Ti offtake?, page-20

Most certainly timeframes have not been met, and in some situations you could be forgiven for perceiving these timeframes as knowingly false. Some LT holders here would remember the 'production in 2016' powerpoint. No CEO who is worth $700+K would not recognise that that was at the time extremely unachievable. Many announcements since that time were also just as unachievable but this has been discussed in great detail through our well read regular posters.

So, we are left to read between the lines and not to believe the announcements from the company as they are not in any way aligned with the facts or the truth, unfortunate as that may be. Timeframes are concerning, I'm not too concerned about cultural heritage at this stage being a showstopper, that will all be settled this year. My concerns are with the BOOT finance, as we have had no correspondence from the company about who will fund or build this $562m bolt on to TIVAN. If a company was looking at funding this, would an MOU not be signed? As we have not seen one, it is assumed no company has yet put their hand up to fund this development, which is not a part of the overall funding arrangement. They will then have to do their own due diligence which we will have to assume the length of time to do this. They will then have to obtain their own finance….and we know how long it takes to obtain finance, I can only hope that this can somehow be obtained more swiftly than what we are forced to experience. So next steps for BOOT:

• MOU with company providing the BOOT development
  • Due diligence
  • Binding agreement
  • Funder MOU
  • Funder due diligence
  • Finance secured for BOOT

How long will this take? We could ask our CEO but due to the timeframes of previous announcements can we take this as anywhere near accurate, I think I would rather ask @scooter99 or @Rhino or @maxter, I believe these guys much more.

So, until I start seeing announcements about what the next steps are, with timeframes that are achievable open and honest I will have to vote with my feet. At this stage I am against removing our very highly paid CEO, but do wish to shoot over the bow that the shareholders are not happy with the transparency of progress. This is something which needs to be addressed, so how to do that without removing members of the management team. I know the way, request the loan provided to our CEO is paid back in full. Last time that was requested there was a threat that shares would have to be sold to pay back. That is generally what a loan is…a loan. A loan while being paid $700k+ is achievable.

So what should we do…this is what I did last vote: