Member Info for Montmuzard

"Those that bought in below 1p already have huge profits and may not want the risk of waiting any longer"

I first bought in below 1p and see the much larger risk as missing out on the eventual and possibly life-changing upside. Not selling a single bean until Dmitri does.

I remember a time where today's 3p gain equated to a 300% rise. For many of us, it still does! For some, it's even more...

I'm now 2000%+ up and counting, and holding strong until D-day: not selling a single shekel until the endgame.

"GLG I'm invested, I don't want to be stuck in this for two years if the sale falls through, in that scenario I'd take a hit and ditch this"

And those of us that have averages in the very low pennies will gladly buy your discounted shares that you've kindly subsidised for us, and patiently wait for the even-bigger payday down the line.

One other thing: if you’ve done your research, you’re an investor and wouldn’t be worrying regardless of what point you’d bought in at. Indeed, if you’d bought in recently you’d see any drops as an opportunity to average down. If you’re worrying, it’s because you haven’t done your research and you’re just a speculator who deserves only slightly more sympathy than the denizens of now-defunct JUB “botfly” Capital. GLA!

Oh, and we’ve already gone back through 20p. There’s a shocker. It’s literally the same pattern every day. MMs drop the price; weak hands wet the bed; strong hands scoop em up, strong finish into close into anticipation of news.

“ So you are telling me if this drops a further 30-40% you'll still be smiling!?”

Yes. Even if it does, which it won’t, many of us will still be 1000% up and fully confident that a massive payday is in sight. The drops are entirely predictable. We’ve seen it all before. Long before.

"... if full company sale it will be put to shareholders to vote. Wonder if we’ll get notice of full company offer in the interim?"

This is my thinking too. It's a message to potential bidders saying that the offers are coming in, we have one on the table that we are ready to accept and will announce it at some point in the next couple of weeks so shareholders can vote on it. So, if you want to get in on the action, get your skates on as the clock is ticking. All the other resolutions are a facade: I mean, who cares about minor edits to the articles of agreement, and why would they need the ability to generate £250K of beer money when they've just raised $10 million? Do me a favour. Hold long and strong. Ignore the bot flies and the big MM trawler in the distance that keeps casting its net deeper and deeper to scoop up the last remaining scared fish. We're nearly at Treasure Island.

What an insane post Ian. I don’t post here much but have just shy of 500,000 at around 1p. I did have a few more but derisked well before suspension. The simple reason I haven’t added is that this has grown to 75% of my portfolio and that’s more risk than I would ever normally be comfortable with, and as I’m a long term investor and generally invest my earnings, I don’t actually have much spare cash, especially at the moment. When I put some more in my ISA each month, I direct it towards my other longs where I see more growth value over the very long term, some of which are underwater and present an opportunity to average down. It’s quite reasonable to assume that EUA may represent a three-bag from where we are now, which is great, but when you’re already sitting on 1500%+ gain, buying more now doesn’t represent great risk-reward compared to other stocks that might ten or twenty bag. So, while holding for the endgame - where I’m hopeful EUA will provide me with a huge chunk of cash to reinvest elsewhere - I have had no intention to average up dramatically in order to increase my position by just a relatively small amount, but further skewing my portfolio (which is going to be skewed anyway as we enter the endgame itself). In fact, I saw little point in spending £1000 or whatever on a handful of shares when I already have half a million which will set me up very nicely thanks whatever happens. My guess is that Rowka has his own perfectly legitimate strategy too.

There is absolutely no way whatsoever that it's going to be in the 20p-30p range. Nonsense.

Great, thanks. So, using Cjen's figures, I wonder what happens if you think about how that net yield gets divided between dividends, further investment and tax. Let's say 60/20/20 (although I reckon investment would be much lower, as little as a couple of million a year and the tax bill could be creatively reduced below 25%). Then assume 40m shares in issue once warrants have been exercised etc. That gives you a £1 dividend every year for 25 years (as long as metal prices don't collapse). Then assume the investment plans lead to the company going after the copper, and they find it. That could be very spicy indeed: dividends well into the pounds.

I suppose one thing missing from this kind of analysis, though, is the price of the initial capex: what would a JV partner want in terms of that? Much depends on how much leverage EUZ have at the negotiating table, which surely depends in turn on whether selling to someone else is plausible. Either way, let's say 80/20 in EUZ's disfavour: so we're still looking at an annual dividend of 20p minimum, all the way up to many pounds if that split is better - which if we have EU money or forward sold silver, it surely would be - and we get the copper. Fun times.

Does anyone have a good sense of the tax situation in Spain regarding Toral?

@Moneymaker - "why hold for years receiving 1p per annum in a few years time when you could receive 10x that upfront"

Maybe because the 1p per annum will actually be 5p and and you'll have it over 20 years, so it's 10x what you would have had up front, and will be reflected to a significant extent in the SP anyway much sooner.

"You say yourself, people will sell out after a no-deal RNS. That is an obvious risk for people expecting to get a big payout in the next few months."

True, for them. Not for me, and, I imagine, many others. I don't mind waiting ten or fifteen years if I can get multiples of what would already be a substantial payout if we go to sale. My average is in the very low pennies, too, and I de-risked before the suspension, so couldn't care less what happens to the SP in the short term. Obviously I expect us to go to sale - and agree with the comments below about the BOD wanting that outcome, only having Sinosteel as a card to play at the negotiating table etc. - but I'll always take bigger long-term gains over smaller short-term ones, especially with the assets we're sitting on. People that jump if a big deal doesn't come off will just transfer their wealth to people with more patience and longer time-horizons. That's the market. Also, after any period of turbulence, once any plans for EUA mining MT (and doing more digging to prove up resources further, along with the flanks of the flanks) will surely be absorbed into the SP rapidly anyway.

From 17.5% down to 15% up: nice to see the consolidation has helped with the volatility problem :-)

Nice to see the consolidation has definitely helped with the volatility problem :-)

Thinking about share price in the event of us taking it to mine, I have done various calculations (albeit based on very rudimentary knowledge) over the past year or so, and with varying mixes of JVs and so on I still envisage something well into double-pound figures in the new, post-consolidated money alongside some very spicy dividends if we get there. I have a decent holding, but am kicking myself for not fully trusting my research, losing faith a bit and not accumulating even more in the weeks before consolidation.

"This increases the chance of a no-sale and EUA mining itself, which would mean a long delay in shareholders getting any payout."

I fail to see how that's a risk. It does mean a long delay, but it potentially means a spectacular payout. I, for one, would be quite happy for EUA to take this to mine itself - and I'll gladly hoover up shares during the inevitable price crash when people start selling out after any no deal RNS - and then take my annual dividend as a share of £100bn+ of PGMs in a 20-year rising market.

Isn't it?

Cautious welcome from a Cambridge Professor in the Guardian today: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/21/vaccine-treatements-interferon-beta-1a-therapy

This paragraph is worth reading before everyone gets a bit too far ahead of themselves (I'm holding, btw, but expect this to remain volatile).

Have we really found the therapy we have been looking for? Maybe. Maybe not. This clinical trial is small (~50 patients received the therapy and ~50 patients received the placebo). It was designed to see whether the therapy was tolerated by the patients, and whether it might be effective. So far, we only have a press release suggesting these things may have happened – what we need to see is the actual research data. The claim of a 79% reduction in the risk of needing mechanical ventilation or dying sounds brilliant. I am an intensive care specialist who knows only too well how great the need for a therapy like this is; according to the latest data from the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre, more than 7,000 people admitted to UK intensive care units have needed mechanical ventilation, and more than 4,000 people have died. However, we need to remember that only about 50 people received this therapy, and while the press release tells us that three people (6%) who received the placebo died, it does not tell us the number of people who required mechanical ventilation. So we cannot tell how meaningful the effect of this drug is, but the reality is likely to be less striking than the impression given by that “79%”.

I'm afraid I have. Only a small chunk of my GLR position - broken all my personal guidelines today when it comes to rainbows and the like - to have a fun spin on the SNG roulette wheel and generate some beer tokens before putting the remainder back where it was here.

For those of us that hold both, it would be great if he showed the same faith in EUZ! [sorry for cross-post]

True, I get that. But equally, you'd only have to get to a £10m market cap for a 30p share price once the consolidation is complete. Is that really out of the bounds of possibility with decent mets and a plausible road map towards a financing solution? Given the scale of the asset, I would suggest not.