Member Info for Ricardo2019

Would that be the same Patriarch of Moscow, a supposed man of God, who Putin has co-opted into proselytising the illegal invasion of a sovereign neighbour, and murderous war against civilians and civilian infrastructure? Oh yes, it would be that same scumbag.

Anyway, ceasefire or no ceasefire makes no difference to EUA. We need either sale asap, or an end to the war with Russia through Russian removal from Ukrainian land, and Ukrainian freedom from illegal invasion guaranteed by major powers.

I don't have a brighter mind but I will try my best to help. If the business burns more cash than it makes, eventually the coffers run dry and we all lose our money (that can happen in many ways, it doesn't even mean the end of the company - it could just mean that you are no longer a part owner). The negativity is because those risks are getting higher the longer it takes for the company to get to profitibility.

Try to learn about balance sheet fundamentals. Dismissing something such as fundamental as 'burning cash' is a major error.

Oh, so it IS a war now. There I was thinking it was still a special military operation. Well, since Putin had made it illegal to call the war a war, I guess he should go to jail for seven years, just like the poor sods who called a spade a spade and were sent to prison for it.

Newsflash, the hostilities aren't ending any time soon. Russia is losing, but very slowly. Putin intends to send more drafted meat into the grinder and keep the war going. He doesn't want peace without land and resources. He's already told us that.

Let's hope we sell the whole shebang soon. It was nice to hear from the BoD yesterday - I have confidence they can steer the good ship EUA out of the storm.

You won't know this perhaps, depending upon what green boxes you are seeing, but aside from some of the expected bickering in one thread, there is some very useful discussion on licences and cash position. Perhaps you've green boxed too many people? Certainly I'm seeing more signal than noise at this time. Unusually so for this board, admittedly!

Cashflow is probably the most important question to answer right now. We can't bank on a quick sale, and have to assume the company will be mining for itself for the short term. We could be in a very positive position but to actually conclude anything we need to work out potential cash flow: i.e. potential income from mining and likely cash burn. EUA refine and sell the stockpile product, so that brings in cash - we then need to sell / restock more product so we're continually mining through 2023 (and I assume production continues to increase) to restock the stockpile (or refine and sell immediately).

So, questions are: how much cash do we need PM to operate (ignoring one-off expenditure)? How much income can we generate from mining from Q2 (assuming that's when current cash in bank runs out) onwards?

Can someone with any knowledge in the area of EUA expenses opine on what they think of the cash/run costs situation please? There's some noise on the internet about it (albeit the noisemakers aren't particularly credible) and any soothing noises would be nice to hear.

So Folio, what do you think that means for the future of EUA?

> This one ok but I do note only the "possible" sale of our Russian assets to BRICs.

That's not a change in the situation. It has always been at the 'possible' stage and will remain so until pen is put to paper for contract signing.

The same person that bigged up FRR, HUR, UKOG etc etc etc? Just a commentator and knows no more than the rest of you lot.

Kakuyu project with 60% interest to XTR

I know we're all impatient for something good to happen, but the likelyhood is that we'll see a much better return on our investment if we wait. I don't know how long but my guess is into H2 next year at least.

And there's no need to take a lowball offer. Mine it ourselves if required.

According to the experts?

Trading group sprang to mind for me too. If people want to trade that's fine. But they shouldn't present themselves as upstanding board citizens when plainly there's something dodgy about their behaviour. No-one who was actually a true LTH would be so calm about the situation (even if currently in profit).

You ask that question, Daisy, as if it matters. Even if the acquisition slipped into next year, nothing is going to stop ALGW's growth. You seem very fixated on the short term. That's a trader mindset. You'll probably lose your money that way (as most AIM traders do). Best to think long term. See prospects here? Hold long term. You don't? Sell today and invest elsewhere. I have a favourite FTSE 50 stock that you can get a pretty much guaranteed 7-8% dividend from. That feels more up your street.

Admittedly, I did originally invest here for the sale but I'd be ok with long term dividend income too.

I would like to see more from the BoD on how they are also turning EUA into a producer, just in case there is no sale.

Maybe Mac can utilise his encyclopedic RNS knowledge to pull out some relevant quotes but I think he green binned me.

@Bamb, the loss of posts was due (at least partially) to our resident troll providing their usual quality of input.

> the bod aren’t going to get anything over the line. The comms have been atrocious.

The second does not begat the first.

Comms are 'bad' because there is no news to tell us, and the BoD are keeping their heads down - as I wish them to do!

Let's keep the conspiracy QANon Trumper BS out of here. Looking at the geography, if the missile was an S-300 type (as seems possible although not yet proven), and given that NATO have already said that their AWACS tracked the missile, the most likely explanation is that a Russian-designed SAM launched by Ukraine in defence of Ukrainian territory against Russian air attacks went awry. If so, Ukraine perhaps has partial responsibility but Russia has total accountability due to it launching illegal attacks on a sovereign nation that necessitate Ukraine defending itself.

I suspect this whole incident will dampen down once the facts become more established. Thankfully, given that this happened in the West we are very likely to find out the truth eventually, which would not be the case if this happened in Russia or Belarus, where they'll happily tout all sorts of nonsense theories about many things from mosquitos to smoking accidents, and warships being sunk by storms. lol.

Fair points there NorthernBoy. Companies usually list on AIM to raise cash after all. I must admit, I didn't have time to check this morning, but I was trying to remember if the 2024 date was a change, or just a reiteration of previous BOD expectations.

My post wasn't intended to be derampy, though perhaps it looks a little negative. I'm still smarting a little at buying in at the top. 19% dilution (my calculation of the result with the new shares) isn't too horrendous, as long as that's not repeated.

The takeaway from this RNS for me is that the company would be going bust next year without it. They are hoping to sort out the cash burn problem by breaking even in 2024. That's how I see it - any differing views?