London South East | The UK's favourite investor portal.

Thanks! This is another really interesting situation and one that could have both a negative and positive spin.

What we do know is as follows - the EIA was completed and formally submitted on 31 December 2025 to trigger the €360 million grant conditions. An EIA is just a decision making tool and one thing that has to be taken into account when the formal decision is made. It's standard for the EIA to include consultation, but under the EU Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA), this window is legally capped at 90 days for strategic projects like Cínovec. Even starting in May, a 45-day public window fits the June deadline comfortably. It's also standard for permitting / approvals to include conditions - in other words your project is approved subject to ensuring x, y and z - during both construction and operation. This can take care of objections, and the EIA should include both the impacts of the project and how they are mitigated. The EIA was undoubtedly thorough (given the cost and who did it) and will be in favour of the project. But it is just a tool to enable decision making.

Your point though is about timelines and Under the CRMA, because Cínovec is a strategic project, it has a legally mandated one-stop-shop permitting process. The 30 June date is the hard deadline for the decision because that is when the €360 million grant expires—the government won't forfeit that funding. This can still be met because the municipal challenge hurdle was cleared on 10 February 2026 when the relevant regional assembly approved the regional rezoning (ZUR). In Czech law, a ZUR is a superior planning act; once land is rezoned it then permits certain uses on that land as of right. For this project it means that technical approval / permitting for the project can be granted and it cannot be legally blocked by local councils.

Technical approval / permitting subject to conditions is permitting.

On your other point, no EBRD is not a charity but its development arm can take a loss, because its banking arm makes that money back x10+ with the financing deal that its development arm has created—this exit allows them to move from equity into a Senior Debt role without conflict of interest. All development banks do this and I am honestly surprised why this has been a controversial point. I work in this area, so I am familiar with it.

I realise that as I post this, it looks like I am always putting a positive spin on things, but really it's just the way I see things developing. Yes, it's not ideal that the CENIA website isn't being updated better, and that there are not more RNS announcements providing some sort of reassurance of the process - but CEZ is in control of all of this and it doesn't care about a EMH retail shareholders - or what we think at this point.

The issue that I am not so positive about - not sure about rather than negative - is the 3.6 m shares that the exec directors of EMH plan to split if voted for in the AGM - they could buy them

In essence, yes. EBRD’s just doesn't care about making money from shares - like most multilateral banks, they make their money through long-term lending and interest.

As a development bank for the EU, their goal is to support green projects that bolster EU industry and carbon reduction. With EMH, they stepped in to support a private company leading the development of the business case for a critical lithium resource. They did their research and bought in at 42p—at a time when lithium prices were sliding—the EBRD provided the capital necessary for EMH to finish the job.

That support led to the Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) and positioned the project to unlock massive EU grants (€400m). No doubt the EBRD being a shareholder supported that process to get nearly half a bil.

The EBRD looks for projects that have strategic value but would struggle between exploration and production. Without the EBRD’s validation, EMH might never have crossed the DFS finish line. As things are they found it hard because the stars just have not aligned - until they started to at the end of 2025/start of 2026.

But EBRD is entering 'Stage 2.' and can see that Geomet is finally ready to stand on its own. The geopolitical context, rising lithium demand, and the alignment of Czech political will have created the right moment. Consequently, the EBRD is moving to take up the role of senior lender.

By dropping below the 5% regulatory threshold, EBRD can now act without filing public RNS disclosures every time they move a share. It is highly probable they’ve signed an NDA to facilitate a smooth transfer of their block—most likely to ČEZ—as part of a consolidated buyout. This is a classic move to bundle friendly shares together. Since retail voter turnout is historically low, consolidating these large institutional blocks is how you guarantee a 'Yes' vote on the final deal.

Overall, it’s very positive because it signals the project is becoming bankable.

But for us the only question that really matters is what is Fair Value in a buyout.

We also have the vote for 3.6m shares for key directors coming up. I haven’t decided if this is a good or bad thing yet. While it’s clearly an incentive-based payday, the concern is whether it makes the board more likely to accept a 'fast' buyout at a lower price rather than holding out for top dollar. Things are getting very interesting.

Look, these are just my views—I'm not trying to influence anyone, just sharing my thoughts as the logic starts to trump the irrational nonsense on the boards. There’s been some good belly laughs along the way (applause to CityDElight) - good luck to all of us for the next month.

Not, if you were cynical, but if you were a buffoon who hadn't the first idea of what EBRD is more like.

The suggestion that that a sovereign-backed multilateral bank like the EBRD would be flipping shares to try and get a discounted price later is effing hilarious and it would be regulatory suicide for the EBRD.

The EBRD is a bank owned by 71 countries and the EU - they don't flip shares or gamble their reputation. They simply don't need to. The EBRD does not think like a retail trader who's had too much red bull.

The goal of the EBRD (and why they have invested in EMH) is only about project completion.

The idea that they would drop below 5% to enable them to drop the rest is also the logic of someone who has zero understanding.

The EBRD has dropped with precision to ensure silence - they can negotiate or transfer their stake behind the scenes without the market seeing their every move during the last phase.

My conjecture (feel free to rip it apart because I could of course be wrong and I am posting here for interest not to influence) is that the EBRD has dropped below 5% to enter 'Stealth Mode' for the final transaction. By falling just below the 5% legal disclosure threshold, they’ve cleared the regulatory tracks to negotiate a private transfer of their stake to a buyer behind the scenes without triggering public disclosure alerts.

In essence, the EBRD likely knows exactly who the buyer is and has signed NDAs. This move allows them to facilitate a structured sale of their block at the appropriate time while simultaneously resolving the institutional conflict of interest between being a major owner and becoming the lead lender for the mine’s construction debt. This is complex corporate maneuvering, but a multi-billion-euro institution like the EBRD has the compliance teams to ensure the transition from shareholder to project funder is handled perfectly for a June resolution.

It's a fascinating (from a legal perspective) situation, and one that to me makes logical sense. I don't think we will have to wait long to see if my conjecture is right - what we will start to notice is large buys and a tick up in the share price in June. If those large buys start happening we will know institutional buyers are starting to connect the dots and FOMO will also start to happen for retail.

Looks like an interesting month ahead.

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for Jemesa

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)