Member Info for Shedulike

Blaustein you're getting some stick but AIM rules are that the shares should be traded if possible. It's not just down to EUA to decide not to relist. Assuming they don't want to they will have to convince the LSE that the current circumstances justify a continuation of suspension. Contrary to popular opinion Aim is not (quite) the Wild West.

Newbie I don't believe the payout here is necessarily only in the endgame. If the Exec's can sort out funding without giving the crown jewels away sentiment will be transformed and the rerate could be astonishing. Go back to the Oct 19 presentation and look at pier comparisons and I'm convinced if funding fears can be negated we will at long last be valued on the marketable products we have, not to mention the unexplored running room within the licence. I'm not going share what I believe is fair value (with funding) because it will sound ludicrous from where we are now. Suffice to say I'm happily buying at these levels with restraint purely because of my personal business insecurity.

Thanks Newbie though I'm not counting any chickens yet with EUA. It might sound slightly bizarre but I'm actually more confident of a good outcome here. Probably because I'm about 100x better researched on EUZ and can see beyond the SP. Not saying the SP isn't thoroughly depressing me though!

Hi Chris, I have a little bit of EUA but in comparison an awful lot more of EUZ which is the one that fascinates me. I think the team here want to develop this project further and after consolidation we'll find out how it is to be financed. For now that might just be for a new round of drilling (where open East & depth), prove the copper, there's a possibility of an updated SS and hopefully the PFS. Then we can think about a sale knowing everything has been done to get the best deal possible.

It may not be in EUA's hands if the LSE don't agree that the formal sale process is a good enough reason to remain suspended:
Rule 40: Suspension
The general principle applied by the Exchange when considering requests for a suspension of trading in AIM securities is that interruptions to trading should be kept to a minimum......... The Exchange will not suspend the trading in AIM securities if it is not satisfied that the circumstances justify suspension.
I'm not saying the LSE won't accept that EUA can remain suspended, just that it isn't simply a decision that the company can make in isolation.

Apologies if already mentioned but 367 posts to check...... Just thinking now that we have engaged UBS does that not 100% clarify EUA's relationship with CITIC and therefore there is no reason to be in suspension? Don't they have a duty to allow trading in the shares if possible?

I know how this board universally enjoys deciphering EUZ's strategy by decoding LR's LinkedIn so thought I'd mention he's 'liked' a Mining.com article about Copper's recovery.

If it's not higher then something will be going horribly wrong :) What's significant is whether the mcap starts to improve and with it our own %'s of that figure.

Bricks as we know the TP broker note is a farce, not changing the target price as each piece of positive work came in, incrementally de-risking the asset, amounts to an admission that they couldn't be bothered to give it any thought. We haven't completely put deleterious elements to bed yet so there is still risk but how the target price could remain the same as the metallurgy improved and we had the stunning cores from TO25 reflects badly on their analysts.

Eh? Norges went down to 0.07% on the 11th, back to 0.17% on the 29th, they have 129,287,282 shares on loan. Suggest everyone reads that for themselves. Nothing happened yesterday other than the notification.

Significant news that the second flotation plant, at Pioneer, is nearing start-up, critical so we can start readying refactory ore from Pioneer for POX. Guess this reduces our dependence on 3rd party ore.

I think there have been a lot of envious eyes following progress here and wishing they'd got in earlier so expect brutal exploitation of the uncertainty on the board in the coming days. Just a shame that it's going to be a distraction from gold hitting new highs.

Fair enough MFM, I think if CB had wanted LR out of Bezant for negative reasons he wouldn't want him remaining in EUZ where he is Chairman and has a big stake. Yes he is Exec at BZT so has more power but I think even allowing for my generally glass half outlook here it does suggest an intensive period of activity is coming at Europa.

Chris good to see some cautious positivity! That makes you a fellow flagrant ramper in these parts (joking all).

MFM do you think dilution is inevitable or do you agree that we have marketable products including silver (which is getting really hot by the way)? I understand that the SP is getting everyone down including me but folk are going on about mistakes from 2018 that they have lived with for two years but now seem inexcusable. It's difficult to see the upside from where we are but the actual work has been consistently positive since the deviated drill just over a year ago now, I sometimes think that if the work had been average but LR had spun it to high heaven he'd be a hero. I'm not happy with the SP and have called for comms to be more energised but not ramped, and that's directly not just on here. We're not getting any metallurgy before consolidation now and I'm not happy about that either but they must have their reasons so looks like the bulletin board is going to be dominated by the dilution fears for another couple of weeks.

In addition even if a deal is announced after consolidation guess what? They still won't rule out dilution, a company can never have too much cash, but everyone will be happier that dilution is less likely. My point is that my exposure to EUZ at this point in the story is not based on 'good intentions and feelings' (sweet though that you see me like that) but I keep my ear to the ground and I have a strong conviction that they don't intend to dilute and are investigating other options. If I was convinced that dilution is inevitable it would be crazy to hang around waiting to be **** *****....... wouldn't it?

They aren't going to rule out dilution - that's the official line. We're going to have to accept that and see what deal is being worked after consolidation. No amount of banging on about it here will change that and yes new investors will stay away and we could yet go a lot lower. There may be a bonus from the EU and that's not entirely guesswork.

Non-equity funding has been a real possibility since the first phase metallurgy, you can now throw into the mix EU funding (hopefully). However I tried to explain earlier why I believe a placing or RI can't be taken off the table. Even though it would be popular and feel like protection for us PI's it would actually be reckless I believe. We do have options but for balance my main concern is us getting a bad deal on say the silver. The golden scenario for me would be getting some breathing space hopefully benefitting from this €2T euro reboot and then being able to negotiate a deal in better markets after further exploration and even proving the copper. Note that silver has touched $18/oz, above pre-crisis levels and is getting us noticed. I can understand why this dilution issue is dominating the agenda here but I'm finding myself increasingly relaxed. If anything was giving me sleepless nights it was Cadmium and Mercury but I'm confident the board wouldn't have taken those options if there was a problem with the deleterious elements. I know it won't be popular with everyone but I really think they've found a way to take this forward, we've been recruiting and the local authorities will want that to continue.

It's not a great situation I agree but there are two important facts that have dictated why we need to have a 50% leeway in potential equity dilution. First they simply cannot take an equity raise off the table, in negotiations whether off take, JV or full sale the other party have to know they are not the only option for EUZ. Second because of the dire market cap an equity raise must have sufficient muscle to raise a realistic amount of working capital. It would have appeared protective of shareholders interests to have made it 10% for instance but in reality that's not going to stave off insolvency in the worst case scenario. I strongly believe we have other funding options but while unpalatable, the 50% facility is prudent.

At least Hambro gave investors the opportunity to participate in the RI and didn't take the option of a cosy institutional placing. Yes I know it dipped below 5p so you could have got in the market at a better price but we weren't to know that for certain (though it usually happens) when the RI was announced. Not defending his performance which took us to that level obviously!