Bored with the Africa talk.Why did they go to TZ? Because the...

First 15 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
RobThomas

2,945 Posts.

1228

05/12/21

09:44

Post #: 58078937
Share

Originally posted by rainbowdaisy: ↑

Rob, yes risk increased with new mining code, Tanzanians appear to be striking a balance to reclaim competitiveness. https://resourcegovernance.org/blog/tanzania-strikes-better-balance-mining-fiscal-regime

Fact is, Tim Goyder’s LionTown resources was in Tanzania looking for lithium even after issues arose— read the Goyder interview for how Tim has been cited, lithium came after risk increased.

Question you can ask then to Tim, why did they go to Tanzania at all? Does it say anything about LTR’s directors good judgement? Or, many posters here claiming to be LTR holders?

First question has a generic answer; the reward was perceived as greater than the risk. If you or others here don’t think so, then your questioning LTR director’s good judgement to go to Africa in the first place. Which would entail meaning, many here may think LTR has a poor fiduciary duty record to it’s shareholders. That is a potential breach of FD, under corporations law. This is certainly not my view.
My view is Goyder saw reward as greater than risk until Tanzanian government failed to understand what competitiveness means. The Mugabe model ruins economies clearly.

If LTR left on good terms from Tanzania it may return if Mohanga is actually better than say Mali’s fine-grained spodumene burden, Because it represents value to do so in this market

Expand

Bored with the Africa talk.

Why did they go to TZ? Because the 2010 Mining Act promised tenure that the 2014 Amendment took away as the government went full Marxist and decided they liked dealing with the Chinese Communists directly in return for badly built roads. If that happens foreign companies sitting between DRC & CCP could get squeezed out with new "reform".

Your point about managing risk applies a lot more to AVZ now than LTR back in 2015. LTR eliminated the risk and left. AVZ is staying in DRC despite recognising confiscation as unmitigated High Risk that can only be treated by "insurance", as stated in their project DFS. But it seems likely to be litigation costs that are insured, not the entire NPV, fixed plant, & infrastructure that's potentially at risk.

LTR will not be rushing back to TZ, no one is.

Last edited by RobThomas: 05/12/21

LTR Price at posting: $1.56 Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
14 Upvote

1 Great analysis

Reply