Namakwa Diamonds Share Discussion Threads

[jimmy2020] 08/12/2011 10:48

Hi Baffins,

Do you know the grounds on which Toro are considering appealing?

I've read through the judgment and the key point seems to be lack of evidence to support the claim, and their legal argument seems speculative to me.

I posted this on another BB earlier ...

Batla/Toro's case rested on two arguments

1. Batla/Toro and Namakwa reached a binding agreement though informal meeting in a coffee shop for a 50/50 venture, where no notes or any written record was made. On Batla/Toro's representative under cross examination, the judge said "I rather gathered the impression that he was caught up in events that led him to a point where like a jaded 'widget' salesman, he had to sell a product he did not quite believe in."

2. The MoU, which reads, "between 62,5% (sixty two point five percent) and 67.5% (sixty seven point five percent) of the shares will be issued to Namakwa and Toro Diamond", implies that this 62.5% or 67.5% will be split equally. The judge notes that there was no evidence to support this and that it is clear from MoU that parties had not yet agreed percentages. He also says the argument lacks commercial reality, given that Namakwa will be providing vast majority of the capital funding.

[peterj5] 08/12/2011 07:53

baffoon has been reported

i have a email blah blah blah, well show it and save face if you have one, we all now know what you are, you have been sussed

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 21:50

Baffins

Many thanks for the predictable reply (lol). I will now refrain from communicating with you whilst we await the RNS from the company regarding the appeal. And for your sake I hope it comes, because if you are wrong, then you may have to fall a long way from the perch you have established with your comments, if indeed you are brave enough to face the music. You said TORO informed you that they are delivering the paperwork this week, well we should see a RNS in the two days that are left of this week.

By the way, perhaps you would like to share the emails you have recieved from TORO with this forum, there would be no reason you wouldn't ?? Or would there.

Best regards

John

[peterj5] 07/12/2011 21:26

onceabroker, don't waste your time arguing with this poster, he will be removed soon, what a cheek

[peterj5] 07/12/2011 21:24

you seem to know a lot of the toro staff. Been on the phone to them regular have we? Considering toro are a company front only, why would you talk to them so much? you are a toro mole planted here to rile us up and put panick in the camp. and you have just been found out today, I'm reporting you to advfn, I'm sure this is illegal.

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 21:11

Baffins

You unfortunately have a bad mannered approach to how you speak to people, this would I imagine be the same attitude you would display away from a forum, a lot can be taken from a writers display. I am very grateful for your correction of my earlier resource post, although I am ungrateful in you execution. But when it comes to relying on information obtained from this company's existing arch enemy who may have a ulterior motives given the fact that their court case has just been shown to include blatant lies and deceits, I would rather rely on a RNS from Nad to confirm if there is a appeal or not.

The only one here who seems misinformed, misleading and downright bad mannered is you, and you would do me a great service by crawling back under the rock you came from. I await you reply with abated breath, you seem to be someone who needs the last word.

Good riddance

John

[peterj5] 07/12/2011 20:42

Baffin, do you work for toro? Seems strange you have just joined here recently and have a lot of Toro details, you seem to know what's happening with the appeal before our company and Toro have announced anything to the market!!!

[jr50] 07/12/2011 20:25

Baffoon

Ever thought of getting a job with public relations, you have a great way of expressing yourself.

Another idiot who thinks he knows it all, but knows zero

[baffins] 07/12/2011 19:50

Not confrontational in the slightest. It is a very simple matter of facts over misleading nonsense but it appears you have taken pity on yourself after being made aware of the facts from the document which you were quoting nonsense from. After-all it was only a small matter, a "minor point", of an extra 11.9 million carats approx in addition to the K6 carats which total approx 660k carats that you claimed was the "dominant percentage" without the slightest indication of that you meant from dated METALLURIGAL TESTWORK detailing minuscule amounts which going forward bears no material relevance of future operations. Regardless, it is good that we have that small matter cleared up now and it is, in fact, the total opposite to which you stated and the K-other ore-body is massively greater than the K6 ore-body.

As for Toro and the "insider knowledge" which you are implying that I have. I previously confirmed that I have been informed that Toro do intend to appeal and also suggested that YOU contact the company just like others may have done to find this out instead of always relaying on your own opinion. Just to point you in the right direction I suggest you contact either/or all of the following Mike Reynolds, Arnaud Vercruysse, Johannes van der Walt and even the very helpful Melissa will be more the willing to help you. For your information, it is not my opinion, I do have clear evidence and it is not insider knowledge. Again, ask the company, it may help you instead of letting your mind create wild accusations and form incorrect opinions.

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 18:23

baffins

you come across as very confrontational, i don't know if its just the way you write your posts, or it is simply the way you are.

i have put my perception and views on here, which is the precise reason we have these forums in the first place. if you have the urge to be critical on minor points and omission/clarity, may i suggest quite respectively that you respond in a manner that you would like corrective advise given to you, otherwise it would be simply better if you did not respond at all.

firstly let me make a few issues clear here.

quote

Sorry but you did state "it is good to note that K6 is the dominant percentage"

end

that statement was within a post dedicated to the publication that was included, and it was in reference to that publications contents. maybe i should have concluded the sentence with the words 'in the resource recovered in testing to date'. but as its only you who took the other inference to the company's total resource instead, i may not be shot at dawn!

quote

Toro do not have to anything immediately regardless of your opinion

end

i have purveyed my opinion only, and your jumping on those words as a 'fact' is wrong and judgemental. it could be said that your referral of 'insider knowledge that TORO are going to appeal, without clear evidence is also your opinion until such time as a communication from NAD has been received to confirm it.

best regards

John

[baffins] 07/12/2011 17:43

"i am referring to the resource recovered to date"

Sorry but you did state "it is good to note that K6 is the dominant percentage" and at no point did you ever mention that you were only referring to the very minuscule "resource recovered to date". Your logic is very simplistic and the "resource recovered to date" highlighted on page 6, which you mention, is based on previous METALLURIGAL TESTWORK, conducted during 2010, consisting of a tiny fraction of the resource of approx 14,300 carats (0.11%) out of a total resource in excess of 12,000,000 carats.

K-other (11.9m carats) is by far the dominant percentage and K6 (660k carats) is very minimal in comparison. K-other contributes approx 94.5% to the total resource whereas K6 only contributes the remaining 5.5% (excluding the minimal K12 facies). I suggest you study the document you provided as it has all the facts contained and it includes the latest SAMREC COMPLIANT RESOURCE STATEMENT of August 2011 which clearly details K-other, K12 and K6 splits in both the indicated and inferred categories.

As for Toro, the time-frames regarding appeals are for a main purpose. Toro do not have to do anything immediately regardless of your opinion. I have heard they will appeal, giving notice of this within the next few days, and I am certain they will utilise all the time they have been given very wisely in a last ditch attempt to obtain a more favourable outcome than the previous decision.

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 16:29

baffins

i agree that there would be no issue for me either if TORO appealed the decision, it is just a matter of questioning on what legal ground they would be able to set a appeal process by, looking through the judges comments, i find it hard to establish where TORO would be able to challenge a particular decision or show that the judge has made a error. to enable a appeal, it needs to have grounds for overturning the decision.

even if TORO have declared unofficially they are considering a appeal, i would have thought that they would have instigated it immediately if they felt they had been wronged by the decision or judgement. time will tell i suppose, but either way, its no longer a worry IMHO

best regards

John

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 16:09

page 6

shows

k other 38,625 tonnes @ 1667.22 ct

k6 116,401 tonnes @ 12,711.40 ct

i am referring to the resource recovered to date.

best regards

John

[mihi cura futuri] 07/12/2011 13:40

nice buying at last

[baffins] 07/12/2011 12:20

"it is good to note that K6 is the dominant percentage"

It is not, K-other has the dominant percentage by a very long way. This fact is clearly shown in all the resource statement tables and also cross section of the entire pipe. As for Toro, I suggest you contact the company and they will inform you of there intentions. As previously mentioned, as a current investor here none of the above concern me.

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 12:06

i am willing to give you my generalised profit projections, as we do not have definitive figures, and quality of stones other then the ramp up period, which are liable to change the figures to a more positive output IMHO.

as you know the company declared a 12,405ct @ 136,376 tonnes at the end of year report for Kao, this would then bring it in line with venmyns estimates done in 2010. a generalised estimates of calculating revenue/costs


•Indicative Revenue/Ton: US$26–28/t
•Indicative Cost/Ton: US$15 –17/t (scope for reduction)

with a estimate 3.6mt estimate for the year (which hopefully would be achieved), we have figures for KAO at year end of (and im taking the lowest end figures of each set)

$93m revenue
$54m costs

profit before group expenditure etc, of $39m.

As well as resource estimates of a company, the most important part is the quality of the management, especially onsite. and we are fortunate enough to the have the best in the market IMHO, in Keith Whitelock.

if you align that with the South Africa operation going from the 9.17m loss last year, to a more streamlined cash generating business within the reduction in workforce and operations from a 24/7 basis, and a revised 38.48kct to 20kct recovered at a lower cost base. we will have a very profitable business.

the loan facility from Jarvine, will be approx 35m used, before the revenue from Kao kicks in. but with a banked profit of over 30m by end of 2012, i cannot see a issue with a large payment to reduce our debt to 50% in 2012 and nil debt in 2013.

these are rough figures, and are fully dependant on the production targets being met, recoverable quality and size, and worldwide demand and economics.

i have to agree with you, that a resolution to the Euro fiasco, would bring a influx of billions to the equity markets, that are currently on the sidelines, this would boost the share price as much as a reported and positive IMS in January 2012

best regards

John

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 12:05

this is a good presentation of current details of the resource and quality of diamonds from Kao mine, it is good to note that K6 is the dominant percentage.



best regards

John

[onceabroker] 07/12/2011 12:05

i cannot see how TORO will launch a appeal, looking at the verdict and how the judge came to his conclusion. NAD have this in the bag, and by launching a appeal, TORO are in danger of further costs IMHO



best regards

John

[baffins] 06/12/2011 15:12

Toro are going to appeal, they will be filing a notice of appeal within the next few days.

I am an investor here and I never expected Toro not to appeal. No concern in my opinion but news of the Toro appeal will be with us very soon.

[joeblogg2] 06/12/2011 15:00

Some person on iii claiming that Torro will appeal and I hope if they doo the court fine them even more for wasting time!!!