OmniChart

OXS daviduzbek 28 Nov 2015

Re: Phone number Send me an email to [email protected] with a number and i'll phoned you next week, let em know approx date and time.Once i got it, i'll delete the yahoo account

OXS Pennyfalls 28 Nov 2015

Phone number DavidUzbek - If I left a mobile number on here, would you call me?If you called you'd have to be online at the time also to check it's youCheers PF

OXS Pennyfalls 28 Nov 2015

ps David Dont go to ground again ! You always disappear when it gets interesting

OXS Pennyfalls 28 Nov 2015

Re: DavidUzbek - and the Oxus case You said ..."There were also a lot of bribes certainly paid, that is how business is done in that country and anybody saying they didn't pay a bribe is lying."...Right, you've piqued my interest now!Firstly, about Newmont, this is the reason (the precedent) I think we're heading for a lowish offer regardless of anything else -and guess who was the Claimant Arbiter for Newmont (ICSID )before it was abortede and settled - Marc LalondeI've been toying with the amount I've got in here again - only because I have reality checks now and then , away from the mass hysteria of the message boards (particulary advfn - which is mindless ramp city imo)If your assertion that bribes were paid (care to elaborate - even generally, and how you knwo this?) is correct, then that alone could blow this out of the water.If bribes were paid, it will depend on 1) To whom 2) on What level and 3) what part of the business deal development did it affect?This could lead to the throwout of the entire case ala Metal Tech (which has some unsettlng parallels) or reduction in payout (ala Yukos, which has some very nice parallels)Anyway, by now, I think people know I'm not a Ramper or Deramper (it's pointless anyway) but I probably am a tad more open to the negative possibilities of this case than many..Over to you...or anyone else with interesting views.Cheers PF

OXS daviduzbek 28 Nov 2015

Re: DavidUzbek Hi Pennyfalls, not seen the Oxus contract as i have already said, but i have seen the Newmont contract and the Oxus contract is based very much on this one. The Newmont contract is written in Russian and English, with Russian taking precedenceWhat other defense can the Uzbeks have ?There were also a lot of bribes certainly paid, that is how business is done in that country and anybody saying they didn't pay a bribe is lying.My point remains, and i think you agree, the case is not as clear cut as we may think as evidenced by the time this is all taking. Sure Calnius have invested heavily, as others have, but not everything Calnius touch is a winner, that would be all a bit too simple and easy !

QPP moonowl 28 Nov 2015

Re: SGH EddieI think if you look back I didn't say there was no shorting going on - I merely asked what evidence you had that it was the shorters that had taken the price down.Later I saw an article that said 15% of the stock was out on loan - so clearly the shorters are in big. They're usually right.Whether it's "fair" or not is not really the point, it's more whether they're likely right or not. They've usually done a lot more research than the average Joe.I think investors would do a lot better just keeping heavily shorted stocks out of their portfolios.

OXS Pennyfalls 28 Nov 2015

DavidUzbek You say: "This failure to finance IS THE Uzbek defense and it's rather strong as it is clearly in breach of contractual terms, warnings were also give to Oxus that no finance would result in removal of the asset."Could you please elaborate on how you know that this is the Uzbek's defence? Are you surmising or do you factually know this somehow?My concerns about the Oxus case remain (as I do remember contemporaneously the management issues at the time 2009/2010) and particularly the lack of financing at the pivotal 2008 juncture.If anyone looks back at company accounts, they were due to get financing with RBS at this time - but the global financial crisis hit - and hit everyone , including Oxus , got hammered.This financing fell through and left Oxus in the lurch. Oxus , in the accounts just prior to this, had been quite upbeat about progress.The Chinese financing had some inherent problems it seems (which would have meant Oxus changing certain licence agreements, which the Uzbeks didn't like - and we don't know how much of all this was down to Oxus, The Chinese or The Uzbeks)...and does that actually constitute misappropriation, or just legit business workings, however harsh.Oxus were certainly hit by various spurious, unfairand overt tax/ audit attacks at certain points but , if you read the accounts, these are usually subsequently over-ridden by Oxus who move on to make upbeat forecasts for the future. There doesn't seem to be a thread of lingering expropriation hanging over them - but obviously, this may not have bee stated for obvious business reasons.The tax/ audit resulted in loss of profit at certain stages, but not expropriation..It was after the failure of financing with RBS that things got tricky - and , I suppose we just do not know what was in the contracts, and what could be legally punitive and what couldn't.But , my point is that the lack of financing at that critical juncture in 2008 had NOTHING to do with the Uzbeks , who were apparently happy for Oxus to gain financing. This was because of the financial crisis. Oxus then suffered because no-one would finance them due to the global climate. (until the Chinese came along)After re-reading the company reports over the years, I still believe that Brigitte Stern (at least) will see this as a case of giving us back what we had. This seems to be her way.In fact, with Brigitte Stern , it almost seems pointless going through years of Arbitration because she almost seems to have made up her mind at the start , and legally works towards that pre-conceived conclusion.You would think Lalonde gores our way...So.. what a bizarre process when ultimately it does seem like a huge decision rests on the shoulders of one man, the chairman. All seems like 5 years of closed shop legal self-indulgence.Whenever I get carried away about what I expect from this (ie will it be a huge amount), I go back to the documents of the time, the BBs of the time, and the Annual reports. If a win (and no unclean hands involved) I still think this is heading for lowball sunk cost or lower end compensation.Views appreciated..and good luck all

ZOX HPC Follower 28 Nov 2015

Re: Majedie asset & Zac Mir There is no evidence yet, in the way of RNS releases, that any major ZOX shareholders have sold off their holding except Hoegh Capital Partners who still have 7 million shares to sell if they want to clear the whole lot.If the price of zinc went back to $2,200 a tonne or higher, 24p a ZOX share would be a realistic target again subject to the scale of any dilution through new equity releases. The Placing Price is all important here...

BA veksi 28 Nov 2015

440-520 Bae spurted from 440 to 520 in no time.So the trendline pressing it down is broken and it bull time. It's gonna dip sometime but now it's buy the dips.Next stop the heights 550p. But it won't be long till it's over 600p. Perhaps not a popular pi share but should be.Defensive, bullish, and riding on world events with Cameron backing it in the budget. What's not to like.I will stay away from the loser lot in the oilies.

SPL Carefully Does It 28 Nov 2015

Re: Legal & General acquired I have to disagree about L&G at ipo.Too many suits, too much money and not enough snouse.I don't rate them and a buy at ipo, knowing the risks, was no e too bright.I make many mistakes but I wouldn't have made that one.Selling now also a mistake unless they know something we don't.A pullback from here would be no surprise followed by a move higher again.L&G are exhibiting classic buy high sell low behaviour imho.

AMC jaja 28 Nov 2015

watch WRES and VAST for next week

BOIL Mayflower27 28 Nov 2015

Re: BOIL What you talking about 1to7. All offshore costings are paid for by the farminee including drilling over next 3-5years- probably equating to net $50m/ 20%!. Current cash position is more than the mkt cap- they are well funded to develop onshore XXI also. They also have $3.6m cash held in escrow offshore and a few £m in NI which is guaranteed return minimum. BOIL are the cash lender!

QPP The Millipede 28 Nov 2015

Re: On the other hand I am glad you liked the joke. I agree that S&G/QPP is not the same sort of fraud that Camkids is/was. (Which is not to imply I think S&G/QPP is any kind of fraud at all although it might be.)Beyond that I am not prepared to conclude anything any more.

ULT wulwirth 28 Nov 2015

fail... John perhaps you can inform your new partners...that. btb is......of little' or no use...[link]

WRN gordonmurr 28 Nov 2015

Re: Hopefully something! well we live in hope!