I note that macquarie have raised the mergin required to 100%...as stated here by HC posters.
I also note that the ARM BEE JV partner to Anglo has a new independant non exec director... from the banking community with their own territory to cover,imlo.
http://www.miningreview.com/node/19060
and comparing BEEs this article re ARM doesnt show any particular community holding/dispersment...but I could be missing it.
Can I deduce that a BEE employs to empower but doesnt necessarily share profits to empower? and a legitimate preferent rights challenge, will, if they dont derail the whole project.
Rather than seeing the Con court case as a G v B case...for the benfit of B. I try to look at it as community rights V government regulations..for the benefit of SA....which could play into a benefit for Anglo waiting on the sidelines..ie Is it different forces..delivering a wanted outcome for any number of reasons? The fact that the B case is so prominent in a University Mining Law course so quickly after the decision was handed down... makes me wonder about its importance and momentum.
Once the DMR decision is handed down wouldnt there be the 180 day PAJA process to go through if you wanted to object and then courts.? What would the B case mean if taught to Universty law students now and if the DMR upheld its origional decisions re rights...it just seems premature to use the case if it changes nothing...other than re applying...which is all its done so far....isnt it? oh reapplying prefently.... I suppose that it highlights the shortcomings of the system and need for changes...I just hope that another act etc. else isnt made invalid...
NKP Price at posting:
45.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
