We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Driver Diver, just in case you are as unfamiliar with the idiom as you are with legal, trusts and especially company law matters (beneficial equitable ownership as opposed to bare legal title too difficult for you?) I thought I'd explain it for you:
"strain at a gnat" ... To exaggerate or put far too much focus on a minor issue to try to make it seem like a major one often in an attempt to deflect from the serious point.
What is it with people on this BB who can't read what's there and see written what isn't written?
Where did I mention anything about Juno LTD (Bermuda) being a listed company. It's not a PLC is it?
Of course it's a private limited company which is why it's a 'LTD'.
Everything I wrote is correct as it often applies to offshore private limited companies in places like Bermuda but it clearly has gone over your head because it seems you know little relevant law.
Well in that case there are shareholders aren't there?
Additionally, even if the shares are only 2 in number (an extremely unlikely and somewhat fanciful scenario) and have a nominal value of $1 Bermudan dollars each, that doesn't preclude them from having a true value of $millions if the 'ltd' company owns assets worth millions (as it must do in this case). In fact, you don't have to be a shareholder to have a valuable right because the shareholders could be trustees so that the legal title vests in the nominal shareholders but the equitable and valuable ownership is in others.
I half suspect that Juno LTD will be structered so that the shareholders will be other offshore corporate entities (in the Cayman Islands perhaps). This is a fairly common regime where offshore entities are concerned and usually aimed at secrecy and minimising tax.
As far as investor's are concerned, it ought not be of much concern and if it is, on payment of a few hundred £s you can unravel most all of the structure and put your mind at rest.
I don't believe for one second that the BOD are asleep at the wheel. If nothing of intetest has materialised by November then it maybe time to reassess my holding. I'm not expecting to be disappointed though and may add some more shares if there is another dip towards 3p or less.
Diver - I may have got the company name wrong but I did say it was an offshore entity.
As for not having shareholders, Bermuda company law is for the most part like English company law so that a 'ltd/limited' company in Bermuda has to have shareholders.
Bob - a holding of 26% by Juno Mining in no way precludes a 'hostile takeover'. All the 25+% holding ensures is that the views of a holder of such a holding has to be given due regard by the BOD and that the BOD cannot act unreasonably with regard to that view.
However, I'm pretty sure that Juno Mining is not only an offshore entity but that it's members comprise at least some if not all of the BOD. If I'm right about that and I think I am, then it explains why the BOD do not directly hold many shares in AYM - they don't need to as they have loads through Juno MIning. In that case the BOD do in fact have a serious amount of skin in the game.
Brent - you are altogether too emotional. Try reading what I actually said before you write things like "Your hypothesis that I have bombarded the BOD with emails is incorrect."
Your AGM motion was aimed at pushing the BOD into finding a buyer. If they are in negotiations this would the very thing that an NDA/Confidentiality Agreement would preclude them from assisting you with.
In any event, the BOD are under no obligation to tutor you on the correct process of getting a motion going and if they attempted to do so and got something a bit wrong they would be exposing themselves to legal action. Do a bit of your own research by reading the constitution of the company which is available from Companies House. A little knowledge of Company Law is also going to be necessary.
Brent
You seem to completely discount the possibility that the BOD may not be in a position to say anything because (as previously explained) they are bound by NDAs / Confidentiality Agreements that cover current discussions with 3rd parties.
You have on many past occasions mentioned that the BOD have responded to your emails in the past so why is it that they are not responding now you have to ask. Why do you assume that it's the worst option i.e they can't be bothered to answer you? You are offended not to hear from them as you have heard before and consequently have gone on the offensive.
In my experience people who answer emails continue to answer emails unless there is a reason not to:
i) Brent is bombarding them with emails and they are sick of him - I don't get the sense that you have bombarded the BOD with emails so I think that we need another answer;
ii) the BOD is precluded from responding because your question impinges on things that are covered by an NDA/Confidentiality Agreement;
iii) the BOD are indeed asleep and haven't switched their laptops on for some months - much as this scenario is used to justify some venting of spleens against the BOD it is in fact an unlikely scenario.
More likely imo is that there are discussions / negotiations ongoing with 3rd parties concerning AYM's assets. Why do I think this? Well if anyone is reading this and wants to understand my thinking go a few threads down and you'll see why.
In the meantime we have no choice but to wait and I'm content to wait. I topped up this week just gone and others have as well (there were a lot more substantial blues than chunky reds).
Brent - you've effectively become a 'de-ramper' with posts such as this. I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve. You won't shame the board into answering your email(s) by these posts. AYM is what it is and when there is news that can be disclosed we will hear that news through an RNS.
Like you and all the others, I want to see some action, hear of plans and proposed developments and so on. As I posted the other day though, if, as I suspect there are, negotiations are ongoing with 3rd parties, then confidentiality agreements will be in place and the BOD will not be free to make announcements or answer emails such as yours. In fact, the fact that they have in the past answered your emails and now are not does suggest that the BOD are not free to give you and answer.
If there are negotiations ongoing - as I suspect there to be - then all parties will have signed confidentiality / non-disclosure agreements. This is the norm (I do a lot of this sort of stuff - i.e. negotiating deals) but it does preclude anybody talking about what is going on. Frustrating for the likes of you, me, diver, money etc etc but it's just the way it is. There won't be any announcements until all parties agree that there can be. If I'm right and I think I must be, then when the announcement(s) comes the SP will rise quickly.
I could be wrong of course - I have no inside info and the BOD could just be comatose. However, given how valuable copper in particular has become I find that very unlikely.
China is doing everything it can to keep the price of iron and copper ore down and this tells me that they are planning to be undertaking projects requiring huge amounts of Steel and copper for some years to come. If that were not the case the Chinese would not be issuing orders from Government (read the Chinese Treasury Dept.) to the smelters (who buy the ore) to reduce what they are willing to pay for ore. This is doomed to failure as the Chinese authorities know but they do achieve temporary successes at times which manage to hold prices of ore down short term and those are worth $billions. It's fighting against the incoming tide though. Once the US infrastructure projects kick off in earnest ore prices will go up significantly and when Europe (incl. the UK) finally gets off sitting on their hand it will only serve to further escalate prices.
Attempts to buck the markets by governments rarely if ever work.
Copper is (as I've said before a number of times), the new gold.
A £10k buy (bar a few quid) this morning shows that there is a lot of confidence out there concerning AYM.
Juno Limited who own 26% of AYM (Brent - a 25%+ holding is highly significant) will be watching the movements in Copper Ore and will be talking to other Miners. Those other Miners will want to be involved in developing Parys Mountain at some point in the future.
Alternatively, there will be Miners who would rather buy AYM to not only get hold of PM but also AYM's stakes in Labrador and Grangesburg.
China, USA and Europe (incl. UK) must spend on infrastructure projects to get past Covid damaged economies and to address the 'Green' revolution (EV's, Grid upgrades (across the Developed World)
Increased use of electricity (e.g. no new gas boilers from 2025 etc.) , IoT, the AI/robotics revolution (needs a lot of copper) Green energy transportation (getting renewables from point of generation to the Grid / storage (in China USA, Europe etc), needs a lot of copper). This means increased demand for steel, copper, zinc, etc for decades to come and a corresponding increasing demand for respective ores.
As the big finds in new sources of ore (especially copper ore) diminish rapidly, smaller resources will already be eyed up and outfits like AYM will have some big miners / equity developers and the like sniffing around. I would expect that negotiations between AYM and 3rd parties are well underway already.
Diver - I am shocked to be on the list at all. My superbly rational, understated and sensitively worded posts on this BB hardly elevate me to the esteemed ranks of the 'Rampers' I would have thought but I shall accept the accolade and wear it as a badge of honour.
p.s. I'm predicting that the SP will hit at least 95p by mid-August (does that elevate me further up the 'charts'?).
Money - according to those carrying on Bowden's conspiracy theories, Brentharg (he of the many posts) is one of Hooley's stooges. Brentharg = Brent Hargreaves.
It's so very improbable as to be completely dissmisable.
The BOD are hardly inspiring and have done well out of AYM for sure but Bowden's ravings were just that, ravings. The BOD are constrained by the majority shareholders but as copper, zinc etc continue to increase in value there will come a point in the not distant future where getting all the goodies out of the ground will become an imperative. Copper is the new oil/gold/whathaveyou.
Brentharg - you voted Brexit eh? That explains a lot.
No need for a crystal ball to know that the BOD is not going to be listening to you even if they acknowledged your email.
You may be surprised to learn that I do think the BOD could do much better but I'm not so naive as to think that even if you succeeded in getting a motion going it'd amount to anything. You're not even a minnow in the AYM grand scheme of things, a microbe is all and I am no better.
BUT, what is in the ground is so very valuable and good things will happen at Parys Mountain in the near future I believe (but I won't define 'near'). Shares are cheap and a very good buy at present and I'll be buying again very soon to rebuild what is still a reasonable holding after a bit of profit taking earlier this year.