Member Info for oldspursfan

And therein lies the problem with your copy and paste postings. Paste what they have said in rns by all means, but with this bod you also have to include the date they said it.

When did they say November? Not recently and certainly not most recently. They have changed the emphasis in the most recent RNS. That is what people are going off, not what they were "targeting" 6 months earlier. Yes November is before the end of the year, but before the end of the year doesn't mean November only.

When they issued the dividend policy you were on here adamant that meant they must be calculating the dividend. I had to call you out on that too, so do you still believe that's what they are doing? If not when did you acknowledge differently?

We'll see Mac, I hope this time isn't another case of something mentioned a lot, then quietly dropped. Credible party anyone? Didn't even make the annual report for last year.

Just seems typical of the bod at the moment that even a previously mentioned 30 day window, had to go through the "vagueness filter" before the interims came out.

It doesnt bother me, as i expect if nothing is issued come 1st December you'll be back on saying "they said before the end of the year so on schedule!" I just hope if that does indeed happen you'll acknowledge what others have been saying as being correct.

So Nellie, you are happy to acknowledge no-one has a crystal ball. In which case why point and laugh at shareholders not selling when this was in the 40s? Were crystals balls in fashion back then?? All a bit counter intuitive, no?

That was a time when the metals we have were on a run, and it looked for all the world we were closing in on a substantial asset sale. As I said in my reply to Mac this BoD don't deal in bad news, nothing has gone wrong at all since the 40s, if you go by the RNSs. This BoD do however prefer to stay silent, subtly deflect or move goalposts, which makes it all the more frustrating watching your investment ebb away and yet thinking each day at 7am could this be the day...?

No-one on here has stated they are seeking a sideline as an IFA either.

However mac, they chose (with great care taken over every word apparently) to drop reference to November in their most recent update, at the end of September. Thats a few weeks before November stops being some distant future point and becomes a reality, when shareholders then expect the BoD to deliver something.

"At Monchetundra the ongoing DFS study for the Loipishnune and West Nittis open pits represents an important reporting milestone for the project's development and is on schedule for submission before the end of 2022."

The point is not that the BoD have said they are behind schedule, it's that dropping specific reference to a November target, especially when we are so close to it, implies we shouldnt hang our hats on November now. This year, but not necessarily next month.

The BoD have never said definitively that anything has gone wrong, fallen through, or won't be met, but it's how their language changes over time that is key. And off the back of the interim, anyone saying the BoD are behind their original DFS schedule has reasonable justification for saying that.

Del I think mac is suggesting the license applications have been processed and approved by the streamlined ERDC process, but the BoD have chosen to delay receiving them.

At least I think that his view on the next "it's obvious" reason why the BoD have kept schtum all year.

Del - I for one appreciate your list of updates we're still waiting on. For all the copy and paste/ read what the RNSs say comments there's usually one key thing missing - when was it said. It's the fact that so much time has passed which means all the optimism those statements initially created, has all but withered and died.

Don't forget the "more [news] to come" tweet in early Jan, since which time, 9 months have passed and the BoD have:
> approved a dividend policy
> created 2 subsidaires; and
> appointed a NED

So keep on putting up your list, and we can all share the irritation as they breach another 100 days. GLA

I invented a face cream that actually ages your skin, because it has highly ironic acid.

Much like most of this thread...

I think the key words from that post are "working towards" completing a sale this year. No guarantees or expectations it will happen this side of January, and much more like how the BoD normally communicate.

I think many may disagree with your opening response, especially given your posting history here and elsewhere.

But to answer your question:
Current sanctions - no impact on our ability to maintain a listing on LSE (the focus of your fears) - as per earlier RNSs
Future sanctions (whatever they may be) - nothing done to date suggests any government will specifically target EUA's listing on LSE, which means your shares can be traded if necessary for the foreseeable future.

Hope that helps

Freddie - if you as our resident de-ramper cannot think of sanctions that could result in our delisting, there's your answer.
Why are you asking the BB to come up with your next deramp line?

How's "Putin could seize our assets" going for you?

I think the more interesting question is why they didn't even want the ability to place up their sleeve this year?

As we know it's a standard AGM agenda item and "highly unusual" for it not to be requested, so I was surprised, even if they thought it would get shareholders backs up, they didn't put it on there. A specific shareplacing-based egm, like April 21, would be at greater risk of failing imo if they were worried about sentiment.

Wk may be producing more this year but as we have seen, sheet happens, so it's also a little risky for our BoD to presume year 1 of enhanced production will generate all the cash they need.

Maybe they genuinely believe they have all the cash they need for 12 months so threw us a bone by not even going there. But I admit it is very tempting to believe we are close to a sale, as that also makes sense...
GLA

CALLS - in which case they should abandon the sale, activate Sinosteel and get on with bringing MT into production, instead of constantly dangling a potential sale carrot that's forever an unspecified number of months away.

It's a shame that somebody forgot to bring the list of pre-submitted questions to the AGM but I had one on there which asked how crucial is the sale to funding the other strategies the Bod have started and announced to great fanfare whilst the sale has been ongoing. Rosgeo, Japan, EUA2 etc. Would a failure to secure a sale to the value the BoD hoped jeopardise these?

I wonder if the BoD have been guilty of putting cart before horse and committing the proceeds before the full amount of cash needed was actually secured. And as we've seen with the wider geopolitical environment: sht happens

If our BoD had received formal offers that they have rejected, would they not need to announce it?

There was reference at the AGM to CS using the phrase "no material offers" received, but I admit I don't get the concept of "materiality" when it comes to M&A - there's either a formal offer or there isnt, it's either recommended for approval or it isnt. Even if it's rejected out of hand would a cursory RNS stating this had happened not be expected, particularly when the main strategy is apparently to sell stuff?

AFAIK there is no recognised threshold below which a formal offer is "immaterial". A part of me thinks that phrase was just gloss, because "no formal offers made" sounds bad.

Morning all, was catching up with the AGM narrative as unable to attend due to work commitments. Thanks to everyone who did attend/ ask anything.

When I submitted my questions to Keith a couple of weeks back, he advised they would be added to the list. Can anyone confirm if the BoD did actually run through a list of pre-submitted questions, or were they relying on live questions from the floor or online?

Sounds like it went quick and not as rumbustious as expected, but nobody mentioned pre-submitted questions, were they ignored?
Thanks

Understood!
I'm still kind of holding out for a statement RNS in the morning as I can quite imagine the number of questions submitted, and range of topics, would have been substantial.

Just a follow up note to the Herbert's who have been asking about when the next placing will be.

The BoD have one more morning before last year's authority to place runs out.

They are not seeking renewal at the AGM.

Read into that what you will.
GLA

Officecat are you still intending to update here during the agm? Any chance you could share the question you've settled on (or at least the topic)?

Come on Wolfe, get it right:

He's THE officecat...

Board representative single handedly answering all questions so the BoD don't have to.

A couple of questions, probably already covered but in case not:

1. Since the banks rns in October 2019, there have (so far as shareholders outside the Board know), been no formal offers for our Russian Assets, despite references in RNS's to interest, informal offers and Rule 15 triggering proposals. What do the Board attribute this to?

2. In the responses to shareholder questions in advance of the 2021 AGM, the BoD stated it "would be highly unusual" not to request a renewal of authority to place shares for the forthcoming year. As no such resolution has been put to shareholders, what makes this AGM highly unusual?

As is say probably covered many times over, but just in case. Thanks and look forward to the commentary.

To quote Onassis, Les, keep watching...!

Don't forget the "I'm only trying to help, why the hostility?" line. That's a Kira-ism right there.