AVZ Discussion 2022

[Winenut]

For the record $12….$12….$12!!! is not a meme

It is (and always has been) from it’s inception a genuine “anchoring strategy” within the realm of social media in the potential negotiation of a sale price/value of AVZ shares and any possible influence that might have on actual players and events in the real market.

Yes used from time to time with a level of humour but always the intent was deadly fucking serious

Get it in your heads everyone……everyone…..

$12….$12….$12!!!

$12!!!!!!!!

umm….$US

 

[Goat]

Honestly !

https://x.com/fastandfiry/status/1921550255751049714

View attachment 84332 View attachment 84331

She can't even spell her flamin name correctly.
F I E R Y - not firy ya smelly vaj.

 

[ptlas]

For the record $12….$12….$12!!! is not a meme

It is (and always has been) from it’s inception a genuine “anchoring strategy” within the realm of social media in the potential negotiation of a sale price/value of AVZ shares and any possible influence that might have on actual players and events in the real market.

Yes used from time to time with a level of humour but always the intent was deadly fucking serious

Get it in your heads everyone……everyone…..

$12….$12….$12!!!

$12!!!!!!!!

umm….$US

For the record $12….$12….$12!!! is not a meme

It is (and always has been) from it’s inception a genuine “anchoring strategy” within the realm of social media in the potential negotiation of a sale price/value of AVZ shares and any possible influence that might have on actual players and events in the real market.

Yes used from time to time with a level of humour but always the intent was deadly fucking serious

Get it in your heads everyone……everyone…..

$12….$12….$12!!!

$12!!!!!!!!

umm….$US



Wino and I have both been seriously promoting this price for years.

A few days ago, I gave figures to justify it.

Those figures were conservative for many reasons.

PS mate, do you need to change your handle, or are you leaving all options open?

 

[Frank]

Fyi, Did you see this BS on X

View attachment 84324

https://x.com/zed_kelly_/status/1921744612353335327

View attachment 84325

View attachment 84327

View attachment 84326

Fyi, Did you see this BS on X

Looks like you did

 

[Spikerama]

For the record $12….$12….$12!!! is not a meme

It is (and always has been) from it’s inception a genuine “anchoring strategy” within the realm of social media in the potential negotiation of a sale price/value of AVZ shares and any possible influence that might have on actual players and events in the real market.

Yes used from time to time with a level of humour but always the intent was deadly fucking serious

Get it in your heads everyone……everyone…..

$12….$12….$12!!!

$12!!!!!!!!

umm….$US

I guess what I meant was that is has become a meme. Even though, from what I remember there were actually some serious calculations that ended up at $12.00 per share if you rounded down.

Can't remember if it was your calcs or someone else's Wino. Why don't you remind us again.

$12….$12….$12!!!















USD

 

[Winenut]

For the record $12….$12….$12!!! is not a meme

It is (and always has been) from it’s inception a genuine “anchoring strategy” within the realm of social media in the potential negotiation of a sale price/value of AVZ shares and any possible influence that might have on actual players and events in the real market.

Yes used from time to time with a level of humour but always the intent was deadly fucking serious

Get it in your heads everyone……everyone…..

$12….$12….$12!!!

$12!!!!!!!!

umm….$US



Wino and I have both been seriously promoting this price for years.

A few days ago, I gave figures to justify it.

Those figures were conservative for many reasons.

PS mate, do you need to change your handle, or are you leaving all options open?

Not sure on the handle question

Winenut

I like wine

Could have been Steaknut I like steak

Could have been Garfishnut I like Garfish

Could have been Cashewnutnut I like Cashew Nuts

Why would I need to change?

Or have i completely misunderstood your post

 

[Small Trader]

As a long-standing holder, I share the optimism and would of course be happy to be able to draw a line under this soon.
However, I am sceptical about the arguments that are now often cited that other bidders could sweeten our exit or significantly increase earnings per share.

There is no explicit rule in the deal that only allows American bidders. However, the information shows that the US has a strong interest in bringing an American company like Kobold on board. This is due to the geopolitical strategy of limiting China's influence in the DRC's extractive sector. The US government actively promotes such investments, for example through the International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC), which secures US projects in the DRC. This suggests that Kobold has been selected as the preferred bidder - not because others are excluded, but because it is a strategic fit.
Kobold Metals is definitely part of the deal. The framework agreement with AVZ is a central part of the implementation of this agreement between the US and the DRC. Kobold's CEO, Benjamin Katabuka, has emphasised that the investment in Manono is being made with the support of the US government, which underlines the link between Kobold and the US strategic agenda.

Of course, the VEA, China or sonswer could also bid, but then we would be back where we have been for the last few years: we need ICSID arbitration to be able to dispose of our property for a deal of a different kind. Because this is currently disputed from the DRC's point of view.

So there is either a deal with Kobold (however high/low the price of compensation will be) or the ICSID proceedings will continue.
Only once this has been finalised could a deal with another bidder become a reality.

Right?

 

[Winenut]

She can't even spell her flamin name correctly.
F I E R Y - not firy ya smelly vaj.

that really isn’t the best post I’ve seen on this forum just quietly…..

and I’ve probably posted some of the pretty ordinary ones myself…

 

[Spikerama]

that really isn’t the best post I’ve seen on this forum just quietly…..

I think he means Maj.

 

[Winenut]

I think he means Maj.

ahhh…..

not so much

IMO

 

[Papst]

Honestly !

https://x.com/fastandfiry/status/1921550255751049714

View attachment 84332 View attachment 84331

This Maja and the other downrampers of a sell price actually remind me of this carrot dick guy and his gang... I mean, manipulation of opinions is not a Chinese invention, after all. Who knows in which boat they are actually sitting...

 

[lellep]

This Maja and the other downrampers of a sell price actually remind me of this carrot dick guy and his gang... I mean, manipulation of opinions is not a Chinese invention, after all. Who knows in which boat they are actually sitting...

Another Emerged poster, welcome to TSE!

 

[Papst]

Another Emerged poster, welcome to TSE!

I haven't logged in since years because of BS like yours. Whatever, put me on ignore.

 

[lellep]

I haven't logged in since years because of BS like yours. Whatever, put me on ignore.

If your intent is good, welcome back!
Perhaps you can understand my suspicioun from my point of view?
Lots of new emerged posters spreading misinformation and trying to create discord!

 

[JNRB]

It's the drc government who are doing the agreeing, not avz.
Cath aren't going to be paying anyone anything if the drc government tell them Manono south is only for the USA.
And it looks like the drc government have just said that Manono south is only for the USA.

And how does that reconcile with the US claiming they can only get involved if all the bullshit and shenanigans stops? By starting from a foundation of bullshit shenanigans? That's why the ONLY way this works is for AVZ to AGREE. That's what's in Nigel's statement, and that's what's got to happen.

Trump is already breaking global alliances and global economies. What do you think is going to happen to trust in the US and the entire global trade system it underpins if news comes out that they did a dodgy deal with a corrupt government to steal a project from an ALLY. It would shatter what last little bit of trust remained that the US was a country people could trust to do business with.

Not a chance. Not even with Trump.

This thing doesn't happen without AVZ being on board and that doesnt happen without a deal that's substantially better than our prospects with CATH.

There is a win-win-win situation on the table here if the US and DRC aren't too arrogant to take it.

 

[TheGermanOne]

Update at icsid page:

Case Details | ICSID

t.co

 

[Rechnerhand]

Update at icsid page:

Case Details | ICSID

t.co

 

[LOCKY82]

Ai summary

Let's break down this statement:
* "The Tribunal issues a decision...": This means that a formal panel or body (the Tribunal) has made an official ruling. Tribunals are often set up to resolve specific types of disputes.
* "...on the Respondent’s request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question...":
* The Respondent is the party against whom a claim or dispute has been brought.
* The objections to jurisdiction are arguments made by the Respondent that the Tribunal does not have the authority or legal power to hear the case.
* To address these objections as a preliminary question means the Respondent wanted the Tribunal to decide whether it even had the right to hear the case before getting into the details of the actual dispute ("the merits").
* "...as a result, the objections to jurisdiction are joined to the merits of the dispute.":
* Joined to the merits means that instead of deciding on the jurisdictional objections first, the Tribunal has decided to consider the objections at the same time as it considers the substance or core issues of the dispute ("the merits").
In simpler terms:
The party being sued (the Respondent) asked the Tribunal to first decide if the Tribunal even had the authority to hear the case. The Tribunal said "no" to this request. Instead, they will deal with the question of their authority at the same time as they consider the actual arguments of the dispute.


Essentially, the Tribunal has decided not to resolve the "can we even hear this case?" question upfront, but to consider it alongside the "what actually happened?" question.
Do you have any other parts of this statement you'd like me to clarify?

 

[tonster66]

Ai summary

Let's break down this statement:
* "The Tribunal issues a decision...": This means that a formal panel or body (the Tribunal) has made an official ruling. Tribunals are often set up to resolve specific types of disputes.
* "...on the Respondent’s request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question...":
* The Respondent is the party against whom a claim or dispute has been brought.
* The objections to jurisdiction are arguments made by the Respondent that the Tribunal does not have the authority or legal power to hear the case.
* To address these objections as a preliminary question means the Respondent wanted the Tribunal to decide whether it even had the right to hear the case before getting into the details of the actual dispute ("the merits").
* "...as a result, the objections to jurisdiction are joined to the merits of the dispute.":
* Joined to the merits means that instead of deciding on the jurisdictional objections first, the Tribunal has decided to consider the objections at the same time as it considers the substance or core issues of the dispute ("the merits").
In simpler terms:
The party being sued (the Respondent) asked the Tribunal to first decide if the Tribunal even had the authority to hear the case. The Tribunal said "no" to this request. Instead, they will deal with the question of their authority at the same time as they consider the actual arguments of the dispute.


Essentially, the Tribunal has decided not to resolve the "can we even hear this case?" question upfront, but to consider it alongside the "what actually happened?" question.
Do you have any other parts of this statement you'd like me to clarify?

Its kind of strange because if they did not have the authority to hear the case why are they hearing the case? More importantly why has the DRC asked the question as it gives authority and legitimacy to the ICSID,

 

[Uglybob]

I thought $10 was the anchoring price and $12 was the meme price with the f@#$ Zinjin bonus?
Not that I can be bothered going back 2167 pages to confirm.