Member Info for Shedulike

Hopefully an indication that something positive is in the pipeline but rather typical of Block that they've made the announcement before a live presentation is actually scheduled.

Chesh I think the problem we have for the short term SP is that looking at the last RNS the only facts with regards to CNPC as far as I can tell is that they are drilling on a licence between the Black Sea and our PIII which, if successful could reflect positively on our licence. Does that suggest the geology is analogous to our licence? PH goes on to say that we would then have access to 'a rig', do they definitely mean their rig and is that a definite agreement, also when might that be? Personally I think until we get some certain news on these farm outs it's difficult to see what will drive the SP beyond this slight recovery.

Bit odd as hasn't the spread remained the same and the mid dropped a fraction? The closing price seems to be taken as that after hours UT at 1.25, much as I've tried to educate myself on the UT I'm not entirely on top of it other than it being some kind of end of day balancing auction so I'll leave that to others..... On the CNPC stuff I'm certainly not discounting it, just questioning the wisdom of putting it in the public domain until they have something concrete to announce. For now I would just conclude..... encouraging.

I make it just 10 today so far and it looks like a stalemate. I wonder if we've gone as far as we can on recent RNS's, I do think we need clarity on our relationship with the CNPC sharpish as it's one thing to comment on their activity in Georgia and post a picture but we need to know if they are the farm out candidate and what the workplan is. Until then for all we know PH just photobombed the image with CNPC 'senior management' :) Sorry for the slightly cynical tone but I don't think they should really have RNS'd this unless something is signed, still it will have gone past the Nomad, so for the sake of their reputation let's hope there's something in it. GLA.

Just reviewed the Ken Seymour interview flagged by Heps and I think it's quite pertinent that he says how important combining geothermal with O&G drilling is for attracting investment. Given the GOG comment specifically on our PII license plus our own announcement about a farm in I'm hopeful that there could be something soon along these lines. Georgia is a signatory to the Paris net zero agreement so they have their obligations and there should be synergy with the PII well deepenings. As KS says O&G is far from over but we need to be part of the process. Let's see what 2024 brings, best wishes to everyone.

Yes Hep's more questions than answers at the moment but I do feel after the last update they have committed to some big announcements in the new year. I wonder if the Georgian government have grown impatient of our steady as you go strategy and have helped introduce some bigger players to help us get things moving on all fronts which had always been promised but I guess it became evident that slowly progressing PI was unlikely to ever fund everything on our own.

Thanks bobbby, very interesting. I think there was also mention of an interview with a former BLOE Director in which he specifically mentions dual O&G / Geothermal drilling technologies. Also that is intriguing re. PII "High impact" farm out. The original plan was for low cost deepenings which would suggest a farm out wouldn't necessarily be needed, some kind of JV might point towards something much more ambitious.

I was interested to read this on the GOG website "Samgori, Patardzeuli, & Ninotsminda Middle Eocene fields and future Field Development Program can play a reasonable role in energy transition of Georgia from Oil and Gas to Renewables". I mentioned the other day that we commissioned something similar with Baker Hughes and given that the Middle Eocene at Samgori and Patardzeuli is PII could this perhaps explain the delay in it getting off the ground? Didn't someone post a link a while back with talk of combined O&G / Geothermal drilling potential in Georgia (would be grateful if whoever it was could repost). Speculation of course but could it turn out that PII is being tweaked into an energy transition model?

Three times I have tried to write a coherent post expressing where I think we are on all four projects and I have given in because it's something of a riddle. I can't decipher for certain what is going on with with PI, except (country to PH statement) they didn't deliver stated goals for 2023 and plans for 2024 are noncommittal. PII appeared to be off the radar but there was intriguing comment about farm in which seems to have been lost amongst the greater excitement around PIII. On PIV have GOGL actually done anything and if they have shouldn't we know about it? I'd love to know more about the geothermal, we paid Baker Hughes to look into it but as shareholders haven't been given the conclusions. So overall I remain very interested in the potential which is clearly massive but frustrated at the lack of clarity. The risk / reward equation remains (for me) healthily towards reward but I do worry about the smoke and mirrors and not least Russian naval activity developing a base in disputed Abkhazia which I believe has weighed more heavily on the SP than the inaction on P's I & II.

Interesting Linkedin find Bobbby. Does make me wonder what happened to the Agreement with Baker Hughes signed in June 21 "Baker Hughes has allocated additional engineers to assess and potentially develop geothermal, carbon capture, and hydrogen applications across the Samgori, Patardzeuli and West Rustavi fields". Did anything come of it? Could this be the implementation of their findings or did it just wither on the vine and nobody told us?

Bricks whatever we think of the morality of share awards when PI's are so underwater the actual mechanics are correct as far as I can tell - 1.5m for the successful completion of the agreement and initial cash payment and 1.5m for the successful MLA application. Possibly you're reading it as a successful MLA being the awarding of a ML but it's the acceptance of the MLA that was in terms. I have mixed feelings but we should understand that all the work to date has been essential to making the MLA possible. Hopefully something soon on Antonina and the enlarged mining area, for me an important part of the Agreement.

They were entitled to these as soon as the MLA was in, the first performance condition (option agreement) was effectively already met when they were passed last year. The time to object to this award was in 2022 but I agree it's still a pretty deplorable look given the SP.

Rather muddled thinking on the PFS but putting that to one side I do agree that the voting was interesting. I suspect that the supportive shareholders who bought at 4.5p on the Denarius deal which was a 60.7 % premium to the SP at the time are far from happy about the Directors subsequently granting themselves options and performance rights exercisable largely below 4.5p It is also noteworthy that Bennelongs 1.5m Advisor Options at 5p shares expired yesterday so likely they have made their feelings clear.

Here's the link:

http://www.europametals.com/site/pdf/897eea81-efe1-4ae4-88e8-d61cdbd987c9/Europa-Metals-2023-AGM-Presentation.pdf

Lot's more detail on the mine plan.

Drill plan for 2024 is for 'combined' Toral and Antonina so appears they're confident of getting the permit for Antonina (expected later this year or early 2024). IP for Toral is encompassed by the MLA and will run until it is granted, before that comes up again!

I very much doubt I'll be able to go to the AGM but my thoughts on your points.

1) Awarded at 5p and they expire at the end of the month incidentally. Of course we don't know what part Bennelong played in the Denarius deal though of course that only added any value for about half an hour :)

2) Habib is difficult to gauge as he could have provided some useful services without delivering a slam dunk deal. My best guess is that he very likely left with the better part of the arrangement. I can't be bothered scouring the 2021 accounts to find out and I suspect it will be bundled up in 'consultancy services' anyway.

3) WA conducted the successful metallurgy of course which is still a critical part of the PFS, what the relationship is now I don't know.

4) Conrad list pre-production contracts amongst their services so I suspect we were investigating forward selling deals. I don't see it as a ploy to 'rope investors in'.

Depends on the motivation for the 'debates' raised here recently IMO Grappa. If they are genuine concerns then they can be answered swiftly with a simple email rather than repeatedly flagged on here. It really isn't difficult to find the answers so for me certain 'other views' look more like scaremongering rather than debate. Personally I'm satisfied about the status of our ability to continue exploration and the legitimacy of the MLA but if I'm certain of one thing that won't stop others who want to assert otherwise for reasons that only they truly know.

Sure, we have to remember that for roughly half the results period Denarius weren't shouldering the costs so looks steady. I have been disappointed that the enlarged mining area hasn't materialised in the last year but they have reiterated the intention "As part of the agreement the parties have also signalled the ambition to secure potential further concessions in the surrounding Northern Spain region therefore expanding the footprint around Toral", so I'm encouraged that the aspiration hasn't slipped off the radar which I always saw as a key upside of the deal but for market recognition we need something concrete.

....... to our JSE contributors.

Evening CHRI5P my only surprise is that Denarius want another campaign before the PFS, still it will only strengthen the metrics and after all they're paying for it! However nobody should be surprised at the ongoing exploration in general as that will continue as long as a resource exists to be defined. Exploration doesn't cease on most licenses even when production commences. We've had an economically viable resource for a while now but that doesn't mean you stop drilling, the more information we can extract the better the mine plan will be informed plus the more indicated and hopefully even measured the better the banking terms will be.

One of the questions I was left with after the EUZ MLA RNS was whether we'd get a new JORC prior to the 2024 drilling. According to the Denarius announcement we can look forward to a new JORC off the back of the 2023 drilling, "Next steps include the preparation of an updated Mineral Resource estimate incorporating the results of the 2023 drilling campaign and then, after some additional infill drilling in the first half of 2024, we will commence work on the preliminary economic assessment for the Toral Project." So with all the assays bar one hole in on 4th Aug I think we can reasonably expect that imminently, particularly as I believe Luis is qualified now to act as the competent person, maybe Addison still independently review the JORC, not sure.