General Discussion Topics, page-102102

Well I would be broader than that, in that the JV equity interest share would apply to anything not covered by the JV operating agreement or any other agreement between the parties in regard to the assets acquired in the JV transaction.

e.g. there could be a clause like "pre-emption rights" that allows either PLL or SYA first right of refusal to acquire the other parties interest in the JV if one of the parties wishes to sell on the same terms that a buyer has made. A common clause.

e.g. there could be a clause allowing "sole rights" in relation to use of asset (e.g. property and/or plant) and what the terms of that are.

What I am trying to say is there are many things that go into a well structured JV to protect the interests of each party and we certainly do know specifically what they are or what exists. I remain open on that issue because KP is an investment banker and he would have advised many companies over the years and he is not stupid. I can not envisage a scenario where he commits significant capital and gives up all say in how that capital is deployed in the future. This is why you see the notation "subject to JV approval". If they really cannot agree under present terms then I can only see 2 options and that is restructure the JV or dissolve the JV. Since "Money Talks", I'm backing a restructure (kind of like the how the whole Debt Ceiling discussion played out).

As for Equity interest in the JV, yeah sure, that is how the residual amount "profit" is distributed (or when assets sold, or capex is contributed). I say residual because things like NSR/GOR, which SYA sold a NSR (to Lithium Royalty Corp) on Tansim of 2% (done before JV with PLL) would first apply. They also did a GOR on Moblan but that's not relevant to the JV

Unequivocally - its complicated. DYOR or not. But I am backing myself that I've read the tea leaves correctly. There is no shortage of posters happy to "pile on" with the latest "Gospel" ...