public relations mess, page-52

I tend to wonder if AGS isn't the one playing tough here - Heathgate is pretty keen to get Four Mile in production, if the question raised to the Minister for Mineral Resources Development on the issue of the four mile native title agreement is anything to go by - see link copied below.

Public information suggests that the native title mining agreement is signed, but the issue is resolution of an outstanding requirement between the parties to the joint venture - ie AGS and Heathgate (or their affiliate company Quasar).

AGS needs to negotiate a fair deal at four mile and have already disputed some of the costs of the joint venture imposed on them. It could be that AGS now has the upper hand and are in a position to ensure that agreements and rights are fair and equitable. The blunt asx releases are more likely directed at Heathgate than at AGS shareholders, and the recent retaliation by Heathgate, suggesting they have an alternative to four mile, tends to support this view.

I am personally very happy to hold AGS and believe it will be very profitable. We haven't seen the AGS study yet and Heathgate haven't been forthcoming with theirs either, but if Heathgate could make money at Beverly back in the late 1990's when uranium was around $10/lb at a similar ISR operation to four mile - except for the added benefit of economy of scale at four mile (eg the same number of employees at Beverly (around 100) will be employed at Four Mile, from numbers given in the media, yet output will be a factor of three or more greater), we could be in for some significant cost reduction at four mile, to be seen once AGS has released their report. And on this, I can't help but think they are holding back on releasing it - after all, three months ago they were only waiting on some results on the effect of high grade deposits on ISR extraction.

This brinkmanship between the parties should all be behind us soon, driven by Heathgate's need to get into production, resulting in AGS being in a well negotiated position as profits start to be generated.


http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,26109183-5003680,00.html

State Minister for Mineral Resources Development Paul Holloway said he was disappointed by the delay.

He said the Government had supported the project since its inception and PIRSA had attempted to facilitate the approval process.

"Resolution of the outstanding requirement remains an issue between the parties to the joint venture,'' Mr Holloway said.

_______________________________________________________
http://markparnell.org.au/speech.php?speech=604

On the 25th of March, 2009, Mark asked the Minister for Mineral Resources Development a question and a supplementary question about the Beverley Four Mile native title agreement.


The Hon. M. PARNELL: Currently, members of ATLA (Adnyamathanha Traditional Lands Association), along with native title named applicants, are in negotiation with Heathgate Resources over the Beverley Four Mile native title mining agreement, which would supersede the existing agreement between Heathgate and the Adnyamathanha.

At a recent meeting of ATLA on 16 January this year, a proposal was put to the people in attendance by Heathgate Resources. There were two key aspects: first, to consider how the Adnyamathanha People's Investment Trust might be managed into the future and, secondly, to amend the existing Beverley native title mining agreement.

The Adnyamathanha People's Investment Trust was set up to manage the receipt and distribution of royalties from the Beverley mine to the Adnyamathanha community. The trust is managed and controlled by Heathgate Resources and the ANZ Bank.

Following the 16 January ATLA meeting, I understand a letter, which was sent to ATLA members by lawyers acting on behalf of Heathgate, indicated that, if the Beverley native title mining agreement was not signed off in the next month, Heathgate Resources would be pursuing costs for the ongoing management of invested moneys.