RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Novo bottomed out- I soldWaitingstill,
I just went through the sequence of NRs and the key findings are listed below, recognizing that the NRs don't include every little details.
- First NR (26 May 2017), initial agreement, Novo as initial Manager of the Gold Project (Item #7). And #11: "Failure to contribute to calls for expenditure by the Manager will result in dilution, at a rate of 1% for every AUD $500,000 not contributed;". Note: "calls for expenditure by the Manager".
https://www.novoresources.com/news-media/news/display/index.php?content_id=237
- Second NR, Novo and ARV signed definitive agreement, introduced Karatha Gold Pty Ltd as Manager after earn-in.
https://www.novoresources.com/news-media/news/display/index.php?content_id=256
- Third NR, Novo does not condone some negative media view on the agreement
https://www.novoresources.com/news-media/news/display/index.php?content_id=258
- Fourth NR, Novo complete earn-in with ARV, both sides through various subsidiaries will contribute 50-50 of expenditures.
It's quite clear that the Manager of the Project whether it's Novo or its subsidiary Karatha Gold Pty Ltd is responsible for managing the JV, and would have a lead role in the decision making, e.g. putting together a package of activities for further exploration/mining and the projected funding for a 50-50 contribution from each main parties, i.e. Novo and ARV. Even though there are committees to discuss the game plan and budgeting, there has to be a mechanism for resolving conflicts and stand-off, since a JV can not be paralysed just because of a stand-off. Just like in any arrangement (e.g. in the US Senate, the VP would appear to be ready to cast his vote) there has to be a tie-breaker vote (e.g., from the Chair of the Committee) to go forward. It's my guess that the Chair of the Committee would belong to Novo side.
Just my interpretation folks.
Happy New Year
GH