I saw that $600k outflow figure to TML but thought that couldn’t be right could it?
I had assumed it was just going to be the $50k deposit they lost.
“1. A non-refundable deposit of $50,000 (paid)
2. A payment of $350,000 upon completion of 21 day due diligence period including receipt of Bulletin
shareholder approval and completing all other conditions precedent (Preliminary Completion date)
3. A payment of $500,000 twelve (12) months after Preliminary Completion
4. A payment of $500,000 twenty four (24) months after Preliminary Completion
5. A payment of $250,000 thirty (30) months after Preliminary Completion
6. There is a further payment of $500,000 payable to TML 90 days after first production from the project” I couldn’t see anything in there that said they could be liable for a further $600k if BNR did nothing, I really hope this isn’t the case.
My personal view was that CM1’s clear problems made BNR realise they probably wouldn’t be able to fund this tenament, rather than the fault of the tenament’s potiential prospects.
This is all very messy, and it’s a damn shame because I loved the way BNR were looking to do business into the future. Self sufficient through an income stream to fund new projects was a fantastic premise.
However A big selling point of the CM1 deal was that any debt and operating costs would be CM1’s problem alone, but now CM1’s problems are straining BNR more than anyone could have thought IMO.
I don’t blame management because I believe they had the right ideas, no one would have expected this. For CM1 to have such large mine and cash problems within 6 months of listed is absolutely staggering.
