We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Hi Toffers,
With respect I think the problem people have with you is you paint this as a no win situation for EUA. WUP's can be sorted without companies being wound up, agreements can be reached on a renegotiated settlement or giving more time to pay. This is not a corner shop it's a PLC so much more for any judge to consider before ordering an end to a company.
When you read up on WUP it is somewhat counterintuitive. You don't start a WUP if there is a dispute, if there is you follow a normal court route to sort the dispute because a judge will throw the WUP out if there is a valid and known dispute. However you can raise a dispute on limited grounds and at a WUP hearing a judge will rule on whether it is a valid reason for dispute.
You would hope that any company under threat of a WUP being issued against them would raise a dispute prior to the WUP being issued as to leave it until a WUP has been issued is madness as a WUP is a serious matter.
If EUA were claiming they had been overbilled then that would have been raised well before a WUP was started, you don't start a WUP if there is a valid dispute because it will be thrown out of court and you would have to pay EUA's legal fees as well as your own. A WUP can be seen as a last resort measure taken to try and recover some debt.
Hi Mizman,
Clearly a WUP has been started because a company of corporate lawyers believe there is no legal position from which EUA can dispute the money owing. The fact that EUA are disputing it is irrelivant if they entered a legally binding contract meaning they have to pay it. Hard to inderstand how it can be amicably settled at the point it's reached, it's somewhat beyond that point I feel.
If you go back to the Proactive interview with DS of a few years ago he said of the potential 40Moz Pd Equ that they could secure around MT that it wouldn't interest a major like NN but there was enough if added together to interest a smaller company. Those areas were the ones that made up the Rosgeo JV of which nothing has so far been secured as sanctions don't allow EUA to buy Russian assets.
And yet Mac still wants to suggest that the far smaller amount we have will be bought by NN or better still a consortium of NN and China.
A potential buyer will have wanted the tax position payable on extracted minerals sorted and that is why the BOD were hopefull of a sale this year as they were trying to sort the tax issue but any sale for billions is very wishful thinking in my opinion.
English comprehension for Mac.
It is expected that counterparties will have their own plans for future development and it is important to leave such options open.
Expected, so not currently known to be the case which it would be if a sale was about to happen now the DFS is in place which is what you have continually claimed.
I'm expecting potential buyers for my house will want to choose their own new kitchen for the house I'm selling so whilst I have a new £40k kitchen booked to be fitted to replace the old one currently in place I won't action it until I know what the potential buyers want to do and if I don't sell the house I will replace the kitchen with one I choose.
Hi del,
Thanks for doing this on behalf of shareholders.
Amending 20
A number of years ago you gave a JORC figure of 2.2moz Pd equivalent at MT however, despite it being a requirement of listing, you never released the actual JORC to shareholders. Why not and will you.
Possible question(s) to add.
The 2020Annual Report mentioned a short infill core drilling campaign focused on L and WN. As it's a requirement of listing to give details of drilling to certain mininum levels why has no information been given to shareholders of the drilling results.
In April 2021 you submitted a detailed exploration project for the MT flanks area to develop those prospects and bring further resources into the MT mine. Any update on this and what has been found/changed resource wise.
A number of years ago you saide the MT area had upper resources from the 1.9moz Pd equ to 2.2moz via JORC but never released the JORC report to shareholders despite it being a listing requirement. Why not.
Is the £28m sitting with a related party to pay for Nyud after (if) the company is sold. Current sanctions mean they can't enter into a JV with a Russian owned company, especially a Russian state owned company, so a buyer who isn't bound by current sanctions gets money in place to compleat the Nyud deal once they have bought EUA. The rest of the JV areas had the 2 year option expire because of sanctions hence the impairment charge where the $500k downpayment is wiped out (page 66 of accounts).
No-one has mentioned the impairment charge on page 62 where a loss (approx £400k) is mentioned on an investment in a UK "waste to electricity" project which wasn't taken to a binding agreement. Was this a possible investment had the company sold that they couldn't commit further funds to as the sale fell through.
Hi Toffers,
I admit I need to read more to clarify (if I can be bothered) but there seem to be sanctions restricting entering into JV with Russian owned companies, there may also be restrictions stopping sales of PGM's to Russian companies and EUA has to sell it's PGM's to Russia to refine as part of the mining licence for WK. BOD may have been less than open with how they are affected in my opinion.
Hi Folio,
The key comments from the text of the second of your attachments
"According to preliminary estimates"
"necessary to access the correctness of geological forecasts as well as undergo exact confirmation of the proposed resources"
So inferred as opposed to proven.
It could be that there is that much there but, as yet, not confirmed to a high level.
Highly important to it's worth which is why EUA, had it entered into the Rosgeo JV, could pick it up cheaply.
Hi Lenoman,
In my view (and I appreciate it is just that) NDA's would not cover failing to inform investors of any increase in reserves/resources. The fact there has been a JORC for NKT shows that. How can investors value a company to invest in if what the company has isn't being revealed.
As I said, I'm not someone coming here saying it's worthless, just that for me to invest meaningfully (as I was) I need more than hope that there is substantially more value here than is detailed.
We all invest in different ways and I hope this works out well.
Hi Lenoman,
I'm not saying there is nothing economical to extract, I'm saying investors here don't know how much is economical to extract due to the lack of any detail or material updates for MT. They have done some drilling since the maiden resource RNS but haven't said what was found despite it being a listing requirement to do so. You find out what's economical to extract by proving up reserves. If you haven't drilled to enough detail to get to a reserve level then a sale will be at a lower price.
Hi TDT,
That's why I went from being pro EUA to having serious questions and selling out (bought a few since, very underwater).
Nothing on what is actually at MT since the maiden resource RNS from years ago and when you properly read that you see a very small fraction proven to above inferred level and that an undisclosed (large) amount is not in the defined open pits but around them and underneath them that may become economical to extract.
The JORC on NKT is based on some of the resource being to inferred level but the rest not even achieving inferred level.
I repeatedly said the ACF report wasn't worth the paper it was printed on when it first appeared and got shouted down by the ramping crew despite giving valid reasons for why it was deeply flawed.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Approving maiden reserves is vastly different to a DFS. The former states a resource/reserve dependant on drilling results. The latter is a very in depth assesment of the viability of a mine in an economic sense.
WK is very shallow pits across a number of relatively small pits whereas MT is 2 much larger and far deeper pits which is why shear values for the rocks etc are needed to decide the angle the pit walls can sustain without collapsing which can have a massive affect on the economics of the mine.
AMC had long delays on their DFS as there is a lot of arguements and counter arguements between company geologists and Russian authorities geologists before the final DFS is agreed.