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:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
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 and Verified Members
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
Chrysalis1 - I could be wrong but to me, it looks quite straightforward. The message I took from it is that they have found a reliable potential buyer but in the meantime its 'business as usual' and we will continue to develop. I hope that's what it means anyway.
How about the possibility that MT is sold now, and the buyers have negotiated / paid for first refusal on Kola JV areas once they are ready, so eventually MT and JV will all be reunited again to become the significant district with MT at its centre
From the recent RNS it suggests the potential acquirer was late on the scene, after the JV. It was the JV that made them appear. IMHO the JV will be included in the sale. Otherwise the current bidder would have been in the running prior to the JV being announced.
All speculation! Will be interesting to see how it unfolds.
The only question I would have is if MT and the wider Kola JV are not being separated, then it implies they are both going. Reason being is if we are not looking to sell MT at least, then based on what other assets we have AIM Rule 15 wouldn't apply. MT has to go for that Rule to be triggered. Nothing else makes sense.
It's not confusing, you just need to understand that Eurasia's assets are WK and MT, Rosgeo JV is seperate as it's a JV. The JV is with Eurasia which has not decided to proceed with any JV assets at this point. It maybe is confusing a little when you do initially read it a couple of times, but even the Rosgeo JV rns tells you that the JV is seperate to the actual assets that Eurasia have. Original bank rns drops the statement referencing the disposal of both assets, at that time the rosgeo JV never existed, nor did it exist when the fsp was started or when non binding offers were tabled.
The AGM is an essential meeting where shareholders get to interact with the BOD. Now outwith the NDAs of the FSP we as shareholders will want to know whats happening. The board will need to have some answers.
In addition the EGM wouldn't have been called so close to the AGM. Its a resolution that would normally (and has historically) been passed then. They clearly did it because they wanted to be able to announce at the AGM in my opinion and was used to put pressure on the potential buyer(s) to conclude by then.
Because the egm resolution expires by agm so logically they will announce something in regards to a deal. I doubt if there isn’t a deal by agm then the resolution to raise money won’t be voted upon again.
I think they are committed to becoming a major player to either illicit a new owner or a rival bid or as the fallback way to full value. I think fsp couldn't run any longer and didnt need to if they are focusing on asset sale as not technically a takeover. The potential bidders should have the info they need now. EUA will likely be working on jorcing some of the state approved resources as hinted by SP Angel. The bidders will understand the price goes up the more is done.
New ACF valuation will kick this on if lands next week.
Some views that essentially point towards a theory that the BOD is creating a landscape for a Dutch auction to which in hindsight seems to have been the play for some time IMHO.
Everyone’s opinion of the direction and outcome is of course their own, based on the research knowledge and the RNS’s that we’ve now all had the chance to consume, over and over.
My main place of question currently is; What evidence if any is there to support the theory that a deal ‘needs’ to be done by the AGM? Is this just a theory because it’s a solid date that we know or is there significant evidence and advantages to the company for achieving this??
Like you I've read it many times too. I think if you read it all at face value it's true, appears contradictory. However as has been said many times this is like a game of poker. If they went with purely the first statement. It would give the impression that the credible party is the only one in the running. That they were more than happy with the offer. They clearly aren't otherwise we would have heard what the offer was.
If they ran just with the later statement then it would indicate we aren't selling and are going alone.
I still can't see MT and the JV being split. They are integral to each other in building the district.
I think its telling us thay we are close but not there, those that were at the table but not the credible party need to reconsider their offers. They still have time to gazump. We are close with one offer, but theres still things that need to be sorted. They shouldn't rest on their laurels because we are happy to go it alone if valuations/agreements can't be met because this is a once in a lifetime opportunity.
Another poker card being played.
Still think the AGM is the ultimate deadline, so not long to wait.
Forgot to add the important bit. If the credible party's preference is to take all the company's assets, then the threat of Eurasia going alone and keeping the jewel in the crown by way of Kola ; having now proved that they have the finances to do so by way of shareholder support from the EGM to monetize additional equity, then this may well be the lever to get them to pay top dollar.
Either way I am comfortable with my investment here and feel the BOD know what they are doing.
Been invested here for a while and enjoyed the nautical banter from Commodore Tilly and his motley crew which certainly lightens things up here.
I've read through the RNS about ten times now. Whilst it is confusing in so far as:-
i) I n the first paragraph and main statement the company states they are now focusing on a sale of substantially all of its assets from a credible party (after having received a number of proposals)
It is only when you get to the Exec officers final qualified comments that,
Ii) they tell us they are focusing on creating the ongoing opportunity by developing the KOLA J/B project.
There are multiple references to bidders and proposals in the plural throughout the RNS to suggest that there was indeed substantial interest.
My view is, that whilst the RNS is unclear and contradictory to a certain extent that the sale of all or part of the company is pretty much on the cards.
It would seem to my way of thinking, the predicament is, whether to sell all of it or a partial sale with a view to creating greater value from the KOLA assets which as yet have not been maximized.
From the BOD"s point of view I suspect they are very aware that their investor's expectations are for a full sale and then sharing out the loot which up until now appears to have always been the plan. On the other hand however, since the Rosgeo JV and as now expressed by the Executive Officers it is probably to go down the route of the partial sale and build a business from it's remaining assets.
Either way, it would seem that there are two separate acceptable and distinctive offers/proposals on the table. Whilst there are still risks, in my mind whichever of these proposals are actioned there should be a significant adjustment to the upside of the current share price.
Perhaps it is intended to put the proposals out to shareholder vote, skewed with a recommendation to take the partial sale and dividends by the BOD?
Just my musings of course and could be totally off the mark.