Member Info for Shedulike

Mm's, towards the end of the latest interview there is more than just a clue to what Bennelong do. Remains to be seen if they can pull it off with us of course but I did sense their hand on LR's shoulder in the interview, could just be a coincidence but it was a much less idiosyncratic delivery by Laurence I thought.

Here you go Mm's - I think the WHI analyst was charging by the minute though and we didn't want to go over 5.
https://*********************/companies/uk/precious-metals/europa-metals-limited/research/whireland/wh-ireland-europa-metals-euz-successful-completion-of-hydrogeological-programme-toral-pb-zn-/41_2021121302545925722/9004f4a7-1df1-481e-adc9-87064c7926af

WHI research note out titled "First light", other working titles considered were "Glimmer of Hope", "Darkest Hour Before the Dawn" or "Last One Out Turn Off the Lights" :)

Indeed Bricks another one ticked off and yes I'm wondering about those mets as well, certainly the longest we've waited from hearing that the samples have been secured to getting the results (from memory at least).

Just logged in to see an unlikely subject heading! Hi Grappa I'm still in but was finding the board depressing so just avoided for a while. Hopefully today's news is the start of better times. This is really, really important news today. I don't expect it to rock the SP but it's a massive step in the de-risking of Toral. Surprised the RNS didn't mention impacts on OPEX as I'm sure it's been mentioned before that mitigating any hydrological issues can impact on operating costs.

Quite, the great mystery that is POG, what happened at 10-20am? A significant surge not related to the gold price or visible POG news. Then a huge UT, why would a balancing trade just happen to be £1m?

Perhaps an appropriate time to wish well to CJ who will be carrying many of our questions to Stratton St tomorrow?

Interesting to listen back to the conversation between Vadim Alexandre and Justin Waite from last February when Waite enthusiastically pushes the agenda that the vaccine would make testing virtually unnecessary. You can hear Alexandre getting quite exasperated trying to explain that you would still need testing at some level while Waite does his level best to refute it. Unfortunately Waite has been proved correct as far as the SP goes (helped massively by the actions of the DHSC) but completely wrong on the need for testing which now looks to be a normal part of life indefinitely. Certainly the idea of Covid providing a revenue window for NCYT that would get slammed shut by vaccines has been errr.. thrown out the window. Unlikely we'll suddenly see the revenues again that first mover advantage gave us but perhaps steady growth as new variants deliver revenue and time for NCYT to develop the non-Covid aspects of the business that I think we all want to hear about.

Steady mfm 'self delusion' is a bit strong I'm only explaining why I believe there is still a path to a good outcome based on the asset, continued good groundwork and hopefully some strengthening of the board on the corp front. Of course I can't answer the questions on where they're looking to take us as they haven't told us, obviously any acquisitions are dependent on transacting on Toral I don't see how we could be competitive for anything worthwhile without that happening first, or bolted onto the transaction. As for how far we're funded, they're implementing cost cutting including salaries so hopefully we'll get a clearer explanation when the review is complete. On Adam Habib his remuneration was non-disclosed from the outset, I said at the time I'd rather see someone on the board rather than an advisor, hopefully we'll see something on that front soon. Just a last general point I don't think optimism is a crime, I have thought through my reasons for staying invested in a level headed way so not delusional. Trust me I have thrown the towel in before where I have seen a hopeless situation, that's not how I see matters here though of course I'm far from happy. It's pretty obvious that the majority of posters find anything other than a daily 'moanathon' about LR irritating so I'm happy to leave you to it I don't see the point in contributing anymore.

Roger have you only been able to sell less than 100k shares since August?

Okay fair enough Grappa, I don't think you'll get 1.25p (wouldn't that be a mcap well below £1m), however I don't think 5p can hold much longer without some positive news.

Other than that all okay Grappa? :) Look just to get something straight I am not defending the company's abysmal record of cr*p placings. I said after the 'value event' (mark 1) comment that if they didn't deliver within two months of printing it then it would have been a mistake to include it in an RNS. So it has been proved a mistake and ultimately a costly one for us so black mark against the Board. My question to myself now is do I believe that despite another setback can some value finally be returned to shareholders. I don't think Toral is a 'pipe dream' as Grappa says, the independent reports look pretty good to me but for a bit more de-risking so weighing it all up I believe the answer is yes with the caveat that my decision is based on risk / reward not a 100% belief that my investment is safe. I kind of thought that anyone else hanging on in there must have come to a similar conclusion or why stay in?

What is it exactly you want to know Newbie? They can outline a strategy but they're not going to to name who they are talking to under NDA. I do agree that we need some more clarity - how exactly is the mining experience of the new investors going to help us? What are Bennelong going to deliver for us in return for their options? However they're not going to say we're talking to X, Y & Z and investors will get a minimum of 50pps by this time next year. As with most equity investments particularly at the risky end of the spectrum there will be uncertainty until a deal is (hopefully) revealed. 'You're in EUA aren't you? Over two years of a sales process and everyone is still speculating as to what is being sold and who might be buying them. I do accept that the Directors there have been much more successful at selling the story and getting institutions to buy in at good levels than at EUZ - but hey at least we can deliver a JORC :)

I suppose they're just not going to share details of a deal that didn't happen. I wouldn't say I'm supportive exactly because we don't have a proposal to scrutinise as yet, but having made my enquiries I'm satisfied that there was a deal at an advanced stage and that they believe they can bring some value for us with the new investors and advisors. Now that we're drilling again I also want the current team remaining in place to oversee that, as this is one area where they've consistently performed. The good field work on the asset at least gives us hope and I wouldn't want to upset the applecart on that front. I do however want to see the Board bolstered with an appointment with someone with a proven track record on mining transactions because clearly this is where we have failed to date. I'm hoping that the pay cuts are to make this possible.

Sorry Bricks that link just seems to bring up a list of all articles - which one are you referring to?

Mac4671, I don't post here much, ironically being much more interested and better researched in parts of my portfolio that aren't serving me as well as EUA :) to date. Any rational investor has to factor in the risk of complete meltdown in Russian investments given global events, or do you think Eurasia are immune from that? Frankly we could all wake up one morning to find EUA assets frozen, on balance I don't expect that, even with the deliberate destabilisation of borders but it's something we should all think about when our capital is staked inside Russia. This could go t*ts up and not even make a line in the FT.

Since Petropavlovsk dual listed on the Moex in June 2020 the shares are well down on the year and the CEO and joint founder Pavel Maslovskiy has been imprisoned as yet without formal charges. The 'Russian Discount' should be applied to EUA IMO with established miners getting something of a biffing recently, expect the unexpected, certainly until my hopes for a good outcome appear as real numbers in my bank account I remain optimistic yet cautious. I genuinely think that the EUA story could potentially pass into AIM folklore but in the absence of all the facts (as we all are) I also wouldn't be surprised if Eurasia fails to match the expectations.

Mfm it isn't simply about booked resources alone but the economics of getting the stuff out of the ground, this additional campaign isn't going to revolutionise the resource in any case, short and sweet and unless 025 was a freak some more indicated to the ledger. The six month campaign in shallow zones could certainly have achieved a larger indicated resource if targeted at the high grade areas but they wanted to improve the early years economics and bring forward the break even. Given the fact that we don't have a non-dilutive funding deal and have raised again at rubbish levels it's fair to question that strategy but the process isn't one dimensional. Anyway more on metallurgy to come and given the fact that Russian miners are getting hammered at the minute I wonder if we'll at last start getting some value from our geography as minds get concentrated on low risk regimes.

I do think that is a valid observation up to a point mfm, however they could have proceeded to the PFS without the extra drilling. When they said the funds would be utilised towards "Certain key components" it was Aug 2020, before the CDTI grant loan landed in October. As I said earlier today the CDTI funds must be spent on drilling so it makes sense to go for some more indicated in the high grade zone before the PFS. In summary the extra drilling isn't essential for a viable PFS but it will strengthen it assuming we hit the targets.

Hi Bricks - must be soon surely given how long ago we obtained the met samples, but the truth is I don't know.