Before the CoA was delivered the prevailing view on HC was that the entire issue was about AVQ vs SMM. However, the loss of the Kolosori lease was not to do with that at all, according to my reading of the CoA, but about the transfer of land from customary ownership to perpetual title and whether all relevant landowners were included. Yet the current AVQ prospectus states that all relevant landowners were included then and seem to be the same now (section 5.2), so they think the application should succeed. Which seems to fly in the face of the CoA. Hard to reconcile those two pieces of information.
Seems very hard to have a discussion on this crucial issue, as it quickly gets derailed and deflected on to something else.
AVQ Price at posting:
15.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
