My reason for voting "No".

I would love to hear some thoughts from others who read these threads but don't usually post so I have started a new thread.

Why I will be voting no.  In case you can't be bothered reading below, the economics of the Achmmach project have changed significantly in the last three months with tin price now at $20,000/tonne and I want a deal/outcome that is reflective of this.

When Kasbah went in to a trading halt (8/7/16), tin price was $17,450/tonne (Westmetall price 7/7/16) , from a 2 month low of $15,500/tonne in May so tin price was still at a precarious level.  I assume Kasbah and Asian Minerals would have to have been discussing the merger at least over the preceeding month if not longer, so can understand the concern of financing the project at those levels especially considering tin price had been as low as $13,225/tonne in January.

Kasbah released a revised DFS in March 2015, with a capex $160m.  This was a period of gloom for the resource sector and understandably difficult for Kasbah to attract funding especially with the price of tin on the decline. In their June 2015 quarterly report, they stated that if tin price increased to $18,000/tonne then they would be confident to mandate commercial lenders to complete their due diligence and provide debt terms.  Obviously the tin price is well over $18,000 and Kasbah have reduced their capex requirements.

In the September 2015 quarterly report, Kasbah mentioned the Small Start Option due to prevailing low tin prices.  In February 2016, they announced their pre-feasibility study with tin prices around $15,100/tonne so recovery was just underway (in line with the resource sector in general).  The PFS demonstrated that the board should continue to progress through to a definite feasibility study which was due to be released in the middle of the year (as it was).

Until the time of the DFS was released, there would be no point approaching finance lenders to see if there was any interest.  The DFS was positive using a tin price of $17,830/tonne but also showed with a tin price of $20,000/tonne the NPV of the project increased from USD$51m to USD$94m.  The current scheme is not reflective at all of this substantial improvement.

For the scheme document to say, that they had been trying to find finance without result for 3 years seems deceptive when the Small Start Option had significantly changed the economics and funding requirements of the Achmmach Project (remembering previously the $18,000 level was important to madate commercial lenders).  Obviously no  funders were approached after the release of the DFS as the company was already in merger discussions.

An argument posed for the merger is that Pala will assist with the funding requirements.  Without any clarity on how or what this would be, it doesn't provides any assurance or certainty nor any indication of further dilution.

I want the scheme rejected so that the Kasbah board is mandated to go back out to the funding world, with a tin price tailwind and improved resource sector sentiment to find a more suitable funding solution than  the current ridiculously dilutive arrangement with Asian Minerals.

I haven't even gone into the fact that Asian Minerals seem to bring nothing to the table - certainly not how to run a profitable mine (see their last updated financial statement), nor mining in Morocco, nor a higher market cap which is amazing considering they are positioned to get 50% of Kasbah's project having spent $0 on it.

http://www.marketwired.com/press-re...atements-and-md-a-tsx-venture-asn-2159242.htm)