This "very late" release for the end of the March Quarterlies...

This "very late" release for the end of the March Quarterlies pretty much summed up what myself and a few other posters were suggesting, that WFE have just about exhausted their cash reserves and possibly (IMO) that was more the reason why the delayed announcement.

Lets not kid ourselves here though and try and sugar coat this announcement, the decision to withdraw from the binding Heads of Agreement with the Congolese companies for 100% Exploration Licences, would have more to do with the cash situation (IMO) versus "we have found more advanced exploration and mining licences" that have become more attractive for the company to consider as viable acquisitions.
Does that mean, that the tenements WFE entered into a binding agreement were/are not viable, and they just hastily grabbed anything in the hope that they would produce the goods to be the "long term" future feed as the mining part of the strategy?
It was part of the "sell" to the shareholders re: "On 20 June 2018, at an Extraordinary General Meeting, shareholders overwhelmingly demonstrated their support to the Company's strategy to acquire advanced and highly prospective cobalt projects and operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo - what is termed the 'DRC Cobalt Strategy'"
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20180801/pdf/43x00t88hpgf0s.pdf
If there is/was more attractive tenement options why didn't WFE pursue them at the time?

WFE raised $3.1M in early/mid 2018 to fund these acquisitions as well as 50% of the Luapula Processing plant. Further to that, part of the process to acquire, WFE conducted their due diligence on the Cobalt acquisitions which were considered suitable by the Company's technical consultants to supply ROM feed to the facility. As it stands (at end of the June quarter) the company have almost depleted all the funds, (approx $60k left for this current quarter) what they previously raised as well as GST credits (over 12 months) plus funds from the conversion of options and are now hanging their hat on this "cornerstone investor" and other off-take/funding agreements, plus assuming that they will have the US$500,000 (less expenses) returned to be able to continue as an on going concern.
I am not convinced that it will be a simple refund with just a "sorry mate" we don't want your land anymore we have changed our minds, can we have our money back, without resistance as the only "clause/condition" that I can see in the binding agreements was it was dependant on being re-listed on the ASX and not a "change of mind".

A potential investor looking to invest in WFE would be a little hesitant (IMO) based on the current available information from the company's announcements, their lack of adhering to ASX listing rules and the Corporations Act (late submission of the quarterly and the missing 1/2 year audited accounts) lack of information (re" keep shareholders updated on the LSE listing) missed time lines, etc.
Where has all the funds gone ........

I would assume that there will be a few pages ripped out of the prospectus now with the withdrawal of the mining leases and no forward prediction on profits.

Crossing t's and dotting i's:
In the quarterly the company indicated that it withdrew its "application for In-Principle Advice" late May 2019 but in fact it was withdrawn 6th June 2019, pedantic maybe but WFE are a professional listed company right, so you would think that they could at a bare minimum have corresponding information across there announcements matching up.
A poster suggested that Brewer (on the bird ) indicated that the company anticipants/will be back trading in August.
It is now mid July and with negotiations still ongoing, I would think that the company will be lucky to be trading on the ASX by September and more likely October based on the time lines that (a) once the "In-Principle Advice Application" is submitted, expected time for the ASX to approve 4weeks (b) shareholder meeting to be announced following approval of the ASX (minimum 3 weeks to call a meeting) (c) shareholders approval and then the company formally applies to be re-listed - no idea what time frame that would be (d) LSE aligning with ASX re-listing the process of listing on the LSE (i) analysts reports (ii) Prospectus (approval from UKLA) (iii) Investor presentations and road shows (iv) AITL goes on the mainboard (v) application for admittance (vi) Accepted and lists.

In February the company announced that it was seeking to list on the LSE, engaged specialist lawyers but also informed the market in that same announcement that it would be kept up to date with the process of the LSE listing. In this released activities report, the company gave minimum information other than it has lodged initial documentation and received feedback that there was no serious items of concern at this time. Since that initial documentation was submitted (April) the company has withdrawn from the binding "Heads of Agreement" for exploration licences, will that now mean that they will have to re-submit the initial documentation as there is a major change to the "DRC Cobalt Strategy" with no future ROM feed for the process facility, making WFE a mine operator (relying on 3rd party supply) rather than a producer?
Will the no serious concerns be turned into serious concerns now ?
Note also that there still has been no official confirmation that the "Category B licence" has been approved for WLMC to operate the facility, this confirmation could have been included in this activities report..... .

Also obvious that there are no staff costs associated with the previous months quarterly, assume that the current quarter will be the same suggesting that the directors/staff have made the decision to defer payments/wages, but this also helps with not showing a negative balance in the cash balance for the end of the quarter. Making this also a point of concern for any potential investors, as much as it is nice to have "all these deals going on in the background" they are still at the negotiating table (including the "cornerstone investor") and WFE need to be able to show the ASX that they are in fact going to be an ongoing concern.
So as much as it it admirable that the management have taken this course of action, they still need to pay the consultants/lawyers, fund road shows, print the prospectus, etc and the "we are advance in negotiations" doesn't pay them accounts. I would also assume that to list on the LSE upfront payments would be required (might be part of the reason it never listed in 1H 2019 (IMO))

Over all though, there is some positives that have come from the late quarterlies
: the cornerstone investor, you would think that WFE wouldn't be indicating this if there was not a level of confidence.

Has Airguide negotiated a binding deal for any company with any company??

@82Punter re: "When a condition is for the buyer's benefit, only the buyer can terminate the contract in the event that the condition isn't satisfied, or the buyer can elect to waive their reliance on the condition.
The seller is then entitled to retain a deposit when the buyer has satisfied or waived all of the conditions and then fails to perform the contract."
Key point here is, the only conditions on the contract that were included in any announcements, were:
(a) satisfy listing rules 11.1.2 & 11.1.3
(b) obtain shareholder approval
(c) re-comply with Chapters 1 & 2 of the ASX listing rules
So I suspect that all three of these conditions will be ticked off; with what you are saying, my take would be that WFE are not entitled to any refund as they will satisfy all the above? WFE not the seller are failing to perform the contract ....... unless there was a time condition that wasn't indicated in any announcements.
@The Avenger WFE in the short term will not be producers, they will be Process Plant Operators (Cat B Licence pending?) it is akin to suggesting that the local 47 Eleven petrol station is a petrol producer rather than just an facility to dispense petrol,
@beisha It is fine to say that dropping the binding agreement for the tenements is fine, but what cost has it been to the shareholders in wasted time and money (meetings, all and sundry for company representatives to fly over and negotiate) the cost of due diligence, engaging technical consultants, lawyers (drawing up agreements) not to mention the share dilution that the performance shares payable to Airguide for now only getting half of what was originally funded through credit rises, etc. As the price of Cobalt comes back, the current "cheap" options of buying tenements won't be as cheap.

cheers