Eshmun I agree with what you post if the Judge uses...

Eshmun

I agree with what you post if the Judge uses "imagination" "fairly clear" and "balance of probabilities" to arrive at a finding. imo

Note:The figures came from AGS's announcements to the ASX.

The Uranium produced to the 30th November was valued at approx. 16.3m.
imo Its unimaginable that the total 16.3m could have been paid to AGS upto 30th November.

There has to be a time lapse between Production and Sales (Spot or L/T deals). imo
Does that mean nothing to AGS's Claim? IF they are going for the return of the 10%?

Whats a sticking point to me in AGS's claim to terminate the Sales and Marketing agreement is, were H/Q in acting as Managers of the J/V in unison with their Sales and Marketing agency, going to sell on the spot market or did they have long term contracts in place!

It costs according to H/Q approx. $41 a lb to produce at Four Mile plus other outgoings?
Did H/Q as Managers of the J/V act in all interests by not selling on the spot market at a loss upto the direction by AGS to sell its share?.

Long Term deals are different to spot.? What long term deals did H/Q have in place as Managers and Sales and Marketing agent for the produced Uranium?, can AGS break or hinder those deals?(if any) by directing H/Q to sell their share only?

I don't think its as cut and dried as many post.

I'm no legal person though and only want an end to this shit.

Md