Member Info for peaceonearth

Oh ok bigfatwitch this is the only account you have......

you sorry excuse for a human being........

Ive nevre understood why you are here day after day after day after day after day

you and bigfatwitch need to get a life get a life !!!!

Ps

I think you will do alright in the Aussie share if you stop panicking and selling at a loss.

Do you really believe that people only buy shares in a company after joining the LSE board hahahahahah

There really is no hope for you Franny lol

Franny has had subect removed

was it getting to close to home for you lol

BFL = yet another of T055er's aliases

you really need to get a life lol

hows your other share doing btw ?

when are you going to start trolling that board ???

Hey T055ER

hows your fantasy Aussie share doing ??

Hows your other investment going T055ER

I believe you bought fantasy shares in a aussie miner have you turned on that board yet posting drivel all day ???

Still spouting drivel i see T055ER lol

How's your other investment going ???

please share with the group any other hot shares your looking at investing in so the group can avoid lol

So its now asking on a public board to be provided with information to avoid paying UK Taxes.

Disgraceful behaviour from the parasite that is Matrix

Happy reading eveyone :)

I will stop now hope it has helped

Regarding speculations about what a sale would look like in Russia,

I can't possibly answer that question either, because no two sales have been treated the same

way in Russia up to this point.

This final question was the ongoing court case of the period in November. That is the Queeld

and Mispare one that I've referred to already,

and it has no affect on the sale or assets.

In fact, the sale of the assets doesn't affect the share question.

The shareholding question is entirely within Eurasia. If we sell the assets, that's what belongs to

Eurasia.

The shareholder is not relevant.

The important is that whatever the board decides to do, it must protect the interest of all the

shareholders, and that is what the court case did about.

I think that's all the questions that I have received from the shareholders today together with the

historical ones.

I thank you all for engaging so actively in our business. That's what this AGM is about. It's what

it's for.

As I keep explaining and we keep reiterating, we've said in the AGM, in the annual report, we

are focused very much on capitalizing on our work,

which for me, I've been with the company 20 years, and we've taken what were greenfield

projects and turned them into significant assets.

That was the job we were given to do as explorers, which is what I am.

We now have the assets ready for development. One of them, of course, is an actual mine, and

the other is ready for mining.

In that regard, we have been very successful. The eruption of the Ukraine crisis has clearly

derailed the value creation,

and I can't take the blame for that I didn't start the war.

Basically, we must do the best we can, unless we will continue to do on your behalf, and all our

behalfs.

There's a question here about the Ukraine crisis generally and its effect on us,

and I've already said that we are not affected by sanctions directly,

and can there be a sale, of course there can, but the problem is there are a lot of factors now

which are unpredictable, and we have to live with that.

But it doesn't interrupt what we're trying to do, nor is anybody stopping us from trying to do that.

The question here about how much of our cash last year was spent on due diligence,

and the answer is not much.

Most of the expenditure was completing the development of West Kytlim,

and as I explained already, that was all done.

It was already committed and spent before the war broke out.

We had committed to the drag line, the electrification of the size, all of that was underway.

So basically, that's what most of the money was spent on last year.

There's a question here about the other Rosgeo JV areas.

I can't ask that question directly except to say that we have to keep it under review.

What we're doing now is not under sanction, and we must be aware that anything new that we

do is also clear.

That's all I can say about that.

There is a point made that if we set our Russian assets in a way,

you could consider us to be a cash shell, but that might not be the case by the time we get there

if we are looking at new projects.

That's true. I can't possibly comment on that at this time.

There's questions here about what can we identify to prospective purchases?

I've made it very clear we can't do that, and we're not allowed to, even if we wanted to,

because AIM will only agree to us publishing an actual commitment from a potential purchaser.

The procedure would be quite straightforward.

Basically, what would happen is if we get a formal offer, we'll announce it to the market,

and that formal offer will then be put to the shareholders and held at a meeting of the

shareholders to decide whether they want to accept this or not.

It's a very simple process.

The question here about the shareholders who invested at 26p.

I don't know the status of our current shareholder lists.

Perhaps I should know, but I didn't find out before this meeting.

And what I would say is, and this is an important part of the question,

are such big shareholders receiving information that everybody else is not in the answer?

It's very clear. Of course, they're not.

We only communicate by RNS or by Twitter in so far as we can,

where it cannot be market sensitive data on Twitter, it can nearly be background information.

But the only way we communicate with shareholders is by RNS.

That's the rule, and that's all we do.

The question here asking about this duration version two, what would it look like?

We're still developing that, but we will keep you informed when we have a clear roadmap for

that.

Regarding a timeline to appoint a new CEO, I think I've said already that we would do that

when the sales process has reached its conclusion.

Our larger shareholder Dmitry Suschov.

His current role in the business remains a specialist.

He has a specialist role within the merger and acquisitions activities of the company,

and he's still very active in that area.

Needless to say he also, like myself, as significant shareholders care a lot about the sales

process being successful.

I must stress that. Some people seem to think that we act independently of the shareholders.

We are shareholders, and it's important that we get a result on behalf of the company.

I would add, by the way, the main thing to say about West Kytlim is that we have basically

rejigged,

or we're in the middle of completing a complete re-calculation of the way the operations will be

organized now

that the electric-dominated operation, and there are a number of places where significant

savings

and operation costs are being made, and we want to complete that process of making a full

assessment of where we go

with the mining operations from now on.

There's a question here about the mining industry in general, and how it affects where Eurasia

would go in the future.

I can only highlight that we've spoken about Eurasia version 2, which is basically moving into

the hydrogen economy, and in fact, renewable energy in general,

which was linked directly to our projects in our mining projects in Russia.

That was our intent.

But now, obviously, the expertise that we've developed and the background that we've gained

means that we would look at projects

as a way of transitioning maybe out of pure mining.

But again, that relies on having a successful sale and development of our new business plans

going forward.

Are we being restricted by regulators and what we announced to the public?

Well, we have to follow the AIM rules. We have to follow the Stock Exchange rules.

We are restricted from speculating, for example, which is what you want us to do.

You would like us to tell you everything we could about the sale process, blow by blow.

And as that is the dominant activity that we're involved in, it would be great if I could do that.

But not only by AIM rules, but also by the restrictions under confidentiality agreements with a

buyer

we can't say any more than that.

And I know it's frustrating for you, but there's nothing I can do about it.

There's a question here about do we have a good relationship with Russian authorities?

Well, I think the fact that I've been working now in Russia for 20 years,

we have local teams who have been largely Russian professionals working on our behalf

everywhere,

and certainly we have never encountered, apart from some traditional sort of football type

of attitude from some Russian officials, we have not met any serious objections to anything we

do,

and in fact I've always been impressed by the way in Russia that they very much follow the

rulebook,

with everything to do with licensing, regulations and compliance, and you must comply.

So for example, the fact that we can't give the details of the DFS is very much part of their

regulatory scheme.

Here's a personal question.

Do I intend to retire after the asset sale, and are I going to retire this year?

Well, all I can say to that is I've been working with the company for 20 years,

I'm still a very significant shareholder in the company.

I want to see the asset sale completed successfully.

It's very much my, I don't like the word "swansong",

but clearly it's something that needs to be done, and with a view, I'll answer this question later,

but with a view to where Eurasia will go in the future, as we have spoken about in general

without being specific,

I think it's fair to say that at 70 years old I deserve a rest.

There's a second question about the accounts, which I think I've already answered,

the 28 million, and as I said, it's all the expenditure that we've made of significance ourselves in

the projects in Russia.

There's a question here about the dividend, and so on.

All I can say is that's our plan.

A dividend should we make a successful sale, there should be a special dividend.

It's very much what we plan to do, but first of all, we have to get the sale done,

and that is on which that's a particular question is related.

There's a question here regarding what the variations in remuneration for directors.

Basically, I'm not quite sure what this is based on, except to say that the Japan office does have

different workloads throughout the year,

and that can vary the amount of expenditure under the headings of the Japanese directors.

A question about the drag line. It's performing very well.

At the moment, it has carried out a lot of stripping work, and is also now stockpiling ore for

treatment.

So, yes, it's working very well now.

There were some hiccups in mid-2022 when it first commissioned, but they've all been sorted

out.

The DFS, the question is when do we intend to publish it and the contents to shareholders and

so on.

And unfortunately there are legal procedures in Russia that must be followed before these

results can be published.

And until that happens, I won't be able to enlighten you on that any further.

There is a question, and this is a question that's been asked a lot.

Why have we put back in Resolution 6 and 7 regarding the potential to raise funds through

equity placements?

And the Board believes that this year is a very critical year for the company.

We hope to complete the sale, and we're also focused on the company post sale.

It's standard practice for companies in our position to seek such an authority, as we have done

in all our AGMs except last year.

Furthermore, I think it's important that the Board has maximum flexibility for business

development in the future.

It would tie our hands that if there was a very good acquisition we made in advance of, say,

completing a sale,

that we wouldn't be able to proceed at least in part in doing something like that.

And that is the kind of thing we keep in mind always, not just during the sale process.

But the sale process takes precedent over everything else, and that's what we've said.

There's a question here about our sales process and the current geopolitical situation.

Basically, the board is focused on getting our assets sold as quickly as possible.

That's all I can really say about that. It's been very clear.

We've made it very clear again and again in our releases and in the annual report.

You can all appreciate, I'm sure, that the market has become difficult now due to this much more

difficult year political situation,

and it hasn't made our job any easier.

There's a question about James leaving the board.

James is an EPC specialist that's regarding the construction and development of mines,

and as we are not commencing that work at the present time, at Monchetundra, even though it's

ready to go,

James has moved to another job where he is doing exactly that role.

And it's worth recording though. He took the projects, not just this one,

but also West Kytlim through to the milestone of production.

There's a question about how many nondisclosure agreements are in place regarding the sale

process and when do they expire?

Basically, that varies a lot through time as some are extended, some new ones as recently as

June were signed,

and they usually have a one to three-year timeline, and as I said, they can be extended.

There's a question about why was the annual report not released on the 3rd until the 3rd of July

when it was expected in June.

This is related specifically to the period since February 22 when the war started,

and this regards to the annual audit, which is a difficult process now where the auditors no

longer have branches or affiliates in Russia,

and as well as Russian speakers locally to represent them.

We're very grateful to Grant Thornton in successfully completing this work under very trying

circumstances.

It was a much tougher job this year than ever before.