Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
". . The Company remains satisfied that its current operations are not prohibited under US, UK or EU sanctions rules. . "
It appears it is the sales process only that is stopping EUA completing its mining activities at WK.
Mr Pompal,
It's EUA's wording.
Mr Cogs,
no harm in highlighting the point - the sales process is the excuse for everything else not happening.
No metal concentrate has been produced at West Kytlim since the end of 2022
" . . . due to the sale process being Eurasia's main priority, no metal concentrate has been produced at West Kytlim since the end of 2022. . . . "
" . . . the Company is currently undertaking a review of its Homase production plan and forecast. . . "
Mr MH01,
They never took the 5% option earlier - maybe Newmont strategy does not include higher ownership of Havieron - at least for now. Maybe from their experience they foresee possible more lucrative opportunities down the line - after further capital expenditure is required.
Mr Rickstars,
I do agree with your statement that most AIM companies have been overvalued - however I also look into how much the overvalue based on info given in RNSs.
EUA had reason to be into the 20's and 30's a few years back based on possible future revenues from a 1000koz/year Pd eq mine in future years (they stated this in RNS back in 2020) - and palladium was booming 2 years back.
GGP never issued any company notification to justify price much above 8p.
Mr Wolfe & Seamus,
I am not sure where end goal in sight comes from - but I normally take what a COMPANY issues in an RNS as factually correct - and when EUA states they have low visibility concerning further update on the sales process - I take this as meaning they have low visibility concerning further update on the sales process.
I think in my last post - I may have stated that it appears many people on all shares tend to ignore information issued in an RNS whilst developing their theories and strategies - seems strange not to pay attention to what probably the only people really in the "know" actually state. Without being critical of them - I do find it strange.
Mr Wannabeloaded,
I am sure any pragmatic minded investor would state that GGP had no right being into the twenties let alone the forties. Its value - based on the data given from the feasibility studies and the percentage of ownership - always indicated a solid 7 - 8p.
If people review the information issued from companies which actually concerns future cash flows (annual mining production) I am sure most will agree.
Mr Del,
Thank you for that.
Maybe he is part of a creditable party sat at a certain (in)famous table
Mr Del929,
Item 3 on your list - is there notification anywhere stating at what price these options were offered at?
As you have quantified your expectations in a list from an interim update - I would consider an additional item 9 - Mining production update (normally expect on quarterly or half-year - and is normally provided by most - but as you made a list maybe add).
Mr WBAFC,
Before I can agree with your statement, can you please arrange for the SP to get over the 80p mark first.
:)
Mr Beast & Mr Aubery,
I think you wish to post on this link for WK production figures.
I agree with you all - it should not be guesswork - the guys in the mines know what they produced - the guys in the smelter plants know what was produced (if any) - the guys on the trucks know how many are driven - the guys with the binoculars spying for investment companies know all this - by not giving operational updates means the ONLY relevant parties that do not know are the shareholders.
Most other junior minors do provide such.
Mr Seamus12,
I have not said it is happening - I said it could be happening - like all discussion on this board.
PLEASE treat posters with the same consideration you would like others to treat you.
As you stated ". . . its all conjecture and therefore fictional. . . " - why are you here - if not to discuss and give your opinions.
postscript note - "why are you here" is 100% rhetorical - I do not need, want or expect an answer.
BondDivi,
what you state about third party sale - I nearly agree with.
I do think Dimitry would be in a position to obtain the required investment (as a Russian AND significant shareholder AND significant contributor to the state of assets) - and for the funding - as mainly I think it shall be coming from similar/same sources (Russian/Chinese investment banks) independent of whoever buys it.
Shareholder approval : the lower the shareprice the easier the threshold for approval - its 3p today - where will it be in the future.
One point - The Sinosteel contract (which I assume is still 100% valid even through a global pandemic and an international conflict) is vital - it allows a 130koz facility to be built and repayments only start after commissioning production achieving the target of 130koz - all for $176m (can be paid from future revenues). With the inflation issues worldwide plus the increase awkwardness of procuring activities associated nowadays with Russia - I would say the Sinosteel contract would be multiple times higher if being negotiated today. I think whoever/whatever finally buy the assets - this Sinosteel contract will be triggered. Very little capital needs to be raised to take ownership of a spanking new 130koz facility apart from the original asset purchase (which could be anything from a few peanuts to $hundreds of millions - based on different varied agued viewpoints).
Mr Seamus12,
Please note - it is happening with Petroneft - so I suggest you take it off the fiction shelf - however there are still plenty of shelves you can assign it to if you still like to ignore what is happening with other companies in Russia.
Following on from the Petroneft, worth over £30m before the conflict started, it looks like all the assets will be sold off to their Russian CEO Pavel Tetyakov (who conveniently took the CEO position in October 2022). The assets being sold to him for peanuts (as expected) - and the peanuts then used to payback bank loans (partially) after which FINALLY I assume the UK listed company shall then declare itself bankrupt and fold (its CEO won’t care much cause he be too busy collecting oil revenues).
So - could the same occur for EUA? I assume there is no legislation for it not to happen - does anyone here know?
I assume Dmitry Suschov is probably somewhat still a little miffed that his EUA shares once worth nearly £200m are now struggling to pay for a wet weekend in a bug-bedded bedsit in boring Bognar, breakfast buffet extra.
I am sure Mr Suschov is not taking all this lying down (not on the bug-bed anyway). I assume his only realistic way back would be to be to take the company back (from unfriendly foreign ownership) as it is the foreign ownership that decimated his assets and Russian ownership would allow recuperation of value (I am sure parent company shall still be in such jurisdiction as Cyprus or Cayman Islands). Assume Dmitry has relevant connections to make all this happen.
And as soon as ownership is received - activation of the Sinosteel contract for 130koz production facility to show pathway to revenue. As Big Chris stated, “the opportunity was there, in my experience you’re supposed to take that opportunity - if its there”
In a few years maybe Dmitry will emerge out of Russia with his billions$ (assume NKT online and Dmitry producing the 1000koz/year as EUA promised). Maybe then Dmitry fancy buying a premier league footy team – maybe Luton Town - if so then I will still be VERY HOPEFUL that they win the league in future - but more importantly, I will also have greater CONFIDENCE that they win the league.
As for shareholders - some of whom may contribute here, I don’t think it matters who buys the assets - the buyers will still get the assets for as low as possible either through boardroom secret negotiations or through the Russian Federations way of ‘authorising’ sales by companies from unfriendly countries. RF appears to be extremely efficient to ensure minimum monies leave the Russian territory from asset sales.
Mr Mac,
You stated ". . . One asset is in full operation. . . ", If you are referring to West Kytlim then the Target Production at full capacity stated by EUA in RNS (1 July 2020) was 64koz.
I don't think EUA have reached such capacity. I don't think EUA have reached 1/2 of that capacity. I don't think EUA have reached 1/4 of that capacity. I don't think EUA have reached 1/8 of that capacity. I don't think EUA have reached 1/16 of that capacity.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Mr Surfer,
I would not consider GRL lack of response disappointing - as I am sure most BOD members of any listed company would consider replying to such a request on an email before publication via RNS a possible break of LSE guidelines for issuing sensitive information - even if it is an acknowledgement of receipt - but lets hope they can supply the mandatory accounts sooner rather than later.
What information I think (or hope) they are still able to provide shareholders with is this years quarterly updates to exploration and mining progress - this is the benchmark that they have lowered constantly over the last 2 years - lets see if they can finally start raising production - and I think an update is due.
Out of all the companies that I follow - this is the one which appears in most need of guidance at both boardroom and production strategies - it be nice to hear they have taken (non exec) personnel on to advise in such tasks.