Member Info for Jemesa

Absolutely - I agree that the 19 days to process the comments between 11 June and 30 June will be tight - but this is where we find out whether the CRMA status and the 36m grant mean something. Also don't forget the permit can be issued subject to conditions - and we should expect a Yes permit granted subject to x, y and z - and this is entirely standard.

Just to clarify - I am not suggesting a RNS now - but I would imagine it could be one with the actual public hearing date.

As you say - fingers crossed - but I think we're go for the 30 June deadline.

Amazing - thank you!!!

This notice on the regional portal is the official start legally mandated under CZ law for 30 days ending 11 June.

Ok, to avoid annoyance I won't say "RNS incoming" but one is likely because while the last one confirmed technical completion, this regional posting is the actual trigger for public consultation. So it would make sense for EMH to bundle this trigger with the date for the public hearing.

This shows the clear path to the June 30 permitting decision in line with the 36m JTF grant deadline and well within the maximum permitted under the CRMA 90 day window.

Basically as you said - all going according to plan :)

I wonder if this will be reflected in the buy side today, will we finally see some upward action?

Thanks for sharing

I may have missed something but why do you think Keith’s target is 60c?

I don’t think this is Keith’s target and given Zeus is suggesting a measly 88p at the end of 2025 I’d suggest the real target is north of £1

Watching Keith explain the level of local detail and consultation that has gone into creating the local level acceptance of the project at that local scale, helped of course, by the brownfield status, I agree 100% that this has been time well spent. Of course, retail just shout start the mine already, or this would have been done if it was in a place called "Africa" (ignoring the diversity in that particular continent) - but this all misses the point - this is about doing something properly - with environmental standards (the highest anywhere in the world) and securing a future supply of the base material for the new economy that we desperately need.

BUT despite all of that - I agree 100% that management needs to be rewarded - hence YES to Pavlik who has 300k shares and should be rewarded.

But don't we think if Keith has 5m plus shares already - he hardly needs an extra 1.8m to incentivise him more.

But I do like the fact they get to write their own incentive package with the first one being an offtake - it's like they are marking their own homework - undoubtedly good for shareholders.

Are we seeing a lot of bots whose algos are saying the moving average for the last 50 days is higher than the MA for the last 200 days?

Thanks - yes, very interesting.

To ensure clarity - I am providing only opinions relating to likely scenarios, but importantly these are based on actual commercial reality, the geopolitical reality, where the lithium market is, how development banks work, how projects are legally permitted, how national and international law work, and how finance is placed. If you have an understanding of this framework, then every time the under rock dweller thinks that something will stop the project in its tracks - it's quite easy to point out actually - that's a green flag not a red one.

Ok this is really interesting, thank you.

First to expand on just how big the Troll's latest GREEN FLAG is - a 3rd party (like a German OEM) would likely bid a lot is because they are buying 3 decades of lithium security, not just a mining stake - to them, a high price now is a hedge against a decade of supply volatility.

For CEZ they actually want a high third-party bid because it floats their boat - a big market valuation for GEOMET is in their direct interest because it makes raising the €1.7B construction debt (minus 400m) easier and allows them to bring in a strategic partner to pay 49% (or whatever portion they decide between them - in one scenario CEZ doesn't have to fork anything out)

The ROFR only applies to the direct transfer of Geomet shares - an upstream acquisition of EMH at the corporate level (the PLC/Ltd itself) would bypass project-level ROFRs entirely, allowing a predator 3rd party to backdoor into the 49% bypassing CEZ having a legal right to match. It's potentially explosive - in all scenarios this green flag is screaming high buyout figure - and is one good explanation of why Keith wants more performance rights...

I suspect quite a bit of this is happening already.

Because CEZ may not match it, may want a strategic partner in Geomet, because for the bidder they don’t want control of Geomet they want 20 plus years of guaranteed lithium from the heart of the EU. What would seem expensive now will seem like an amazing deal in 10 years.

All the troll has done is his speciality - tried to find something negative but actually revealed a big green flag.

Of course there can be a bidding war between potential buyers - but when that’s over and EMH has a final signed offer then CEZ has the right of first refusal.

The ROFR doesn't stop a bidding war - it follows one.

EMH can solicit bids from any interested buyers including global carmakers - once that happens CEZ is then legally forced to match the highest price in cash to keep the stake.

Plus as we know EMH holds a veto on all project funding. CEZ cannot raise the €1.7B construction debt or force rules without EMH’s signature.

So there’s a massive green flag because CEZ must pay a fair, high-premium market price match any bid - the bidding war can happen - of course it can.

BTW - mouse brains has confessed that he only appears on these boards because he hopes EMH crashes and burns so he can laught at EMH investors - treat such trolls with the disdain these low lifes deserve.

Can you message it to me pls?

Even a broken clock is right twice a day, we’ve yet to witness the troll with the brain of a mouse being right once.

The latest rubbish is wrong because “brain of a mouse” doesn’t understand that EMH holds a veto on all project funding, preventing CEZ from acting alone or diluting them. A Right of First Refusal doesn't kill a deal (as mouse brain thinks) it forces CEZ to match the high-premium price of any third-party bid .

For an OEM the 49% is a guarantee of offtake in Europe's largest lithium resource, a strategic prize that ensures EMH is a kingmaker.

Personally I think cez will take the 49% and pay well for it.

There’s a simple reason this is good for geomet and cez - a high market cap will make finance cheaper - hence why fair value is not going to be based on s/p

Thanks! I think this all makes sense, but this is where we will find out if the CRMA makes a difference.

Art. 11 crma mandates a 30-day consultation minimum for Strategic Projects, to stop the usual multi-month delays.

This window opened 6 May and it legally closes 5 june giving the Ministry a clear three-week runway to issue the final permit by the June 30 grant deadline.

That permitting can be subject to conditions and will be.

Then the only question for EMH shareholders will be what’s the value of a half share in a permitted lithium JV with zero debt, 400m in grants, sitting on an enormous resource with ESG approval, EU passported, +30%, a captive customer base etc etc

I agree with your assessment of fair value and so will the market.

I don’t completely disagree with you. But an offtake agreement is just a contract and a contract can have a clause that says: subject to permit being granted.

As for who decides it’s the cz state - based on all relevant information - including local comments. But what will carry the most weight is the EIA and the government consultant’s assessment of that EIA. This has been a long and careful process and Keith has talked about that. It’s been a decade of discussion and making changes to the design of the project. The 2026 context and the CRMA has made a big difference.

Ultimately this will be for the Min of Env / state to grant the permit - while nothing is guaranteed the signs are all point one way - particularly the EIA consultant.

Not long to wait to see who’s right.

It occurs to me that this could be a very different conversation in a few weeks. It’s very much in EMH’s and Keith’s interest to see the share price ticking up. There’s likely to be some movement before 29 May to see what news may be released, and then a pretty strong hint that an offtake could be announced shortly after that, plus the public hearing date and even then the general anticipated permitting decision.

As usual a lot of nonsense circulating. If you don't run or own a business, you see big figures used by people when they talk about 10 year time frames. Keith took home about GBP200k per annum.

Then there's conspiracy theories about CEZ - a predatory shark ready to attack pre-permitting to steal EMH from retail investors

What a joke.

Fair value today still has a permitting risk - despite the wink wink - CEZ/The state are granting the permit. So pre-permitting there is a big risk discount. Whether that is 25 p or a higher fair value is endlessly debatable and ultimately depends on what shareholders would vote for. BUT - while mouse brains has said EMH fair value is 25p - EMH has specific veto rights in the Geomet JV. How do you take over a partner who has the legal power to stop the project's development?

Yes, we can argue what would happen in the end / legal teams etc. but why would CEO think this small, when it can still buy EMH at a great deal which for CEZ is like sofa change.

Post permit the valuation shifts it is (NPV) of the lithium in the ground, minus the cost to get it out. This is where the £1.14 comes in.

Ultimately CEZ is not a mickey mouse company it is 70% state-owned. Screwing international investors on a "Strategic EU Project" would be an embarrassment.

So a fair offer route is the one that CEZ will take and this will use formal Independent Expert Report based on the Australasian VALMIN Code (due to EMH’s Aussie domicile).

The assessment would be based on:

DFS NPV: The core cash-flow model.

Strategic premium - the only major lithium source in the EU.

Similar Transactions

Grant Inclusion - 400m - meaning less debt burden (yes mouse brains it only counts at the construction phase - but it's guaranteed)

One of the big four accounting outfits will do this fair assessment.

1.14 is likely - but it could be more 1.50+ if lithium keeps rising, and who knows if more good news comes in.

You asked about the extra 3.6m shares - These are performance rights - they only vest if targets are met, and interesting to me is this offtake target, suggesting that an offtake for at least 25% will be announced between 29 May and 30 June. Keith is writing in a fat cheque on the way out. I don't see it as an incentive for him - but it is an incentive for Pavlik - I have voted yes to his resolution - no to Keith - for me more needed to be explained about that.

Ok there’s a few things to unpack here. First off - a EIA is only a decision making tool. It’s used to provide an expert assessment of what the impacts will be if the development is allowed to go ahead. The EIA has been submitted - end of Dec and checked by the ministry of environment’s own expert. It’s all good.

The decision to approve the project rests only with the min of env in cz. The law in cz says there must be a chance for public consultation before the min of env makes the final decision.

This is a huge project.

So where the CRMA comes in - is that it puts in place max time limits for the decision making. This is why the final decision must be made before 30 June.

I get the complaints over the delays, and the frustration but all EMH shareholders have to wait only until 30 June and to do that don’t listen to posters who have the brains of a mouse.

Good point!

I liked Montesaurus’s idea of trying to get some unified action. He suggested larger shareholders coordinate - how many shares is a larger shareholder?

In other news yahoo finance is covering EMH:

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-penny-stocks-3-top-140514545.html

Lithium price surge is mostly driven by BESS: http://www.aastocks.com/en/stocks/news/aafn-news/NOW.1523522/1

The timing is impeccable

lukask, you are viewing this as a retail investor.

unfortunately cez is a state-backed behemoth. it is currently restructuring to move away from retail and get more strategic. but right now cez is a clumsy giant. the people inside are salaried professionals - their role when they get round to it is project de-risk, not marketing to emh investors.

i’d suggest cez would downplay the project to keep the price lower for its buyout - but let’s face it **** up rather than conspiracy is the answer 99% of the time.

on keith - poor fella hes in a trap. if he talks more, he’s accused of a pump and dump by the same people on this forum. if he stays quiet, he’s called invisible by the same people on this forum.

the reality is he has delivered:

• the dfs (technical bankability)

• the eia (environmental path)

• permitting updates (the june 30 roadmap)

his job is project delivery. he is hitting milestones while the forum gets distracted by squeaks about german fax machines

the bottom line:

zeus capital has already told the market what is fair. that value will likely be realized when an offer is made, not through retail hype. we are in the final quiet window before the permit. the work is being done, even if it isn't being tweeted - in fact i think emh website’s twitter is down - at least that’s what it says.

i’d love to think aim was a rational place - and nobody’s listening if we complain about a lack of liquidity.

but it’s all happening - it’s a question of hanging in there for 30-60 days. that’s all.

Another mainstream nod for EMH: https://markets.investorschronicle.co.uk/data/equities/tearsheet/forecasts?s=EMH:LSE