Mitchell Drilling, page-44

Grafex capital gains tax kerfuffle relates to a specific case a few years back (going from memory here) where the MOZ gov missed out on substantial capital gains tax revenue through a vendor. The "shared" responsibility by Grafex and TON to ensure CGT gets paid to MOZ gov is a hedge - either way the gov gets the revenue and it's left to the transaction participants to figure it out. Western world of course we understand that the responsibility should be on vendor but it's East Africa unfortunately. It's a case of Sheffield's connections with the MOZ government vs Ferreira's connections, and she has been very quiet since her appointment. Initial prospectus from memory mentioned it could be upwards of 5 mil but I'd need to double check IMO.
$AU5m cash/share split was also necessary to be paid to Grafex before Feb 24 to move from 90% to 100%, yet March 1st they're still negotiating final payment to move to 90%. Grafex probably wanted all cash at a guess IMO.

As for the mistake of not getting the CR underwritten, this is where it should be obvious of why Brad had to go - before the SPP of $11m at 15c, there was a failed soph/insto placement at 18c for a similar amount that fell embarrassingly short. The company could no longer raise money under Brad, justified or not. No instos present on the register and few willing to give the company more money. As much as BB is touted as a good salesman, how was it that the company supposedly had world class deposits of the scale and attributes identified yet zero institutional interest and declining soph participation. Yes the SP rose to 90c and 71c but very very few people actually made money at those levels. Whether price should have gone there in the first place, and if they were actually Brad's achievements are questions for another day.

The GMP association only lasted as long as Brad was at the helm. Pre-his sacking, GMP, as I'm sure you were aware, were underwriting any shortfall up to $4m. TON would get $4m plus any shareholder involvement for the first $7m raised by shareholders. Then for the revised SPP at 9c, any shareholder involvement went in lieu of GMP's responsibilities, and this was after Brad left. Even GMP were unwilling to fully back Brad's plans and underwrite the full $11m while he was still in office, but their lessening of underwriting responsibilities shows it was Brad that they were in for, not the company itself.

Anyway, I'd also possibly add to the list of creditors any consultancy group working of the DFS - perhaps Optiro were consultants again? The DFS had been underway since about May and highly unlikely that it was only Mitchell drilling employed and owed. Companies specialising in pit design, EPC consulting, who knows how far they got into it, but it was covering four separate projects and however many millions of dollars? Chinese participation/consultation for the Yichang factory JV? Fines for not contributing to the YX JV given it was under construction in Q4 last year?

All IMO of course, hope it helps Oz