Originally posted by AlCp
It's fact, not imagination, $2M can only pay for their salary and "administration" cost or drill a few holes and that's it.
You have provided no facts. None whatsoever.
So what happens to the $20m debt that axiom KB are in? Your answer "
It will be a write-off...." (Unsubstantiated)
...what do axiom have now? Your answer: "
Split K landowners, so only AxiomB......"
(Unsubstantiated)
BTW-Good teamwork with what appears to be a collaborative effort to post a loaded question and unsubstantiated answer, shame on you.
At least do us the noble act of providing a links or something, anything, at least Guzz is trying. FYI those financials have been argued for some time, and Axiom have maintained a stalwart performance in light of corrupt, unimaginable heavy challenges.
You have provided
no substantiation for ANY of your posts, so on the basis of this, yes, it is your
imagination or your own opinion (IMO). Some friendly advice would be to use the term IMO, so we can determine if you are genuine.
I'll also delve into the documents that provided little or no evidence that would suggest that Axiom has provided inaccurate or misleading information. Need I also mention your ridiculous suggestion of contacting a representing legal company that has so far been based on a vexatious and deliberate attempt to mislead. Your attempts to harass and basically be a pain are noted, and you should stop this immature behaviour, apart from the legal implications of your actions.
Axiom has suggested it will pursue a
Judicial Review, which it is entitled to do, especially based on the recent events in Kolosori. It has done so in the past and is quite experienced at taking on the corrupt, dishonest and greedy. I included this as it represents an opportunity to understand this process.
http://www.paclii.org/sb/cases/SBCA/2016/1.html
Landowners have every right to have representation, if a few choose to go it alone, the opportunity for majority landholders still stands to reason. I included this as an example from these findings as
FACTS. (Points 6 & 7)
"Kolosori http://www.paclii.org/sb/cases/SBCA/2016/1.html
Takata is an area of land of between 60 and 65 square kilometres in the south easternpart of the island of Santa Isabel. The island of San Jorge lies offshore from Takata. Priorto February 2011 all of Takata and San Jorge were customary land. (6)
Kolosori is sometimes used as an alternative name for Takata. More accurately, it is thatpart of Takata between the Takata and Havihua rivers. Its customary owners belonged tothree tribes - the Thogakama, the Vihuvunaghi and the Posomogo. There were sub-tribesand clans within the tribes, including the Thavia sub-tribe or clan of the Thogakama andthe Veronica Lona clan of the Posomogo." (7)
If representatives of Landholders are acting in the best interests of their customary tribes, they should not be out pocketing individual financial gains that should be passed on to the families of these regions. The Kolosori Government representative is an embarrassment to the region and an example of why we have a need for transparency and protecting us from unscrupulous bribes and corruption.
Whilst Guzz has linked AVQ's financials, it can only serve for one purpose. Many have come before you suggesting that Admin costs are too high, however you neglect to mention the difficulty of management in this region, and maybe it takes good experience to manage. I a sure you were offering an opinion in respect to the financial and not advice, however, a processing plant is a distraction from the current issues. If you care to look at the success of one such project, read this
https://www.mining-technology.com/projects/bhp-ravensthorpe/
GLTA Holders
