Member Info for Jemesa

I agree delays are frustrating, but it’s easy to overlook the importance of legal process and compliance with environmental standards because that’s exactly what makes this source of lithium so valuable and strategic. Takes longer but it’s done properly meaning high value and green transition with values in tact.

I am not so sure - my own view is that once the impact of this sinks in there should be an influx of buyers front running the 30 June decision. Clearly bigger funds won't buy while there is uncertainty - but any detailed review of what's going on should be showing a compelling buy opportunity now.

This is because while its tight there can be a definitive decision on the environmental approval on or before June 30.

This is a real time and massive validation of what the CRMA framework is designed to do - basically ensure big decisions are taken within defined timeframes to show that the EU can do things that are of strategic importance - stopping the business as usual delay narrative that has hampered the EU and led to its strategic supply chain fragility.

The reason I am robust about this requires a recap:

- 31 December 2025 (EIA Submitted) - with Geomet lodging an incredibly detailed EIA, with modeling to show exactly how deep-mining water table impacts are managed.

- February 2026 Regional Rezoning Approved - The project arguably cleared the highest hurdle it faced by securing local land-use laws and spatial planning - once this regional level is sorted - national can support.

-- May 2026 - another huge tick - The Ministry of Env officially published the EIA, confirming the documentation met all strict completeness requirements - remember this work was done by the MoE's own independent consultant - providing the technical and objective evidence to support the MoE decision - this ensures the decision is based on robust science/geology etc

May 2026 (EMH RNS) - Update on the limited cross-border EIA, proving it is limited strictly to underground mining hydrology and confirming meetings had happened with all technical models already shared with German authorities.

Now - we have

11 June - an absolute deadline for public concerns to be submitted in writing, leaving a 6-day review window before the public hearing - these objections to have any real impact must focus on the EIA.

17 June Public Hearing - The live presentation and debate to ensure all local and cross-border public feedback is officially logged into the record.

On or before 30 June -Final Decision - This is possible - but it could be deferred - this is when the Ministry delivers the final binding EIA environmental clearance - the trigger for 36m just transition funds.

The key question at this point is whether the environmental approval can be issued on or before 30 June 2026 - the entire CRMA framework, the funding and the reputation of the CZ/CEZ approach is on the line - as is the EU CRMA framework - and they will want to show big investors (like POSCO) they are in control. So - I am 60% certain the decision will be made on or before 30 June - I am 100% certain it will be a yes (even if slightly deferred with a grant extension)

This is where the CRMA framework should apply. My understanding is that:

- all written submissions must be in by 11 June

- public hearing 17 June

- decision on or before 30 June

The decision is the environmental approval which will be based on the EIA which the Min of Environment independent consultant has already said - Yes 👍

The public hearing satisfies the public consultation requirement - and it should focus on the EIA undertaken and accepted by MoE consultant.

This is positive news. Not sure whether there will be a RNS update (probably not) but a big tick.

Ok - what is "radio silence" and a "static undervalued sp" telling you?

You don't have to provide your opinion, but you keep suggesting you have one that has recently changed from a month ago, so just asking what is it this month?

So, just for clarity - what do you think...

it's only surreal if you read it the way you have interpreted it.

yes, of course posco would not take a tiny percentage - by the same token posco wouldn't pay stump up half a billion if it was just a gamble.

but they are in the eu (low country risk) and they are buying into a premium, shovel-ready asset with eu approval stamped all over it.

emh has done a lot to get it there - fantastic dfs and grants locked in.

you seem to assume that the current share price isn't the ridiculous undervaluation that it is.

to explain so you don't misinterpret what i am saying again - in this scenario posco pays a premium for a substantial 20-25% project stake (reducing emh to ~37%) and uses its massive balance sheet to guarantee bank debt for the rest of the build.

posco is not after dividends they are laser focused on a binding offtake agreement for 100% of the 37,500 tonnes of annual lithium to feed their global ev factories.

emh gets a reduced but fully funded, debt-free portion of a mine with zero corporate dilution - that aligns with shareholders and management.

this scenario is only realistic if you value what emh has done - you factor in the grants - the crma framework - and the geopolitical ****storm of 2026

Repeating gratitude for finding this.

While I am no expert at watching what shares do - the trading activity for EMH over the last month has shown huge volume within a tightly controlled 17-18p. So why is it being controlled? (if it is)

Now we have had the CEZ AGM comments - basically this project is not an if - it's when - and now this follow up link (thanks to Rpks) with POSCO linked again to the project - that represents both the funding and expertise required. A POSCO/CEZ partnership delivers this project and this kind of behind the scenes structure would explain the controlled investment into EMH.

There are 3 possibilities for EMH from here:

A corporate buyout to clean up the joint venture structure entirely—delivering immediate fair value (my view only £1+).

A project-level earn-in, where POSCO funds the massive construction costs directly in exchange for a portion of Geomet. (We take a slightly smaller percentage of the project, but we don't pay for build costs).

A non-dilutive debt-and-offtake facility that leaves EMH with its full 49% shareholding in Geomet—we stay in and earn massive long-term dividends—the absolute dream.

Whichever of the 3 ends up as the option—funding (and the threat of dilution to EMH shareholders) is permanently resolved. This would explain why the share price is holding so steady. Last chance to buy at this price?

I get the questions why EBRD is selling now, but it's actually a sign of the maturity of the project. The EBRD is a development bank - Not an investment bank. The word bank causes the confusion.

EBRD has provided funding and taken equity at a crucial stage of this project - and it has succeeded in that aim - it does not want and nor has it ever intended to make a profit from EMH shares - Rather its role ended with the DFS and the submission of the EIA - and now its temporary Czech investment mandate expired in March 2026.

The core point for EMH shareholders (weary as they may be) is that the project has matured past early-stage development risk and is getting close to securing the finance. I initially thought this could be from the EBRD - but I was wrong - it's likely to be the closely connected Euro Investment Bank - EIB - that I think holds shares in EBRD.

Cinovec has been granted CRMA status meaning that the EIB is legally positioned to provide the massive low-interest loans required to fund the actual mine build as soon as local building permits are approved - so unfortunately for us this really is a grind of ticking each box - before the project gets funded.

Thanks - noted and corrected.

@mick88 - really interesting find on that 6% generic Mining CAPEX - because prior to FID there's no way that the description of what's this for can be stated - as you note 0% on coal - so it's a holding bucket - of around US$900m - 51% of the build has been put to one side - ready to go. Compelling speculation of course, and strongly suggests: We're actively dating, looking for an independently wealthy, established and experienced mining life partner with a good sense of humour.

Exactly what we’d expect from CEZ as a state backed partner - if anything it shows just how across the project they are:

- we’re getting the permit

- we may bring in [Posco]

- we want lithium supply

- the price of lithium has to be good - don’t panic we won’t do this unless it’s going to be profitable

The disaster would have been him ruffling some papers and say, what lithium project are you talking about?

@$1 I’ll fly in from the UK / may need a few days notice

Another interesting one: showing the rising demand is here now:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2026/may/31/cheaper-energy-bills-battery-revolution-climate-crisis

The shareholders have just said, “Keith, mate, you’ve got 5.7m reasons to get this right, you don’t need an extra 1.8m reasons” - not sure who advised him to try it on, but he shouldn’t be surprised by the slow clap he got.

Interesting article: https://www.mining.com/web/eu-backed-group-warns-of-expensive-critical-metals-stockpiling/

Thanks Tom - very interesting and now wondering if lack of communication and EBRD divesting are linked to proximity to offtake and financing.

Don’t worry about the troll, he’s trying to dig a new tunnel into Germany to stop Keith and prove his point that tunnels are real - and there’s no internet access down there.

Yes - must have all gone down the pub in Perth to buy Keith a round and cheer him up and forgot to send the fax? Never mind Keith you still have 5.7m shares and if you get a buyout of more than £1 then the drinks are on you.

But we've all seen it and same Directors were re-elected, 10% emergency funding capacity was approved, and Pavlik got his incentive in his back pocket by a thin margin - I'd suggest good for him and us.

I know I am repeating myself but it's good to see management and shareholder interests are well aligned - they know they can't just rely on an automatic bonus payout during a takeover—the best and cleanest way they profit now is by negotiating the absolute highest possible ordinary share price for everyone.

Pavlik got his though - good sense has prevailed IMHO - now team - everyone is adequately incentivized - let’s

Focus on the big announcements

Interesting article today including this point about price forecasts: "UBS is the most bullish, projecting lithium carbonate to trade to US$30,519 per tonne in 2026 and US$41,875 per tonne in 2027, against a prior consensus of US$15,566 and US$15,984 per tonne respectively. For spodumene, UBS sees the long-term price settling at US$1,400 per tonne."

https://www.marketindex.com.au/news/latest-on-lithium-sure-everyone-wants-a-byd-but-sodium-ion-is-coming

The article makes some interesting points about sodium and people with more technical understanding than me have explained that sodium ion should be seen as a complementary technology rather than a threat.

Interesting points that point to us all finding out a lot more in June.

On the 5m options - pretty sure their not Keith's - his alignment is secured with his current 5.7m shareholding (and potentially 1.8m more if he gets the nod at the AGM) - these options you are talking about appear to be issued to unnamed consultants / employees perhaps? Not sure when they were issued by at 25c I am sure they are not forgotten about.

So everything seems aligned for June, and an offer... personally I think it will be a fair one based only on the fact that the EU has to encourage private investment in this area if it has any serious hope of competing with the US/China. Not treating private investors well sends entirely the wrong message. Pure speculation of course.