Member Info for Alfe

CesarMonty,

are you thick or thick? if you are talking about the 2008 issue, yes DS paid 5p each for 60 million. But he has been averaging down since and beyond that 60 million. None of his other 465 million holdings are bought beyond 2p. He converted a USD500k loan note for 133 million shares, at 0.28p. His latest share issue of 9 million shares are priced at 0.5p for his fees.

Do you really freaking believe his share average is 5p, and that he takes 5p as a starting point to calculate how much he would want at the end of the day? No, because his average is way way lower than 5p.

How about showing the full picture than asking people to do their research? How about do yours first?

ShareAnorak has been in the share before suspension, so I hope you don't cast aspersions of him like that.

On the other hand MrSpeculator has only been in it since Thursday.

Again - I'm going to repeat this. The only "fundamentals" that matter in a M&A acquisition is the price that the buyer is willing to pay, and the price CS, DS and the rest are willing to sell. Contrary to the rumours here, DS has been in since 0.5p, not 5p. So 30p isn't out of whack for him.

As always, temper expectations and hope they get surpassed. Don't set them too high only to get disappointed if it really goes for lower than £1.

Thanks for the reply! I understand that grunt work would be done by more junior bankers, as my ex was one of them! I do understand from said ex about deal structures, so I was wondering if Ian Hart or Jason Hutchings wanting their names on the RNS (and the deal) would be indicative of any possible signs of its relative size (in terms of $) and importance.

Thanks for the info, ShareAnorak.

Would it be possible to elucidate a bit more info? I understand the UBS names on the FSP RNS - Jason Hutchings, and Ian Hart, are UBS's Head of M&A in Natural Resources in EMEA and Co-Chairman for IB in the UK. Are these names indicative of who's the deal head on the case or are they just generic?

Usually it will be just under 195p if the offer is 195p. There will still be liquidity of some sort, since the offeror will often try to purchase off as many shares on the free market from people who are willing to sell.

There might be times that it might just exceed the offer price by a tiny bit if people think a better offer is going to come, or if they think the offeror will up its offer, but usually it's within a very tight range of the publicised offer price.

It's not going to be Sibanye-Stillwater, although they're really hungry for M&A.

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2020-05-14-sibanyes-froneman-says-no-ma-until-debt-cut-and-dividend-revived/

Anyway I have no beef with you Mac. I have no idea how telling MrSpeculator to shut up with absolutes that he cannot guarantee like "dividends will be offered" (because we don't know if, or when, a sale goes through, or when EUA turns to profit), got you into this.

I've been in EUA long enough, Mac, since around 3p. Perhaps you need to stop thinking you're the only one here long enough.

But since you decide to go down the route of defending MrSpeculator, then which is it? Full sale of the company (a takeover), or sale of only MT leading to a special dividend?

Do you agree that CS, DS and the bunch would also not be offering a WK dividend if the company is still making a loss?

Being in production doesn't mean that we will be getting a dividend. AFAIK, EUA is still not in profit - why would we be getting a dividend now? And why would we be getting a dividend for WK if the company were to be sold under the current FSP process? No one has claimed to the contrary that we wouldn't be getting a dividend years down the road, if EUA isn't sold.

What I don't get is - Mac, I have no idea why you're supporting MrSpectator's delusional ideas that we will be getting a dividend AND having a sale. But if you want to undermine your own credibility for him, sure.

Mac, I am aware about the Sinosteel EPC, and from a value perspective, that's actually better for LTHs in the long run.

In fact I don't even know what your point is (and whether it's for me) so I'm leaving there as that.

With all due respect, you can't say you aren't ramping the share in the first line and then claim "dividend will be coming" (in the definitive) in the other. I don't think anyone else on this BB has ever claimed that will actually happen in the short term.

So are we selling the company or are we producing enough to give a dividend?

Lol sure. I do hope the best for you, because that would be the best for me too. My average cost per share is less than half than yours so I don't have as much to worry about losses as you would, comparatively.

Just honestly stop ramping the share and claiming that there is absolutely NO risk for anyone for getting in at this price point, AND don't make assumptions of what this will be sold for. Because we don't know what it will be sold of (or if it will be sold), end of.

Hi fellow Bristolian - will do, will look into WRES as you suggested.

I think we shouldnt talk more about other stocks lest other people burn us on the stake in this BB :P

Eh. Barrick's license rights are also enshrined in law. It might help you emotionally to discount Barrick's circumstances, but logically it's also a risk that one needs to take into account. I can't change if you can't acknowledge the possible (not saying it will definitively happen, because I think it's rather less likely for EUA) risks that any EUA investor should be cognizant of.

MrSpeculator, given that you are the kind who only buys in just after FSP is launched without even knowing what a "fair valuation" of EUA is, aren't you the kind of people who goes in short-term and takes a 15% loss? You don't even have the patience to wait if FSP falls through (which would cause the share price to drop) and if we mine MT alone in the next decade or so.

A bit rich of you to not realise the profile I was painting was someone like you, no?

gfd, as said, I agree that the intrinsic value of EUA's assets are more than 20p, and I do hope for a return equivalent to that. But such valuations are irrelevant to the final one we get from the offerors/BOD. It is for this reason that I only have a price I wish I would get, but I don't fuss too much about it.

After all, Lonmin and Ophir Energy's assets were worth way more than what they were offered and bought for. We might get a way bigger premium that NAP for no reason as well. That final price is the only one that truly matters.

On return from suspension, it isn't my ideal but I'm glad the EUA employees who exercised their options are getting their shares.

I'm not saying that it's "very risky", but there is still some risk involved at 20p or whatever the price is now. Not "no risk". However that has not been communicated in many of the rampy posts and I did see comments of the "is this a no brainer we gonna get rich" ilk, people selling entire stakes in GGP or whatsoever to put it here. I personally did top up a tiny bit at 12/13p so I do think there was some upside then. But perhaps a tiny bit of risk awareness would have been prudent?

I believe you do agree there still remain some risks - MT flanks (might go the way of Barrick's Fedorova Tundra), potential bidders (does NN have enough $ even after their expanded credit lines?), and sale options (only MT or all?), that might influence the price, and the length EUA shares would be held. We might be stuck in the same 5 month situation or worse for EUA to ramp up production for MT (if it decides to go it alone). Good for LTH who don't mind holding EUA for ages - however all these don't seem to be very much acknowledged with many newbies hoping to gain a quick gain + exit once EUA is sold.

One of my other concerns is that pre-suspension we were always a bit wary that the stock might and can retrace, but no one seems to be acknowledge shares might go up and as well as down, or sideways, as people who have been here since ages ago would now. And that's a bit of an issue - those who bought at 22p is now sitting at 15% loss. If anything I think it's in nobody's interest for this BB then to be infested with LancashireLads that has been moaning all days about losing his entire investment whilst we were suspended. People are free to take their own investments at whatever price range but I hope they're not just blinded by the belief of a 100% upside because like I said, we can't predict the future.

Thanks for articulating what I am feeling with the BB these days. Pre-lifting of suspension people posted prices as banter - something they would like and hope they would get. Like the little guess in what the first day post-suspension price would be. And that was in good light-hearted fun. People were more willing to talk about the key developments that suggested potential upside (WK, Tipil, MT, Sinosteel agreement, MT flanks, CITIC and VTB approach, appointments of NEDs) than make a definite claim about price.

I'm not sure whether it's the influx of new posters but the tone has since changed and has gone towards "this WILL reach 50p, WILL reach 70p, there is upside if you get in below 30-40p" as if it's a done deal. As with everything in life, there is nothing certain, and the latter posts this BB has been infested with has been frankly quite rampy. Especially by relative newbies who didn't even know what the ACF report was on Thursday!

I can say for sure I have trust in the BOD and their ability to get the best deal, but I cannot be in good conscience tell anyone for sure that buying EUA at 20p is "A TOTALLY GOOD IDEA, NO RISK!!1¡¡¡!!!" because no one knows for sure. The only constant I know is that the BOD can be trusted, but everything else is out of our control. Including whether a sale will go on, or even if it does, whether we get a really good price for our EUA shares. And that's what some surprisingly seasoned investors don't seem to get on this BB.

Sibir? The share that was worth £6 six months before it got suspended at 174p for corporate governance and missing money issues? And Gazprom's £4/£5 offer is a win?

Do you actually know what you're investing in or are you just delusional?

This is slightly off-topic but what's the deal with EEE? Their Georgian ops don't seem to be going well, and the thing largely going for them is Munni Munni. It just seems buying Artemis Resources on the ASX instead made more sense, unfortunately can't get in since they requested for suspension for capital raising first thing today.