African Min. Share Discussion Threads

[deusfaber] 29/1/2015 22:14

stitch up.In admin TMC and SISG will get the approval from GOSL to take it for peanuts
and screw over both creditors and shareholders.
Timis did it with marampa and got a taste for it.

[cantrememberthis2] 29/1/2015 21:52

AMI WOULD still own 75% of TONK even if it went to admin, they stake would be worth more than £0.00

[casual47] 29/1/2015 21:34

Yes, Earnest, I'd say so.

If TIO and ARPS is being managed 100% operationally and financially by the board of the Operation Companies then what is the role of AMI?

Is AMI to become some sort of shell / mining investment company? So rather than AMI wholly owning Tonk and having subsidiaries it will become just a shareholder of a new company with Gibril its CEO?

[tommy107] 29/1/2015 21:25

Right, money only to be spent on TIO and not AMI. But where does this leave AMI with an unprofitable mine?

[earnestwipplethwaiteiii] 29/1/2015 21:00

Thanks casual47. This news has the mark of a condition set by SISG for the release of funds/ possible increased stakeholding - and understandably so - get control of costs!

[casual47] 29/1/2015 20:33

It could just mean what it says......that the project companies have what is needed to stand alone operationally and financially.

E.g. their own CEO and staff etc, their own budget (that can't be snaffled away by AMI) etc.

Another way to see this: next time Shandong give money to the projects then it will go in an escrow account in name of TIO and ARPS, rather than AMI? (assuming that is how it is/was)

[fishyneck] 29/1/2015 20:26

Yes my thoughts are they can't just asset strip AMI under our noses..but pardon the pun but the whole thing is a minefield of who owns what!!

Fn

[casual47] 29/1/2015 20:22

The separation was set in motion many months ago, at least as far back as August 2014, when Shandong agreed to the release of project funds for AMI purposes.

See for example the 15 Aug 2014 RNS which stated:

"A condition of the release of these funds into the Project Companies is that there is a financial and operational separation of their activities from AML. In addition, Shandong has requested certain changes to the management structure of the project companies, which has been agreed by the Board of AML."

Initially AW was appointed as CEO of both AMI and project companies. Having the same person at the helm of both is of course not a good way to guarantee a separation of AMI and project companies so it makes sense that in December last year AW stood down.

What the full impact is of this separation is puzzling for me too (What were the Ts&Cs of the separation? I don't think we were told -- Should we have been?)

Why we have this strange seemingly opposing emails from AW and Gibril....I don't know.

If this is a stitch up (let AMI sink while TIO and ARPS survive) then it must have been a long game one as the roots of it go as far back as August last year, if not longer.....

AMI won't just "lose" their 75% stake of course -- this can still be sold off....even in Admin. And then we are back to the same discussions as before: Who will pick it up? What happens to the mining lease which AMI holds? Etc Etc

[deusfaber] 29/1/2015 20:20

reads terribly;

[newswseller] 29/1/2015 20:20

Separation happened in Aug, see RNs 15thAug 2014

[wooster4] 29/1/2015 19:51

how has the iron ore price fared since our suspension - has it bounced at all?

[casual47] 29/1/2015 19:50

Hope so! Here's to the £1+ club!

[kirk 6] 29/1/2015 19:45

Yes can see that still reads very well though.

[casual47] 29/1/2015 19:41

He is talking about funding for the project companies, TIO and ARP.

AMI will still need funding itself of course

[kirk 6] 29/1/2015 19:20

Why would it say thisI am hopeful that an agreement will be reached between our Shareholders in the near future and, subject to the relevant approvals being obtained, we will be able to secure the additional funding necessary to restart our operations and Phase 2 expansion.

[kirk 6] 29/1/2015 19:19

What would be the benefit of that??

[casual47] 29/1/2015 19:11

Depends....

What do they mean with this: "ensure that the Operating Entities could operate on a stand alone basis going forward."

Does it mean even if AMI goes into Admin then TIO and ARP will continue because they are "stand alone" and don't depend on AMI?

So perhaps AMI's survival is no longer needed?

[kirk 6] 29/1/2015 19:05

Advanced discussions!

[kirk 6] 29/1/2015 19:05

Reads well though ?

[casual47] 29/1/2015 19:03

"decisions now require my approval as CEO of AML (......) It applies equally at AML level and Operating Company level (TIOSL and ARPSSL), because AML is the 75% shareholder in these companies. My approval is in addition to any normal management process and approval."

vs

"Following yesterday’s email from Alan Watling, (......) Therefore, any decisions, financial or otherwise, relating to the Operating Entities will be taken by myself and my team."

[casual47] 29/1/2015 18:43

Another post from Liu re. internal email to employees, this time the email came from Gibril.

This is a very curious email as it appears to completely contradict AW's email, even going so far as to quote past board decisions as if to add weight to what he is saying. Could there be an internal power struggle going on?

AW said all financial decisions even on project level should be done by him because AML is 75% shareholder in the project companies.

Gibril says that HE will take all financial decisions "with his team" for the project companies, quoting the "Board decision 19 June 2014" and the mysterious board resolution from 9 January 2015. He is also pointing out that AW resigned from the project companies BOD and that he is now their acting CEO.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Also....why would he say "Should you have any questions, relating to the above, please feel free to contact Frank Timis" -- Why doesn't he say "ask me" -- is it to show that Frank is behin him in this?

Is there a split / power struggle between AW on one side and FT and Gibril on the other? On which side would Shandong / GoSL sit?

Or am I seeing too much in this?

The email below.....

=====
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Dear All,

As many of you are aware, the shareholders of the Operating Entities (AML, Shandong Iron & Steel Group (SISG) and the Government of Sierra Leone) are in advanced discussions to secure additional funding for the Operating Entities, which, if successful, would enable the operations to resume in the near future.

During this period and in order to ensure that we do not prejudice the outcome of those negotiations, we need to ensure that we manage the Operating Entities in accordance with the Companies’ by-laws and respect the decisions taken by the Companies’ board of directors.

Following yesterday’s email from Alan Watling, I thought it necessary to clarify the delegations of authority that apply for the Operating Entities approved by the Operating Entities’ Board

1. All business related to the project companies should be decided by the project company board and not the AML board (Board decision 19 June 2014);

2. On 9 January 2015, the Boards also resolved to ‎proceed with the separation of the Operating Entities and AML to ensure that the Operating Entities could operate on a stand alone basis going forward.

Following Alan Watling’s decision to resign from the Operating Entities’ Board on 10 December 2014, I have been appointed as acting CEO to help provide direction and support during this challenging period which I will do within the remit provided by the Boards. Therefore, any decisions, financial or otherwise, relating to the Operating Entities will be taken by myself and my team.

I am hopeful that an agreement will be reached between our Shareholders in the near future and, subject to the relevant approvals being obtained, we will be able to secure the additional funding necessary to restart our operations and Phase 2 expansion.

I hope the above clarifies the relevant delegations of authorities and I would like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your dedication, professionalism and support during this challenging period and I will keep you updated with regards to developments in due course.

Should you have any questions, relating to the above, please feel free to contact Frank Timis (Chairman of the Board) or Kweku Lisk (Secretary to the Board).

Kind regards
Gibril Bangura
Executive Chairman SL/Acting CEO

[kirk 6] 29/1/2015 17:21

Operations to start soon according to lse

[fishyneck] 29/1/2015 12:34

It shows there is a lot of weight behind protecting the future of this mine, just hope we as shareholders benefit!

fn.

[casual47] 29/1/2015 12:16

A badly written article, with a lot of obvious inaccuracies, but nevertheless, FWIW:



Interesting paragraph (grain of salt etc):

"A team from the Ministry of Mines and Mineral Resources has joined African Minerals and Shandong in negotiations to try and find a way to revive the Tonkolili mine but until an agreement is reached, Sierra Leone’s long suffering workers will continue to hold their breath."