Member Info for Crocqman

Agree. I received no acknowledgement to my email query some 2 weeks ago when they have normally replied quite quickly in the past.

I sent a follow up yesterday to outline my dissatisfaction at the current state of affairs, radio silence and dwindling trust and belief in the 'old' regime, the lesser of the 2 options in the vote.

Not expecting any reply, but we'll see. If anything it will just say they are working hard, etc, etc

Companies like this like to talk about dividends, but it usually comes from Q's raised by shareholders and is a standard response rather than a real wish to do so. Other than a 1-off payment for an exceptional money making event, I don't think talk of dividends is worthwhile.

And higher gas prices over winter, or another compressor increasing production does not warrant a payment to shareholders. Imo

They would be better off re-investing any money, reducing debt or improving terms of debt.

Looking to pay a dividend when the mcap is less than 50m is really not sensible and would not maken this a more attractive investment.

Gas storage and taking advantage of the SFB site is where the possibilities lie, but likely longer term

Good that you got a reply.

Not even an acknowledgement to anybody my 2 or 3 emails this year and now of my IQs were ever accepted or published after some initial success.

I suspect my email address is on a black list for some reason, but no idea why that may be.

The reply doesn't really say anything though, unsurprisingly.

I think it shows that the changing strategy is slowly producing the desired results.

It will take time, but profitability is around the corner if (IF!) they can deliver on current projects and continue to showcase and improve the tech

The economic climate has been against companies like EQT since COVID times as investors have moved their cash to less riskier prospects, but that could be changing. The US elections and Ukraine/Middle East situations will be having an impact on a more global level.

Not saying mgmt have not made mistakes, but they have taken action to move on a different and more sensible trajectory of growth.

None of this will appease those who only look at the SP though.

This coming from someone who is considerably down, but still sees the potential here if not a route back to break even.

Thanks Couerdelion on the 2027 date. I looked back a few RNS's and couldn't see a firm date.

I may have had an earlier date in mind from one of my other stocks

I think many shareholders here are pinning their hopes on the site potential. Outside of SFB and this possibility, none of the other assets or proposals are of interest to me unless they are self-paying with no real outlay

Looks like an LSE glitch with prices today, yesterday's closing moves still appear to be showing.

HL shows the SP up 5%.

It was an expected update to be fair, just delayed from original timeline.

Is this the first mention of a 2027 production date? I believe the last update talked of the Chilean government wanting 3 to 4 projects to be in production in 2026 via this CEOL process and I thought CTL were ahead of the curve on that front at LV

At least you have received an acknowledgment.

2 of my small cap companies also not doing well have not even acknowledged contact via their official contact pages despite promoting their new and updated websites and commitment to shareholder engagement.

Maybe something is afoot after all.

6 trades reported so far today for less than £10k and up over 20%.

AIM !!

The usual +10% and -10% cycle of movement on no news is at least broken. Will it hold?

Nothing too surprising in the figures at first glance and plenty to continue to knock the company with on progress too, no doubt.

Unsurprising in this economic climate that there are delays and uncertainty with regard to backing of projects.

What I see as a plus though is the strategy shift appears to be working and it looks as if the company is finally on an organised and achievable path.

Much to do to continue this progress, and of course, the SP is still hugely disappointing for the majority, but so long as financing/costs can stay under control it does look like there is a profitable business here so long as they continue on this strategy, continue to develop and prove the tech and win over local councils/governments who are looking at projects at the scale that EQT can benefit.

Interested in the considered thoughts of others here to this update

More than 2 months since any real news.

Are some still convinced this is still in a closed period and directors cannot buy?

Nowhere near results reporting when there actually is a closed period, and no sign of big news that those who claim to be itk predicted weeks ago.

Needs something here to wake the SP up

More than 2 months since any real news.

Are some still convinced this is still in a closed period and directors cannot buy?

Nowhere near results reporting when there actually is a closed period, and no sign of big news that those who claim to be itk predicted weeks ago.

Needs something here to wake the SP up

All the recent announcements suggest all works are proceeding to timescale, or ahead of and I expect this to continue subject to financing requirements.

The latest (Q2 Financials RNS on 15/8), says dewatering continues, but the level is being held at 280m to allow shaft refurbishment to take place. So, it has never stopped, but the level is being held for anticipated works.

The timescale from the 2nd Phase works RNS (11/07) states:

NCK Shaft Refurbishment and Mine Dewatering Progressing as Planned

· Phase 2 of NCK shaft refurbishment has commenced, following the on-schedule installation of a new work platform and main cage modifications (See Figures 1 and 2), providing a safe and stable work platform that will enable faster replacement of the old shaft timbers with new steel buntons and guides;

· Mine dewatering continues with the submersible pumps operating at a rate of approximately 300 cubic metres per hour and the water treatment plant operating to specifications;

· The water level is being maintained at approximately 280 metres below surface, as planned, and the pumping rate is in-line with expected rates for this time of year;

· South Crofty is not hydrologically connected to neighbouring historic mines and natural groundwater inflows are exactly in-line with pre-dewatering predictions, which were modelled using historic dewatering rates, the known volume of underground voids and the groundwater rebound that was measured after the mine closed in 1998;

· Shaft refurbishment and mine dewatering is anticipated to reach the 195-fathom level (approximately 350 metres below surface) in Q4-2024 and refurbishment of the 195-fathom pump station and installation of permanent pumps is scheduled to be completed in Q1-2025;

· The Company maintains guidance to complete NCK shaft refurbishment and dewatering of South Crofty Mine to the 400-fathom level (approximately 730 metres below surface) in Q3-2025.

I still expect Fund raising to be required in Q1 next year, although others think it will be before then.

The question is, will any government backing of the project lead to better terms for any raise and what form will it take (placing, partnership, government loan, etc). I would hope to see more updates on good progress to show that the company is keeping to schedule and budget in order to maximise the possibilities for a non-diluting raise. It is probably too soon to expect any off-take agreement, but you never know.

I still think voting for the existing regime was the better of the options available.

It was down to them to show change was going to happen and shareholders views were taken on board.

To date, this has not happened, and the status quo in terms of radio silence and lack of visible change/progress is the cause for dissatisfaction on my part.

I was a supporter of the existing regime during the requisition process, as well as before, but have voiced my dissatisfaction at the complete radio silence since the suspension.

Over the past few years, I have emailed the company on several occasions, and have always received a reply.

I sent another email to them on 09/09 as a result of the long suspension with no real update as to when the situation would change, and have not received a reply.

Having backed the company by adding shares prior to the acquisition vote, I feel totally let down by the current state of affairs.

Yes, perhaps they are waiting on finance news before giving an update, but this should be separate from the filing of accounts, and the limbo situation is very damaging.

Considerably down on my investment at the suspension price, and even the recent news posted about graphite prices and deals struck elsewhere do not raise my hopes of anything similar being taken advantage of here.

What a missed opportunity this seems to have become, and from such a promising position from circa 2 years ago

Imo, a shared buyback is the last thing the company should be considering at this time and certainly not until they start generating a regular income stream that does not impact on growth.

Shares in issue is pretty low by small cap standards.

Any and all cash should be used for debt requirements and growth/delivery until such time as management can prove this really is a viable business.

Funds or Institutional Investors have to keep within strict guidelines as to % held in sectors, individual companies, small caps, etc.

If there are redemptions and funds need to be raised, a pro-rata trade is usually made across the portfolio to ensure the weightings remain the same and restrictions are not breached.

Just one example why someone may be selling. A requirement for compliance rather than necessarily wanting to.

Or a Fund Manager has restrictions in the small cap space and sees a better opportunity elsewhere.

Funds, Institutional Investors do not think or act like PI's, they are bound by restrictions and will not think twice about what they trade, or when if circumstances dictate as they often do not have the choice and whether making a loss or gain is less of a concern in the grand scheme of maintaining the portfolio. It doesn't necessarily mean a change in view on a share either.

What would be concerning is a pattern of similar sized trades on a regular basis. Not sure that is the case here.

Just as an update, unsurprisingly, I have received no response or even an acknowledgement to the message I sent to ANGS on 03/09 via the contact page on their shiny new website.

So much for the CEO's pledge that "We are committed to improving communications with all our stakeholders...."

I suppose a PI does not qualify as a stakeholder in their eyes

Just to add, the company would not have gone down this route if they did not think they wouldn't qualify for an ASX listing. Too much time, effort and money to do so.

Hopefully, it is just a regulatory thing holding things up

Those sort of valuation figures would only be seen of they have something up their sleeve by way of outside investment, or project not currently in the public domain.

Not a chance from existing assets no matter how high the price of oil/gas may go.

And no chance that anyone trying to place a forecast on the company would use hypothetical purchases or events to come up with a figure, so I think 20p can safely be ignored. 1p seems a long way off and even then with a major new announcement.

imo