Aim Res. Share Discussion Threads

[dcroston] 19/3/2008 19:01

Ged,

That pretty much backs up my 1854 post. This may explain why MF was moved From MD to Non-Exec Director. I for one hope that NS are successfull in their pursuit of any wrong doing so that any untrustworthy employee is made an example of and in the meantime, hopefully we can get on with building a mine.

Its pretty clear that zero ore has been mined yet so what are they doing executing performance rights.

DC

[cezary] 19/3/2008 18:58

sounds like sour grapes to me by NS.
I have no sympathy for hedge-funds!!!
Nor should the court.

[ged5] 19/3/2008 18:10

"A muddy one for His Honour
When is a hole in the ground a mine, and when is it just a hole?
That is the question the Federal Court judge Arthur Emmett will soon be deciding after a billion-dollar US hedge fund took the zinc miner AIM Resources to court arguing that its Perkoa zinc mine in Burkina Faso, west Africa, is really just an incomplete hole.

It's in AIM's interests to argue the hole is complete, because it allows it to trigger the issue of 8 million performance rights to directors. But a Connecticut hedge fund, North Sound Legacy, International, which owns nearly 10 per cent of the company, says the performance rights should not have been exercised by the directors both because they had already expired and because the mine was not complete and no ore had been produced...."

[bo doodak] 16/3/2008 23:24

Instability could be starting to increase

[dcroston] 16/3/2008 12:46

Got this info from an NS contact yesterday.

The link is to an attachment which lists the questions that NS wanted answering at last years AGM and in NS's view still hadnt been fully answered satisfactorily after the AGM and this is why they have been pursuing this through the courts.

I suggest that these questions have now been answered with the previous update announcement except perhaps the one in relation to performance related shares.

Hope this brings some clarity for everyone regarding the impending court case. Here's the link. Please note you may have to register to www.postitfree.org to view.



DC

[tazzie2] 14/3/2008 22:46

I get the impression that inorder to raise more money, good news will come out to suit this requirement, perhaps after joining the Canadian exchange if this is still on the cards.. So we will have to continue to wait this out. Reading between the lines there seems to be a positive outlook to the extra exploration at Perkoa.
For the last three months , the share price has been stuck in a rut at the 5p level and I hope, bottomed out. Perhaps a good time to top up as I have today!

[hoggar] 14/3/2008 14:31

I suppose it can be said, the company is attempting to be more transparent with this announcement, but can they transpose words and promises into actual deeds this time?.
With Perkoa, they have one major advantage. By the time they finally get the concentrate to market the zinc price could again double by late next year. This is because there are at least eight major mines closing next year and zinc will again be in short supply.
If you are satisfied with the new management structure, this could be worth accumulating at this price.

[tazzie2] 14/3/2008 00:06

Thanks DC

Report has been posted on website as of 10 am Oz time. Not much new info although a schedule/timetable has been promised.

[dcroston] 13/3/2008 09:17

Tazzie2,

I emailed the company as follows.

'What are the chances of the company producing regular updates on all projects so that at least shareholders have a clearer picture of how things stand. I look on quite a few bulletin boards and that topic quite often comes up and I get the feeling many shareholders are frustrated with regards to the lack of updates. Do you not think this would be beneficial all around if a monthly update was provided?'

and received the following reply.

'An information release is being prepared as we speak and is scheduled for
release before the end of the week.'

DC

[tazzie2] 12/3/2008 23:36

DC

What makes you so sure that we will get news this or next week?

T

[dcroston] 12/3/2008 23:04

Re: Performance rights.

Having read again the statement from the 2007 Annual Report regarding employee rights to performance shares i am just a little confused. The statement reads as follows: -


'The performance rights were granted under the terms of the Company's performance Rights Plan approved by shareholders on 18 November 2005. The performance rights were granted for no consideration and are exercisable on or before 30 June 2007, if on 29 June 2007 the market value of the underlying shares has increased by at least 15% to their market value at the date the performance rights were granted and when first ore has been mined from the Perkoa Zinc project.'

I am interested in the part which states that 'exercisable when first ore has been mined from Perkoa Zinc Project'. Now to my knowledge the company has already exercised at least 14Million performance right shares and to my knowledge we have mined zero ore from Perkoa.

I assume that the performance shares that have already been exercised must have also been issued under the same rules indicated in the statement above and If so, why has anyone in the company been able to exercise any performance shares yet?

I smell a rat.

DC

[dcroston] 12/3/2008 13:47

For those shareholders eager to hear news on project progress, We will get an update this week. Lets hope its some good news on progress at Perkoa at the very least, anything else would be a bonus.

DC

[cezary] 12/3/2008 08:50

In the upcoming court case there is always 1 loser.
And that loser will be ???.
IMO, it has to be NS

[j4kes] 11/3/2008 22:33

yes you are totally right. I got a little mixed up, will delete, thanx for the info

[dcroston] 11/3/2008 18:55

J4kes,

I don't mean to be argumentative but your post isnt correct. If you check these links below you will see that the performance related shares issued to VB and BC where only approved in the AGM on 8th August 2007 when the share price was at 12.75p, its obviously been rapidly falling since then and infact hasnt been above 12.75p since that time, the highest it reached was 12.25. I dont think we can read to much in to the latest announcement at the moment except that Vic and Bill's performance shares just didnt reach their target.

1. This link below shows the resolution that was passed on 8th August 2007.

From:

Resolution 3 – Grant of Performance Rights to Victor Bradley and William Cash To consider and, if thought fit, to pass the following resolution as an ordinary resolution:

"That, for the purpose of ASX Listing Rule 10.14 and for all other purposes, the Company be authorised to
grant:
(a) 4,000,000 Performance Rights to Victor Bradley;
(b) 2,000,000 Performance Rights to William Cash;
under the Performance Rights Plan and on the terms set out in the Explanatory Memorandum."

2. This link confirms the passing of resolution 3 on 8th August 2007.



DC

[dcroston] 11/3/2008 14:44

Having investigated this performance rights issue a bit more I noticed that their is a specific ruling on these types of rights that prevents the holder from executing them if the share price hasnt increased at least 15% since the time of issue. This would probably point to the fact that they expired naturally rather than anything sinister. Still I'm not complaining.

From the 2007 Annual Report.

'The performance rights were granted under the terms of the Company's performance Rights Plan approved by shareholders on 18 November 2005. The performance rights were granted for no consideration and are exercisable on or before 30 June 2007, if on 29 June 2007 the market value of the underlying shares has increased by at least 15% to their market value at the date the performance
rights were granted and when first ore has been mined from the Perkoa Zinc project.'

DC

[dcroston] 11/3/2008 13:39

I believe it came under Item 2 of the AGM last year (See Below). The shareholders voted against the proposed remuneration package in the AGM but the company chose to ignore it for obvious reason.

Item 2 – Adoption of Remuneration Report
In accordance with Section 250R(2) of the Corporations Act 2001, the Company must put to the vote a resolution that
the Remuneration Report contained within the Company's Annual Report be adopted.
However, in accordance with section 250R(3) of the Act, shareholders should note that this resolution is an "advisory
only" resolution and does not bind the Directors or the Company. The Directors will however take the outcome of the
vote into consideration when reviewing remuneration practices and policies.
Following consideration of the Remuneration Report, the Chairman will give shareholders a reasonable opportunity
to ask questions about or make comments on the Remuneration Report at the Annual General Meeting.

[tazzie2] 11/3/2008 13:02

Who decides if individual directors get performance rights. Do the shareholders have a say in this or just the board?

[hoggar] 11/3/2008 11:47

The whole affair of performance rights prior to production was a scandalous and contemptuous episode. This subject has without question had a major negative influence with shareholders.
I am pleased to see the back of that corporate greed nonesense.

[dcroston] 11/3/2008 10:24

Thats one of the theories Hoggar. The other one's I've heard are that management didnt hit specific performance targets to allow them to execute their rights to performance shares and the other one was that even this management with the company in its current state of affairs wouldnt have the gall to execute their right to performance related shares. I'd say the first two theories are fairly believeable. Anyway, looking on the bright side at least it means less dilution for us already hard hit frustrated shareholders.

[hoggar] 11/3/2008 09:53

I see the 6mil performance rights issued to directors has been relinquished. I would think NS had a hand in this decision.

[arja] 05/3/2008 20:31

heading for 16 cents minimum ! but nightmare to trade in UK with the MMs !!

[bonzophil] 28/2/2008 16:25

No nasty shocks in the results - good, but would like to have seen some deadlines set for operational targets.

[dcroston] 27/2/2008 21:00

Bonzo,

It was the increase in Oz of 18% ish that brought about the rise in the UK. The rise was nothing to do with the increase of the price of zinc as that shift upward in the zinc price only started this morning about 9am UK time which probably means that Oz havent yet factored in any increase in the zinc price. I have no idea what has brought about the increase in SP, only time will tell whether it is pure speculation or if there is something about to be announced which we dont know about yet.

Interesting times ahead maybe.

DC