Trading Bougainville Copper (ADRs) 867948

haben, sonst würden wir wohl bei 20 Cent stehen ....

die angekündigten "volumenstarken" eintragungen der letzten wochen haben leider nichts bewirkt .....

# 15596: 10 jahres-wertpapierleihe respektive 10-jahres-veroptionierung glaube ich beim besten willen nicht....  

http://www.tradingroom.com.au/apps/qt/...amp;sy=tpl&code=BOC#tabs

Today: 16-Apr-2013

            Trades Volume     Value
                    §
Today 21 130,000     67,927
This Week 27 205,965   111,227
This Month 98 691,031   395,588
This Year 1,266 7,693,174  4,647,823
Rol. Year 3,600  17,055,766 11,732,481

Mit nur marginalen Aenderungen in der Top 100er Liste ist es offensichtlich dass die Verschiebungen überwiegend nur bei den Nominees stattgefunden haben.

Bis zur Beendigung des ADR Programms betrug die Handelsquote D:AU ca. 4:1

Folglich befanden sich nur rd. 20% der Freefloat Böcke (20 Mill. St) in AU.
Gleichzeitig sind in der Top 100 er Liste (ohne RIO,PNG,Nominees) ca. 18 Mill St. eingetragen.(die meisten davon schon seit Jahren)

Dann gibt es noch eine (offizielle) Shortposition von 3 824 033,40 AUD (ca. 7 Mill St.)

http://www.asx.com.au/data/securities_lending_outstanding_loaned.xls

Der Handel in AU ist, anders als in USA nur deshalb noch möglich weil man (Nominee) in AU den Kurs drücken u. im Anschluss in D. billig Stücke abgreifen kann.

bei den geringen Börsen-Umsätzen hat ein solcher Player schon die komplette BCL-Aktienkurs-Kontrolle, wenn er nur einen von vielen Börsenplätzen konsequent kontrolliert.

Und auch wenn in den Nullerjahren erst München danach Frankfurt scheinbar die führenden Börsenplätze für BCL-Aktien waren, in den letzten Jahren war die ASX die Leitbörse für den BCL-Aktienkurs.

Interessant ist, das dieser Deal trotz bester Panguna-News-Entwicklung funktioniert und kein Big-Player gegen das Spiel vom Short-Player-A wettet. Das war ja für mich auch vor wenigen Monaten der Grund hier im Forum die provozierende Frage in den Raum zu stellen, wer mir 10.000.000€ leiht, damit ich damit weit über 10.000.000 BCL-Aktien zu einem garantierten Aktienkurs unter 1-AU-Dollar kaufen kann. Weil, selbst im worstcase wird eine BCL-Aktie in 5 Jahren nicht unter 3€ zu kriegen sein. Und im bestcase werden es mind. 15€ sein.  

so denken neben mir auch noch andere.
aber warum kauft kein "dicker" mal eben für 10 mio € boc?
selbst wenn nur defensiv von tag zu tag was so brief ist.
"dicke" gibts doch genug..........  

...das verstehe ich auch nicht .... was da kohle von institutionellen investoren mit geschlossenen immof.onds, dem seltenen-erdenhype oder solaraktien durch den wind gepustet wurde .... einige fonds können natürlich nicht bzw. dürfen nicht in "Penny-stocks", aber es gibt genügend die a.) gerne mal `ne wette eingehen und b.) randvoll mit schotter sind ....  

Danke für die Bemerkung mit dem Aktionärsregister.  Habs mir mal angeschaut das Verfahren bei Bougainville.

Darf ich Dich mal bitten ein paar Worte über den Nutzen einer solchen Reg. zu verlieren ? Kursrelevanz ? usw


Exakt auf diesem Gebiet habe ich noch NULL Ahnung !

Danke im voraus!  

...auf Sicht von 5 Jahren. Na denn...  

ASX-Handel - Könnte es auch mit den Regulierungen -Stichwort "BOC-Rule" und den damit verbundenen "kontrollierten" Aktionen zu tun haben?  

das kann ich nicht nachvollziehen, dann hätte es auch Kurs jenseits der 1 AUD nicht geben dürfen/können...
Die Theorie "wir helfen uns" gefällt mir ganz gut...macht auch Sinn...anders ist das ganze ja nicht mehr zu verstehen...
meine 23 k konnte ich als Gesamtpaket an der ASX nicht sehen ...vielleicht tauchen sie noch an der ASX noch auf...  

Gibt es zu der BOC Rule auch etwas offizielles zum nachlesen?
Wenn ja, bitte einstellen.  

"Up until the early 1990’s the regulatory regime for short selling had worked effectively,
particular when you examine the 1987’s crash and instances when the 10% limitation rule
(ASX Business Rule 19.5) had previously been applied in stocks like Bougainville Copper
(“BOC”)."

http://www.asxgroup.com.au/media/PDFs/...ublic_consultation_paper.pdf

Wenn ich die BOC-Rule richtig verstanden habe, ist diese nur in AU geltend und sie schreibt vor, das max. 10% aller Aktien einer Gesellschaft short verkauft werden dürfen.

Aber wie kann die AU-Börsenaufsicht die Einhaltung einer solchen Rule überprüfen?

Dazu kommt, BCL-Aktien werden in mehreren Ländern gehandelt. Und es gibt mehrere Banken außerhalb von AU, bei denen man BCL-Aktien short verkaufen kann.

Ein Gesetz, dessen Einhaltung nicht überwacht und nicht kontrolliert werden kann, ist ein zahnloses Gesetz. Das ist ja so, wie wenn verboten würde, Nachts von der Nachbarin zu träumen.

Ich glaube, das die international agierenden Shortys ganz genau wissen, dass man ihnen gar nicht auf die Schliche kommen kann, sollten sie mehr als 10% short sein in einem Aktien-Wert.

Daher glaube ich, das die BOC-Rule was unseren hier diskutierten BCL-Aktienkurs-Deal angeht, wenig Einfluss hat.

----------

In diesen Zusammenhang passt auch die Einschätzung, das BCL mit seiner Nachfrage-Initiative "wer-hat-wie-viel-BCL-Aktien-bei-welcher-Bank?" rausfinden wollte, wie viele BCL-Aktien international ungefähr short sind.

Die Frage "wer-ist-mit-wie-vielen-BCL-Aktien-short" ist allerdings mit dieser Initiative auch nicht beantwortet. BCL weiß aber nun ungefähr, wie viele reale BCL-Aktien und wie viele short-Aktien im Börsenhandel am Markt sind.

Ich werte diese BCL-Initiative als eine Maßnahme, nach mehr als 20 Jahren Minen-Stillstand und einer exzellenten BCL-Perspektive so langsam wieder den internationalen BCL-Aktienhandel kontrollieren zu wollen. Diese Initiative war ein Schuss vor den Bug der Shortys.

Spätestens wenn BCL selbst in 7- oder kleiner 8-stelliger Umsatz-Stücke-Höhe am Börsenmarkt als BCL-Aktien-Käufer auftreten würde, würden die Shortys die Finger von derartigen BCL-Short-Wetten lassen, weil die Wette können Sie dann nur verlieren.

BCL wird das aber erst dann tun, wenn BCL an höheren BCL-Aktienkursen interessiert ist. Und sind sie eben nach wie vor nicht. So lange vor Ort der Poker um den goldenen Kuchen läuft wird sich das auch nicht ändern.

Und so lange BCL die Minenrechte nicht auch gesetzlich und vertraglich verankert zugesichert bekommt wird BCL an weiterhin niedrigen BCL-Aktienkursen interessiert sein. Und das alles weißt unser Shorty-Player-A auch, daher fühlt er sich im Moment noch sehr sicher und zockt sein Spiel mit Player-B weiter.

----------

Letztlich sind das aber alles nur Details von einem Spiel, das nur so lange läuft, so lange vor Ort die politische Entwicklung zum Thema "Panguna-mit-BCL" offiziell unklar ist.
Die News-Lage an sich zeigt aber in die richtige Richtung. Wie Taylor auch bin ich für BCL sehr optimistisch.

Und sollte China zum Zuge kommen wird BCL auch nicht gänzlich leer ausgehen und ein akzeptables Übernahmeangebot erhalten.  

Sehr geehrter Herr ..........,

wir haben soeben die Rückmeldung der Bank erhalten:

„Anträge für eine Eintragung ins ausländische Aktienregister können nicht angenommen werden, da hier eine physische Auslieferung erfolgen muss, die mit einem zu hohem Aufwand und Risiko verbunden.

Das einzige was hier noch erfolgen kann, ist eine Bankbestätigung, in der wir Ihnen den Depotbestand bestätigen. Beachten Sie bitte in diesem Zusammenhang, dass lt. Preis- und Leistungsverzeichnis für die Erstellung einer Bankbestätigung eine Bearbeitungsgebühr in Höhe von 15,00 Euro anfällt.“

Wir hoffen, Ihnen mit unseren Informationen zumindest etwas weitergeholfen zu haben.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen
A...... R........
Kundenbetreuung  

"Wenn ich die BOC-Rule richtig verstanden habe, ist diese nur in AU geltend und sie schreibt vor, das max. 10% aller Aktien einer Gesellschaft short verkauft werden dürfen."

Im Klartext: BOC war die Company bei der die 10% Regel in AU am weitesten überschritten war.(60?,80?,100? Mill.)

Dazu kommen die XX Millionen in D u. USA ausgegebenen ADRs.

Unter  http://www.bougainville-copper.eu/geschaeftsberichte-2.html

kann man sich alle Geschäftsberichte seit BCL Gründung 1967 downloaden.Die darin veröffentlichten Top 20 Shareholder Listen lassen bei keinem Nominee Eindeckungen in diesen Grössenordnungen erkennen.

http://ramumine.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/...-bougainville-mining-law/  

Kannst du den Zeitungstext lesen?

„Anträge für eine Eintragung ins ausländische Aktienregister können nicht angenommen werden, da hier eine physische Auslieferung erfolgen muss, die mit einem zu hohem Aufwand und Risiko verbunden." ... sieh an -erstaunlich- oder? Kaum zu glauben, dass die das Vertrauen von Milliarden an angelegten Kundengeldern genießen und dann so einen - verzeiht den Ausdruck -DRECK ablabern - einfach nur armselig. Oder schon wieder Zwecktölpel um den Abzug eines größeren Blocks zu verhindern?

Schick denen mal einen Scan - von einer der Eintragsbestätigungen, die Du schon hast und schreib dazu, dass die Mitbewerber das so für 100Euro hinkriegen und für die Mitbewerber das Risiko, dass ein Brief zum Wert von ca. 5Euro (für Briefpapier Kuwert und Briefmarke von AU bis zu Dir) der die Eintragsbestätigung enthält, durchaus überschaubar ist und die das Risiko regelmäßig auch eingehen.

vG
Tom  

„Anträge für eine Eintragung ins ausländische Aktienregister können  nicht angenommen werden, da hier eine physische Auslieferung erfolgen  muss, die mit einem zu hohem Aufwand und Risiko verbunden."

Wer ist denn der Flatex-Nominee bei welchem es zu gefährlich ist die Shares ins Register einzutragen,hehehehehe?

Dass ein Uebertrag zu Computershare mit einer physischen Auslieferung verbunden ist hat sich wohl der Azubi ausgedacht.Oder sollte das Risiko darin begründet sein dass die Stücke zur Auslieferung nicht vorhanden sein könnten?

Du solltest ihm mal diesen Link zukommen lassen,anscheinend hat dieser Bankfuzzi überhaupt nicht kapiert worum es dir geht.

http://www.asx.com.au/products/how_settlement_works.htm

For financial products traded on the Australian Securities Exchange,  settlement is effected by a world class computer system called CHESS,  which stands for the Clearing House Electronic Subregister System.

       

CHESS is operated by the ASX Settlement Corporation (ASX  Settlement), a wholly owned subsidiary of the ASX.  ASTC authorises  participants such as brokers, custodians, institutional investors,  settlement agents and so on to access CHESS and settle trades made by  themselves or on behalf of their clients.

       

Usually, three business days after a buyer and seller agree  to a trade, CHESS effects the settlement of that trade.  It does this by  transferring the title or legal ownership of the shares while  simultaneously facilitating the transfer of money for those shares  between participants via their respective banks.  This type of  settlement is called Delivery versus Payment (DvP).  It is irrevocable.

hi nekro,

kann dir gerne ein pdf mit dem text zum artikel senden, aber finde hier keine funktion ein pdf anzuhängen (1,6mb). gibt es dafür eine Funktion?


bg  

anbei das dokument ... einfach reinzoomen, müsste dann lesbar sein...  

Is PNG"s mining boom coming to an end?
by ramunickel
[The mining industry always loves a good bit of scaremongering - but maybe they really are worried their flow of huge profits from PNG could be on the slide... if they are that should be viewed not as a threat but as an opportunity for the people of PNG to set their own development path rather than continuing to be suckered by the false promises and Colonial style thievery of the mining industry]

Wantok | PNG Industry News

PNG"S golden era [for foreign miners] for mineral exploration and development ['development'? The miners love using this word when what they are really talking about is not development but 'extraction'] may be coming to an end in the face of gold"s steepest price decline in three decades and a build-up in global copper stocks.

The sudden change in fortunes will not be an unfamiliar experience to PNG policymakers who are prone to shoot themselves in the foot when times are good [never miss a chance to put the kanakas down and make them seem inferior]– a perfect example being the late 1970s when they imposed a moratorium on gold exploration just as prices rose to record levels. [The foreigners hated that - all those potential profits they missed out on]

The air of unreality showed up again in the so-called "lost decade" of the 1990s when former prime minister Sir Mekere Morauta reduced the threshold for additional profits tax at a time when grassroots exploration had been run into the ground. [Oh those miners do HATE paying tax!]

It was widely predicted then [by the foreign miners who love a good bit of scaremongering] that much of the resources sector would be wiped out by the middle of this decade, with the possible exception of the Lihir gold mine.

New life was breathed into the sector by Morauta"s successor, Sir Michael Somare, who abandoned the APT on everything but gas projects and introduced fiscal incentives [sounds better than tax breaks and rushed environmental approvals] in early 2003.

Two years later booming commodity prices underpinned PNG"s golden era for mining and exploration [yep, the foreign miners made a fortune].

The impending slowdown has not impacted on PNG"s officialdom, caught up in the euphoria generated by the biggest ever investment, the PNG LNG project, which remains on schedule to deliver massive export earnings growth starting next year.

But the wreckage [I don't think he is referring to the environmental wreckage caused by Ok Tedi, Porgera, Misema, Lihit, Porgera etc and the destroyed lives of Papua New Guineans] that has been building is there for all to see, with the PNG government itself playing a significant role in the coming hiatus.

Setbacks to PNG"s sovereign risk profile [ie how easy it is to steal money of the locals] began with the Somare government"s decision to kill off Frontier Resources" Kodu copper-gold project, at the urging of former Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd. [don't forget the mining industry is in a constant state of war with the Australian government over its attempts to raise taxes and enforce environmental standards]

The current government, mainly through the PNG Treasury, lifted the sovereign risk profile further [ie stood up to the miners and tried to defend, for once, the interests of PNG people] when it reneged on a mining lease granted to Nautilus Minerals [Govt has not reneged on the lease, it has just refused to pump tax payers money into the project on terms that are materially unfair to PNG] and decided to unilaterally block development, for reasons which are still not totally clear [the reasons are very clear - check the posts on this blog explaining the dispute].

It seems Treasury managed even to tell the prime minister"s office not to concern itself with the Solwara 1 deepsea mining venture when requested for clarification!

The value of a government grant of a mining lease, after the considerable costs of exploration and environmental and feasibility studies, was already somewhat questionable even prior to Solwara 1.

Non-governmental organisations had previously delayed production at the Ramu nickel venture by two years [even MCC admitted in evidence in court this was not true - the court case did not delay construction work] through a court challenge that did not give due recognition to the hoops developers [they are not 'developers' they are minerals extraction companies who have a legal duty to maximise profits] had already been through with various arms of government.

So regular Wantok readers may be asking, "we know all that – what"s new?"

Consider the diffidence with which Xstrata is approaching its world-scale Frieda River copper-gold project [because the project was over hyped and is too expensive to deliver] and its lack of transparency in recent months and the tardiness over the anticipated release of Marengo Mining"s Yandera feasibility study.

In both cases there seems to be much going for these projects, at least on paper.

It could well be that global economic uncertainties have been at play in both projects – even before the past week"s dramatic plunge in gold prices to $US1360 an ounce. [Ah, global economics, reducing potential profits so time to complain about the PNG government]

Gold prices shouldn"t affect Marengo but then global copper stockpiles have risen to 612,000 tonnes, the highest level since September 2003.

Junior explorers have been severely impaired in their ability to raise funds for ongoing exploration activities and their share prices have generally been somewhat depressed.

Lately big explorers have been reducing their level of activity.

The 2012 annual report of Barrick Gold showed a $141 million write-off for the Kainantu property it purchased from Highlands Pacific in 2008.

Barrick subsequently touted its vast Morobe exploration leases, including the Kainantu area, as being among the most prospective in the world.

Now the Kainantu impairment charge – and write-down of its Highlands investment by $84 million – signal a virtual end to this exploration affair.

Barrick"s annual report was titled "Driven By Returns" and released only months after Standard & Poor"s downgraded its credit rating to BBB+ with a negative outlook.

The share price of the world"s biggest gold miner has halved in the past year from $C42 a share to $20.30.

If the gold price were to drop further to around $US1200, as some expect, it is almost certain Barrick will review the future of its Porgera gold mine which remains troubled by pit wall remediation work and hundreds of illegal miners who work at the company"s open pit on most days.

Such a price plunge would also severely impact relative PNG newcomer Newcrest Mining, which continues to face incessant production problems at Lihir where a million ounce upgrade has just been completed.

Unfortunately, it seems, previous owners of the mine had left a legacy of maintenance issues, the latest of which has resulted in the untimely shutdown of one of three autoclaves.

The latter will affect gold production as well as production costs.

Newcrest, which has seen its share price plummet to $A17, its lowest level in almost eight years, is also 50% owner of the much-touted Wafi-Golpu copper-gold project in Morobe Province.

In all likelihood plans to enter a full feasibility study by the end of this year could also be stalled by an overzealous PNG Treasury.

The timeframe for the multi-billion dollar development is set for 2019 but it is unlikely to be met, given current circumstances.

ramunickel | April 18, 2013 at 12:39 pm  

Danke

Erste Reaktionen darauf aus Boug.

.............Yes, this paid advertisement appeared in the papers last month.

I believe, from what I read, is that these two gentlemen are supporters of the BRDC concept which they were a party to when they were in government.

Our so called leaders should not fall into the PNG politics of taking out full page paid advertisements to criticise the government of the day.

.................Right on, These two guys were at the forefront of the brown envelope brigade.The only thing former minister for mining was mining was his opportunity to cash in. These two were foremost (with one other) in pushing ahead the Invincible deal.

Da haben sich die Civellis,Semple, Morumbis und co wieder mal in Unkosten gestürzt, die 1 Seite des National als Anzeige dürfte so einiges gekostet haben.Kommt Momis mit seiner "Mining Policy durch so dürfte das das Aus für die Morumbi Pläne bedeuten.


Hier die Transcription der Anzeige mit automatischer Texterkennung, zwar mit einigen Fehlern,insgesamt aber gut lesbar.

The National - Wednesday, April 17, 2013

REGAN/MOMIS MINING POLICY TAKES AWAY
BOUGAINVILLEAN CUSTOMARY RESOURCES AND
THE FUTURE OF BOUGAINVILLE

The current ABG leadership and their foreign advisor are setting the
stage to take ownership, control and all decision making away from the
customary landowners of Bougainville. Their policy, if enacted into law,
is designed to give them two years, enough time to deal off the
resources of Bougainville before the next elections. However, their
plans are likely to leave a 50 year mess.

The latest Mining Draft, which incorporates the advice they received
from the former .colonialmasters and Kiaps in Canberra on their Feb 14th
trip has just become available-and is a total top down approach:
Emboldenedby the encouragement they received from Canberra, their second
draft polic-ybares its fangs. Nobody had seen it, even the Members, and
yet thetwo-man show (Regan/Momis) intended to force it through the
recent legislature.ln fairness to the Members, they have probably been
given only carefully selected information about the contents of the
policy from the top down. And even if they had read the latest draft
policy, it is silffyly-driffid-tffat they may not have seen the true
intent lurking there. There is 11,z'
ordinary members and even the Bougainville-ixecutive Couner Wilbert-
would reject it out of hand if they had correct technical advice. For
some reason Regan/Momis did not present it for a vote, and a lucky thing
indeed for Bougainville that it was not passed into law..

On close reading the policy is niodeledon Russia and Venezuela where the
presidents have complete control over the development of resources: they
choose their partners and do the deals on the terms that they set. That
is why it is written that Putin, the President of Russia, is by far the
richest man in the world.

Of course the ABG leaders were elected in,a democratic process. But they
also swore an oath to uphold the laws of PNG and Bougainville under the
Constitution. Section 23 requires that the ownership is returned to the
customary landowners, which would prevent the ABG from doing mining
deals. They throw out Section 23, so what they are trying to do is
UNCONSTITUTIONAL They were elected to operate within the Constitution
not outside the Constitution. They have no mandate to operate outside
the laws of Bougainville. Their policy is an attempt to fool the
Bougainville people and the majority of the Members. It treats
Bougainvilleans,including the Members, and most of the Ministers,as
unintelligent fools that have no business being involved about decisions
that will affect the future of Bougainville. Section 23 stops their
Russian model cold so they have to ignore it.

The Regan/Momis Policy
It decreesin Section 10 Joint-ownership of minerals on Bougainville -
Unconstitutional. This allows the ABG to get its name on the titleof all
minerals, which then allows them the naked power to take absolute
control over all aspects of mining without any checks and balances. What
is notable is that the policy cleverly handicaps the customary
landowners from getting licences over their own lands and paves the way
for the ABG and its selected foreign mining companies to take total
control into the future. The problem isthat the current political
perpetrators will be gone leaving the future of Bougainville under a
dark cloud of more crises to come.

The key Sections and what they do
For the benefit of Bougainvilleans and the Members who have not been
given the correct technical advice, some of the key sections are addressed.
Even though the majority of Etougainvilleans fought for the return of
their stolen mineral rights,which were to be recovered by
implementingSection 23 of the Constitution, nowhere in the Regan/Mamis
policy is Section 23 referred to. Here is what it does contain:

Section 36 gives the ABG the right,as being on the title to ownership,
to get into the mining business and enter into joint venture deals with
selected partners - but not just any partners: their partners will be
those that they "select" from the "competitive tender process"
(auction). This auction process is spelled out in Section 40.

Let us comment on this: Governments throughout the democratic world stay
away from doing business. Most governments have realized over time that
most politicians and bureaucrats bad business people and are open to
corruption. As an example, the USA government is not in any business
deals and is the richest country in the world. In Communist countries
and other Dictatorships, they certainly do control the resources, and
enrich themselves and their friends at the direct expense of their
citizens. Russia, as an example, is the richest resource country in the
world with a very rich Presidentand famous billionaire oligarchs that,
with the Russian Government as partners, together they plunder the
country's resources, while over 100 million Russians live near or below
the poverty level.

What does the policy say about the Bougainville customary landowners who
thought they were getting their resources back? After all Section 23. is
the foundation for the ownership of resources on Bougainville; after all
it is what the majority of Bougainvilleans fought and sacrificed for
-the return of their stolen mineral Rights.What do they get?

Section 12of the Regan/Momis policy signals to the customary landowners
what they can expect to get out of mining - the right to be "consulted".
To make sure that the landowners feel as though they are involved, the
policy provides for a forum and mediation in the event that the
landowners object to the ABG and its foreign partner showing up down
their road to start exploration.But, even if the landowners object and
can say no to the ABG/Foreign mining partners, there is a hammer decree
in Section 26(2) which reads bluntly:

(2) The Autonomous Bougainville Government is by force of this section
empowered to override the requirement for the consents -...

It couldn't be more clearly put - no matter what the landowners of
Panguna say or the landowners of the other resources on Bougainville
say, the Momis/Regan policy reserves the right to bring the hammer down
on any opposition and to give the go ahead no matter what they say. What
happened to the "Right to Say NO"?

Under the Regan/Momis plan it is easy to see what they have planned over
the next two years until the next elections. They are under a time
constraint and will take any shortcut they can. We set out some facts:

- BCL is Rio Tinto - Fact
- Rio- Tinto's biggest shareholder is Chalco as to 12.93% - Chalco is a
giant worldwide Chinese State owned Mining Company - Fact.
- MOU's exist between the President and China; their content is secret- Fact
- Regan/Momis have .produced a mining policy to get BCL back on
Bougainville and to allow the ABG to select joint-venture partners over
all'of the mineral resources of Bougainville -this could include Chalco
or its affiliates - Fact

So it is not hard to imagine what the Regan/Mornis team have in mind for
RIO/BCL on the one hand and with other companies and players known to be
lurking just out of sight that have "cordial" relations with the two-man
team.

Only a scenario resembling the above can explain the Regan/Momis mining
policy that savages the customary landowners of Bougainville and its
people. It treats them and their last 24 years with contempt: so much so
that in Section 19, before a Bougainville Landowner company can apply
for a licence over its resources it is required to undertake preliminary
social mapping and to submit it to the Secretary for the Bougainville
Executive Council to consider it for approval. Regan/Momis, and every
Papua New Guinean knows how long it takes to carry out social mapping. A
legitimately formed company with the major clan and sub-clan chiefs as
directors would be adequate to get a licence; the expensive and
extensive Social Mapping studies couldbe done as positive exploration
results flow. This arbitrary requirement is like cutting the leg off a
runner before the race to make sure he can't win. It is designed to stop
Bougainvilleans. With them having the last say on who can apply for
exploration licences, it gives the Regan/Momis two-man team the two
years it needs wittiout any competition from customary landowners to
auction and joint- venture Oft the minerals of Bougainville.

By the time the customary landowners present their Social Mapping and
get it approved by the BEC, their resources will likely have been
join-ventured off - their resources will be owned by someone else. The
current Government has two years left - just enough time to block the
landowners, do their deals and leave town. And they will leave 50 years
of crisis for the coming generations of Bougainvilleans. Under Section
23, none of the above plunder could take place.

Two boots to trample the late President Kabul's grave
There are other sections of the Regan/Momis policy that are amateurish
and unworkable, and illustrate that the drafters have no experience or
knowledge of real world mining exploration; but two(particularly evil
sections are strategically placed at the end in Sections 203 and 204
that we as Bougainvilleans should be aware of.
Section 203 repeals the BRDC Act and is reproduced here for all
Bougainvilleans to see:

"The Bogenvil Resources Development Corporation (ARCM) Ltd (Kabui Model)
Authorization Act 2008 is repealed."

This throws out the Kabui Model; a model that recognizes the rights of
the customary landowners and the Government's limited role to ensure
fair development and participation for all Bougainvilleans. The late
President was very strong on this - he had a great unselfish vision for
the people of Bougainville; and the people are only now fully realizing
the bravery, wisdom and true love of Bougainville that the late
President had, especially in the light of what they have seen since.

Section 204 grants all the mineral "rights" BCL had and ever dreamed of
over Panguna and the surrounding areas, despite the
fact that the Bougainville Constitution under section 23 for the
resources-returns them to the customary landowners. This is an intended
illegal grant and is unconstitutional.

On one single page, and in consecutive sections 203 and 204,the
Regan/Momis policy manages to place two boots on the late President's
grave to trampleand spoil it. The one boot 203 repeals the Kabui Model
Act while the other boot, 204, welcomes back SCI to the President and
his wife's hereditary lands and where his grave lies. Revenge,
Bougainvilleans are sayingl

Bougainvilleans should be aware what the Regan/Momis top-down policy has
in store for them; the platform for a corrupt Bougainville and the
robbing of Bougainville's future.Section 23 is bigger than mining. It is
a bottom-up Melanesian culture approach where everyone shares. Section
23 restores the stolen mineral rights to where they have always been
until the colonial masters appeared. Section 23 prevents corruption and
guarantees a proud and brilliant future for Bougainville.

The world is watching and ready to cheer if Bougainville can break away
from its old colonial past and adopt the new model that Section 23
stipulates. The Regan/Momis policy attempts to return to the past. It is
old thinking andis unconstitutional.

Beobachte die Aktie schon länger und bin jetzt auch mal eingestiegen zu 0,45€.

 

Mal sehen was passiert.....

 

Von meinen 5 VK Orders an der ASX, jeweils 1K a 80,82,84,86,88 um die Orderbuch Grafik zu entzerren wurden heute 2 Orders (86,88) angeblich von der ASX gecancelt.
Begründung:Zu weit vom aktuellen Kurs entfernt???

Somit wird das Schlupfloch Verkaufsorders zu einem hohen Kurs aufzugeben um das Ausleihen der Böcke zum Shorten zu verhindern jetzt sogar anscheinend von "höchster Stelle" unterbunden.Erst werden die Stimmrechte verweigert, danach  das ADR Programm gecancelt,In USA wird der Handel komplett unterbunden,in AU wird der Preis gedrückt,auf allen Ebenen wird versucht das Eintragen der Böcke ins Aktionärsregister zu verhindern.DAS kann doch nur bedeuten dass die Nominees massive Probleme mit der Auslieferung haben? Meinungen?

Objet:Your order to sell BOC has been cancelled

The SELL order for 1000 BOC was cancelled on 18/04/2013 at 06:50:00 PM.

The reason for cancellation is: The order was purged by the ASX - Reason: Order price was too far from the market price.
Please contact the CMC Markets Stockbroking Help Desk  if you would like more information about this order.

bei auslieferungsproblemen der nominees müsste sich aber der kurs nach oben bewegen ... tut er aber nicht ...

falls ein auslieferungssproblem der nominess vorläge, würden die nominees ihr problem ja nur in die zukunft verschieben, desto stärker sind den kurs deckeln, desto mehr müssen sie irgendwann eindecken ....

es fehlt einfach die nachfrage nach dem wert..... nobody believes the story currently ....