Member Info for Jambo813

Red trader
After all in costs let’s say $1500 on 25m oz a 30% share of that would be $11.25 b
If that lasted 50 years that would be $225,000,000 annual income pre tax. That could earn a annual div equal to todays value of a couple of pence over 50 years

They cannot just do it they would need to have enough votes to get over 50% and vote it through.Back then pre suspension and exit of Nomad is very cloudy.
Buyer talking to EUA
Placing
Then nothing ,
except Nomad gone then suspension due to speculation on social media ( possibly because talk of supposed 80p sale).

Exactly why I still am and will be here for the whole journey.
Not forgetting the other licences .
I am no mining expert but given the promising activity by NN and others in the whole area I am confident of further discoveries by GGP. They may not strike first time round but Newmont taught me patience pays. My post is exactly what I would say if I read that page if we were in mid conversation.
Read it , comment on it, dismiss it.

Just looked up that page on Paddy’s link and saw the 3rd criteria for a Tier 2
moderate resource or exploration upside likely.
Moderate as appose to ‘Significant’ for a tier 1
I just hope that is not the reason Sandeep has dropped T2 into the recent presentation.

I agree with Noviceman, it is the only logical reason they have moved on this so fast.
Yes, we know EUA said they will be developing it but they would say that anyway. In business any deal is not a deal until the ink is dry on the paper and the words in the RNS is the fall back position if no deal materialised.

The official suspension RNS stated the reason was because of Social Media Speculation.
That must have been the source of any 80p being banded about I guess.
Where was the source is the question as the EUA Nomad parted company with EUA shortly afterwards. Does anyone know the reason for this?

RMR this is what the board announced in Oct 19
I too would like to know where the 80p quote came from

However, as set out in the Announcement, no engagement letter has yet been signed with the Banks, although they continue to work on the Company's behalf; no agreement on success fees has yet been reached; and the Company also reiterates that there can be no guarantee that any transaction will occur nor that there can be any guarantee as to the value that could be achieved for any of the Assets in any potential transaction.

You do that Rickster
And anyone else that cannot have a grown up conversation, cannot grasp a concept so resort to childish responses. At least be original if you do.

Aspenwood et all
There is no contradiction it is mere speculation not expectation. Peeps speculate how they will make ridiculous multiples of the current SP on any dividend, does not make them wrong until they are or are not.
We may well all make a profit on any dividend if it is higher than the highest price paid by anyone to buy. Great.
What I speculated that COULD in THEORY happen post dividend of course as Mike said, is negative, whether it is just the value of the SP (nothing wrong though if holding longer term) or conditions that COULD be possibly lead to going private.
Just because it is negative does not make it inconceivable.
By the way Aspen you did not disappoint....Not a shareholder response.
I never post on boards where I do not hold shares. I may read them but do my own research before I buy. Always.

@Mike
Not sure I should respond either given your closing remarks.
However, I have no agenda whatsoever and as a holder sincerely hope your roadmap is how this pans out.
As I posted before my speculation was is entirely based on the loose threads and questions many have puzzled over on the information and gaps in the sale RNS.
Also a perfectly plausible one for the Uber rampers to ponder over before they sadly have to dig out the predictable response that ..I must be a paid de-ramper. Yawn. GLA

Keep coming back and I will try and reply.
The answer to why the theory (and it only a theory for reasons already explained) has not been hinted at in the RNS is obvious for 2 reasons.
1. There is no agenda to take EUA private
2. If there is, they would give no hint to shareholders if there was a plan.

Aspen
We agree on something, that EUA has exceptional potential alongside which has been proved up.
We all know how much (or rather little) value the market can reflect a SP on potential.
Now think about how the market will behave after any Special Dividend is locked in for shareholders.
Many are bound to be selling ( let’s say Ex Div date) so lots of sells on a share which at that point will be based on what?
If the answer is potential I would expect a fairly low number AND it is being sold into.
If the small minority of large percentage shareholders are still short of the percentage they need, that would be the time to buy, and cheaply too. Same goes for an outsider with an eye on a cheap buy out.

@friendsps
The way any board would benefit. They would first receive the special dividend just like all holders of circa 2.8 billion shares.
After that if ( I say IF ) a company is taken private by whichever means and voted for by majority shareholding’s held by a minority of actual shareholders ( including directors) it would go through.
The actual true value and or true potential of that company would be owned by a minority would it not?
So who benefits the most the minority owners of the private company who share profits between them instead of paying dividends out Billions of shares

Ps. If specific to EUA then it would happen after the special dividend

Aspen
This is not aimed specifically to EUA but when it comes to AIM companies too many PIs complain about never ending placings & manipulation of SP by MMS. The one thing they never spot and which is the biggest rip off IMO is when good companies with a decent MCAP get taken private. All within the legal framework.
That is what some city sharks specialists do. Knock on the door with a plan to elbow the small guys that hold the billions of shares.
I am not saying EUA would do this but asked the question in full knowledge I will get flack. Sometimes though I get an answer to the perfectly reasonable question.
Again, only asked because the RNS itself begs such thoughts & questions.

Robert
It would have been helpful if the EUA board could have given a little more clarity in there update as to the end of the sale process.
They did not and there was enough ambiguity and loose threads to allow ( without too much imagination) shareholders to come to positive or negative conclusions as to EUA’s future.
Blame the BOD and not investors who can identify possible red flags.
I said possible and still holding until there is more clarity. If If no one knows the answer to my question then I will need to do some homework I guess.

The board had already indicated there was several different proposals with non binding bids and were looking to move to which I would have hoped ( best case scenario) all moving to binding bids.
So not sure if the this proposal EUA are focusing on was one of the several non bindings or not.
Suspect it wasn’t as they would surely have moved to binding.
So the proposal came in some time after the non binding RNS and if so must have come from perhaps a front running non binding potential buyer who has been in the process all along.
What I don’t get is the experts on here all told us there are buyers desperate for EUA s assets, and would be in a bidding war till the last man is standing.
They cannot be that desperate or in competition as why pay out £14m for the placed shares. That only buys you shares in EUA, it does not buy or secure assets ( proven or potential it that).
What percentage of shares( including options & warrants ) do the directors , any associated companies AND the entity who took up the placing have in total ?
I hope it is nowhere near the 50% threshold where a small number of shareholders could take this private.

They will trade anywhere on the globe they can, if they have to and that is why the regs will be watered down or pushed back.

Jeez , what is it you can comment on here that does not pass the deramper bar set by some.
Happyscot comments that EUA is not a leaky ship and gets the flak reserved for so called deramping.

It could surely still be possible if EUA know (which they will) the numbers of any binding offer long before any RNS,
Have the ability to release all the information, including actual or indicative dividend payable per share.
They could also when making the announcement declare (common for special dividends) it would be payable to holders at the close of the previous business day. ( ie. a pre market opening RNS so SP would be treated as Ex Div.
Whatever they do it is going to be very interesting what the market will price the shares on an ex div basis.
If the div rate is announced in advance and needs to be voted on and an ex date has to follow that, it is possible to trade shares with a special condition of Special Ex.
This means the seller is selling in a cum (with) dividend period pre ex date but wants to keep the dividend. The sale price obviously is lower by the dividend rate per share.