining equipment, used by 66% of respondents, is outright purchase. It also shows that African miners are increasingly centralizing procurement, with 49% of respondents expecting greater centralism over the next two years. The report, based on responses from 108 buyers and decision-makers across 100 mines in 16 African countries, including South Africa, Botswana, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Tanzania Zambia and Zimbabwe, concludes the local industry has began an expansion phase". (from PFP page).
Taken from a poster on PFP this morning; "Mozambique receives US$16 billion in foreign investment over five years Mozambique has received over US$16 billion in foreign direct investment (FDI) in the last five years, between 2010 and 2014, according to figures from the Ministry of Planning and Development. The investment was focused, for the most part, on natural resources, especially coal and oil and gas research in the Rovuma basin in the province of Cabo Delgado, also according to official figures cited by Mozambican daily newspaper Notícias. The Ministry of Planning and Development said in a statement that FDI recorded from 2010 to 2014 resulted from changes in legislation, especially the legal framework of the mining sector, which culminated in the adoption of the new Mining Law and the oil Law and an updated Policy and Strategy for Mining Resources. “The new Oil Law offers more stability for companies and greater flexibility in Mozambique,” the newspaper said adding that the new law included supply guarantees for the domestic market, with a quota of at least 25 percent of the oil and gas produced in the country, provision for natural gas liquefaction and the conversion of gas into liquid fuels. (macauhub/MZ)"
Same poster posted this about 8 new contracts, so I think this is what the link says, but please do look as I've not fully looked yet; "Mozambican government prepares eight new contracts for coal mining The government of Mozambique will sign eight new contracts for coal mining in Mozambique within two years, the Mozambican Minister of Mining Resources said Wednesday in Maputo. Six of these projects will become operational “within 18 to 24 months,” while the remaining two will be authorised “soon,” one of which is related to an underground mine in Tete province, the region where all the projects are located. The Mining Resources Minister, also noted there were 1,773 mining titles in the country, of which 124 are in the coal sector, although only four of these are currently exploring coal. Admitting that the drop in coal prices on international markets was affecting development of the Mozambican coal sector, Bias said the government was working towards reducing tariffs for transportation and logistics in the country, with a view to reducing businesses’ operating expenses. Moreover, the minister called for mining companies to seek alternatives to export, mainly by focusing on the domestic market, announcing a drop in production tax (royalties), from 3 percent to 1.5 percent on coal that is used in Mozambique. “We want to encourage the emergence of industries and the availability of coal can develop the economy,” she said, claiming later that “this reduction will mean that there is much more investment focused on industrialisation,” of the country".
Just spotted this from a poster on PFP board which I'm in. Again, about the new government making it's mark in Mozambique. http://www.ventures-africa.com/2015/01/standard-bank-says-investments-in-mozambique-have-exceeded-500m
Thanks for your very kind words and support again, I appreciate it, as it seems I am always being attacked, I've had it on the FITB board too, simply because I prefer to post what I feel are realistic posts and not the hype the share for the sake of raising the sp as some seem to like to do. I am a supporter here, but I think everyone has to be patient and await the administrators findings. In the meantime, as I said before, I think everyone should post whatever information they have big or small, to the administrators because for them it is a bit like a crime scene. They have to wade through all the paperwork, try and piece together what assets there are, where some have gone, etc, and I am not saying it has happened, but I remember a case I was involved in years ago, when I was young (those were the days!) and my clients husband moved every asset he had offshore, and once that happens, it becomes so difficult to trace things, although technology these days may help such situations more now. The administrators are at the start of a jigsaw puzzle, and they may be missing quite a few key pieces, so tell them what you know, cold hard facts, and let them piece the jigsaw together. If you don't tell them, they won't know all the history and the goings on. They are like the detectives making house to house enquiries! They may not knock on your door so knock on theirs! I again say be careful as and when the time comes, if it comes, to considering litigation. It can be costly and can so easily backfire and if you put your name to it, you become liable If it falls foul. Be sure to know all the pros and cons before making a decision as to whether to join in or not, if an action is proposed. If you can't afford to take the risk of losing, don't take it, litigation is like AIM, it's a gamble, but make sure there are very good prospects of success and ten only take the risk, if you are prepared to take just that. Litigation101 is probably lying on a beach right now in some far off place but if these administrators are thorough, and Baker Tilly have a very good reputation, then that sand might just start to sink! Finally, even you Duxi, email the administrators and tell them how you feel, and what you know, and that includes all the pensioners who have lost so heavily here, you have a right to be heard, however painful it may be for you. GLA.
It's a very valid question and statement you have produced to put to the action group, to ask them to put the administrators, or even better, send an email yourself to the administrators, their details are on the Baker Tilly site and I think they have been mentioned on this board as well. If you don't ask, you will never know.
I agree, there needs to be some proper regulation on AIM, and a safety net in the same way if you invest up to 85k in a bank, and something goes wrong,but until then, we have no such protection, and the risks are our own.
Then that's good, and I'm sure they will do all they can, but just make sure you know all the pros and cons before signing up for any court action that's all, IMO. Best of luck.
Litigation101 is not my mate. As stated, it looks like I rumbled him and it was JFJ being obnoxious. Duxi for the record, I know what I am talking about, but unfortunately the action group decided not to listen, and so if I were you, I would not put too much faith in them, because they left everything too late. It is now down to the administrators, pure and simple, to decide what assets the company hold, what needs to be sold and as quickly as possible to realise debts, and then, if anything left, to make a payment to shareholders for the rest, but that is looking hugely unlikely IMO, and don't forget, the administrators have their fees etc, which will be colossal to come out of any funds, and as there is no NOMAD either, the future, to my mind, looks rather bleak, so as I think you have done, the best way to view this is that it stands as a loss, but if anything should be recouped, then that would be a bonus. At the moment, I don't see that any of it justifies the colossal expense of a class action, but only that can be determined once the administrators have finalised their role and as I have said before, if legal proceedings are taken, it has to be borne in mind that should the class action fail, all those who become a part of it, would be liable for the costs and for damages to the company, so it shouldn't be lightly, nor in the vein of let's jump on board, because all litigation is risky and you must insist you know all the pros and cons before making your mind up on that one. Best wishes.
It's not rubbish, but think what you like, I really don't care.
I've just had a secure message from HL to confirm company in administration etc and ..."Therefore it is expected that the listing will be cancelled on 12 February 2015". Thought I'd just let you know, although I know this is old news so to speak. They do state any shares held in an ISA have to be moved to another account obviously I assume for tax reasons.
Just found this from another poster on the PFP board toda, Is it conceivable this would also possibly help here, as someone else on the PFP infers that this person has good links with the UK etc? Just a thought as I don't know enough about Bhr and in the ins and outs of it all as I have said before. "http://www.thezimbabwean.co/politics/74563/nyusi-appoints-his-government.html "The Ministries of Mineral Resources and Energy are merged, and the new ministry is headed by the former deputy finance minister, Pedro Couto, a man with a reputation for integrity and independent thinking."
Can I make a further suggestion which has just come to mind, and it is just a suggestion, and I know you don't like me, but I am thinking, as and when you have your meeting with the administrators, perhaps take along a tape recorder for two reasons, one so that obviously you have a correct record of what is said so as to avoid doubt, as it easy to forget things in a meeting like that, and particularly if a lot of figures and facts are banded about, and secondly, so that you can report back as accurately as possible to shareholders. Just a thought, but in this particular case, I just feel it would be both practical and beneficial, and particularly if any form of litigation might then subsequently be embarked upon.
I should add that if successful, compensation would be awarded as I see it to those in the class action, but then, the administrators on behalf of the company I assume, would have difficulty in trying to prevent payouts also to other genuine shareholders, as a precedent would have already been set by the court, but only if there is a cause of action worth pursuing, and if it were successful of course. Just my opinion, but a barristers opinion would answer this for everyone concerned.
Just popped in again, Beacon Hill Resources is a UK listed company at companies house therefore the company can be sued within the courts jurisdiction for England and Wales as their registered office is here. They are based in London and interestingly, companies house webcheck site states that the company is still active. I assume I am looking at the right company, sometimes doubt myself, but I'm sure I am. My fear is that as I said some weeks ago, it would have been best to have sought legal action then when this started brewing to see whether an injunction could be obtained from the High Court o freeze assets but that has now gone by the board due to the company going in to admin and nothing happening. Now it's down to the administrators and I think the leaders of the action group need to find out quickly from the administrators what their plan is, and if at all possible, take a barrister along to that meeting. As I have said, in view of the financial difficulties of funding lawyers, I personally take the view that direct access is the route to take to get a barrister on board and get a barristers opinion very quickly. If someone or a few people were prepared to finance that then it would be a start, and you can always ask for a fixed fee consultation or set a limit for initial work but I would suggest that the action group try and arrange a meeting with the administrators and a barrister all on the same day, and if possible, take the barrister along to the meeting with the administrators, and then have a separate meeting with the barrister afterwards to discuss a possible plan of action so that the group can then report back in one go, perhaps by way of a group meeting in London the next day? These are just my views. I am trying to help as best as I can, even though I was called all sorts of nasty things a few weeks ago, but I am genuine, and do have a holding, and am not in any way connected to the company nor Litigation101 whom I think I rumbled as JFJ! Finally on the point of any pay out, again, I believe any pay out if achieved would have to be on the number of shareholdings of all shareholders, regardless of price paid, as that is the risk we all take of course, and that if an action was successful, then obviously an order for costs would be made by the Court so that the legal costs are reimbursed! Best wishes all.
Just popped my head in here again and glad to see you are now taking note of what I said a while back that you should have a secure site so that the company cannot read your intentions and that you should seek legal advice, and the pointers that I gave. So far as whether only actiong roup members would get any money back if successful, that would of course be discriminatory to other shareholders in my opinion and in any event, if successful, those who funded the action would get an order for costs, so hopefully get their money back, but all I would say is, don't embark on litigation unless you get a very favourable opinion from counsel, and remember, a solicitor is like a GP, gives general advice, it is the barrister who is the specialist, and to save money, as I said, direct access to the barrister is the way to go! Good luck all.
Just a suggestion but go on the website and look at this chambers, and also read the section about direct access which confirms what I have said. I don't know this sets credentials for company/commercial/fraud work, but I have used them for family work when I was practising, so just a suggestion, but there are plenty more within the Temple, so my advice would be for the action group leaders to ring round, and see if someone will offer them a conference with counsel on a pro bono basis, as I said before. No harm in trying is there?!
No wonder you've lost money! Honestly!
I would just like to sound a note of caution regarding legal action and the firm you have mentioned. as I, for one, if I joined the action group for a class action, would not be in favour of the law firm you mention. I would also sound a note of caution about legal fees. If the case is lost, there will almost certainly be fees of some kind or other, including disbursements to pay to the groups lawyers, and those disbursements include barristers fees, court fees, experts fees which would probably involve a couple of forensic accountants etc, never mind the legal costs of BHR through its administrators which could be a multiple of thousands and thousands, so who is going to withstand all of that? If the case is won, then all well and good, but it is a high risk gamble here in my opinion, and as I said, I felt the legal action should have been taken prior to the company going in to admin and not after, but I was just criticised. I honestly think at present, IMO, you would be throwing your money away, on top of what you have all individually lost, as BHR had ample time to move their asset base around prior to admin, and as I also said, you have to stay one step ahead of your enemy in law, and my gut feeling is that this just hasn't happened here. However, if there are a number who want an indication as to whether it is worth pursuing or not, I would strongly suggest IMO of course, that the action group seek a barrister's opinion first on the merits or otherwise of the case, and not just start legal action for the sake of revenge and then give matters further consideration after that. In order to seek the barrister's opinion, you don't have to go through a solicitor or a law firm, you can approach barrister's chambers directly, and there are plenty of good ones in London. To instruct the solicitor to do it, you will be paying twice over i.e. the solicitors fees for gathering the information from you, digesting it and making sense of it all, and sending it all in instructions to counsel and then the barrister's fees for advising and then for the solicitor digesting that advice and reporting back to you. Cut the lawyer out at this stage IMO as there are enough of you in the action group to know the full history, and ring a number of barristers chambers and see who would be interesting in advising in a conference with the action group leaders, and whether they would do it on a pro bono basis (without a fee at this stage)? I would also suggest, IMO, that people stop posting on here and on the action group website what the groups intentions are, as you are feeding fodder to the company, so another method of communication which is secure, would be ideal.