Member Info for GingerHippo

Monty, I’ve been over it and over it. I’m confident with the conclusions I have reached. Thanks

The flanks resources are detailed in the Russian Cadastre. We since have huge amounts of drilling samples to prove it up.

The BoD say 22.6M oz. you’re basically calling them liars. With respects, I’d rather go with what the BoD have released rather than an anonymous internet poster who are calling them liars.

For further reading:

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/EUA/monchetundra-update-y1zwj1c5tpmei84.html

Myfronts, I’d be glad to. 22.6M oz is what the investor presentation says. They RNSd that they have a lot of data to back it up.

https://www.eurasiamining.co.uk/component/rsfiles/download-file/files?path=Presentations%252FEUA%2BPresentation%2BSept%2B2020.pdf&Itemid=693

Monty, I’m still waiting for that link to where eua values the in situ value including the flanks at $2.2Bn. I’m fairly certain it doesn’t exist, so if you have the link, here’s the chance to prove me wrong......

Otherwise I’m sticking with my own calculation for in situ value, no link needed, just a calculator. 22M oz times $2000 per oz

Monty, please could you link where eua valued their assets at $2.2Bn, including the flanks.

I don’t remember ever seeing that one before. I’ll give you some time to link it before I say categorically that it doesn’t exist.

Should have said $750M not $750K but point remains

Monty, you say in situ value of $4.5Bn. No sir. We have 22M oz of PGM at $2000 per oz which is worth $44Bn in situ. Plus WK, plus gold, copper etc.

I think you are completely discounting the flanks, as if they don’t exist. But they do. Only eua have the right to obtain a mining license there. That’s worth a lot of money.

Honestly if the deal was for $750K it would have been done by now and you wouldn’t need by “complex structures” per the last RNS

@Hartlebury, it is true that the accounts would have been signed by the auditors before the RNS, but companies house still have to process the accounts (they can and do reject them sometimes). It is very very unlikely that they would be rejected by companies house, but still, i would think lse would like to see them on companies house website before saying "yes, you have definitely fulfilled the criteria for listing."

Imagine a scenario where lse had allowed trading to continue on the basis of the accounts on an RNS, but then discover that there was a technical issue with the accounts and they were rejected by companies house. Wouldn't they look silly. That's why I think they want to see accounts on companies house first. Otherwise, why haven't we resumed trading? Immediately means immediately. You can't just stay suspended cos you feel like it.

It could well be the case that there's something else going on that I'm not aware of. Who knows? This is just my reasoning as to why we are still suspended.

I think we'll find that we resume trading within a day or so of the accounts being shown on companies house. If accounts are shown on companies house and we are still suspended a few days later, then I'll have to say there's something else going on.

yes they published annual accounts on 3 Dec. But by then they were also late for interims too. These were published on 29 Jan and trading resumed 2.5 hours later. Since those were interim accounts, not annual accounts we can't compare the 2 situations.

Also worth nothing that the accounts that were RNSd and put on the website are not signed. Only the Companies House accounts will be signed. I'm not sure that's the point here, but I think it is indicative that the ones at companies house are the main ones in some sense.

The RNS said "The Company will seek a restoration of its listing immediately following publication of its audited Accounts "

If RNSing the accounts was considered good enough, we would have resumed trading by now, like it took Lookers just 2 hours to get unsuspended once they'd satisfied listing criteria. That's why I think that the RNS was not considered good enough to satisfy listing criteria.

The company is registered in the UK, company number 03936915. They will file accounts here.

Lookers were suspended because the annual accounts were late. It took them so long to file those that in the meantime they became late for interim accounts as well. So when they published interims they were immediately relisted, no need to wait for companies house (interims don't go to companies house).

We are suspended because the annual accounts are late per listing rules. I think the LSE won't readmit us until the accounts are shown on companies house. My 2 cents.

Question then is, why aren't they on companies house yet? Put in the post Friday, at companies house Monday. It's now Wednesday. I think either they'll be up soon and we'll resume trading, or there's a technical issue with the accounts which will be rectified easily. Don't forget we changed accounting period 3 times, the name once and then had a post balance sheet event so there's extra boxes to tick in the accounts. I'm sure Crowe know what they're doing.

Being suspended does not change my positive opinion of the company.

Some people are worried that if Alexei sold at 29p he must think the final sale will be for 29p or less.

Not so at all. If he thought the sale would be for 29p or less (a) he would have sold when we hit 40p, (b) he would have sold the lot, except (c) nobody would have bought it from him.

The only conclusion I think is reasonable is that Alexei thinks the final sales price will be more than 40p.

Isttimelucky,

"anything could have happened behind the scenes since we are at 40p causing AC to sell at 29p" - only something personal to Alexei. if he knew anything that would have a material effect on the final sales price it would have been illegal for him to sell.

"Its one thing to find a buyer for 27m shares, its another thinbg to find a buyer for his entire shareholding" - possibly but what's a few million between friends....

"He is closer to whats going on than most" - no he's not, or he wouldn't be allowed to sell.

"any buyer wouldnt have his inside knowledge so have no reason not to buy at current market value" - if they thought for one second he was selling because it's not worth 29p they wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. Veles are not idiots.

"in time will look back and think why didnt i buy more at todays price" - that one's easy. No more cash.

Some people are worried that if Alexei sold at 29p he must think the final sale will be for 29p or less.

Not so at all. If he thought the sale would be for 29p or less (a) he would have sold when we hit 40p, (b) he would have sold the lot, except (c) nobody would have bought it from him.

The only conclusion I think is reasonable is that Alexei thinks the final sales price will be more than 40p.

People seem to be worried that is Alexei sold at 29p he must think the sale will be for 29p or less.

Not so at all. If he thought the sale will be for 29p (1) he would have sold at 40p, (2) he would have sold the lot, except (3) nobody would have bought it from him.

Monkey, maybe. Or maybe he’s a conniving, self-interested little bugger. I guess we’ll never know for sure

Part of the problem I think is ppl on lse trusting posters who write what we want to hear. Write positive posts and you get a lot more ‘likes’. Build up these kind of posters into trusted commentators when they actually have no more knowledge than the average PI. Then it’s ‘shocking’ when they drop the other foot. No it isn’t. They knew nothing then and they know nothing now.

How many likes did DmitryReacts get by predicting a sale RNS today? Why? He was wrong. Same thing happens on every board