To answer your question some of the biggest conflicts of interest at present reside in JB and Buckler having operating at Altura source: https://theorg.com/org/altura-mining-ltd/teams/board-of-directors. So they have a long standing relationship with one another in a then failed company and now at SYA. As I said, without going into it all in detail company starts to lose creditability especially from an investment point of view when independence and conflicts of interest start to appear. This is because a company loses objectivity, focus, professionalism and meeting targets, when things get swept under the rug in the interest of being mates ie also degradation in performance.... this site lists directors roles: https://www.aicd.com.au/board-of-directors/roles/independent.html
The other large one, which is hypothetical from my P.O.V but still warrants discussion is our relationship with PLL. ie They are formally a shareholder, but now simply a JV partner and offtake purchaser from the JV. But what is our relationship with them? Because at first I recall them saying at the AGM that SYA had full intention to meet the needs of the agree offtake with our partner. ie so appears to be on sound and understanding terms. Yet then recall our same management team saying "We had no idea, PLL was going to sell its SYA stock down". So, how good of a buddy buddy are they when the above has occurred? First it appears like good team players, then it appears to be like a stab in the back. IE PLL looking out for its own interest.
We are still producing now to satisfy PLL needs when again from profitability standpoint it seems pretty lean or even towards loss territory. So how exactly does that work for the shareholders of this company? Seems to be more of operating for the sake of satisfying a third party does it not?
The operational review also indicated that PLL a JV partner had a say in the outcome:
Operating ScenariosThe review considered several Continued Operations scenarios at NAL, including a continuationof the production ramp-up to the full plan as well as various moderated production outputscenarios.The JV partners also evaluated various Care and Maintenance scenarios covering options toeither slow down or cease mining, process existing stocks only, and suspend operations for upto 12 months.Key considerations assessed as part of the scenario analysis included sunk costs, the progressof initiatives to deliver production upgrades and unit cost savings, the substantial costsassociated with the recommencement of operations following any care and maintenanceprogram and potential impacts on the workforce, community and other local stakeholders.Review OutcomeFollowing assessment of these alternatives, the JV partners agreed to continue operations inline with the full ramp-up plan at NAL, with regular business reviews of operating costs andmarket conditions.The review found that there has not been sufficient time for multiple capital improvementprojects (Crushed Ore Dome, Crushed Ore Refeed System) to deliver intended productionincreases and unit operating cost improvements.The JV partners are committed to continuing to assess capital improvement projects toenhance ramp-up of production and have determined that there is clear line of sight to achievingsteady state spodumene concentrate production at design levels during 2024. NAL also aimsto reduce unit operating costs of spodumene concentrate by the end of 2024.
But again, the problem with that is, its a conflict of interest in them even partaking in whether or not we continue to operate. Shouldnt then be up to SYA as the 100% operator. An not a company to which also happens to be the purchaser of the spodumene we produce.
The only similar thing I can compare it to is, if you had a say in your own wage increase at a place that wasnt sure whether it was going to give you one.
So you have the above in the works, on top of as I have already said. What ability does our board have at securing offtakes? Well the history said we had some pending, then it never happened. An now with the collapse of spod prices, we probably have buckleys from this board unless they sign off on giving our stuff away for peanuts and patting themselves on the back..... So it reaches the conclusion, is part of the consideration to keep operating, to lick the lips of KP at PLL and ensure we are in good standing if he is the man to get SYA a sound offtake on the residual product if and when the market turns???
Its not conclusive this is the case at all, but there is more than enough information here to show you that it has every possibility.
An again, that conflict interest between SYA and PLL and our ability to act in our best interest, and the one between our two longstanding board members erodes investors in this company.
SYA Price at posting:
3.7¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)