With all due respect @franky1 (noting the high regard I hold for you and @fooca) my question remains unanswered. How exactly is the deal at risk based on your conversations with Brendan, considering the following facts:
The deal is contingent solely on Resolution 3, which is guaranteed to pass.
LLL will continue providing transitional support (funded by Ganfeng), and Ganfeng will manage the project regardless of the transaction's approval. Given this commercial structure, Ganfeng has already accounted for the possibility of team members leaving, making it irrelevant, especially since Simon and Tom are on six-month notices and cannot leave before the handover.
The source of this information is Brendan Borg, who apparently made extravagant promises leading up to FFX 249d, which resulted poorly for shareholders. Are you truly suggesting he's a reliable source, considering the track record and the fact that none of this is being communicated publicly, to base your investment decisions on?
Absent any clear evidence or facts, I'm not convinced by what you and Focca are saying. As a result, I still believe Resolutions 4 and 5 should be rejected unless you can provide a compelling reason otherwise. I genuinely want to know, as I'm only incentivized to receive the best possible outcome.
Finally, regarding M&A – Shareholders invested in Leo Lithium for the Goulamina project. With that project lost and management trust eroded, returning all remaining capital after taxes and fees should be the top priority. I don't want the board to find a new project and seek a relisting, as I don't believe that will be value-accretive for shareholders or produce the highest return in the shortest period of time. I invested in Goulamina. How can we trust management who simply refuse to respond to basic shareholder inquiries via email?
LLL Price at posting:
50.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)