Member Info for Shedulike

The point is it's all about de-risking. Proving that what we have already demonstrated is as likely to occur across the rest of the high mineralisation zones, so that whoever takes it on can be confident that their mine won't underperform. Further enhancements to the economics hopefully from the ore sorting.

Perhaps it would help to read this summary of what the third phase is about:
"Next steps
Following these latest results, Europa Metal's intends to immediately commence an analysis of ore sorting as a specific optimisation route, which has presented itself as a viable possibility from WAI's findings. Accordingly, mineralisation in the upper portion of the ore body will now be tested using XRT (X-Ray Transmission) ore sorting techniques to assess its amenability to pre-concentration and to determine the viability of XRT within the process route by utilising existing samples from distinct lithological areas already sampled from holes TOD-024 and TOD-025.
The Company will also, simultaneously with the above mentioned ore sorting analysis, undertake a further metallurgical test on mineralisation sampled from the high-grade intersection encountered in hole TOD-025. This assessment will provide further context to the variability work required to advance the project towards a pre-feasibility study by spatially assessing the mineralisation across the possible mining area identified within the scoping study (as announced by the Company in December 2018). It is anticipated that the results from such further metallurgical testwork will enhance the Company's understanding of the concentrate characteristics".
Not mentioned in there is that they are also testing for deleterious elements from more zones to increase confidence. I think where there was no trace eg. Bismuth and Iron (from memory) they could be confidently ticked off. The elements for which there have been traces they need to test from other cores for a more definitive picture. My complete guess is that there are traces of potentially troublesome products but they are not showing likely penalty levels. Something LR said to me suggested that the Nomad wanted that proven before they could 'shout about it'.

Trombone it was meant to be light hearted ("pipe down"geddit? and even a nice little :) so there could be no misunderstanding) but never mind, you are welcome to have a pop at me if you wish. Water off a ducks back after years on here. By the way I have no ambition to administrate this board as you put it. You can oppose someone's position in the spirit of debate without wanting to stifle it. That seems to be a regular misunderstanding on here. Try watching how Parliament works, you know democracy? I suppose we lack a speaker to administrate properly as you came fairly close to some 'unparliamentary language' there. As I said I have no problem with a strong exchange of views.

Haha Steve well I hope so for all our sakes. Still risk hence the ludicrous mcap. The only thing not in doubt is that the future of EUZ is coming to a head very soon. Welcome back to the asylum :)

mfm - my take on that is from the brokers point of view we have had incredible assay results from 025 and progressed the mets but not chalked off all the risks yet. Plus the latest assays aren't in the official resource figures. I also found it odd they didn't raise the value slightly but from memory wasn't it around 0.070 anyway which even after the rise post consolidation is 35p in new money. Comments like the company are 'winging it' when we have multiple work streams employing world leaders in metallurgy, meticulously bringing this project together, honestly, I haven't the words...

Wilfred - I would recommend having a butcher's at the Petropavlovsk website to get a handle on the scale of this operation. We're back in the FTSE 250, once upon a time before I had any grey hair on the brink of the FTSE 100.

Yes Jedster, the idea that CB would tolerate incompetence is ridiculous.

They just have to mfm if the Nomad say so. It doesn't mean much - flip it around and of course there are things not in the public domain that could explain the increase. They will have information on the metallurgy, ore sorting and further hydrology that could have a massive impact on the SP. They don't get the results like we did with exam results at school, they'll be in constant consultation with the service providers and stuff inevitably gets out. I'm not saying there is necessarily a leak in this case, I suspect they were more concerned with JSE as you say.

The statement re. share price movement is jumping through a hoop for the Nomad. It amused me they said the standard "The Company knows of no...." and then listed seven reasons to support it, that was quite a culture shock for an EUZ investor. Two of the reasons I actually think were a bit rich as we could still easily compare ourselves to peers by the more meaningful mcap rather than just SP before consolidation and on returning to the same value as last year, yes but that was before the placing, remember Dan? Given that most EUZ news arrives a good month after expected you might be right Tico (you're not Costa Rican are you by the way?). I travelled there on a gap year and the boys were Ticos and the girls Ticas, at least they were in the late 80's, hope that's not considered massively politically incorrect these days??

I don't think that is unrealistic Steve but remember we are short of cash and someone who has cash and wants a share of our asset is going to get a slice. The upside of giving away that slice is if we can fund a bit more exploration and take this to PFS the whole cake gets very much bigger for everyone. Imagine not only a greater Lead, Zinc, Silver resource but we could be adding Copper to that too. It's all rather interesting, get the deleterious elements out of the way and replace interesting with exciting.

Are we about to embark on the biggest week in EUZ / FCR history? Three and a half months since they outlined the objectives of these third phase mets, surely they've pulled it all together by now. I'm hoping to see the most comprehensive report into the economics of Toral which should be a big clue to the direction we're going in. The absolute 'back of the net' scenario would be some EU cash giving us time to dictate terms from a stronger position with other parties, but maybe I'm daydreaming to avoid the litany of tasks waiting for me outside....

Richana & everyone, yes it is confusing but PH & Pavel can't put out an official POG circular without conveying the opinion of the Directors they are opposing. I think it would be handy if someone could put aside modesty and step forward as the best researched POG investor and perhaps summarise the situation. I can confidently say that's not me! One thing I can clear up is that PH coming onto the board was always a temporary measure which is why he is recommending his own removal .

Jupes I know I often end up sparring with Bobby as we tend to disagree on most things but I wouldn't be so certain of Bobby being entirely open. Check for yourself, 8th June declares he's out, 18th June declares he's back in "I have bought back in to keep a minimum holding as a punt in case there is actually a plan". Then continues to question the aptitude of the management and still an average of 70p apparently, there's hundreds of companies to choose from on the stock exchange why reinvest in one where there is only an off chance of there being a plan?? I appreciate Bobby could be calculating his average factoring in closed positions but for me it never quite adds up, the June buy must have been tiny not to impact that average. I genuinely have no problem with him except that when I oppose something he says it's taken as an 'attack' rather than debate. I don't expect Bobby to ever explain why he is drawn like a moth to a flame to a company he (apparently) doesn't like but he should at least understand that someone opposing your position isn't a personal attack or stifling debate but invigorating it. I would recommend the 'unfilter' button to Bobby and maybe if things continue to improve we'll find some common ground at last.

Richana isn't that because they have to declare the vote as made by all the current Directors according to the companies constitution. So for instance in the circular there is no official recommendation for 1-6 as "The resolution did not have the support of at least 2 Elected Directors". Also I noticed that the circular states that Everest hold 5.04% plus a beneficial interest in 2.46%, there have been figures of 40% quoted as being against Pavel, can anyone concisely explain the make-up of the %'s of parties that we fear are acting in concert? Thanks in advance.

Looking back on the week it would be reasonable to conclude that consolidation has been a success so far. We have settled at 0.03p old money now the exchanges are aligned which is an improvement on the SP without any new operational or funding announcements, suggests the market isn't expecting a placing IMO. Furthermore in the volatility believers had an opportunity to grab some more at 0.01p, even below if you were quick and doubters had a great chance to exit above 0.05 old money. So in the mayhem everybody has had the opportunity to adjust their position according to their sentiment, right?

I've been trying to move profit from my small sell on Wednesday into my ISA and can't get a quote, hate doing NT as it feels like a lucky dip. So frustrating when you actually call it right for once and the MM's don't deliver a proper service, feels like a stitch up.

I'm not expecting another placing 10BT but whether a JV would involve issuing a partner an equity stake in EUZ I don't know. Not really something I know about, I would imagine a partner would want exposure to the asset rather than our stock so it will probably be a slice of our resource that we give up. In a way that is diluting your share of the asset but for LTH's the proven resource has grown since we first invested. On that front the team has delivered for us but it hasn't been reflected in the SP. Remove funding fears and Wednesday will look like a tiny blip on the chart IMO. Pier comparisons should help people who want to do some research feel more confident with that. Really worth watching the Oct presentation that LR prepared (the link was RNS'd), since then we've had positive mets, hydrology, a massively important geotechnical study, and the mega core that moved the dial to 11.

Trade that issue was with the assays from 024 & 025. ALS Laboratories weren't prepared for the level of mineralisation from 025 which produced stunning results. Remember 025 returned our best cores to date and isn't even in the JORC yet. WA are in a sense rerunning some metallurgy as we're doing similar tests as in the second phase but from more zones to build up this spatial representivity that we here mentioned. All about derisking so that whoever pumps in the capital to build this thing can be as confident as is possible they will dig up the grades that our drilling has indicated.

It's certain the Nomad insisted on the RNS, but interesting that they authorised the defensive comments. I don't agree with you Valueit about 'weasel words' but I know they have delivered operationally and have confidence they can convert that into shareholder value. There are still risks but diminishing.

I'm not expecting it tomorrow but with EUZ who knows. MC also said something interesting about the results of the mets dictating the direction we will go in re. funding. Possibly we have options, LR has alluded to groups not normally interested in mining but looking for silver plays, with the right deal that could work for us but I suspect most of us would favour a deal with a big player. MC said we're too small for Lundin but they've always batted away the 'Lundin Question', surely a profitable mine is a profitable mine, who knows. Anyway nice to bounce ideas around outside trading hours when everything is a bit more rational.