Member Info for gsdsitgs

Its just too thin with no real interest from institutions, no volume, no excitement. Works both ways, today all the US gold miners, rare earths etc are down 5-8% and ALTN is down just 2.4% so that's some relative strength.

The EBRD actions, both selloff and ceasing Czech operations, seem like some sort of political signalling, not logical behavior. Perhaps they don't like the new prime minister or some corruption or something else. At least they could've kept their equity share, it's pocket change for them so why dump it...

https://www.ebrd.com/home/what-we-do/where-we-invest/czechia.html#customtab-4b105c50be-item-067c9d40cb-tab

The CEZ AGM just shows that lithium is not a priority for them, they didn't mention it on their own, just answered one question by the NIMBY activist. And obviously they won't increase their CAPEX in any presentation for a project they didn't give FID to yet.

All gold names are crashing last 5-6 days (as well as silver, precious metals, copper), add to that that ALTN is not listed in the US and has relatively tiny volume every day. I wouldn't be surprised if one or two institutions can move this name 80-10 % in a day both ways. Fundamentally not much changed since April (except gold prices)

Hunter16 if you have any specific source for the fact that it will be delayed for 6+ months due to Germany, please post it. I couldn't find anything.

I researched the Czech law and comparable cross-border projects and basically found only two (comparable in importance) - nuclear waste storage in Czechia (near Austria) and coal power plant in Poland (near Czechia). In both cases it seems that the other party had to be notified, then given some time to "voice concerns" and the final decision was always done by the authority on whose territory the project was. So it was built even if the other country objected or protested. I don't have the specific time frames how long it took though...

The German party (Saxony) was notified, provided the translated EIA and other stuff. Cinovec is an independent project, not connected or blocked by any activity in ZNWD, so as far as I know it can absolutely be signed without anything happening in Zinnwald, it is mandatory to notify the cross-border authorities, not mandatory for Zinnwald to be completed or have EIA or anything like that. They can comment on some EIA points, if I understand correctly only the mine itself (water levels etc.), they can't really comment on railroad, processing plant, transportation etc.

My guess is end of June (as some here claimed) is too optimistic, 6+ months too pesimistic but again I have no idea what the truth is because EMH doesn't provide any information.

Considering the style and volume EMH is trading both in London and on ASX, it can reach 60c by someone just fat fingering a market order...

It would be way more trustworthy if the performance rights were tied to a price like AU$1+ (with the current share count). CEZ and possibly Geomet will do some work and KC will just get more shares for nothing. EBRD selling shares is also bizarre, they do not need the cash, they realize a loss and there's no logical reason to sell equity so that they'd get involved in loan financing.

It's sad, similar projects at similar stages (Keliber Finland, Thacker Pass USA) were often valued/traded at 40-60% of NPV. EMH is traded as if it is shutting down this year. I have no idea how anyone can defend KC as a good manager, if you want to see a good manager, look at the guy who had the vision for VUL.AX and led it through everything (and yes, communicated way better as well)

Skelly, imho you're right that there can't be any realistic bidding war. The ROFR seems tricky or maybe I don't understand the wording. The SHA is available here: https://or.justice.cz/ias/ui/vypis-sl-detail?dokument=62004908&subjektId=362777&spis=1222371 (in the attached PDF starts on page 5 and buyout/ROFR on page 10).

Sounds like if someone besides CEZ makes a bid, CEZ can just buyout EMH at that specific price. I do not see anything in the SHA itself that would be blocking this theoretical scenario... besides some wording like "in good faith".

Just to clarify the EIA and the permitting process, the local mayors have very little say in that but so does the top-level government (ministers). The most important binding decision will actually be made at the region level (Ustecky kraj), the good thing is that the local council is controlled by the same party as the current government (Babis / ANO) and they mostly seem to understand and support it at both national and regional level.

I still do not see how the EIA could be finished and approved by the end of June though... The math just doesn't work out. I've looked into some of the larger documents uploaded into CENIA and there are no real issues with the EIA so my bet is it will go through.

Many other issues though - the documents clearly say that there will be no tin and tungsten (as they'd improve add up to 5% in credits but significiantly decrease the lithium yiels). That's why I found it surprising that KC said at the April'26 conference that the credits are there. Also all the documents mention three variants, null variant (nothing happens), base variant (mine and ropecon) and alternative variant (mine and a drift/tunnel). With the ropecon construction time estimated to be 1 year or the tunnel alternative estimated to be 3 years. All the documents recommend the ropecon (lower environmental impact etc) but then why is there the tunnel alternative at all in the first place? Who decides to put it in and who decides which version would be done?

CEZ could end the suffering by offering a buyout at a fair price but they can't do it at this stage... and they probably don't care that much whether the project is successful after all. If EIA, permits and EU loans are done (and lithium price keeps rising), the buyout price should be a 5-7 bagger from here imho.

Skelly, the "requires" part literally means that the Czech authority (CENIA) informed Geomet that CENIA requires the submitting party to inform the German party and get a reply from them, however the final decision always falls into the hands of the Czech authorities.

I agree that this can be an issue, seems to me this is a completely unknown land as such huge projects near the border are not common. I found only two other instances where a large cross-border EIA involving Czechia was required, one was nuclear waste repository (with Austria) in the 2000s and a more recent one was a Polish coal plant. In both cases the local EIA agency somewhat made its own decision and mostly ignored the other country (which may not mean anything for EMH).

I wouldn't be surprised if the officials themselves don't know how to handle this exactly because noone has done anything similar before. It's not like there are new mines opening in Czechia as often as in Australia or Africa.

Just a technical note Jemesa, the time window doesn't start when it is published on the CENIA website but when it is published on the involved municipality (Ustecky kraj) notice board and website. Which may be later this week or it may be the May 11th date someone here mentioned a few days ago.

Otherwise I think you're right that Germany itself can't really stop or block the project (and I haven't heard of any big German opposition anyways)

As I wrote before, I have no experience with going through an EIA myself so I'm just rephrasing what I found on that link (https://hrabovjanka.cz/blog/ochrana-prirody-eia/) which itself is an unofficial and unrelated website. However, the points there are pretty clear - there are two possible processes for approving a project.

The sped-up process (aka "small EIA") and the standard process (aka "big EIA") and I'm 100% sure the local Usti municipality said in January the project will be going through the big one ("velka EIA" mentioned in point 2 in the link). I couldn't find any Czech law that would actually clearly define how a "CMRA strategic project" should be handled and what are the timelines etc. CMRA is mostly an European Union thing afaik.

So I'd be very happy if everything is approved by June 30th, the grant is awarded and FID made in the following weeks, however from the documents uploaded to CENIA I found zero evidence confirming that. And EMH / KC is quiet as always.

I admire the optimism of Fingers and Jemesa and some others saying that everything will be approved and done by the end of June or even in 30 days. I'm not saying it's impossible but Czechia is infamous for delays and difficulty of permitting anything (from highways to high rises to even something as simple as a residential family house).

I'm still not sure if I'm reading the document correctly but this still feels like documentation ordered by GET sro (which is a company that earlier did PFS if I recall correctly), i.e. this is not the expert assessment/review from the government. And if you read the link I posted earlier today, this assessment's legal deadline is 60 days that can be extended by 30 more days (for some reason...).

So whatever is CEZ and Geomet doing now, I hope they have some way of pushing this through, something like getting in touch with Havlicek to speed up things and order the new minister of environment to get it done quickly (the new minister actually seems to be a very pro-industry guy). So again we are back in a situation where some delays may happen, may threaten the project and the grants and noone from EMH communicates at what stage we are.

I've never done any EIA but this describes the six stages: https://hrabovjanka.cz/blog/ochrana-prirody-eia/

My understanding is that once it is officially published on the region/municipality website (not the EIA website), it is in stage 4.

So the theoretically best case is 60+30 days until approval, more likely with delays could be end of year.

However I have no idea who can block it in stages 5 and 6. Seems like the government supports it, the local Usti Region supports it, most municipalities support it, all the authorities (listed at the bottom of the MZP536_infDokumentace.pdf file) have no objections, the EIA found no big issues, CEZ is waiting to make the FID.

There is this local NGO (Cinvald zs) woman that hates everything (funnily enough she works in a local chemical plant), I'm not sure if she can do anything about it if even the local mayors can't really block it. CEZ probably won't be willing to make the FID until they are 100% sure they will have the EIA (but I may be wrong).

Page 1: We further request the affected territorial self-governing units and affected authorities within the meaning of

Section 8, paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Act to send a written statement on the documentation no later than 30 days from the date of publication of the information on the documentation on the official bulletin board of the affected region, i.e. the Ústí nad Labem Region. This deadline will also be published at the link below. We would also like to inform you in advance that the public hearing within the meaning of Section 17 of the Act will probably take place in the second half of June 2026. We will inform you in good time about the exact date and place of the public hearing

page 95: In conclusion, it can be stated that the submitted plan "Mining and processing of ores from the Cínovec deposit"

does not have a significant negative impact on the integrity and favorable condition of the protected areas of any Special Bird Area or any Site of European Importance in any of the proposed variants. The determined slightly negative impact due to the risk of affecting surface and shallow groundwater can

be eliminated by appropriately set revitalization measures on peatlands.

The local municipalities can "protest" but they can't really revert zoning plans or government decision (as its declared a strategic project and the government can override the local decisions). So to me it seems like there's no problem with the EIA. The major problem is EMH not communicating anything...

Makes sense that if they knew they screwed up with the EIA, they wouldn't bother with setting up the performance rights (tied to offtake, FID, and construction start).

It still doesn't explain why there is so little communication and now there's no information from anyone - EMH, CEZ, EIA authority... The lunch ladies in the Czech EIA and in CEZ probably have more information than EMH shareholders.

So KC at a conference in April mentions tin and tungsten credits in his presentation, however these were completely missing in the DFS published earlier this year.

EBRD is selling part of its stake at a huge loss in an illiquid microcap name shortly before supposed catalysts. Why not just hold it and write it off, pretty sure EBRD is not desparate for a few thousand euros. I don't understand the logic.

He also says they are "finalizing offtake discussions", if they want any good financing, they should announce it pretty soon.

Either KC is completely incompetent or he has no say in what is happening now and he's basically waiting for what CEZ will do. Even European Lithium with a worse project in Austria, worse local support, worse economy somehow managed to hit a homerun by pivoting to rare earths in Greenland and got a buyout by CRML. Why? Because the management actually did something. With management like that, EMH should be valued somewhere near LAC.US (which by the way is breaking out today on the chart).

If you read between the lines, the sentence "The timing and form of such funding (whether third party debt or shareholder funding) remains subject to the unanimous approval of Geomet's shareholders" suggests they'd prefer to get a loan from EBRD or whoever, that's why they mention it and put it before shareholder funding.

Geomet with the DFS is in a better position than before but it's the same old story, no communication from EMH and this was probably published just because someone went to the Czech business registry, looked at the latest documents published by Geomet and found the last bullet point on the last page saying Geomet informed the shareholders they will need funds until the FID.

This forum would be a much better place if you stopped posting the AI slop Jemesa

Agreed with 2026 being the most important year for EMH. My base scenario is FID and then a prompt buyout at prices comparable to LAC or VUL (so 3-5 bagger from here at least).

The dreams of a 10-bagger from 2021 prices were exactly that - dreams in 2021. The time to do anything was back then... It's nice that something is finally happening in 2026 but before any digging starts in Cinovec, we'll probably have singularity, AGI and alien disclosure. And EMH will be meaningless anyways.

ASX today closed positively for lithium (and uranium) names.

All these local mayors being worried and asking for money is just virtue signalling. It's not any real action or real activity.

It was pretty clear during the Usti zoning plan vote, the CEZ vice-chairman presented the project and some local politicians (from the PM's party) supported him. Then there were some local residents talking and a local politican (Papajanovsky iirc) asking ad hoc questions which he should've submitted in advance.

The others basically told him he's unprepared but he kept asking about how much money the local municipalities will get - and they answered the obvious truth, the tax distribution among regions is set at the national level and if he wants to change that, the law needs to change and he can do that in the parliament which he is a member of.

Then the voting took place and it was approved.

I haven't seen any tunnel or these new alternative corridors mentioned anywhere in PFS or DFS. Germany's ZNWD plans involve a tunnel which imho makes the project unrealistic and capex crazy high. It is the same questions and same ideas (alternative loading stations and alternative railway lines) repeated again and again after they were rejected with rational arguments. The Cinovec mayor is absolutely confused and mixing old and new stuff together, I don't know what his goal is (probably he doesn't either).

Jemesa, not every price action is evil shorts action, the US markets crashed on Thursday and ASX reacted with a delay in the same direction.

I don't have any verified shorts data ("ASIC data confirms a short position of 1.82 million shares" sounds off) but I find it absurd that anyone would want to short a thin microcap with big spreads, tiny volume and the risk of gapping 100%+ on at least two separate events (FID and buyout).

So many opportunities to short everywhere, I'd recommend any shorters to look into all the US listed SaaS and AI-disrupted stocks that haven't crashed yet, there won't be many people willing to sell EMH shares to you. I remember myself moving the price of this a lot on both ASX and LSE with my orders.

The minister of industry met with the Koreans in December. https://x.com/KarelHavlicek_/status/1998393822628163704

The local stock exchange also had a Korean-Czech IPO last year (Doosan Skoda) so this makes sense if the Koreans can bring money as well as some know-how in the chemicals and technology.