Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
Toffers- I think you’re speaking a load of nonsense.
Nothing you have posted suggests in any way that the hearing in November wouldn’t be the final hearing. Ie a hearing at which the judge, having heard evidence and submissions, decides whether the claim succeeds and the quantum of any damages.
It is not standard practice for the court to have additional hearings for the fun of it. A claim sets out the allegations and the loss allegedly suffered. If they haven’t stated that they wanted to sell the shares at a point prior to this by this stage I would suggest that any prospect of the level of damages you so readily foresee is close to zero.
You have been incredibly critical of the company’s response to the litigation. In part justifiably so. However: IF the company is insured and the claimants haven’t said they wanted to sell the shares why is any of this price sensitive? Also, why criticise the company for wanting a witness at a late hour when clearly the claimants can’t even value their alleged loss (according to you) at this stage.
I think, like any sane person, I may ignore your spurious, one sided ramblings until there is a bit more coherence and balance in your posts.
The case is set for trial in November. From what has been posted that is the final hearing. Not a preliminary issue.
Given judgement follows the evidence at what point do you say the claimants can give evidence once they know if they have won the first point? This sounds wholly inconsistent with the likely procedure.
In the claim form, original or intended, do the claimants allege that they wanted to sell any shares at any specific point in time?
To seek damages they would require to prove that the the court.
If they don’t plead it they can’t prove it and the judge isn’t going to randomly decide that they would, could or should have sold at an earlier date had they received the certificates.
If you want to educate everyone here on the law at least try and explain both sides to the coin and remove the negative filters.
Are we all just operating on an assumption that the directors are instructing solicitors directly and paying for them without this showing on the accounts?
Or is it more likely that it’s being funded by insurers and the insurers are making the calls as to how the litigation proceeds?
Not convinced we have absolute clarity on this from an RNS but the lawyers aren’t going to work unless they know they will be paid, the company is probably going to involve insurers as soon as the claim was intimated.
So yeah… would love to know more but right now I feel it’s more likely than not that the insurers are running the litigation, therefore cover the majority of any successful claim and the company is largely insulated from the result irrespective of the outcome.
But whatever. Probably more fun to think some random behind a keyboard knows more about the law than the lawyers involved and more about the case and the company than the directors…
Not read every post on this subject but….
I would assume that EUA had to inform their insurers when this claim was made (if not significantly before hand).
I would assume that the insurers are either running the case or at least signing off any decisions being made. This would ordinarily be the case where insurer is potentially paying anything.
I would assume that a solicitor of however many years would have considered that.
The decision to continue running this is presumably a risk the insurer considers appropriate.
If the insurer is running the case the company can say that the outcome has no bearing on a potential sale.
IF the above is wrong and the insurer is not involved then yeah, we are all doomed and big ball of flames incoming etc etc.
What is your take on it?
Having actually read the RNS it sounds like virtue signalling to say that a subsidiary is subject to sanctions but the parent company isn’t other than in respect of the specified subsidiary.
They have set up a committee and will cooperate with the sanctions.
So please enlighten us what else we should be taking from an RNS on another company?
Average around 38p. Percentages on HL May be slightly out.
Yeah basically didn’t have the funds to keep chasing it down and didn’t have the confidence that a reversal would take place before I needed said funds.
Haven’t sold. Just sitting with my fingers crossed cause I don’t trust myself trading it.
Page 23 of the report:
“ The Company continues to progress discussions with regard to the potential sale of its assets, appointing KPMG Russia as agent in May 2022, and has set aside sufficient funds to complete and submit a Definitive Feasibility Study for the Monchetundra project in November 2022.”
I may misunderstand but is this suggesting if someone doesn’t buy by Nov 22 then the company progresses the DFS?
From the recent RNS appointing a new NED:
Christian Schaffalitzky, Executive Chairman commented: "The Directors are pleased that Artem Matyushok, a high profile M&A professional has agreed to join Eurasia. The experience of Artem and his knowledge of Eurasia can significantly speed up our Russian assets sale process".
Perhaps I am being pedantic, but why specify “Russian assets”? Does this mean EUA are now potentially looking to sell all Russian assets?
When the asset sale was first considered it was prior to the JV. This is perhaps the clearest indication that EUA’s stake in that JV is also on the table for any sale.
Same goes for anything though.
If it’s Moex, why not announce it?
If it’s no deal, why not announce it?
Suspended no one can do anything about it anyway. To me I am hoping that this is positive news but needs to be announced by a company on a different exchange before EUA can publish. Fingers crossed.
Try checking the news. Should give you at least a hint of what is different now from December…
A conflict which is out of control of the BoD (obviously) and which I fully anticipate they are doing their best to ride and prepare for the future.
Whilst the share price is obviously lower and not great to see in the portfolio I don’t think anything (bar the sale) that the BoD announce right now would make any difference.
I’m hanging around hoping that this comes good. I trust the BoD, and suspect things may have been looking very different but for factors out with their control.
The company has not been directly impacted by any sanctions - yet.
As things escalate however the risk of additional sanctions increases and the risk of Putin retaliating in some way which will adversely effect shareholders also increases.
There is also a concern about having any dealings in Russia. Many people will now object to that on morality / principles.
Combine the images we are shown on the news with the plummeting share price and it presents as a mad dash to offload and get out.
I’m hugely under water here as a % of my initial holding. I have thought repeatedly about selling. I have thought repeatedly about trying to buy more.
At the end of the day though I lack the courage to actively trade this, lack the funds to average down and also am not prepared to risk throwing that money away.
So I will continue to watch the news and hope for a positive outcome at some point.
What is happening in Ukraine is a tragedy that I’m not convinced anyone expected or predicted. However that is for a different forum. This forum in my eyes is to speak about these shares, this company. So putting aside (for the purposes of this post) the human cost of the war and trying to find a light at the end of the tunnel I hope that some form of compromise is found soon, that Sanctions can be scaled back and that Russia resumes trade with the world.
How that comes about and in what timescale I don’t know.
I suspect my investment here may never make a profit. This is down to the behaviour and actions of the Russian state. I don’t place any blame on the company or the board. The board can only announce what news it has. I also would expect them to be reviewing options for the future very carefully and potentially keeping their heads down until things ‘normalise’.
Horrible situation for all those in Ukraine and all those also who will be significantly impacted by the fallout, whether economic or otherwise. I hope those who post here with glee about the falling share price give serious consideration to their behaviour.
Very true. From a little research online other miners with NPV projects which they sell tend to realise between 5 and 30% of the NPV as per JORC depending on circumstances.
Great RNS, good progress but still doesn’t confirm how much it adds to the actual market value of the company.
We await more positive news and hopefully a sale in the coming weeks.
Or they couldn’t say anything due to NDAs.
Or they no longer have a need to pitch to investors.
I’m not surprised that they didn’t attend given the lack of RNS.
There are many explanations for what has happened. We just need to wait for the board to update us when they can.