The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Rowka,
Yep I agree. There is quite a lot of outside negativity but that's usually a good sign that the share is doing well. All here for the big win.
Onwards and upwards.
TomTwit,
You have access to the second EUA Telegram group and not the original. The main group full of LTHs was locked months and months ago as it is and excellent group of nice people who share tons of research. Since we know that larger groups usually turn to chaos (as seen here when the derampers come out to play) we voted to keep the group locked and open a second one. This second group that you have access to largely contains people from here/ new investors so if you have an issue you should be directing it to them and not GMF who literally opened that group to share all the research that was done in the one place to make it easy for people to access. The original group that you do not have access to have been measuring our body fat percentages and posting results Pre and Post eating curry for the past week because we are just chilling waiting for a massive sale.
In the Telegram group that you do have access to, Rowka has been mentioned a handful of times (out of 10s of thousands of messages) and it is normally something like “Rowka posted this research paper on LSE”. The paper is discussed and debated on how relevant it is to the final sale price (for example the Rh from some studies is in the wider area and not necessarily in our licence but there may also be some in our licence). Everyone gets encouraged to read the research and draw their own conclusions. Some people have had digs at Rowka because believe it or not some people don’t like each other. This is usually met with “let keep this to EUA” to which they reply “sorry, you’re right”. If your life has been ruined by something in the group then flag it up so it can be addressed otherwise people don't know what's up. Your first response of racing to glue tongue to bum on LSE is very poor form and reminds me of Randall Weems from Recess.
Anyway, more important than who likes who:
Target resources of 15.5 Moz = good
+ 7Moz = goood
Plan for 1000Koz pa = gooood
Keith's email re MT "we intend to update on developments as these are fully verified and proven by the Company in due course". = goooood
Keith's email re interim results “we will update regarding interim results quite soon” = gooooood
Still have multiple interested parties = goooooood
Rowkas paper of other resources giving a buyer less scope to negotiate down = gooooooood.
Sub 20p top ups = goooooooood.
Me still buzzed from learning new valuation methods from Brookkers on here = gooooooooood (Joey voice from friends).
GLA,
Alta
Good Morning TomTwit,
Did someone steal the toy from your cereal packet this morning?!
I’ve been posting on LSE for over a year now, also have had several enjoyable conversations with Rowka in private about the immense value contained within EUA assets, so if you’re trying to cause trouble you are sadly going to fail!
The telegram group is fully open, nothing to hide.
Tomtwit the grass, a snitch not a very good attribute. Anyway were all here for same reason the full sale of eua.. anything over 50p is a positive hoping for more but lets see.
tomtwit - your post earlier today 5.50
"gmf78- I have just been catching up on your Telegram group, I was sickened to read the constant abuse from you and your cronies in the direction of Rowka, then you have the nerve to come here and start posting. You really are something else."
To be honest I have never seen any abuse of Rowka coming from gmf78, on this board - and think that both have very positive outlooks for EUA outcomes. I think that they may have arrived at different estimates on likely sale price, but both were multiples of current price. I don't read the Telegram group so not sure what is said on that forum, but until I see anything unpleasant on this board I will value the comments of Rowka and gmf78. We don't want to create a Monday morning dispute between posters when it is not necessary - and would be a distraction. All the best. Mayt...
If they were going to shaft us then the licenses wouldn’t have been granted, also note the fsp started even before we were given approval for the flanks, this shows confidence. Also just think would a no deal really be a shafting??? Sorry lads instead of having $3b for your palladium now you’ll have to extract $40b from the ground and reap the tremendous rewards yourselves.
gmf78 I'm just looking at the ways in which we could be shafted, hope we're not. I always believe that if something looks too good to be true then it usually is
Dog Sh*t sandwiches are yummy but the Russians have yet to fully appreciate the Marmite like meatiness that they contain.
Rowka, you said:
"PP if you did some detailed research, rather than cherry picking snippets, you would realise NN put a lot of pressure on the government to ease restrictions on PGM’s and associated subjects."
If this is the case, and you found this during your detailed research, do you have the documentation of the laws that were changed. All amendments are listed at the site I pointed to but can't see anything there.
My business uses precious metals, Rhodium in particular and the prices have definitely fed through into related manufacturing costs, partly why I looked at investing in something like this.
Legislation is the only "stance" I trust.
And what have you got against dog **** sandwiches?!
PP - why are you persisting with saying this is a concern?
The subsidiaries that hold the licences cannot sell or transfer the licence, but there is absolutely nothing to stop that company itself changing ownership. You’ve said that on your copy paste from Thomson Reuters analysis earlier on.
It is clearly constructed so the company that holds the licence is based in Russia and as such pays taxes in Russia. Nothing to stop the owners being based anywhere else in the world.
As an example, Norilsk Nickel operate several licences and their shares are traded on several global indices. Nothing to worry about. Really isn’t
For those interested in "detailed research" the amendments to Russian mining law are listed here, I don't see any amendments to the laws previously discussed though.
hTTps://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://docs.cntd.ru/document/9003403&prev=search&pto=aue
Licences being issued could be taken as a sign that none of the foreign ownership or the state rights to purchase rare elements and metals is a problem but the laws still stand as far as I'm aware.
Just a reminder that EUA holds the licences through 2 distinct subsidiaries, one for MT and one for WK. So nothing to stop the company selling one or both mines to different companies.
So it will be a Russian company that holds the licences, a Russian company that pays taxes on their activities and the ultimate ownership will be of less concern than the revenue it generates for the Russian economy.
If the federal state was concerned they wouldn’t have granted approval for the mining licences. They have done because it isn’t a concern obviously.
Oh dear, it was quite cordial until you brought up the "t*t", facts are that the law is there so it's a risk. NN are currently as popular as dogsh*t sandwiches in Russia, it's a concern at least.
OK, so it would be an about turn on their current stance, not impossible, a risk, but not expected.
This next part is concerning as Rowka has pointed out REE's are to be announced.
"Deposits of federal significance. Russian law contains the concept of a "deposit of federal significance" which includes, among other things, mineral deposits that:
Contain uranium, high quality raw quartz, rare earth elements of the yttrium group, nickel, cobalt, tantalum, niobium, beryllium, lithium, diamond deposits or ore deposits of the platinum group metals (if these reserves were set out by the state balance of mineral resources on or after 1 January 2006)."
thomson reuters
Does this following law point towards only a full sale being viable and that we couldn't sell one site as discussed?
"Under Russian law, the rights granted pursuant to a subsoil licence cannot be subleased, assigned, sold or otherwise transferred except in certain limited circumstances. Therefore, in practice, the "transfer" of subsoil use rights is usually realised by transferring the shares or the participating interest in the charter capital of the legal entity holding the subsoil licence."
thomson reuters
Last day of September this Wednesday. Let’s have some news! GLA