Member Info for Highside

Crisp
How much you have in the bank when reporting depends on when you last raised.
admin expenses were the same for 21 and 22 at ie: Administration expenses (1,327,747) for 22 (1,357,427) for 21
about £105k a month so since Jun they would have burned £420k

you say they had £270k more in the bank, where do you get that figure ?
I read
Cash and cash equivalents at 30 June 1,650,056 for 22 1,180,768 for 21 as £469.288 more in the bank.
I conclude the last raise was done because the option to dilute 50% expired at the AGM shortly after, not because they were running out of cash. This begs the question why was it done at the then SP low when not immediately needed.

The fact remains that this time last year we were told we had 12 months funding....times up so how are we doing ? well dont expect the accounts to tell you....or the BOD
Better not to say how long you are funded for if you dont update it after the time expires. Little wonder the JV possibility has left the market flat.

Yes you are right, 4 months, i feel much better now.

So now we know the financial situation last June..lol, a yearly report nearly half a year out of date.

We may be fed-up that EUZ has lost 80% of its share value in 18months but spare a thought for Denarius, they have lost 80% in less than a year :-)
I do hope this is not the Titanic rushing to the aid of the lusitania ;-)

Yes and you have to factor in the saving implemented after the 12 month finance figure like the loss of LR wages and expences.

Absolutely. the completion of the DD if its successful will add enormously to the credibility of the plan with out a doubt. It needs to proceed without a hitch as we were forecast by most to run out of cash by October so at this stage an interim placing is still a possibility unless we are updated to the contrary.
I doubt MC is bothered about informing shareholders as a priority, he knows from past votes that the board, Bennelong and DB can pretty much carry any vote and voting no is not really an option..

To answer your question bricks....Yes
2 points
Investment here puts you at a severe risk if the deal doesnt go ahead. EUZ will be broke and up a creek.
Investment in Demerius gives you some sort of security because this deal is not make or break for them so while you may not profit, you are not risking the loss of all your investment.
As shed has alluded too, we really dont know the details needed to give a considered opinion. most importantly, will the money from Demerius be enough to complete both options as metered out in the schedule ?. Until we know if EUZ will need to expand workforce with two sites for example its hard to work out cash burn. Over 3 years they could easily lose 500k just on a wage for a CEO with expenses.
finally at this stage this is just a rescue plan with no guarantee it will even happen.
Its early days...

The Proposed Transaction is subject, inter alia, to confirmatory due diligence by Denarius, the finalisation and entering into of a Definitive Agreement (within the next 60 days unless extended by the parties) and all requisite shareholder and regulatory approvals, as appropriate, and there can be no guarantee that the transaction will be completed.

You lot crease me up, next you will me moaning that you only get a couple of posts a week...oh hang on...
Eyes tightly shut and fingers in your ears :-) thats the way forward for the gang of three :-)

Cri5P
That is exactly what i just said.

It is a mine field :-) but i read it as the final $3.5m is the hand shake that seals the JV 0n Toral....but by that time Toral will have a PFS so even if they with hold the final $3.5m the PFS will have ben funded and EUZ will 100% own Toral..
It means that Denarius are not committed to the final instalment until they know that the PFS on Toral shows financial viability. They is nothing that says EUZ has to pay the money received up till then, back. I see it that even if their is a disaster along the way the worse we can end up is where we are now but with a completed PFS.
My only worry is that the sums quoted are not big enough to cover all the costs and that EUZ might still have to raise to match Denarius, the extra work might mean we need a CEO that can give more time on site to the project than MC can offer and that we may need more hands to the pump so wages/expenses could rise considerably. do we have warehouse space still to keep drilling cores and what is involved in recommissioning a mothballed mine ? No doubt everything will need to be replaced so apart from the Geological data what else is salvageable..
Until MC comes out and explains the plan in detail we will not know and i cant see him doing that till the plan has passed DD and is further advanced. Even small things like "the joint venture" is that Denarius and EUZ ? or Toral and Antonina :-)

"So why make Antonina a make or break for the deal?"
They didnt. thats why there are 2 options.
Regardless of whether Antonina is viable EUZ get Toral proved up to PFS in a 50/50 joint venture as some here had been wishing for...
stage 2 is too prove up Antonia to PFS std at no cost to EUZ for which we hand over 29% of Toral for 20% of Antonina
Antonina is as i said a condition of the agreement because the value of the two sites at PHF stage together would be considerably greater than the value of the two sites individually. Put simply one processing mine with two pits is cheaper than two processing mines with two pits

I disagree
EUZ has been working hard for sometime to expand the Toral asset with deep drills and peripheral drills. Antonina represents a way of increasing the "Toral" asset making it more interesting to larger outfits and more economically viable. this is, i think , why the plan is in 2 options. You say "why not apply independently?" I dont think Denarius want to bid for it alone because its value is on the back of Toral. they also want EUZ to do all the ground work with their position already established with the Junta and the area. This is a plan that works equally for both companies, EUZ get 20% of a much enlarged asset. financial security and a PFS. Denarius get a fast track entry to 80% of a larger asset, all the work already done and the remainder done for them including PFS x2 by a "contractor" (EUZ) already pretty much established on site.
While both companies end up with an asset of a size that will attract serious interest to world players.
Of course at this stage its all hypothetical but at least its a possibility on the table.

Crisp ...but you say "only then do they get their 51% of the combined project".
No they get 80% of the combined project but we get 20% of a larger project than just toral but as Cjen says, we dont yet know how large antonina is.

i dont understand where you get 51% from for the overall project.
as i read it its 51% for option 1
Option two is just an option to acquire an additional 29% interest in EMI, or the project's underlying permit(s)
they can stop at option 1.

the redeeming factor as i see it is EUZ will have acquired 20% of antonina as a going concern for just doing the ground work
so although we only retain 20% of the overall project it is 20% of a much larger project so if Antonina was as large as Toral we would have the equivalent of 40% of toral..

Thanks Cjen i missed that.

I( dont think matters Rad, its very much like the arrival of Toral when all was pretty much lost 5years ago
In other words its a life linen we probably have to grab regardless. :-)

I dont think it matters too much as long as they can raise the funds by March.
More of a concern to me would be some of the time frames ,it seems to me they have 3 years to complete option 1 which is basically to get a PFS done which we expected to already be done at this stage, 3 years ago ?
they will the have another period, Option 2, where they will PFS etc the enlarged project with an open ended time frame on that.
So i see it as another 4-5 years to get where we expected to be already by this time ( remember they appointed a PFS manager over a year ago ) but admittedly including Antonina this time.
that said a thousand things could and probably will go wrong before anything i signed so lets wait and see but i dont fancy hanging on for another 4-5 years, thats taking the pee a bit on top of the losses most of us have suffered..

Thankyou, just going through the RNS a bit deeper as i have a slack morning.
its very loose at the moment. Option 2 in particular where thy have to put up $2m within 1 year of exercising option 1
and
delivering a further pre-feasibility study demonstrating positive economic results over the proposed enlarged project, including the Antonina''
This further PFS on the whole project including Antonina " and surrounding concessions" could be very expensive and time consuming going on the present speed of thing.

I also see the money designated for specific tasks but nothing mentioned about day to day running. the $4m is over 3 years and includes cost of drilling and obtaining a PFS. even if we are generous and say $4m is £4m thats not nearly enough over 3 years given the historic cash burn of £2m a year without costing a PFS
Given the increased work load will we also need a CEO ?
Hopefully we will get updates on all this as the end of year approaches.

Can anyone explain the "potential financing round" in this segment of the RNS please ?

In order to be able to exercise the First Option and acquire a 51% interest in the Toral Project (i) Denarius and Europa Metals shall agree on a work programme and budget and (ii) Denarius will thereafter fund a minimum of US$4m of expenditure (including US$650,000 to be advanced to Europa Metals as to US$100,000 on signing of the Definitive Agreement and as to US$550,000 on completion of a "potential financing round" by Denarius, which is expected to be concluded by 31 March 2023) towards: