Member Info for tomcat-14

there’s plenty of movements though... so we don’t know if some of them are the actual settlement contracts and approvals... allowing the court to order the transfer of dev shares and release of escrow monies to the 22% creditors who came forward... by next friday... lol...

‘demote their credit to unsecured status as previously threatened’... the bank made us a settlement offer... that was accepted subject to contract... is it within the powers of the court to make a court order on the jrp for those the payments to be made in line with the agreed settlement... in absence of the contract...
it’s a middle ground... without demoting the guarantee... but enabling the fulfilment of the settlement of same... as has been agreed between the parties involved...

or 1 ship...

that’s one of the 3 options the court has...
another is...
‘ (g) schedule for sale of iron ore suspended by decision of Egrégio TJ / SP; (h) activities carried out by Recuperanda and a loan agreement with Investidora in order to obtain funds to carry out the activities. It gathers images of Virtual Tour held in Porto da Recuperanda in Santana / AP)’... lift the suspension and invoke the previous court ruling to ship (g) & (h)...

they were given an option of whether to continue their claim from the jrp... or anglo... i’m assuming the other 78% have opted for anglo... following ‘ (a) ... the latest decisions made in the incident’...

also...
‘(b) a survey showing that 22% of creditors presented bank details’...

agreed... particularly if they’ve proactively been progressing the items we need to get resolved before that commitment is made... under the radar whilst the banks have been dragging their feet...

quick check is they’ve shuffled a few pages around... haven’t checked contents yet... but looks the same on the face of it...

so you have... that’s strange...

you can’t can you... i’m only just coming to terms with the size of amapa... compared to sonora cinovec or yangibana... it dwarfs them all at these ore prices... ;)

definitely a number 11 in the bottom left hand corner of the page on mine... have you got a special edition... :)

page 11... ;)

dev being the operator...

yes... both / either really... pba’s book value being represented by it’s wholly owned subsidiary dev...

at the time we signed up to the deal... the $24m option would have been questionable... on our ability to raise it... which shouldn’t be an issue for us... now that the iron prices are booming...

it’ll be a 49% : 51% jv ownership of the project operator dev... at project level... if we do take up the 49%...
projected development and value growth having been mapped out already... as previously discussed... (book value of dev)...
20% $2.5m (100% $12.5m) 0-months...
7% $3.5m (100% $50m) 6-months...
22% $24m (100% $110m) 12-months...
then 6-12months to complete and start new mining production...

doesn’t page 9 of the jan21 presentation tie in with the jrp interpretations that the remaining equity raise is $24m... giving a total $30m equity raise for dip a and dip b financing...

if that happened ob... there’d be no debt funding element... and i have an incline that the jrp is pretty much a pre-planned path to rehabilitation...

how much is one 50,000t shipment of 62% fe worth today ob...

at least 3 options to choose from to release the $2.5m escrow payments by the date we advised the court that we would be in a position to...