Member Info for Broxburn68

It would seem that the contents of the article have been passed over by many unfortunately, John Helmer is a long serving foreign correspondent in Russia; "a fascinating and talented fellow, if not a fair bit over the top in his pursuit of truths", according to Wikipedia, lol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Helmer_(journalist)

Some excepts from the article are:

Russia, which is the world’s second largest source of platinum reserves and mine production, is much more attractive by comparison: South Africa’s loss is Russia’s gain. And not just for Norilsk Nickel, the dominant Russian miner, but also for small platinum mining companies. Right now, they say they have the proven deposits; what they need is the cash to pay for the mining operations to dig it out, refine and sell it.

The problem for Russian platinum miners is that the supply of relatively low-cost alluvial – river-dredged — sources of the metal are petering out. To make up for this, junior Russian miners must raise investment to finance costly underground excavation. If they succeed, their combined output of platinum will double. It’s on speculation of this that the share price of Eurasia Mining quadrupled in London last week.

This year’s alluvial mining season is already ended; the rivers have frozen. There is reluctance on the part of the alluvial miners who are not listed on foreign stock exchanges to publish regular and reliable production and sales data. Output at Eurasia, which mines in western Russia and is listed in London, is growing; at Amur and Koryakgelodobycha in the far east, the platinum is running out.

Monchetundra will be primarily a palladium producer, with an unusually high ratio, 3 to 1, of palladium to platinum. Published market projections, based on a palladium price of $1,000 per ounce, indicate earnings from Monchetundra will be around $28 million in 2021 and triple that within two years. The current palladium price is $1,778.

EUA have had very small levels of production though, so please be careful in any comparisons to Norlisk/ Amur, etc, and don't aim too high with projected valuations of the company's assets.

@BertieMC, I believe that Queeld Ventures are owned by the wife of Dmitry Ananyev. They're a Cyprus based venture capital operation. There has been some excellent research on Queeld by another poster recently; I think you would find a google search of Mr Ananyev interesting.

Queeld are just shareholders in EUA have no bearing on on the future performance of the company.

This is an extract from the 2014 accounts showing the purchase of the 50% stake from AAP if this may help as a base for current valuations, though there have been many advances since then of course.

June 2014 the company announced that in addition to 50% already held it acquired additional 50% of Urals Alluvial Platinum Limited (the “UAP” or “Acquiree”) from its joint venture partner for the nominal value. The acquisition was subject to South African exchange control approval, which was lifted in September 2014. As a result of this transaction the Company obtained 100% control over the UAP and increased indirect control over UAP subsidiaries (Note 5.2).
The primary reason for the acquisition was to obtain larger interest in West Kytlim project 75% of which was controlled by the Acquiree. The business combination was achieved in stages. Its previously held 50% equity interest was fair valued prior to acquisition.
Due to significant borrowings on the balance of the Acquiree the fair value of previously held interest was nil. Deemed result on disposal of previously held interest was nil.
Following acquisition certain financial restructures had been made and the borrowings provided to the Acquiree by the parties outside of the Group had been waived. The Group fair valued the net assets of Acquiree transferred on the Group (note 5.3.3).
Bargain purchase gain of £1,327,356 arose on the acquisition of full control over Acquiree because the consideration paid was less than fair value of identifiable net assets attributable to the owners of the Company (Note 9). The Acquiree had not generated any revenue since acquisition.
2014
Assets acquired and liability recognised at the date of acquisition £
Non-current assets
Property, plant and equipment 9,691
Intangible assets 4,652,378
Current assets
Other receivables 241,798
Cash and cash equivalents 23,217
Non-current liabilities
Borrowings* (3,924,002)
Current liabilities
Trade and other payables (53,078)
Fair value of the net assets acquired 950,005
Other receivables represent advances made, prepayments and VAT receivables, which expected to be recovered
and/expensed within 12 months.
*Borrowings represent the loan provided by the Company to the UAP prior to the acquisition transaction.

Yes, jimjam it's fairly small scale as alluded to in my initial post and if trading on Tuesday does not show any adverse reaction, I'll take this as a positive.

These were genuine questions, mac4671. It would be nice to receive reasoned answers.

"Further potential resources exist in the on strike continuation of the mineralisation at Loipishnune as it extends into the area between Loipishnune and West Nittis, beyond the current mining license"

I've been watching EUA since it has come to prominence in the last couple of weeks or so (as has most of the AIM investing community by the looks of it!) and I would't be posting if I didn't have an interest in investing here. I've not done so yet. There are still a few points that I need to consider. Maybe I'm looking a gift horse in the mouth and inspecting each of it's teeth, but here goes:

There were 17m warrants admitted to the market on Friday. The late trades exceeded this amount though. I would expect that these were large sell/buy orders which were filled off market by many opposite smaller buys and sells by brokers. The share price dropped. There was no ii involvement here as at Sep 19 and at this MC I would not expect there to be so.

There are a further 18.7m warrants due to be admitted to the market on Tuesday. If there is no adverse market reaction then, I would be happy that the warrant holders are keen to keep holding, which would instil a great amount of confidence. The amount of warrants is not massive in the scale of total shares in issue, but still significant.

Judging by Mr Suschov's comments about dividends on the proactive interview, this must mean that the intention is to sell the assets of the company, surely? Considering the retained losses, this is the only practical way to achieve a dividend distribution to all shareholders in the near term. These dividends must be distributed pro-rata amongst all ordinary shareholders, including directors.

I'm sceptical about the valuations of the company given by some on here to say the least. If that was the case, why sell up? They are debt free and have loans they can draw down on. The resources quoted by the company are to a large degree speculative and not confirmed. Many even lie outside the land they have permits in place for.

I'll also be looking closely at any TR-1s issued; the Queeld situation is fascinating but as an earlier poster suggested it's nothing directly to do with the company. Maybe they are selling down.

Any sensible comments much appreciated and best to all. No twitter links please!!

Thanks Silverite for sharing your research. Much appreciated. I hope I've not been too presumptious, but I've had a look back at your previous posts on EUA and this gives another fascinating dimension to this share which I was not aware of. Maybe TR-1s will be of high significance when they are issued, hopefully soon.

I would also recommend that anyone else researching this share like myself also looks at previous posts made by TrickyDickyTwo, which again I found very enlightening. I note that both of you have been involved here for quite some time.

Wishing you all the very best and it's good to read some posts of some substance here occasionally!

@mac4671, these buys are most likely the purchase of options granted to the participants in lieu of fees and salaries on 2nd November 2018. These options were at 0.42p. I hope this helps.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/EUA/eurasia-mining-plc-issue-of-equity-and-options-and-directors-holdings-lshdd6lwgvwx7id.html

Would that not involve a reduction in capital, which means cash would be returned to shareholders at paid-up (par) value of the shares?

The issue I see with dividends is that they can only (in general) be paid from retained profit . There are £26,738,291 of retained losses on the balance sheet as at 30th June, so the only way profits can be generated in the near term to provide funds for a dividend is to sell the assets of the company. At what price is a matter for debate indeed.

Preference shares usually pay a fixed dividend and do rank above ordinary shares in the pecking order. I can't see any preference shares listed at CH however.

I must say that I don't see the relevance of some of the company's tweets to the current situation . It also puzzles me that a company which has been trading since 1995 and has had numerous fundraisings recently can be suddenly worth a fortune in the eyes of some.

I think that we would all agree that some flesh needs put on the bone with regard to the near future and look forward to the issue of RNSs from the company very soon.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03010091/filing-history

Thanks gggg21. The majority are ordinary trades with delayed publication, which made me come to the dark pool scenario. It would be interesting to see what you think.

In a number of these trades the execution price of these large trades lies in between, or very close to, the previous bid and offer prices. This may seem unusual as you would normally expect large buys or sells to be executed at a significant premium or discount to the prevailing trades.

Perhaps these trades were "dark pool" trades; I've seen these before in other shares I've owned. Dark pools allow investors to trade without exposure until after the trade has been executed.

The primary advantage of dark pool trading is that investors making large trades can do so without exposure while finding buyers and sellers. This prevents heavy price devaluation, which would otherwise occur. The original matching of trades in a dark pool would be done based on the average price of the best bid and the best offer available on a displayed stock exchange.

In effect these are a mechanism to conduct large transactions in shares without significantly altering the share price at the time.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dark-pool.asp

LB28: There are accumulated losses of £26.6m in the balance sheet as at 30th June this year. Dividends must be paid from accumulated profits after tax. Even if the £50m somehow made it's way in total to the bottom line, this would leave far less than 2p a share available from distribution.

EQUITY 30.06.19
Capital and reserves
Issued capital 29,397,189
Reserves 3,803,544
Accumulated losses (26,632,516)

https://www.eurasiamining.co.uk/investors/financial-reports/download?path=EUA%2BInterim%2B2019.pdf

I would think so, and the obvious is the very significant upside when copper rises again. Sooner rather than later hopefully.

Yes, it may be insignificant as you say. I noticed the following broker update which might be of interest. There's a mixed bag of views generally. Wishing you well here.

Zacks Investment Research downgraded shares of KAZ MINL PLC/ADR (OTCMKTS:KZMYY) from a hold rating to a sell rating in a research report released on Friday, Zacks.com reports.

Several other research analysts have also commented on KZMYY. ValuEngine lowered KAZ MINL PLC/ADR from a hold rating to a sell rating in a research report on Wednesday, October 16th. Credit Suisse Group raised KAZ MINL PLC/ADR from an underperform rating to a neutral rating in a research report on Friday, June 28th. Two analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, one has issued a hold rating and two have given a buy rating to the stock. KAZ MINL PLC/ADR currently has a consensus rating of Hold and an average target price of $5.25.

https://rivertonroll.com/news/2019/10/22/kaz-minl-plc-adr-otcmktskzmyy-stock-rating-lowered-by-zacks-investment-research.html

There's certainly been a large voulme of late trades both buys and sells. Intriguing..

The Nuclear Safety Council (CSN), renewed in March, continues to evaluate Berkeley's request to build the uranium processing plant. Theoretically, the report should be completed before the end of the year. But there is no specific date planned to make the decision, according to sources from the agency.

The National Court has rejected the administrative appeal filed by the association Ecologists in Action of Salamanca against the authorization granted in 2015 by the Secretary of State for Energy to Berkeley Minera Spain to start the uranium mine project in Retortillo (Salamanca).

https://www.lainformacion.com/empresas/justicia-tumba-recurso-ecologistas-uranio-berkeley/6515549/

Very good synopsis by flundra earlier; that's how I read the situation as well. Still no real news, but I'll post what I can find. Looks like FIL may still be selling down looking at some recent trades.

Perhaps a foot-long is being a bit greedy...