Member Info for Professor1

Tilly
Love your quote -and which made my day

"AND FOR THE BOT FLY SHORTERS WHO CLIMBED ABOARD, THE PLANK IS THAT WAY"

Ian - great posting.

Interesting to note from an earlier article that one of the potential bidders could be Sibayne- Stillwater. Out of interest I find the attached article which shows that the worlds biggest metals streaming co Wheaton Precious Metals ( market cap C$29 Billion) entered into the Purchase Agreement with Sibayne by making upfront payment of C$500 million. See attached. Also, under " Potential Future Growth" reference to acquisition of the platinum group metal (PGM) by- product stream at Sudbury.

https://www.wheatonpm.com/streams/Stillwater/default.aspx

Also, Wheaton Metals announced on 22 September 2020 of its intention to seek listing on the LSE. See attached.

https://www.edisongroup.com/publication/london-calling/27798/

Rolaw1

Absolutely agree with you. With 2.759 billion shares, at 50p you are looking at a consideration of a mere £1.380 billion.
If the 40 million resource is what EUA are going by and 2/3 of this being palladium and 1/3 platinum and the MV of these being $2200 and $1000 respectively, with the AISC of say around $800, these would generate over $40 billion over time I think.

Accepting a mere 1.380 billion would suggest, on the basis of 40 million ounces, a sum of only £35 per ounce produced. This I do not think the EUA Board will be willing to entertain with any bidder and part of the reason that they have stated that they could take this into production themselves is to get a strong value for the shareholders. It would be daft for a company to giveaway at a price that gives 50p per share when they know they can generate significant value for what resource we have.

Its a July 2020 article - not sure if people has seen this before hence posting it.

https://www.powerof78.com/2020/07/19/eua-potential-bidders/

https://www.thearmchairtrader.com/eurasia-mining-shares-rally-as-the-company-prepares-for-sale/

https://www.vaneck.com/etf/equity/rsxj/holdings/

Or is this simply reflecting the increase in market value?

Hi Guys

The last time when we all looked at VenEck ETF's holding in EUA, it was 2.49%.

From the Daily Holdings I have seen just now, the percentage has now increased to 3.62%. Please can you all confirm this increased percentage is indeed correct. If so then the ETF is clearly building stake in EUA.

£2.44 Coming up. GLA

Absolutely Mac4671. Deal is done and legal doc now being drawn up.

Expect the news very soon. GLA

Thanks Bhargav- will do.
My Hargreaves account price does not appear to be in sinc with google. Is anyone experiencing this?

Many thanks Phoebus
Have been building up stake here for long time now and is looking excellent.

Many thanks Wolfebag.

Both Bhargav and I have strong interest here from few years ago - hence the question.

Bhargav

Do you have a view on this point please

Please can someone explain the rationale behind the name change of Newmont Colombia to Agnico Monte.

Hi Dickie82

I do bot have scientific background but after reading you post, I did some research and agree to what you are saying. Please see attached research which concludes that palladium filled cathods ( as opposed to palladium coated ones) results in much less formation of lithium peroxide and lithium carbonates and enhances battery performance.

COULD IT BE TESLA????

https://www.mdpi.com/2313-0105/5/1/15/pdf-vor

Also see from researchgate

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312018629_Palladium-Filled_Carbon_Nanotubes_Cathode_for_Improved_Electrolyte_Stability_and_Cyclability_Performance_of_Li-O2_Batteries

The appointment of the lawyers DLA - a massive giveaway to the shareholders of a mega deal which is about to unfold on AIM. GLA

Rowka

My utmost respect for you from the day I came on board here. I have learnt an enormous amount from you so thank you so much.

A better proposition could be to have a JV, say 50 /50 so that we derive more value over time and a special dividend now. However, the Management will have negotiated hard knowing we can go it alone and only accept a fair value. In EUA's case, this will have been based on the fair value of the assets in the ground and not some fuddy duddy premium over market price.

In the NPV analysis for MT shown in the article ' Power of 78' posted here, the best case shown was £2.32 per share. However, this analysis was based only on 15m ounces over the 18 year period (processing 1m ounce from years 6 to 18 )and with very modest increase in the price (£25) of palladium year on year. Also a very conservative WACC was used to arrive at the discounted NPV and hence the price per share of £2.32.

If you now take, not 15m ounces, but say 30m ounces on which EUA has based its negotiations and giving the 10m (excess of 40m over 30m) free sort of to the purchaser, then the cashflows double. If this is the case, then the NPV and the share price based on revised NPV will also double FROM £2.32. I would be able to recalculate at some stage over the weekend assuming the WACC of 10% used is reasonable. This probably factors in the country risk and I am not sure if this would be correct. If the true WACC to use was say 7% then the end result gets even better.

GLA

Blessings from the Colombia Minister of Mines

https://www.mining.com/web/colombias-mining-future-tied-to-metals-not-coal-minister-says/