Also, would/should there have been due diligence carried out in order to sell to a $1 private company?
Why was the management allowed to sell of a large asset without shareholder approval? Is it because it was classified as 'non core'? If so, who does these classifications?
Still no one answered my question, is their Iron ore business worth anything?
Their iron ore business has been running at a loss since production started. The really worrying thing is that production has actually declined according to their latest announcement and is now at a laughable 15-20,000 tonnes per month. And they seem to be burning through 4 million dollars a month to achieve it which is clearly not sustainable.Still no one answered my question, is their Iron ore business worth anything?
I totally agree with you both. This smells bad. It really looks like a scam. Also, according to the announcments, Thomas is still on the board. I am living in France and I would like to know if it is possible in Australia to request an investigation on this ? Rincon was the family jewels and Thomas just gave them away for a free lunch ???? This is criminal. I want my money back - every cent of it.
This was posted on another site by T_Oberlaender.
Quote-
Here's the email that I sent to Phil Thomas:
"Dear Mr. Thomas,
As a shareholder of Admiralty Resources, I am very confused and
concerned by the recent sale of the Rincon Salar asset.
This asset has been valued by your company in excess of $40 billion,
yet it was sold for $36 million to an unknown and newly formed
company. This transaction appears to have been done in place of the
proposed de-merger to spin off the lithium assets in Rincon Lithium
Ltd., which would have properly rewarded shareholders.
Please get back to me immediately with any information you can
provide
that will make sense of this transaction. In the absence of any
response, or any sensible explanation, I will be following up with
inquiries to the appropriate agencies, both security and law
enforcement."
Here's the response I received:
"Hi
I am just a non-executive director now, but let me give you some
facts:
- no-one valued the business at $40b - that's the value of the
inground
lithium resource if you took it out and sold it at current prices, the
market is so small it would have taken 1,200 years!
- the market valued the whole company on the day of the sale at A$35m,
so the fact it was sold just one part not operating at $35.2m was a
major achievement
- Rincon had a book value of $23m, and a $9m loss - so getting
someone
to buy it for $35m and then asking them to spend US$125m to develop it
and we get to have 10% of the equity should they list was a major
achievement.
- the car market has become severely depressed, oil prices have
halved,
project finance has completely dried up and asset values in latin
America have been decimated, and to top this off Argentina has grabbed
pension assets and nationalised them, making asset protection almost
impossible to insure. Not an ideal climate to launch a new chemical
business in.
- Why sell the Rincon - we had no ability to issue any more shares
(15%
rule), we owed Hawkswood $11.745m and we had a fixed and floating
charge
over the business.
In other words we had absolutely no where to go - except maybe the
obvious.
- The demerger was difficult to implement due to taxation reasons and
had absolutely nothing to do with this asset sale, which I would have
thought was obvious.
There is nothing stopping the board putting in another asset at a
later
time, to replace the cashflow which was PROJECTED to be about $100m
per
annum from RINCON once it got up and running. (this is equivalent to
selling 1.75m tonnes of iron ore per annum).
Your last comment is deplorable as a shareholder and I personally take
offence to it as I am the fourth largest shareholder, but the only one
that has not sold right through this crisis and if you don't think my
interests are not aligned with shareholders interests then you are a
fool.
You obviously don't read our press releases because the Australian
Securities Exchange sanctioned the sale (listing rule 11.4), all
directors made full disclosure, and I worked day and night for two
months trying to secure alternative options but we didn't get there.
Given we have just been through our public audit I suspect ASIC will
have no interest in your complaints as we as a board complied to the
letter, and as a board can do what we believe appropriate in the best
interests of shareholders and we do what we think is best at the time.
Phil Thomas"
End Quote
What a dumb proposal. And the proponent of this claims to have accounting experienceGood luck in finding the required 17,500 shareholders to raise the money as proposed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?