Member Info for Ideas

What a curious day. £14k sold, £20k bought, share price down 5%!

I was just going to say I don’t think we can continue to read anything into the delay now as the Parliament breaks in July, so it is reasonable for there to be some holiday period before they get ready for the next Parliamentary session.

I re-listened to the last video today and Graham expressly said we’re on the next ministerial committee meeting agenda - reasonably assuming this is true, then I could see why opportunists might now start to buy back in as we approach end of month. Any positive decision would lead a long way up.

A variation on Testpack's comment, GW62, is that they are motivated as you describe but are fully insulated if it fails; they're all in arms length full salaries and not taking a subsistence salary and shares in lieu (aka. sweat equity) so far as I know.

- Graham (CEO) $348,000

- James (non exec Chair) $117,000 (for three quarters)

- Hayden (non exec) $35,000 (for 6 Board meetings)

I don't suggest anything abnormal but these are definitely employees that either do well (anyhow) or better (if the project succeeds).

It's a good, better, best scenario and any reputation impact can be explained away by politics.

Number one news I’d like to hear is an investment from the Akwa Group; I’d be comfortable about the permit after that.

On potash, says we’re at the bottom of the potash cycle again and it should now rise again from here:

https://archive.is/vk8RY

Classic example today, basically dead flat and the change is in the market makers appetite

Bought value £6.40k

Sold value £3.60k

Change -0.05 (-2.22%)

Reading again, yes I agree its “Political, rather than just environmental.”

Fully agree that ‘bullishness’ in Parliament does not necessarily translate to anything outside it; they’re all ‘warm words’ until we get a permit.

One thing that I have seen around that goes to what you’re saying is that one of the tools to be used to help move decisions on was to provide compensation to local authorities, either for their inconvenience (here water, noise, etc.) or to others if one was seen to get a golden ticket through some investment - handing nimby concerns, basically.

That’s the sort of thing that can help us and would be apt to dispense. Still ‘warm words’ until a cert but I’ll share if I see the wording again (might even have been in what I shared below in which case won’t!)

Discussion below of a Q4 2022 / Q1 2023 law to encourage inward investment into Morocco; they do sound quite bullish about it, including removing barriers through the regional investment commissions that refused the ESIA - presumably this is an example of why EML thinks the ministerial forum chaired by the head of government is better.

https://www-lereporter-ma.translate.goog/loi-cadre-03-22-une-nouvelle-ere-souvre-pour-linvestissement-au-maroc/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Anything is possible, but how would there be a backlog if it simply stops for summer; is that twitter speculation or from a company source ?

I’m being too narrow below, it’s just not an independent / impartial research paper.

I would advise caution calling it a 'research paper', because that may imply independence, whereas that’s paid for marketing; first sentence:

"This document is a marketing communication sponsored by Emmerson plc"

I'm not questioning (or supporting) it's usefulness, as haven't looked again since it first came out but just want to signpost for balance.

Doesn't mean it's of no use and may not affect this point on the factual set up of the project, so thanks still for pointing to it again as agree the useful info is spread out across many different docs.

Golder Associates here publishing Emmerson as a case study that appears to give the impression that it came up with the dry tailings, which I think I recall EML attributed to Reminex.

"Cost-effective infrastructure solutions were devised, including a dry stack tailings facility to the north of the project area."

https://www.golder.com/project/moroccan-potash-mine-moving-to-meet-crop-boosting-demand/

Predator Oil and Gas had their environmental permits through within a year, though note Predator (75%) operates Guercif in joint venture with the Office National des Hydrocarbures et des Mines ("ONHYM") acting on behalf of the State (25%), so there’s a shared benefit, and it’s not a mine.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/PRD/approval-guercif-environmental-impact-assessment-pv8r76yqsmiemlv.html

FYI the head of government two weeks ago highlighting the Royal Vision that Africa doesn’t need help but mutually beneficial partnerships.

Jobs granted, the bit I think is most lacking from the ESIA may be a 25% stake in the project in line with national rules for oil and gas.

The head of government is an oil and gas billionaire and past agriculture minister and I assume must like a commercial deal to have racked up the billions. Hopefully Graham can 1) see and 2) close the deal, if this were true.

https://www.maroc.ma/en/news/russia-africa-summit-akhannouch-highlights-royal-vision-strengthening-africas-relations-its

It would be good to see the Board buying more at this low price to demonstrate the confidence they speak of - surely easy Christmas present money.

Thanks for the reply - it’s an interesting point that, once you attract scrutiny, other things get identified.

Increases the workload to dig back out in a way that feels unfairly harsh, even if they’re technically fair points.

Beyondthesea, have you any thoughts on why they didn’t / couldn’t solve those things in the last two years of discussion with the Regional Investment Committee (i.e. why it wasn’t possible before but would be possible now, with the information we know)?

Certainly the return on a field of solar panels would be different!

The business can reapply with a different scheme or pivot and do something else - solar panels don’t use much water.

The short and euphemistic answer is that it would be disruptive.

Agree, they might be odds on to win approval but would be better to be straight

I agree that a conditional approval with achievable things to tick off would be fine, especially if they trigger after we make money to pay for it.

On 'referred' please remember Graham also said the permit was 'imminent' some years ago - I don't any more think we can take it all literally.

Graham has hired a PR firm that specialises among other things in crisis management.

The video interview published recently was a scripted reality conversation with his crisis management PR advisor, see the offer below:

https://www.blytheray.com/expertise/blytheray-broadcast-service/

The same guy may or may not have overseen the RNS, which the business has already admitted it did not publish on time.

All of this is why I think ‘referred’ in the RNS is ‘spin’ designed to protect the share price, and underlying all that describing their request for the decision to be 'referred' under article 37 of the governing Law 48.17, which says:

ARTICLE 37

Any refusal decision issued by the regional commission must be reasoned.

It may be the subject, by the investor concerned, of an appeal before the Ministerial Steering Committee provided for in Title III of this law within

10 days from the date of its notification.

However, the investor may, prior to referral to the Ministerial Commission, file an informal appeal with the regional wali, who presents

it to the Regional Commission, which must rule within 10 days of receipt of the appeal.

In the absence of a response within the aforementioned period or when the Regional

Commission confirms its previous decision, the investor may lodge an appeal before

the Ministerial Commission, which rules within a period not exceeding 30 days.

***

Having read the above, here's EML's press statement:

"Following a recent evaluation meeting, regional investment authority the Commission Régionale Unifiée d'Investissement (CRUI) was unable to approve the ESIA application.

Consequently, the company has exercised its right to refer approval to the Ministerial Committee, which is chaired by the head of government and includes several national Ministers."

There’s always room for another interpretation but I cannot see how these two are describing different situations and that’s all above my basis for saying.