Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video 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.
MrYFronts:
Are you saying that Rosgeo will not charge EUA market value for buying in? If they do, then there can be no immediate net gain in value, ie EUA cannot immediately turn round and sell their interest for more than they bought it for. If they don't, then Rosgeo will have gifted value to British PIs, which I think we can both agree is unlikely.
The current net value of the JV to EUA is $500k and that will not increase until they have paid for the licenses *and added value beyond that*. Not sure why this is at all controversial.
Hi TMS,
Something of a lame attempt, I expect better of you.
You are fully aware that EUA has spent 500k to have the right to buy into the Rosgeo JV and that Nyud and Moroshkovoe licenses are in the process of being obtained and that there are 6 JV areas being closely looked at by EUA and that money has been raised to buy into the JV areas.
So whilst suggesting the JV has no value to EUA currently is correct it is entirely misleading as you well know.
TheMadShort has posted this!
"EUA approached them saying they wanted help selling the company"
That's funny, I thought the Banks approached EUA :-)
+
Isttime, you asked about the Banks?
"The Banks have agreed to work on a success fee basis, so that their motivation is directly linked to a successful completion of an alternative asset transaction superior to those outlined in the announcement of 15 September 2019. The interest from the Banks is originating from the recent palladium acquisitions namely Stillwater for c. US$2bn by Sibanye in 2017 and NAP for approximately CAD$1bn by Impala Platinum earlier this month. The title of the slides for investors prepared by VTB Capital is as follows: "The Last Non Consolidated Palladium Play".
Also
"No agreement on success fees has yet been reached"
Dated -
Mon, 25th Nov 2019 12:30
RNS Number : 5618U
Eurasia Mining PLC
25 November 2019
Mizman:
Well that's very kind of you to say. I've never made any secret of my position. It does make me laugh that people will automatically discount what I say as being self-interested (and of course it is, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong), while uncritically praising the dedicated rampers copy/pasting nonsense and/or abuse for thousands of posts a month.
TMS,
I don't think you are mad. Definitely very dedicated and have a financial interest in driving the share price down. Whether you are right about valuation of the assets, remains to be seen.
TMS
I have no idea as to your background, nor do i care, but your comments as to how an investment bank operates is complete and utter nonsense, and that is a FACT.
Calamari:
Yeah no doubt. That just makes it all the more hilarious that EUA PIs seem to think the state will gift *them* free money and not the putin-backed megacorp next door.
Calamari:
It's not that complicated. EUA approached them saying they wanted help selling the company. UBS said yes and are taking fees for doing nothing. When the no sale rns comes, EUA will obviously not say that there was never any chance of a sale, they will say that having studied the options the board have decided it is best to go alone. No reputational damage for UBS, retainers banked, trebles all round.
As to why other AIM cos don't do this, it takes quite a bit of time and money to set up with no guarantee of success. I would expect others to start doing similar though, after what EUA have done.
MrYFronts:
And to add to my last post, what are the resources worth given that EUA do not own the any of whatever may be in the JV and therefore obviously cannot sell it to any buyer.
EIE01:
I completely agree that the Board as past masters at ramping and will be desperate to defend the share price. The question is, how long can they avoid admitting that there is no sale? I'm not going to make any firm predictions given that they've managed an astonishing 25 months and three placings so far
If anyone has ever worked within an investment bank such as UBS they would be fully aware of the total nonsense being spoken by some posters here.
Why people pay any attention to such comments is beyond me.
In regards to the current lack of update from the BOD, i would make two observations:
1) I believe 'shortly' is very much approaching and feel we will have an update at the very latest end of next week.
2) EUA have a history of defending the share price, as such i expect they are pushing hard to release share price enhancing news.
I will have to go through the earlier RNS's but I was under impression that UBS fee was centred around a sale happening i.e. no sale no fee so you argument would seem so what irrelevant, a bit like your posts in general. Can i suggest you stop making off the cuff remarks and actually make points that start a conversation and do not make those who have done there research and taken a position laugh.
' EUA were simply gifted huge amounts of value by the state'
The state benefits hugely thats the point.....however fair play you acknowledge the 'huge amounts of value' contained thats good.
It's a moment, an epiphany, time for you to go long! :D
MrYFronts:
I'll cede the point since you do seem to know what you're talking about more than most. What would you say such resources are worth on market given comparative valuations and transactions? I'm not aware of anyone ever paying anything over nominal value for P2 PGMs.
How can any of us interact with a poster with a clear agenda and narrative on the fact he wants his opinions to affect holders to sell to bolster his bank account ? Very few can really move the sp and way up or down but the narrative is to create negativity, none of us know the exact outcome but work on facts we can see from EUA , Russia as a whole , mining sector and the green revolution incoming. This has enabled us to make a decision to invest in EUA , it’s very simple and we hope for the best outcome which IMO will be a sale more than the sp has been this far.
I don’t wish anyone loses money in the market but for the shorters, rampers and deramper s I hope they lose enough to change their greedy, selfish ways for sure .
Hold tight everyone :)
Calamari,
UBS, DLA, WI are simply companies being paid to provide a service. They are expressing no opinion on the valuation.
Hi TMS,
Whilst I agree with your point ref the ACF report I would say you are very much mistaken regarding what EUA have at MT.
The majority of what is at MT is C2, not an inferred resource but what qualifies as an indicated resource or probable reserve so worth more than an inferred resource but less than a measured resource or proven reserve.
A part of the C2 resources at West Nittis just scrape to a inferred resource level because they are besides the C1 reserves there. That is as per Russian Standard.
They also know both WN and L pits extend beyond what has already been proven so whilst they haven't proven how much more there is there it has more value than simply being inferred because geo and magnetic surveys that form part of a JORC report will take into account that there are extensions of the proven reserves/resources.
4 areas of the JV have proven reserves and resources, again to C1 and C2 levels. From tisnigri reports Mac has posted these areas have 3moz of Pd and 625Koz of Pt. If expressed as a Pt equivalent it's around 6.5moz of Pt equivalent.
What EUA have never revealed is what makes up the Pt equivalent figures that give the c105moz of Pt equivalent, it could include the Copper and Nickel which would up the proven 6.5moz Pt equivalent. EUA should have clearly stated how the Pt equivalent was reached and any JORC report that gave a Pt equivalent would list what was included (Copper, Nickel, Pd, Pt, gold etc) and the prices of each material at the time of the report.
So there is a lot more value there than you believe there to be.
POAZ for example may be P2 inferred resources but being the same source rock and same type of multi layered reef type deposit as MT and being close to it has a bearing on it and it's perceived value which is higher in it's potential for delivering on what may be there than if it was a stand alone deposit away from something proven as MT has been.
Beast:
I am saying that an option that EUA paid $500k for is worth... $500k. I am not saying anything controversial. They own nothing else.
It's the bulls who are implying something underhand is going on by suggesting that in fact EUA were simply gifted huge amounts of value by the state.
If they were mining MT then I agree the plan (and 1m is still year 3 levels) becomes more relevant and something to hold the BoD to account over.
But until that decision is made, any criticism over actual 2023 mining output is somewhat moot imo
So your now trying to infer Russia is a rogue state with no understanding or no obligation to honour business agreements licences or contracts despite international banks and global law firms involved in Eurasia mining asset sales?
And how do you think that would benefit Russia as oppossed to developing an area to rival Bushveld with billions of rare earth metals and considerably larger areas to explore in the surrounding areas, whilst ignoring the fact EUA has represented Russia internationally?
And further to that nonsense you think EUA are that short sighted to simply 'flip' the licences to the next party and ignore the vast resources and further potential in the area whilst disrespecting the country they built a relationship with for the past 3 decades?
LMFAO....COMEDY GOLD!
rule 16 roasted stork taste like ......... chicken apparently :)
Re Rule 15: I believe that nothing will be sold and it will therefore never be triggered.
OSF:
Re the JV value, I can maybe accept the option is now worth more than $500k, ($750k? $1m?) although you're going to have to provide evidence as to how, since the only real development since EUA were granted the option is that PGM prices have fallen. What I cannot accept, and what is patently ludicrous, is the idea that this option alone is now worth tens or even hundreds of millions to EUA despite the fact they actually own none of any of the licenses.
a) most of the existing drilling data pre-dates jorc. So let's wait for the jorc, then we'll see.
b) i dont believe the jv areas will be sold yet, unless we get taken over completely. We're an explorer, that will likely continue post-sale with proving these up, and selling them on. Then we realise value.
Now can you answer my question about which test under Rule 15 will be met by the sale, and the Rule in gerneral triggered?
OSF:
Not only is the Sinosteel deal for MT only and not the flanks, not only can it not be activated without a DFS, not *only* is it only for 125koz/year and not 1m, but the latest ACF report came out in September. I will not put what I think of ACF here as it will get my post removed, but surely you can see the problem here.
Can you actually respond to my points re
a)EUA's almost complete lack of proven resources
b)The fact that the JV is only worth $500k to a buyer unless you believe the Russian state would just gift huge value to British PIs over NN.