Member Info for Innoffthecush

There was a multi national force in the Balkans , including Russian troops, stopping genocide.

NATO expansion happened because Russia's neighbours are terrified of Russian aggression , and sought NATO membership. NATO did not actively recruit them. As for missiles Russia has many more missiles pointing at Europe than vice versa. Putin's famous essay he wrote a few years ago, that re wrote history and set out his ambition to conquer states on Russia's border (it's worth a read) was ignored at first, but his invasion of Ukraine showed that far from being bluster, his ambitions were as stated. This prompted Sweden, Finland etc to seek NATO membership, abandoning long held neutrality. So he has himself to blame for so called NATO expansion. NATO is a defensive alliance.

Agree Skippy he looked very odd indeed. Almost mad. Very bizarre speech. The people around the room in the security meeting in Moscow looked very uncomfortable indeed. It's almost a Stalin like situation, they all looked terrified. He wants to wreck Ukraine because he fears the desire for democracy and freedom may spread to Russia , with dire consequences for him. I am not sure NATO membership is the main issue. I fear escalation by miscalculation. The West must show steel here or he may be tempted to try the same trick with Moldova, Georgia etc who are not NATO members. This is dangerous and we need leadership of high order in order to weather it. Thank God Corbyn is not in charge. He was at it again in Parliament yesterday blaming NATO for the crisis, and requesting NATO to pull out from Eastern Europe. He is so stupid by thinking that if we disarmed everyone else would follow. As the Polish saying goes "we play chess but they play kick arse" . Lenin said "where you meet mush push through, if you meet steel, withdraw". It is time for the west to show some steel,.

Is Putin being rational? He looked anything but to me. It is true that he wants the Soviet Empire back. Constantly said it. Things are not good economically in Russia. He is scared he may end up like many other dictators. That makes him desperate, and thus very dangerous. If the West sanctions any company with links to the Russian state, then where does that leave a company with joint ventures with Rosgeo? I am holding , but at the moment it feels like a 50/50 gamble. The security issue is more worrying. He cannot win a conventional war against NATO. If he starts losing he will use battlefield nuclear weapons. That has been baked into Soviet planning for decades , thus Mutual assured Destruction kept the peace in Europe. Any rational person would not contemplate that. But is he rational? Or has he had his way for so long in Russia that he has lost his grip on reality. There are many ways this could resolve without serious damage , however it is not a sure thing. Worrying.

It is puzzling why the Russians are building Field Hospitals near the Ukrainian border if they have no intension of any action. It makes me wonder if Mr Putin has lost the plot. If he invades he'll get precisely what he purports to fear i.e. more NATO deployment in Eastern Europe. He suffers from "small man" syndrome I fear. He is bitter about the demise of the USSR, he has said so on many occasions, and the potential for miscalculation is enormous. it is also very expensive indeed to keep all those troops in the field, the Russian economy is not strong, and GDP about the same size as California, or thereabouts. While NATO spends about 2% of GDP on defence Russia spends 30% of it's GDP on the military. It is puzzling then as to what he really wants to achieve.

Interesting that 200 day moving average is 26p. Share price reverting to the mean...until concrete change announced. Patience.

Still holding. But I am worried by the troop build up. Things are pretty toxic inside Russia, the West have issued a threat of "serious economic harm" if he does invade. Putin has always been very open about his conviction that the loss of the Soviet Empire was "the most tragic event of the twentieth century". Hope nobody miscalculates. He may be doing it as part of a wider strategy to wring out some economic gains, or to use it as a bargaining chip to get EU, USA and GB to lift sanctions on his rich mates. Hope so . Otherwise there may be problems.

There is a table but also links to a series of mini articles about each company in the Aim 100. I'm holding.

It's in the Investors Chronicle Magazine in the printed version and online.

Aim 100 review re EUA advises "avoid".

I am sure most people fully aware of these, but for those who do not, it may be of interest.

https://stockhead.com.au/primers/your-guide-to-mining-feasibility-studies/

All indications are that Earths population will become stable in next two decades. Most advanced economies have already done so. Germany , Japan , UK etc already done so . As more women become educated in developing world ,birth rates dramatically reduce. That's why we "import" labour (been doing it since post WW2). Average age increasing etc. Birth rates already on downward trend in more developed African states.

Just read the "Operations" section of Eurasia website. It reflects the RNS updates over the last few months. I feel we are now in for a steady medium term growth. If they sell then someone or a group of someones will have to pay a high price. That may happen but with the JV etc , the prospect of a "get rich quick" sale MAY be diminishing. The get rich quick merchants are perfectly entitled to sell up and speculate elsewhere. It is my intention to hold , or even top up ,if the opportunity arises. I have not got a massive holding , but was fortunate to get in first at 2 to 3p. I understand the worries of people who got in at prices in excess of the present SP , but in my opinion patience in this case may well be rewarded.

To be fair Ian there is research whereby the material the car is made of becomes its own solar power plant. The research centres on Graphene

Just for info, my very small top up at 9.03 of 3806 shares is showing as "unknown" on EUA website.

Agree Calamari. I have seen on this board in the past people comparing SXX to Eua. The point is that some people seem to bash everything, good bad or indifferent. Some people think their geese are swans , or perhaps a better analogy, their Donkeys are Unicorns. Each stock needs to be looked at carefully. SXX was risky. ITM is risky. Like all youngish companies that do not make money YET , there is always a risk. EUA is subject to risk, political geological, who knows, but in this case I see the risk reward balance heavily in the shareholders favour. My opinion only. I have been right before and wrong before.

Re SXX. Ver y poor example. SXX had spent 1.5 billion on the mine. They could not raise further funds. Anglo need to spend a further 3.1 billion to get it into production in 2 years Together with the 550 million Anglo spent to buy the company, thats a total investment of about 5 billion. Potash is less than 300 dollars a metric TONNE. We have loads stuff in the ground worth between 1200 and 2800 dollars an oz. Some stuff worth 28000 dollars an ounce. No comparison.

I don't buy it. It's a hoax.

This is a good read re the "price capped at 75% of the value" of the minerals in the ground as if the state had auctioned them.
Also looks at awarding and transfer of various licenses.
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-011-1888?contextData=(sc.Default)&transitionType=Default&firstPage=true

We are not done yet in terms of outcomes, unless the ducks are already in line. EUA has 24 months to decide which sites to develop or not as the case may be. The state has basically given control to the BOD to maximize it's gains , and by the same token the shareholders. Who knows which "ducks" will shove their beak in the pond? We may know more soon ,I think pretty soon , but as to Monday's SP, frankly I have not got a clue. The RNS release at 5pm seems calculated to let the market digest the news and react accordingly.