Member Info for EIE01

TC - Of course a lender would have the option to wind up EUA and then what?

If I was a lender would I be interested in a charge over the assets? I would have a hell of a lot of questions as those assets haven’t managed to be sold by the BOD, why would I think I can sell them.

I repeat ANY debt provider in these circumstances isn’t interested in the assets, there only concern will be can EUA repay any sums borrowed.

EUA have no regular income, as such the ONLY way to repay will be selling assets, condensate or both.

It follows that if a debt facility is provided then the debt provider would be very confident of one or both sale events happening, I’m sure the due diligence undertaken to provide a debt facility in these circumstances will be extremely thorough.

I tend to agree, next RNS is likely to be confirmation of loan facility and accounts released or hopefully SALE.

Not sure how you can be in advanced talks with loan provider, without provider already satisfied that EUA will be able to repay any debt drawn down

STB - It will be a facility from which EUA can drawn down amounts as and when necessary, and obviously repay when in position to.

Ultimately it can’t be longterm as EUA are not generating income.

This facility will only be provided on the basis that the provider is extremely confident of getting all loaned funds back, and that only happens from the sale of assets, concentrate or both.

If this facility is available or draw down then I personally think it is extremely positive signal to the market.

But as I said earlier I’m only interested in sale of assets completing.

I found the following statement from the RNS interesting, “……there can be no guarantee the Facility will be entered into”

Does this mean loan facility provider will not provide, or in my opinion that EUA will not enter into a facility as the company expect income from sales of assets, concentrate or both in the very near term.

Surely by now if there were no offers on the table the BOD would change strategy and consider invoking the Sinosteel facility.

I can only assume there are potentially offers on the table, the BOD want more and are prepared for the company to plod along until market conditions improve and consequently offers, or they have a deadline in mind and at which point will accept the best offer.

The BOD like all shareholders must be desperate to meet ve on and agree a deal.

Seasick but without loan facility in place the accounts can’t be signed off as a going concern.

The financial statements submitted on the basis will just cause panic and until questions from investors.

In all fairness the BOD informed the market sometime ago that there was sufficient working capital to Q3 24, well we are basically here now.

Del, the potential lender could charge a 1,000% but it’s pretty meaningless if they don’t get paid.

EUA aren’t going to need significant sums of money, the facility is required for two reasons, 1) allow auditor to sign off accounts as a going concern 2) provide EUA with some working capital IF needed. The working capital amount must be fairly minimal.

I have actually considered contacting the company and providing such a facility, subject to various questions.

My main point though is if agreement is reached with a loan provider, it must be viewed extremely positively, as it will be a very strong indication that either the sales of assets, concentrate or both are to happen in the near future. Otherwise how will the lender be paid?

Some of my thoughts and questions regards the situation.

One option to raise finance would be issuing new shares. Currently choosing not to, as I assume dilution not attractive.

In advanced talks with loan facility provider. What comfort would the loan provider have that any loan provided would be repaid? Eurasia is not generating regular income, as such the facility provider must be confident that there will be another source of income, ie sale on concentrate or sale of assets.

The loan provider will have zero interest in a charge over assets, as presumably would feel if EUA haven’t sold by now, how will loan provider.

In my opinion if a loan facility is provided, then this would be a very important signal that either concentrate or assets are due to be sold very ‘shortly’

Personally I’m not interested in concentrate sale, just finalise this never ending assets sale.

Note the word EXPECTED in the following statement from today’s update.

“Notwithstanding additional sources of working capital that are expected to be available to the Company, specifically based on the stored inventory of PGM concentrates held by the Company and the Facility.”

I’m not a kid, I have not interest in making up stories.

I posted for the benefit of genuine holders who I thought maybe interested.

I guarantee this offer was made, but I have no interest in taking it up.

A mutual friend who knows I have a significant holding in EUA contacted me to say he has a business acquaintance who has been buying Russian debt for a considerable period of time.

The acquaintance is familiar with EUA and offered me 30% of the value.

I have zero interest in that, am in to the end, whatever that maybe, I just found it interesting that the offer was made now, from someone familiar with Russian market.

Most of the posters here currently are stark raving mad.

Worse than a group of kids.

Seriously haven’t you better things to do with your life.

How is tomorrow 4 weeks since suspension?

EUA was suspended on 1 July as such 4 weeks will be 29 Jul.

Also RNS stated approximately 4 weeks to finalise the audit, so may take a little longer than 4 weeks. That said the BOD should be fully aware of shareholders frustration with previously stated timelines, as such you would had thought they would had been cautious in stating any timeline.

It’s pure nonsense without absolutely to grounds to believe SLB would be interested in acquiring a stake in HE1.

May as well say MacDonalds are potentially interested.

Again SLB are an extraction company.

Toffers is quick to call out posters for posting misleading messages, and now she is doing it, funnily enough following a purchase of shares.

Toffers more wild theories from you.

Can you provide an example in which SLB have invested in companies that hold mining assets/fields.

Acquiring a stake in a drilling company is TOTALLY different, SLB are specialists in extraction, they don’t hold mining assets.

Toffers is absolutely mad a totally deranged, a very strange person.

She will ruin this board, that much I can guarantee and very much best ignored.

I won’t comment on her anymore.

Toffers maybe you could inform us all of how many PLCs you have been on the board, enlightened us to your experience and achievements.

Doing a evening legal course at college doesn’t count.

Oh dear Toffers is now off with her endless postings.

Conspiracies, criticisms blah blah blah.

Never backs anything up, just her opinions and thoughts, to be fair she never really ever adds to a debate, just endless arguments.

Yesterday she was saying how great HE1, informing the board of her buys, how the price is about to increase as NT to buy !!!!

A number of media outlets quoting Zelensky being potentially open to peace talks, but using intermediaries, as opposed to direct talks.

Will this be an initial step towards progress, who knows.

What both sides state in public and what is actually happening behind the scenes I would imagine are very different.

3 weeks to 1 month maximum for an audit lol

Absolutely ridiculous statement!!!!

No mention of an issue with the Going Concern statement, so cash must be fine for another 12 months, assuming assets not sold before.

Poor show by the company not to have accounts filed on time, it’s not the first company and it certainly won’t be the last.