We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
There we go, all good - delay due to resubmitting assays to confirm unprecedented high levels of silver. Waiting on environmental studies for MLA, as I guessed before these almost certainly require third party expert approval so we're probably at the mercy of the boffins on those. Don't know if anyone can enlighten me but I make it 4,439.7m of drills completed. They say 7000m in this campaign and that "Hole TOD-051 is currently nearing completion and comprises the final drillhole for this campaign" , surely 051 won't be 2,500m? Have I missed wedges?
Thanks CJ appreciate the supportive comments. I have had reassurances on a couple of fronts and asked for permission to share on here which was granted. Sadly after reading yesterdays posts I didn't feel inclined to. For anyone genuinely invested I apologise but I'm sure it won't be difficult with some professional correspondence for anyone to get the same info. Just to say there has been a misunderstanding on the 31st July deadline which has more to do with us and Denarius than the Junta. I do think that EUZ RNS's haven't helped as they gave the impression that the 31st was indeed the Junta's deadline so I hope I'm not struck off the payroll after this public show of dissent.
I'm not sure how analogous this well is to WR-B01Za but they announced spud on Dec 13th and posted on Twitter that the horizontal section had started on Jan 13th so I think we have a way to go yet unfortunately Chesh.
It does feel a bit like info is on the decline. They produced a technical video before JKT-1ST and the Tweets from WR-B01 ST provided more info on the operational landmarks but I guess it's early days on WR-34Z. I don't think we had TD info on either of the first two wells (before drilling) though I'm sure I saw a diagram showing the well design of WR-BO1. I think the shutters came down a bit when WR-BO1 had wellbore issues.
Hey Jed appreciate the humour from a holder but as I'm sure you know they're not drilling for fun. As we all know going for maximum certainty in the central mining zone before the PFS. Speculation alert! Do Denarius want a bit of 'measured', possibly. Slightly more interesting is that on limited info I reckon that recent assays have thrown a curveball and they're being reexamined - which explains why TOD-044 which we know was at the lab mid May hasn't been made public. Could be good or bad, wasn't it ever thus with EUZ?
CHRI5P I do think an RNS just making the situation clear would be in order. As you say they have stated there is a 31st July deadline so really there ought to be clarification should that pass without news that the MLA is in or not. As I said before if they do need more time I can't see it being a problem but I believe they should confirm that with the market.
Sorry CHRI5P hadn't seen that when making my last post which was replying to 08:32. I agree that it could do with being cleared up along with whether we need an extension to the MLA deadline, I don't think they can let it pass without a statement of some sort. If we do it won't be a great look as in the spring it was announced as being on course but I guess a lot of the archaeology and environmental reports require third party experts so we could be waiting on something. Of course like everyone else I don't know but I would expect the Junta to react supportively if we do miss it.
Not sure what the point of that is but I have absolutely no problem standing by the post from June - everything I stated as fact is in B&W in the announcements. The matter of whether the PEA will be included the MLA was speculative hence the use of 'suspect we will' (suspect: "to imagine to exist or be true, likely, or probable") and the conditional tense 'could be'. As we have more recently discussed it now looks more likely the PEA will include current drilling so cannot be in the PEA, just the other day I concluded that any PEA issued now would have to be based on our own Nov 22 Jorc in June I was leaning the other way, I also remember saying before the confirmatory drilling began that it was difficult to see how they could complete 7000m of drilling get it assayed and JORC'd in time for the MLA. News of two drills and 24hr drilling suggested they were in a hurry and partly lead to what I said in June. Anyway if the purpose of reposting what I said was to reflect badly on me then I think it has completely failed for all the reasons above.
To be honest CHRI5P my opinion is that if the new PEA is a requirement of the MLA it would be based on the last EUZ Nov 22 JORC as a JORC on the current drilling is some way off, so I genuinely don't know. If by 'extension to the area' you mean enlarging the block model I'm certain that's not happening for now, certainly all Option 1 drilling will be within the current block model. On the MLA I don't know if the 31st July deadline was imposed by EUZ on Denarius as a condition of Option 1 or by the Junta on EUZ as 100% owners until the JV is triggered. Either way if the deadline is not met I can't see EUZ claiming the $4m loan off Denarius for $1 anymore than the Junta chucking us off the licence later this year. Not in anyone's interests, much more likely an extension of the deadline.
CHRI5P I'm not sure if the PEA has to be part of the MLA or not but it does say in the presentation that it requires CAPEX and OPEX calculations close to a PFS level of detail. Other requirements listed look like components of a PEA to me so who knows?
Well I couldn't help having a bit of fun with Highside's 23:28 meltdown - I mean have you read it? But to be fair this little volley of posts started with some scaremongering based on inaccurate information which needed to be put straight. I'm not going to apologise for that.
Maybe there was an adequate existing pad from when the well was originally drilled? Difficult to see in the pictures though it looks like they just scraped off what was minimal topsoil and use natural firm rocky footings as a base. Bit worried there is only one Portaloo.
I'm really saddened to see the chicanery of certain ex-holders here - the last exploration permit was acquired in Nov 2020 and runs for three years:
"The Investigation Permit has been renewed, following, inter alia, a consultation process conducted by the relevant bodies of the Junta of Castilla y León, for a further three years until 15 November 2023". (Nov 2020)
As for the MLA it is a condition of Option 1 which until completed as CHRI5P says we own 100% of Toral, if Denarius fail to complete Option 1 we keep the loan (or what remains of the $4m) which covers Option 1 works:
"In the event that the First Option is not exercised, Denarius shall be required to assign the loan to Europa Metals for US$1".
No, because the money wouldn't have been procured without the innovation programme, it had to be specifically demonstrated that it was directed at gathering the drilling data. You could have argued that much of it went on the wages of the graduates involved in the CTDI project but that would have taken a little mental agility. As it happens I also think remuneration is too high, of course I would given the SP performance and yes my investment is doing badly. Unfortunately AIM wages are scandalous and we're operating in that market. You might have forgotten that the remaining Directors now take half salary with the remainder made up in shares in the deferral scheme, if EUZ is ultimately successful they will do very well out of that arrangement also so trust me I'm aware they know how to feather their own nests. Anyway the programme created some positive local engagement which should help our relations with the Junta and we could also have a marketable product if the correctional algorithm is of value to other explorers. Time will tell on that one.
You are probably right Heps I just noticed in the CPR that KRT-45 is outside of the enhanced fracture density area and another graph shows water at 1600m. To be honest I don't have the expertise to know if these are insurmountable problems, I would assume not or surely our experts would have dismissed KRT-45 as a target from the outset. The fact that it wasn't put into production would also suggest a negative to me. After WR-34ST we'll have two pads ready for new wells, I know ground works are a fraction of the overall costs of a well but wouldn't the temptation be to deploy the latest technology on brand new wells? As things stand I'm probably putting the cart in front of the horse anyway.