Member Info for pulp

Some great posters on here yesterday, thanks for sharing thoughts and info.

I took a position here earlier in the year thinking / expecting this to recover strongly, especially after news of forthcoming sale and improving business performance. It’s taken a little longer than expected and bit of patience, but certainly pleased with recent progress.

I’m certainly positive about the future here, with focus around reduced costs and lots of upside potential, as new remote working practices post COVID become common place.

It’s also highly unlikely landlords would evict in any case as they would be left with empty premises and a liability to cover, they would much sooner come to an amicable agreement.

It’s also worthy of note that cinemas have other favourable lease clauses. I was involved a couple of years back in a new retail development and the cinema was an anchor tenant. Within their agreement, the retail park (and more specifically restaurants) had to be occupied and in use before the cinema paid rent. The cinema effectively had a two year holiday from rent, through lack of occupation , yet the cinema was and remained a popular venue throughout.

Whilst I’ve not made anything here (yet) I have no concerns about the future for CINE.

I hadn’t quite realised the sheer size of this project.

The exclusivity area is by my calculation above 100km2 which is equivalent to the size of Manchester or Liverpool !!

That is vast and worthy of describing as a new mining region to rival any other in the world !

Gilen01 is spot on here. Lawyers will conduct a conflict of interest check to establish first if they are not already committed to acting In relation to the potential transaction. DLA, having worked for both organisations, is no issue at all and will certainly not need approval by NN. Its quite often beneficial, as already stated. It would simply be that EUA made contact first, which given they hold all the cards, is not surprising. Iain’s role as a NED will be more strategic and Is unlikely to represent undertaking legal work in any transaction in my opinion, so will need the support of DLA from an early stage.

It was only 11 months ago, when Christian Schaffalitzky, Chairman at Eurasia commented: 'We are pleased to offer this further update on the resource surrounding our Monchetundra Project. We are now well established in Kola with a production license valid until 2038 and our exclusivity to the flanks firmly established under applicable laws. We have always noted the significant potential in the area which we now more strongly believe can be developed into a new global mining region for PGM to rival other large PGM producing regions of the world, including the Bushveld Complex in South Africa and the Taimyr Peninsula in Russia’.

This is no ordinary mine for sale and will become a world class global mining region to rival any other for those with the knowledge, capability and financial clout necessary to secure this. I can’t see Vladimir passing on being a part of this fantastic opportunity in his back yard ??

I’m also expecting the Chinese will be involved in some capacity Mac, with Citic support.

I’ve not dismissed Lesego who carried out DD via James N (pre NDA’s) and who now have established Chinese And Citic links with its new exec team who were brought in around July. James N quietly vacated Lesego to become a more prominent feature in EUA. I don’t believe this a coincidence, we will soon see !

https://www.lesego.com/lesego-platinum-team.php

I see our recent and desperate deramper has been busy all weekend, sharing both his drivel and misleading / limited knowledge. Ask yourself this, why would you take note of anyone who is not invested here and purports to being some sort of bulletin board saviour ? You shouldn’t, he clearly has an agenda.

Significant DD will be required within an FSP by any investor / group of investors here - this takes significant time and governance. KAZ deal by comparison was an inside job (taking the company private) and one thats arguably not in the best interests of all shareholders.

The BOD here are aligned to the interests of all share holders and have a track record which proves it. UBS / DLA’s continued participation also clearly points to only one thing - DEAL, the extent of which will be enjoyed by new and LTH’s alike.

Early market signs not that bad folks, but let’s see

European shares moved higher during premarket trading on Monday as investors geared up for this week's presidential election in the United States. Both candidates made appearances at numerous campaign events over the weekend, with President Donald Trump particularly focusing on the key battleground state of Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, a number of European countries expanded lockdowns designed to combat the spread of the coronavirus pandemic, namely Greece, Austria, and the United Kingdom.

The DAX gained 0.69% at 7:37 am CET. The CAC 40 was up 0.28%, while the FTSE 100 rose 0.10% in London. The euro declined 0.08% compared to the dollar at 7:38 am CET, buying 1.16385. The pound fell 0.28% against the dollar a minute later, to go for 1.29049.

I agree, arguing with facts is the best way. In this case however, only pointing out the factual turnover is not the whole story though is it !!

The FSP is now drawing to a close. It’s now or never, the choice is yours !! We know Pipers are closing so ask yourself why EUA would update its website this week ?? They have made it clear they are constrained in what can be said officially !! Purely a hunch, but makes sense to me. GLA

“In recent months, Eurasia has received a number of inbound expressions of interest from multiple parties interested in acquiring all of or a stake in its assets. The Board has therefore decided to appoint UBS Investment Bank in London ("UBS") as its leading financial adviser to assist in a review of its strategic options including asset sales or a sale of the Company.”

The above statement (included within an RNS) clearly contemplates Parties who are interested in a stake in EUA’s assets. Stake in this context could mean the sale of all or part of an asset hence why discussions around JV’s, strategic alliances, strategic working partnerships all have some validity here.

We already know this is more than a one horse race.

The current share price (each day) bares no resemblance to where this will end up, recent placing and flanks confirmation being clear evidence of this. Don’t think for a second negotiations will make any reference to anything but what potential exists in the ground.

We are being held in a temporary state until this is concluded.

Its worth a read of JUB’s statement of affairs, see link.

They lost £3.2m in 18 months and it looks like at least £1.7m of that was it’s accidental short with EUA !

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08803382/filing-history

Pulp750@ y a h o o . c o m.

Website Deleting stuff temporarily, argh. I see we need Russian govt approval where a foreign entity involved, but I couldn’t see anywhere that this should be an issue if aligned with Russian partners. Still believe NN did the deal some time ago (majority partner), small stake for EUA as you suggest and remaining seats at the table being thrashed out by Banks. What’s your take on origin of ACF report ?

Found it Rowka, further restrictions associated with deposits of federal significance. Some really interesting and relevant info to review here.

Do you see the law as a barrier or complication to a multi party arrangement ?

I also hadn’t realised that we don’t own the assets whilst it remains in the ground, even with a licence in place. Extraction being the important bit.

Under Russian law, the rights granted pursuant to a subsoil licence cannot be subleased, assigned, sold or otherwise transferred except in certain limited circumstances. Therefore, in practice, the "transfer" of subsoil use rights is usually realised by transferring the shares or the participating interest in the charter capital of the legal entity holding the subsoil licence.

While he was both the CEO and NED in theory he should exclude himself from of any discussions that would constitute a conflict. Mmm.

He could very well be a leading part of the next chapter and the switch in CEO’s does coincide with time when a bid in part or full would be made.

Do we think the ACF report was instigated and authorised by EUA BOD for publication ?

Musso, I also think they will be involved in the final sale, albeit as part of a wider JV team with NN. I also think EUA will retain a minority too. Let’s also not forget that our very own NED James N was the CEO up until July (and still is according to EUA website). Interesting......