Tanzania Mining Act of 2010 (Vain Politics)

[Zitto]

Unafahamu nini maana ya debt financing? Hii sheria inazuia ushiriki kwa njia ya debt financing? Do you believe a foreign debt financer cannot invest in gemstone mining in Tanzania kwa mujibu wa sheria hii? Did you read this law?

ndugu yangu H.S suala la debt financing halihusiani na sharti la umiliki asilimia 50 kuwa kwa Watanzania. Namna gani ya kuwekeza itakuwa ni makubaliano kati ya wamiliki wa kampuni. Debt Financing haina madhara yeyote katika umiliki. Inapunguza tu malipo ya dividend kwa wamiliki kwani lazima walipe kwanza deni

 

[Zitto]

It is government's prerogative to renew or not renew a contract.however, has Tanzaniteone recover the Capital invested? Do you understand the economic repercussions of what is currently taking place between the government and Tanzaniteone?



How much capital is required to start a large scale mining that could benefit a country? We are importing mosquito nets, where is that capacity going to come from?

Who are those Tanzanians with the capacity similar to TanzaniteOne that will provide meangingful jobs to the locals?

What about legacy investors that invested billions? How long has TanzaniteOne been in Tanzania? Have they recovered their invested capital?

Hypothetical scenario, I am a new investor with $3billion, does it mean that, I will be able to get a Tanzanian with similar amount to inject in the startup?

If total direct foreign investment the country received last year was less than $680million, where in the world will an individual get even $50 million to invest in gemstones??



How is floating of 25% of shares at the DSE going to help the communities surrounding the mines? Who are the potential buyers of the shares if not MAFISADI already in the board of Directors of TanzaniteOne?

How would you guarantee that no foreigners will buy any of the shares issued?
How can you enforce transparency through disclosures, while the country's laws deterring corruption cannot be enfoced?



If this law, stipulated to the new entrants, who then agrees with it, well and good. But not after a company has invested so much. All I can see here is simple. If the government intent is to safeguard the stones, then it would be perfect to simply let them go, because 50/50 may prove to be problematic considering the fact that, some of them secured various loans under certain terms and conditions and that may force them to re-negotiate



The law is not negotiable. It can only be negotiated in parliament in the form of amendment. In your opinion, what can the government discuss with TanzniteOne if the law is straight, they must float 25% its shares?

John mbona mambo mengi unaongea hayahusiani na mjadala ndugu yangu? Tumalize mjadala huu tuhamie kwingine.

Sheria inasema leseni ya gemstone itatolewa kwa Watazania tu. Mtanzania anaweza kuingia ubia na mgeni ilimradi umiliki usizidi asilimia 50. Hivi sasa asilimia 25 ya TanzaniteOne ipo mikononi mwa Watanzania. Inabidi watoe hiyo ilobakia ama kwa kuuza hisa kwenye soko la hisa au kwa kushirikiana na serikali. Sasa tatizo lipo wapi hapo ndugu yangu

 

[Kobello]

It is government’s prerogative to renew or not renew a contract.however, has Tanzaniteone recover the Capital invested? Do you understand the economic repercussions of what is currently taking place between the government and Tanzaniteone?



How much capital is required to start a large scale mining that could benefit a country? We are importing mosquito nets, where is that capacity going to come from?

Who are those Tanzanians with the capacity similar to TanzaniteOne that will provide meangingful jobs to the locals?

What about legacy investors that invested billions? How long has TanzaniteOne been in Tanzania? Have they recovered their invested capital?

Hypothetical scenario, I am a new investor with $3billion, does it mean that, I will be able to get a Tanzanian with similar amount to inject in the startup?

If total direct foreign investment the country received last year was less than $680million, where in the world will an individual get even $50 million to invest in gemstones??



How is floating of 25% of shares at the DSE going to help the communities surrounding the mines? Who are the potential buyers of the shares if not MAFISADI already in the board of Directors of TanzaniteOne?

How would you guarantee that no foreigners will buy any of the shares issued?
How can you enforce transparency through disclosures, while the country’s laws deterring corruption cannot be enfoced?



If this law, stipulated to the new entrants, who then agrees with it, well and good. But not after a company has invested so much. All I can see here is simple. If the government intent is to safeguard the stones, then it would be perfect to simply let them go, because 50/50 may prove to be problematic considering the fact that, some of them secured various loans under certain terms and conditions and that may force them to re-negotiate



The law is not negotiable. It can only be negotiated in parliament in the form of amendment. In your opinion, what can the government discuss with TanzniteOne if the law is straight, they must float 25% its shares?

What you fail to understand is, the law tries to put our natural resources in our hands, and not foreign investors.

In countries like US, natural resources are privately owned while in Tanzania, natural resouces are publicly owned with the president as a trustee. Just try to create a law that will base on that stipulation, and see if you can come up with a piece of legislation that will automatically put public ownership at anything less than 50% ... if you do that, then you will automatically contradict our agrarian laws, and thats what the pre-Bomani acts were doing.Even this bill, is too dilute and creates a window for corruption if you ask me, but thats not what I'm debating you about.

What Im talking about is the notion that, Tanzania is unattractive to foreign investors because of its laws, especially the current Mining Act. The law is well supported by our constitution and other agrarian and investment laws and it's definately not against any International agreements that Tanzania has put herself in.The threats of international arbitration courts should only be cited when refferring to corruption and bureaucracy thats prevailing in our government, and not the written laws (especially the Bomani act).

It's kinda dumb to compare Vodacom, Tigo and any other investment that doesn't extract our natural resources but bring technology that uses our labor for the mutual benefit of both the investor and our country. These are two different kinds of investments and should be looked upon differently, especially to a person like you who has self proclaimed that he has done a bunch of research and spent a lot of time in finding investors for Tanzania ... I mean really? lol

It's also dumb to bring that red highlited idea that if a foreign investor brings 3bn$, then we need to find a citizen with 3bn$ .... dude, are you serious?? ... phew!! lemme give you an example:
Recently in Afghanistan, 2trillion$ worth of Lithium was found arround the Tora Bora region. Lithium is used
in cell phones and so many other technological materials. So if you want to extract that lithium, you can either take it Congo style, or buy it from the government that is extracting it, and own that mine 100% (Chavez/Putin style) ... or you can jointly extract hat mine with the people of afghanistan, BEARING IN MIND THAT THEY HAVE 2T$ WORTH OF CAPITAL IN THE FORM OF NATURAL RESOURCES. So, basically it's the Afghan people who will choose the company to "HIRE", so that they can get that 2T$ worth of lithium. And you will have to negotiate with them on tour cut. YUOR 3B$ SHOULD BE MATCHED WITH THE NATURAL RESOURCE DESIRED TO BE EXPLOITED AND THE PROFIT BE DIVIDED HALF WAY.

Justifying Investors not caring about people of Nyamongo based on the way their government act and blaming the government officials for taking 10% and leaving the investor who offered or agreed to pay that 10% in return for a favor is STUPI and i wont even talk about it cos you've already shown your corrupted mindset and lack of patriotism ... it's people like you that brings Africa back to what we've been fighting against since 1884-85.

 

[John Mashaka]

John mbona mambo mengi unaongea hayahusiani na mjadala ndugu yangu? Tumalize mjadala huu tuhamie kwingine.

Sheria inasema leseni ya gemstone itatolewa kwa Watazania tu. Mtanzania anaweza kuingia ubia na mgeni ilimradi umiliki usizidi asilimia 50. Hivi sasa asilimia 25 ya TanzaniteOne ipo mikononi mwa Watanzania. Inabidi watoe hiyo ilobakia ama kwa kuuza hisa kwenye soko la hisa au kwa kushirikiana na serikali. Sasa tatizo lipo wapi hapo ndugu yangu

Mr. Zitto,
This now makes sense. They government may have done this to safeguard these rare-stones. However the approach is the problem. This could have been done in a better way, because the ripple effects could cost our country in so many ways. Otherwise I do not see the enactment attracting foreign investment

 

[John Mashaka]

John Mashaka;5793526]What you fail to understand is, the law tries to put our natural resources in our hands, and not foreign investors.

My wish always is seeing what belongs to Tanzanians benefiting Tanzanians. I am always against the practice of reaping off the African continent. I like the ENACTMENT. What I oppose, is the approach by which the Law is being enforced upon Legacy investors. Let new investors come on 50/50 basis

In countries like US, natural resources are privately owned while in Tanzania, natural resouces are publicly owned with the president as a trustee. Just try to create a law that will base on that stipulation, and see if you can come up with a piece of legislation that will automatically put public ownership at anything less than 50% ... if you do that, then you will automatically contradict our agrarian laws, and thats what the pre-Bomani acts were doing.Even this bill, is too dilute and creates a window for corruption if you ask me, but thats not what I'm debating you about.

You are very vague here, but I do agree with you, unfortunately, very few LAWS have been respected by some investors and the rich. Sometimes they are bent to please Wawekezaji. My assumption is that, maybe someone in the TanzaniteOne crossed paths with someone powerful who in turn decided to flex his muscles

What Im talking about is the notion that, Tanzania is unattractive to foreign investors because of its laws, especially the current Mining Act. The law is well supported by our constitution and other agrarian and investment laws and it's definately not against any International agreements that Tanzania has put herself in.The threats of international arbitration courts should only be cited when refferring to corruption and bureaucracy thats prevailing in our government, and not the written laws (especially the Bomani act).

All things equal, we should assume, that TanzaniteOne Capital outlay was not that large. Otherwise, it could cause some legal wrangling should the new law affect the company's financial obligations; compontents of the debt Financing for that matter and the capital expenditure. Many a times, investors could take you to court citing the initial agreement

It's kinda dumb to compare Vodacom, Tigo and any other investment that doesn't extract our natural resources but bring technology that uses our labor for the mutual benefit of both the investor and our country. These are two different kinds of investments and should be looked upon differently, especially to a person like you who has self proclaimed that he has done a bunch of research and spent a lot of time in finding investors for Tanzania ... I mean really? lol

Mr. Kobella, you are an interlectual using a pen name while I am using my real name. I think I am making a fool of myself to continue discussing anything with you due to your language. We can agree or disagree through logic without resorting to obscene language !

It's also dumb to bring that red highlited idea that if a foreign investor brings 3bn$, then we need to find a citizen with 3bn$ .... dude, are you serious?? ... phew!! lemme give you an example:

This is not my idea. The law requires 50/50 Investment approach. Since licening cannot be granted to foreign investors, the only route would be partneship with locals on that basis. This is the law we have been discussing.

Justifying Investors not caring about people of Nyamongo based on the way their government act and blaming the government officials for taking 10% and leaving the investor who offered or agreed to pay that 10% in return for a favor is STUPI and i wont even talk about it cos you've already shown your corrupted mindset and lack of patriotism ... it's people like you that brings Africa back to what we've been fighting against since 1884-85.

An investor must respect host countries LAWS, failure to do so automatically breaches contractual agreement. Once you breach a contract the government has the right to fine, cancel the licence and even expel the investor depending on the gravity. Who has been held liable for the various deaths in Tarime? I have deep roots in Tarime. I have seen fresh bodies lying lifeless due to gunshots. If pain, I have more pain than you think, maybe you have never been there, and wondering why question my partiotism ! Who is paying for those water sources contaminated? Land taken without reasonable compensation?

Large scale mining is capital intensive. $50million would not be sufficient for a meaningful project that will create enough jobs. Most of the large scale mining projects are normally around $600million and higher. Some investments reaches $5billion. I have worked on one in Argentina that was worth $3.6billion

It seems we are on the same page on some areas and completely at odds in some especially on civility. I think Zitto summed it up, that Mining Licenses for Gemstones can only be issued to Tanzanian Citizens. Foreigners have the option to partner with the locals on 50/50 Basis. I am only trying to see a prevalance of rationality between the government of Tanzania and TanzaniteOne. Otherwise the ripple effect of the saga could go a long way, making Tanzania unfriendly investor country

 

[H.S]

ndugu yangu H.S suala la debt financing halihusiani na sharti la umiliki asilimia 50 kuwa kwa Watanzania. Namna gani ya kuwekeza itakuwa ni makubaliano kati ya wamiliki wa kampuni. Debt Financing haina madhara yeyote katika umiliki. Inapunguza tu malipo ya dividend kwa wamiliki kwani lazima walipe kwanza deni

Mr. Zitto, that is my point. The law imposes bureaucracy and politics in equity investment but there are several other ways in which a foreign investor could still have an upper hand, hence rendering the law ineffective.

Most people are under the false impression that this law gives them some advantage over foreigners. I am saying the law does not prevent new comers from having significant interests in gemstone mining.

Foreign investors do not come to Tanzania to be engaged in the 'politics of ownership' but instead they are in the country to make a buck and the law does not prevent them from making bucks in the gemstone mining sector. They will use whatever legal vehicle available to make money.

Please follow this basic scenario and keep your eyes on the money not politics:

A Tanzanian is offered some seed money by a foreigner for prospecting on condition that if results come back positive the investor will invest in debt in the company that is 100% owned by a Tanzanian, the foregn investor will invest in debt financing to the tune of $9m earning 15% p.a for the life of the project and the Tanzanian will invest $1m and is projecting to also earn 15% return on his investment after factoring in interest on debt financing, for simplicity the principal is payable at the end of the project. So now each party is expecting 15% return on his investment p.a.

Every year the foreign debt financer will be earning about $1,350,000 (15% of $9m), the 100% Tanzanian owner will be earning $150,000 (15% of the $1m). So we now have a situation where the owner and the foreign investor who does not own a single share are earning the same percentage return on investment (equity vs debt) but the foreigner is earning 9 times the money than the Tanzanian because of different levels of investments.($1m vs $9m).

It is quiete realistic to have an arrangement in which parties agree to the same return on investment even though one party invests in equity and the other in debt.

By the time the mine is de-commisioned, for every $1 the Tanzanian earned the foreigner has earned $9.

If we focus on 'politics of ownership' we see that the Tanzanian owned 100% of the mine throughout its life cycle but if we follow money trail we see that the Tanzanian got only 10% while the non owner investor walked away with 90%.

By the time tunaanza kufukia mashimo Mtanzania anayependa siasa za umiliki kaweka $1 mfukoni na mgeni who does not care about politics of ownership but has his eyes set on the money has $9.

kati ya aliyepata $1 na ni mmiliki na aliyepata $9 na si mmiliki bali ni mwekezaji nani bingwa ?

 

[H.S]

John mbona mambo mengi unaongea hayahusiani na mjadala ndugu yangu? Tumalize mjadala huu tuhamie kwingine.

Sheria inasema leseni ya gemstone itatolewa kwa Watazania tu. Mtanzania anaweza kuingia ubia na mgeni ilimradi umiliki usizidi asilimia 50. Hivi sasa asilimia 25 ya TanzaniteOne ipo mikononi mwa Watanzania. Inabidi watoe hiyo ilobakia ama kwa kuuza hisa kwenye soko la hisa au kwa kushirikiana na serikali. Sasa tatizo lipo wapi hapo ndugu yangu

Ndg Zitto, tatizo ni kwamba wakati wanakaribishwa hawakuambiwa kwamba hilo ni sharti. Kama leo munataka watoe 50% kwa lazima to locals nini kinachowazuia kesho kusema sasa munataka 75%?

Kwani kuna wa Tanzania walionyimwa kununua hisa za TanzaniteOne? Why are we fighting over shares that earn single digit returns instead of investing our energy on investing on building new companies?

Ndg Zitto, you have travelled the whole world, how can you downplay the cost of not being trusted as a government?

 

[Mzuvendi]

Mzuvendi, you do not believe there is a relationship between poorly crafted laws and corruption?

Sometimes in order to test whether the law is poorly crafted, you have to put it to test. Besides, law making process isn't science and therefore, the best approach out there is to refine the existing ones.

Now with regard to corruption, it's an issue. However, as I stated in my previous post, it isn't the focal point of this discussion . You started this thread to talk about the Tanzania Mining Act of 2010 and how it impedes investments. Let's stick to that.

 

[Mzuvendi]

Ndg Zitto, tatizo ni kwamba wakati wanakaribishwa hawakuambiwa kwamba hilo ni sharti. Kama leo munataka watoe 50% kwa lazima to locals nini kinachowazuia kesho kusema sasa munataka 75%?

Kwani kuna wa Tanzania walionyimwa kununua hisa za TanzaniteOne? Why are we fighting over shares that earn single digit returns instead of investing our energy on investing on building new companies?

Ndg Zitto, you have travelled the whole world, how can you downplay the cost of not being trusted as a government?

H.S;

Anybody can buy a passenger bus. However, in order to operate it commercially you need to get a license which includes the expiration date and other conditions from the appropriate authority . If you fail to renew your license, your bus operation will cease to exist. You can keep your bus (the capital), but you won't be able to operate it legally. In the case that you decide to renew your licence, you will have to accept new conditions.

Tanzaniaone are operating under license issued by the government of Tanzania. If their license is valid for the next 10 or 100 years, I will have a problem if the government force them sell their share to Tanzanians. However, if their license is up for renewal, then they have to follow new rules.

 

[H.S]

Sometimes in order to test whether the law is poorly crafted, you have to put it to test. Besides, law making process isn't science and therefore, the best approach out there is to refine the existing ones.

Now with regard to corruption, it's an issue. However, as I stated in my previous post, it isn't the focal point of this discussion . You started this thread to talk about the Tanzania Mining Act of 2010 and how it impedes investments. Let's stick to that.

This one does not need testing. The law was confined to equity financing when there are over a dozen ways to get a stake in a company without equity investing. If you charge a punitive price for entering through one door and there are 12 others doors that do not charge similarly what is the point of testing whether or not you can sustain a business with revenues from the one door.

Bad laws create environment of curruption and that hinders investment

 

[H.S]

H.S;

Anybody can buy a passenger bus. However, in order to operate it commercially you need to get a license which includes the expiration date and other conditions from the appropriate authority . If you fail to renew your license, your bus operation will cease to exist. You can keep your bus (the capital), but you won't be able to operate it legally. In the case that you decide to renew your licence, you will have to accept new conditions.

Tanzaniaone are operating under license issued by the government of Tanzania. If their license is valid for the next 10 or 100 years, I will have a problem if the government force them sell their share to Tanzanians. However, if their license is up for renewal, then they have to follow new rules.

@ Mzuvendi, Terms do get changed when there is a clear benefit for doing so and the assessment of benefits ought to outweigh the cost.

I have touched on costs.

Can you share two benefits of this law? Something of economic benefit that you did not have prior to the enactment of this law.

Private citizens must challenge our legislators when they make such laws that do really make any difference otherwise the culture of legislating vain laws will continue. As I said before this is not the only law that is full of politics but empty on economic merit, I will be bringing more such Parliamentary resolutions, policies and laws so that citizens who have national interests above party politics can weigh in.

 

[H.S]

Swala hapa ni serikali kulipa au uchangiaji wao hili kupata fifity percent based on fairness, kama walivyotaka watanzania kupata hisa na namna za kuingia ubia katika makampuni hayo. Hapo ndipo utata ulipo kwa mujibu wenu vinginevyo ni sera ambayo hipo kitaifa na ya kumjali mtazania na mlinzi akiwa serkali.

What you will get from this law is the ability to buy shares at DSE instead of London Stock Exchange. How does that make your life any better?

Weka pembeni siasa za kumjali Mtanzania na Serikali kuwa mlinzi, wewe unaeamini somebody anakujali umeshapata nini mpaka sasa hivi kutokana na sheria hii? What did you get so far?

 

[H.S]

How does it put natural resources in your hands? By the ability to buy TanzaniteOne shares at DSE? Does it mean if you buy these shares at London Stock Exchange that is not putting resources in your hands but if you buy them at DSE that amounts to putting resources in your hands?

 

[Eric Cartman]

What you will get from this law is the ability to buy shares at DSE instead of London Stock Exchange. How does that make your life any better?

Weka pembeni siasa za kumjali Mtanzania na Serikali kuwa mlinzi, wewe unaeamini somebody anakujali umeshapata nini mpaka sasa hivi kutokana na sheria hii? What did you get so far?

He he he! what a bubblier, money the policy is not about a few individuals or for me to benefit directly (matter of fact i wasn't even in their thoughts when these decisions were made).

This policy is about giving a chance at a few home internal entrepreneurs and backing down at peoples' concerns on giving away our natural resources to outside investors at cheap without their participation (that is political economy).

Money note (understand) economical political decisions are not always based on global businesses, sometimes its just about votes and pleasing the local thinking. But then what does someone with a finance background and not willing to learn politics would know about these decisions (political demands are as critical as business decisions only this time people influence decision makers to favor them with or without the understanding of economical decisions). Therefore the government officials have to be clever based on their society demands.

Money you need to up your game, for the good of us all politics is politics and economics is economics, and when it comes to national decisions you have to justify them based on local demands, i'm out of this debate.

Ciao im no longer into this.

 

[H.S]

He he he! what a bubblier, money the policy is not about a few individuals or for me to benefit directly (matter of fact i wasn't even in their thoughts when these decisions were made).

I am glad that now you finally know you were not in their thoughts.

 

[Mzuvendi]

This one does not need testing. The law was confined to equity financing when there are over a dozen ways to get a stake in a company without equity investing. If you charge a punitive price for entering through one door and there are 12 others doors that do not charge similarly what is the point of testing whether or not you can sustain a business with revenues from the one door.

Bad laws create environment of curruption and that hinders investment

If you had raised the issue when the act was still a bill, probably I would have agreed with you that it doesn't need testing. However,now it's the law of the land, and we have to put it to test. As a matter of fact your introduction at the beginning of this thread does just that. There you have tried to weigh the pros and cons of the act. The problem is you can't convince the public that your perception of the act is better than theirs.

 

[Mzuvendi]

@ Mzuvendi, Terms do get changed when there is a clear benefit for doing so and the assessment of benefits ought to outweigh the cost.

I have touched on costs.

Can you share two benefits of this law? Something of economic benefit that you did not have prior to the enactment of this law.

Private citizens must challenge our legislators when they make such laws that do really make any difference otherwise the culture of legislating vain laws will continue. As I said before this is not the only law that is full of politics but empty on economic merit, I will be bringing more such Parliamentary resolutions, policies and laws so that citizens who have national interests above party politics can weigh in.

H.S;

Middle class is emerging in Tanzania. The number isn't impressive, but we should recognize that people with disposable income exist. Beside, the number of stable financial institutions such as banks, and retirement funds has increased in the past 20 years. The law gives or might give the entities explain above the opportunity to invest their financial resources locally. So this is the first benefit.

Second, the extraction of gems, in particular Tanzanite, isn't a new business in Tanzania. Small miners were very good at it but, the government's love of foreign investors took away the right of Tanzanians to make living in their own country. So to some extent the law brings back the ownership.

Now with regard the duties of private citizens, I think your at fault. For YOU didn't challenge your
legislator, when the time was appropriate. Additionally, you don't need the whole nation to be behind you to make a difference. If you think this law is so bad, you can still challenge its constitutionality in court.

 

[Kobello]

How does it put natural resources in your hands? By the ability to buy TanzaniteOne shares at DSE? Does it mean if you buy these shares at London Stock Exchange that is not putting resources in your hands but if you buy them at DSE that amounts to putting resources in your hands?

That can easily be answered.

1.Even if I'm flat broke, the government through STAMICO, NDC ...or even social security funds can be a shareholder (majority) benefiting me and my peeps, yo hear?

2. LONDON EXCHANGE??? I think thats where they play with our money right? .. the money that they took from our motherland back in the days, with an excuse that we are lazy and uncivilized. I'm not that greedy to just go and perpetuate or glorify what they did and what they are doin' right now ... If Londoners demonstrated against their 1%ers, why would I take sides with them? (The 1%ers)...... Remember occupy whatever?

3. I don't have foreign currency, investing in my DSE increases the value of Tshs, a good thing for "us" if you ask me.

4. Im morally obligated to participate to the best of my ability to build my nation for the future generations (a philosophical stance that your kind lack).

5. Just to stay away from people like you.

 

[H.S]

That can easily be answered.

1.Even if I'm flat broke, the government through STAMICO, NDC ...or even social security funds can be a shareholder (majority) benefiting me and my peeps, yo hear?

2. LONDON EXCHANGE??? I think thats where they play with our money right? .. the money that they took from our motherland back in the days, with an excuse that we are lazy and uncivilized. I'm not that greedy to just go and perpetuate or glorify what they did and what they are doin' right now ... If Londoners demonstrated against their 1%ers, why would I take sides with them? (The 1%ers)...... Remember occupy whatever?

3. I don't have foreign currency, investing in my DSE increases the value of Tshs, a good thing for "us" if you ask me.

4. Im morally obligated to participate to the best of my ability to build my nation for the future generations (a philosophical stance that your kind lack).

5. Just to stay away from people like you.

If you knew the performance history of TanzaniteOne Stock and the shrinking margins of gemstones you would not be too enthusiastic about wanting the Government to buy the shares. If you knew that if the Government invests $100m they can potentially end up earning just $3-$4m annually if they are lucky you would have realized there ought to be a better way to invest the money than to buy TanzaniteOne shares.

You want Tanzanians to buy under performing assets and you believe you are helping the nation?!!

You need to up your game on investments and economics.

 

[Kobello]

If you knew the performance history of TanzaniteOne Stock and the shrinking margins of gemstones you would not be too enthusiastic about wanting the Government to buy the shares. If you knew that if the Government invests $100m they can potentially end up earning just $3-$4m annually if they are lucky you would have realized there ought to be a better way to invest the money than to buy TanzaniteOne shares.

You want Tanzanians to buy under performing assets and you believe you are helping the nation?!!

You need to up your game on investments and economics.

Your posts gets naiv-er as time goes.
I don't even think you know what you are talking about.

Tanzanite is becoming rarer and will only last 10 more years before all deposits will be depleted. Just like oil which will dissappear in the next century if consumed at the current rate.

China has shown a lot of interest, and with a tighter control of the black market, investment in Tanzanite will definately be a smart move.

The price was at its peak in Oct 2012 ... and fell by almost 5% in just two months...... We know whats going on. So, just pack up and get the hell on if you think Tanzanite will never be as precious. Just go somewhere with your bulldozers or whatever u use, why still fighting for lincence renewal???