Member Info for Teacup64

It looks as though the delay in the Diamond policy announcement is due to the announcement itself not being limited to diamonds only. According to the following article, other mineral specific policies are being created to announce alongside the Diamond policy.

https://africanminingmarket.com/zimbabwe-government-is-working-on-mineral-specific-policies-to-boost-growth/3192/

That's the one! ....I couldn't think of its name.

I think we lost Ross's unimportant comments, and everyone else got taken down with him by the looks of things.....definitely looks tidier I must say!

Hi JDAU,

I'm just getting a little fed up with the slow progress. I understand that we are just short of news on several fronts, but the time between each update is getting unbearable. I have stayed off the board as much as I could, and will continue too. I just got released from my cage and wanted to verbally kick someones ass. That's all ;)

So much of a barge pole stock that he's willing to camp out for years on end following it.....hmmmm! He really is a muppet isn't he, lol!

I'm getting fed up of this complete ****** now! Whilst I'm stressfully being loyal, CB's off getting paid from everywhere else whilst remaining silent here! Does anyone remember when he said, "I want to get the word out there", about 3 months ago, but since hasn't said a single thing to promote us.....what loyalty ey! *******!

VM - I can see why they want to cut & polish themselves....you only have to look at Antwerp to see the money made to sympathise for their reasons. But yes, plenty of wiggle room, or leverage if you like.

Sandy - Good article. I have seen other links posted on this board, including from Reuters stating 49% max, but really want to wait for confirmation rather than speculate.

However, coming from minutes of Chitando's meetings, it does make it very likely that over 50% ownership may actually be possible. If not, then what I described earlier could achieve the same whilst giving Zimbabwe 51% of the produce....I guess we'll have to hold on and wait.

It sometimes makes me wonder, given Zimbabwe's former not so friendly to foreign business style, if small leaks to the media about their upcoming policy announcement, are purposely being made to unofficially test the water and gather feedback for possible minor alterations if needed....but now I'm speculating ;)

Not following as closely as some on here have, regarding Zimbabwe's Diamond Policy, I get the sense that Zimbabwe wants to retain the controlling share over the countries diamond operations. Unless I have missed parts, it makes me wonder why some companies like Vast are still loitering, as its the controlling share of the assets that all the companies desire. So if I am correct in saying that it appears that Zimbabwe still wants to retain the controlling share, why does AP remain interested in Zimbabwe? It made me think of scenarios where companies are able to obtain the controlling share whilst still giving 51% to Zimbabwe. An example might be as below: 49% to Vast. 40% to Zim.gov. 11% to a non governmental Zimbabwean community group. Given the example above, the indiginisation rule can continue to remain, where Zimbabwe retains the lions share of the minerals produced from their land(51%), but more importantly, the legal right over the land would be in the hands of the company, thus giving foreign companies the controlling share and solving the ownership problem....Perhaps this is what AP is expecting?

I though it was quite good too. I'm enjoying all the humour surrounding this whole Brexit Deal or No Deal ordeal ;)

FAHP,

"I agree, raise your concerns, we want a balanced bb. However, if you do at least back it up."

I'm not sure what you mean by "make sure you back it up".......my concerns are backed up by APs statement in the Q&A, as well as several RNSs!

"Do I care if AP gets rich with us? Nope, that's like worrying about a tax bill before you earn the money haha."

You haven't even gained profits yet, so anything that reduces the amount of money you could potentially receive is worthy of concern.....especially as your not even up yet!

"This will be big without diamonds, all our assets are outstanding....imo :D"

This is exactly what I talk of, people hyping things they know nothing about yet! .....but continuing to shut my point down which has relevance to everybody, whether they care or not!

I wonder if Schroeders feel less mighty than before, now that a private individual nearly owns as much as they do? Shame on them!.....lol, soon it'll be little man Schroeder!

Sandcrab - "Best filtered".......go on then, rather than talking about it, why don't you start the ball rolling and try what it's actually like, instead of dictating it to others....you could be starting a motion yourself ;)

Thanks Fantasy.

Perro - What negativity do you actually see from me?.....All I did was post a valid opinion, and I've spent the rest of the time defending what is a very valid point whilst strangely being critisised! .....please point out where that is not the case?

How do you expect a motion to happen if no one promotes the ideals?

It's ok if you don't mind dilution, others do and will. Thats why it is relevant!

Hi Mullaney,

My brother doesn't have, or want an account with LSE, he just asked me to raise the issue. It is reasonable, valid and real, but some on this board, both times, have thrown their toys out the pram starting all out war. Others have demonstrated that it can be debated, opinions shared without any problem.

I think that anyone that gets bored of this debate should seriously consider filtering me....However, I don't feel that will happen, as they need to know when this subject is raised, in order to publicly cririse me when it does get mentioned to other new users, in an attempt to rid of a valid point that concerns every shareholder.....I smell a rat on this board, under several aliases!

Mullaney, that does not apply to you, or the posters that have shared their opinions without trying to shut me down.

Dodge, I wasn't critisising your proposal, its well reasoned I understand. I would just prefer to see another form of bonus, perhaps a price maintenance cash bonus decided yearly by shareholders at an AGM, to drive further incentive towards future growth. A cash bonus for peak SP, possibly at several tiers. Rather than diluting shareholders, AP can instead buy shares already in circulation, which shows absolute confidence that the board see more growth upcoming, and further restricts the narrowing number of free float shares available....sticky fingers and limited shares can only mean one thing!

Can the people greenthumbing every post that isn't mine, please grow up abit and face that others have different opinions sometimes. Thank you.

Perroverde - Likewise, if that's what you feel is best ;)

It's strange that every time I bring this up, the board goes into a crazy overdrive of misunderstood critisism, when all it ever required was response like these....beats me tbh!

Badge - Thats cool, it's your decision and there's nothing I can do to change that ;)

Hi Rob,

I do intend to buy when the news drops, it's why I'm here, and why I'm keen that everyone should vote the options down, to protect my later investment, and my brothers current investment. Whether I bore the same few names on here doesn't matter to me. Newbies that overlook this board, have the right to view propaganda that doesn't get aired by the happyclappers.