Member Info for oldspursfan

With focus moving onto Sinosteel/EPCF, Spikey at 10:02 mentions earlier conclusion of an eight figure upfront cost. A simple Grok search backs that up. Query related to activating in full, relevant extracts below:

"The funding deal between Eurasia Mining Ltd (EUA) and Sinosteel pertains to an Engineering, Procurement, Construction, and Financing (EPCF) contract for EUA's Monchetundra palladium-platinum-gold project in Russia.

If the deal is activated to its fullest available extent (i.e., the full EPCF scope is executed, including drawing down the entire financing package after meeting preconditions like detailed project documentation approval and land surveys):

Upfront costs for EUA/TGK: TGK is required to provide an equity contribution of US$26.5 million, paid directly to Sinosteel at the outset of contract activation to cover the non-financed portion of the contract."

Obviously you can take as being proportional, but if CS is now asking us to "look there" for shareholder value, how our contribution is to be funded is a highly pertinent question for the webinar.

*receivable

Chess, I get what you are "inferring" but the problem here is that this isnt a linear equation. WK may hold 0.3% of resources (it sounds based on every possible classification of resources, but that's a different matter).

However it is the furthest advanced by far. It's our only ready to mine, infrastructure in place, income generator. The other licenses are years behind.

So even if one concedes WK has 0.3% of the resources, in terms of sale attractiveness I'd reckon it carries at least 10% of the value. I'd would have hoped the cash reveivanle for this part would be whole pennies, not fractions of one. That is worrying.

Am I reding that right? Wk sold for just $9m cash? 0.3pps? That has to be a joke surely?

Well done BoD you see you can do what you state you will do (almost) on time.

I will set my expectations low however. Primary benefit of this listing being a wider pool of contacts and potential private placement recipients, with "increased liquidity" merely improving the ability to flip those shares quickly.

I still cannot see a direct link between this third listing, alongside LSE and Frankfurt that we aren't leaving, and a sale of our mining licenses. Unless someone tries to stake-build towards a takeover bid, in full view of everyone and with the market reacting?? Those two don't seem to go hand in hand imv when they could just make a direct formal offer.

We'll just have to see...

GLA

Gecko if the date was set for the 19th August then CS didn't need to announce it today. There's a three week notice period for AGMs, so plenty of time yet to get everything in order before announcing, especially if they are mega busy sorting out another route for shares, both existing and any new ones, to go.

It's basic stuff and they keep ballsing it up.

Thanks Del, missed that originally!

Looks like Kotaro and Tamerlan were both up last year, which means they won't be up now. Surprised I didn't recall that, as that was like 5 minutes ago in EUA time.

It is a bit odd as I'm sure both Kotaro and Artem were ratifed as Non Execs three years ago, yet K was up after 2 years and A now potentially? This after the suspension, song and dance rotuine to state for absolutely certain that A was definitely a NED and an Independent NED at that. Not that I routinely come across Non Exec Board Members who are highly dependent on the company, but it begs the question do they even read their own Articles??

Let's see how much CS's webinar comment of Artem "adding value" and being great to have on the team influences the outcome if he is up.

Del I wasn't expecting a long list of FY2024 agm resolutions, but longer than that!

As mentioned i don't think the Non Execs are up for reappointment as the articles give them a 9 year term, 3 is for Execs. Trying to recall when Tamerlan was last up, as he is named as Executive Director.

Link on the rns takes you to the circulars and notices page which hasn't been updated from last year. Documents relating to 2023? Don't tell me they haven't even got this in order before rns'ing.

6.6m in sales, but shed storage costs must be high as direct cost of sales were 6.7m, so it's another year where they are unable to sell what they mined, for more than it cost them to mine it.

Sale is primary focus, discussions still continuing, no guarantees etc.

However the ability to place more shares easier when CS desires is progressing very well and should be announced imminently.

Perhaps I'm not so down with the kids anymore, but I really don't think Del asking the company PR providers whether CS is going to meet the basic requirements of AIM regulations, when the last time he got the AR and Accounts out before close of play 30th June was back in 2022, makes him particularly "needy".

Maybe I just don't have such a laissez-faire approach to the basics, although that would make us more in tune with how CS manages things.

CS spin working overtime. Target of H1 for listing that he didn't have to give, and think it's safe to say has been missed. One day to go after today and we are not AT the "finishing line" but merely approaching it.

SB I reckon if we were to add two more words to the introduction it wouldn't be Os and Ru but "...license holding..." which sadly better explains what the BoD have actually been doing for the last few years.

@del thanks for keeping the list up to date, some of those must have thick layers of dust they've been around for so long!

One question on your list I think we can answer though: I would not expect either Artem or Kotaro to be up for reappointment. They are last I recall Non Execs ("Independent" too as if that needed saying).

EUA's articles state that Executive Directors have a cycle of 3 years before they have to resign and seek reelection. For NEDs (best sit down) it's 9 years.

Still at least CS is happy they are part of team and adding value. Guess you'd have to be at that particular table to see what value that is.

GLA

Evening Spikey

Had the BoDs heads been screwed on right, reclaiming the loan issued to the subsidiary would be put front and centre and prevent the need for any dilution whatsoever. But that's not the current MO it seems.

Its eyes down for the endgame now, imo. And CS has obviously realised that putting his shareholding up as collateral, adversely impacts his ability to negotiate a fatter brown envelope when the MBO finally lands at pittance per share.

Thruppence? Long time no see!

Would I be right in thinking this rise has absolutely nothing to do with anything our illustrious Board of Directors have done?

Momentum because it's moving - guess it's better than nowt. GLA.

And happy Christmas to you Offler and all who have attempted to make this BB at the very least an entertaining read over the last 12 months.

Take note:

Closing SP on Friday 22nd December 2023: 2.15p

Closing SP on Tuesday 24th December 2024: 2.15p

Negative or positive? For all that bluster, it hasn't mattered much has it?

Hoping 2025 brings some long overdue tangible progress.

Well if a new US President makes CS more willing to share what was in the MT DFS, and what notable events have happened whilst working on delivering on our one and only strategy for the last 18 months, then bring on 2025.

Can't be any worse surely?

Stretch

... if you can’t hold a share for ten years, then don’t even bother holding it for ten minutes…"

Same logic can be applied to Bulletin Boards

"...if you can't tolerate an alternative view and just spend all your time green boxing, don't even bother posting."

Hi EI, sorry mate just catching up. Re CS saying they are keeping their heads down, was that comment at the same AGM that he also said he was hopeful of a sale conclusion by the end of the year?

That would be 18 months after the SMO started and according to all RNS's since (up to very recently) everything was officially fine thank you, no impact, strategy progressing, nothing to see here.

That is the disconnect that is certainly peeing me off, and the sheer unwillingness to put any news that can be perceived as "not good" into RNS form.

If it's good RNS it, if bad keep quiet. Now, on a totally different subject, where's that DFS again...??

Hi threeskins

It would have been nice if the BoD had informed everyone that keeping their heads down was the plan following the SMO.

As understandable as it may be, it was not what they said they were doing. We all guessed it over the last 30 months or so, and some on this board were saying it's a genius strategy, albeit unannounced.

However the lack of transparency is what is going to do for CS, he's all gloss and no substance.