Ann: Proposed Acquisition of Copper-Gold Explorer and Developer, page-13

Yes, I don't understand just HOW this proposal can be implemented.
They have a timetable, so clearly they are confident that their process and timeline can be attained.
Original shareholders have had their shareholding totally diluted.
All value of their shareholding has disappeared.
the only theoretical value is in the ASX Listing and structure, and any tax losses.
LWP is a Listed Shell with very significant baggage.

So the name change is just that - a change in name, but all liabilities and assets remain with the corporate entity.
So i don't understand HOW LWP (or Qmines Ltd) can provide and do a Placement, provide a new Prospectus, issue shares to the Vendors of Taprock, before any of the matters under Legal investigation are resolved??

Just HOW can LWP go to existing shareholders and seek approval, when existing shareholders have no freekin' idea as to what is going on with the legacy issues???

In ANY deal proposed to existing shareholders, the Board must provide an IER. The deal with Taprock proposes issuing LWP shares (and I think clear Control) to the Vendors of Taprock. So any IER must address and detail the value of existing LWP?

So just HOW can the value of LWP be determined until such time as the company and more importantly its shareholders, are made privy to the results of the two Legal reports, and the likely action to be taken by the ASX and ASIC, and perhaps the Company itself.

Who knows, LWP itself, may very well have the ability to chase funds misappropriated by previous board. Who knows, the proceeds may well be of such quantum that LWP does not need to raise the very material sums proposed in this deal? Or, we may not need to cede control to the Vendors in such a manner. ie instead of issuing 50m new shares, hey, maybe we might only need to issue say 20m (because we believe that LWP can recover funds from litigation??) But how would we know ???!!!

The company has about $200k in cash. So ANY money to be recovered from the sleazy practices conducted by previous incumbents, is going to be material to company, and its s/h.

The losses suffered by LWP and individual s/h is significant - must be in $millions.
The ability for shareholders, and LWP itself, to try and recover funds misappropriated by previous directors and mgt is material and significant.
Given the blatant actions of the previous mob, the prospects of recovery from Directors Insurance may well be material.
LWP itself, may well have the ability to sue the previous Board. That prospect just might be valuable?

Equally, just what baggage might Taprock be accepting IF they acquire a controlling interest in LWP.
HOW and Why would they accept shares in LWP with the baggage of the ASIC investigation?
Just HOW do they get comfortable?? Why would they hand over the tenements etc, and accept shares in LWP, with all that baggage in tow??
Have they been privy to the results of the Reports??
IF so, then they have info which we shareholders do not?
That would be Inside Info, wouldn't it?
If they have it, we must have it.
Who knows?

This deal will need the approval of Lanstead with their 20%.
Given that the Board has proposed this deal, one would assume Lanstead would vote in favour?
But have a read of Konig's Affidavit.
He claims that the decision of the LWP board to invest in Graphenera and deal with VV, was partly based on the "nod" of Lanstead.
Of course, that Graphenera deal caused LWP to lose $m, at least $1m, and led to the downfall of LWP, and the losses of all our investment.
So the question s/h need answered, is does Lanstead enter this deal with "clean hands"???
I don't think that Affidavit was ever tested in court?
It's probably bull...t, to save his butt. How would we know?
I have no real idea, because now I don't believe anything SK has said.
The answer to that question would surely be within the legal reports??
We need the results of the reports for many reasons, only one of which is to determine IF Lanstead can vote?? And that is absolutely crucial to the outcome of this proposal.
So will Lanstead be able to vote their shares when LWP s/h are asked to approve this deal?

Just HOW can we vote on this proposal, when we do not have the relevant, and very material facts, relating to the outcome of those very important legal reviews???

Just a very poor focus on the rights and needs of existing shareholders.
We are kept in the dark, and fed s...t, just like the mushrooms we are.
We are only being given a say in this deal, because LWP is required to by law.