AGS attempted to get the 75% back with the M&D C Matter.
It failed.
AGS then decided (imo) to sell ACE through defeat of the M&D C Matter(imo).
It failed. imo
They were (possibly) trumped (again) by H/Q/BBros with that( the SALE). imo
Obvious to me is most of AGS's problems were contained in the signing off of the JVA and then not wanting to accept it when there were changes to the Board
My opinion only!
One or all of the Board Members considered that Legal Action was the path to go down because of it. imo (rightly or wrongly)
Even though the possibility of defeat was real and the consequences of that not pretty. imo
Here we are today. No 25%, No ACE!
But the four main Directors are still there.
We pay as Shareholders.
You want to blame Q/H/BBros?
Remember AGS withdrew from two Legal Actions with a number of disputes still in play.
The Directors sold ACE for 40m(US) plus the mined Uranium.
The path they started with ACE and the legal Action would have ended a lot worse if they didn't accept the "offer" from Q. imo
Along with us (the small shareholder), a lesson learned. imo
Someone is responsible for the position of AGS today and I suggest that the cost of failure with the Legal Action was the major contributor with that plus all the associated ex's eg advisors, negotiated deals(itochu) etc .
FO We could be sitting here today with 25% (ACE). imo
If you attend the next AGM, look at the other side of the table and ask the Directors why we have no 25%?
Md
AGS Price at posting:
3.1¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
