Member Info for Shedulike

Highside re. 14:24 reply - just seen it, understood.

I make DB's share of the raise 22% so if they are dreamers they're not the only one, as someone once said. I'm sure DB are extremely disappointed with the performance of their 12.75p stock but I can't imagine the decision to risk more money being made in the manner suggested by Highside, that's not to say there isn't a gambling element in most exploration investments but whichever investment manager proposed this decision will have certainly provided a risk assessment to their seniors. Yes many, many millions to get a PFS but most of that investment has already been made which surely is a factor in DB's decision not to throw the towel in and probably attracted the new investors to come in at this level.

Cheers Grappa all well and out of isolation. Coronavirus and investing in EUZ, what a year! I certainly won’t be walking under any coconut trees for a while as they say accidents come in threes .

Morning Grappa, I wasn't able to participate for family reasons. I believe the conclusions have been sent to LR who has acknowledged receipt.

Interesting that UFO also had a bookbuild placing arranged by WHI today choosing not to use their current broker TP who like us also arranged their last placing.....

DB sold just under a third of their initial placing shares autumn 2019, by my calculations looking at the price at the time that didn't give them a free carry but they were de-risked to a large extent. The fact they didn't sell them all tells me they expected the SP to progress. It didn't but they bought again at 12.75p, higher than their initial pre-consolidation investment which I make 7.5p converting to 2020 money. They now hold a higher % than at any time in the past, at the very least I thinks it's fair to conclude that they expect an improvement in the SP. Not much but something, I expect November to be interesting.

Ps. Just to add in the spirit of PI harmony, I did notice on Sun evening that you posted that you hoped my isolating was precautionary so thanks for that comment. Well H we did have plague in the family but all okay and only one of us was laid seriously low. Released from isolation yesterday thankfully but really dispirited at how rude, unprofessional and accusing the NHS track and trace operatives were. Anyway onwards and upwards and with regards to EUZ I personally think we need to urge the Exec's to issue a clear mission statement to PI's with close reference to the resolutions before any knee jerk reaction. Could that be a plan?

Okay Highside - perhaps give this a Bobby Beal thing a rest - you said a lot of things positive and negative in that guise before reincarnating yourself and pretending to be a prospective new investor, so whatever you're getting out of selectively reminiscing it's not particularly constructive. I remember you being very enthusiastic about AH while many had experience of his track record and were cautious about his abilities. Like I've said before I think we've done pretty well on here given the latest disappointment so don't post tripe like "It's a shame BB's posts disappeared" when you deleted that profile yourself.

Bricks, CJ et al - I think as PI's we urgently need some flesh put on the bones of the explanatory statement. For a start why on earth are we suddenly engaging Bennelong Corporate Ltd - what is the rationale? Personally I haven't got the faintest idea what the chances are of it being a net positive. I wonder if a first step in coming to a consensus might be requesting LR to communicate a more detailed overview of the resolutions.

I'm still trying to digest everything and get a clear picture on how exactly I feel about matters to be honest (in addition to being generally pi**ed off), so maybe I'm not the best poster to head the lynch mob :) I'm expecting some news on multiple fronts before the AGM, I realise that's been said most years but I want to hear if these new investors are going to be vocal and what they have to say if anything. I have expressed an opinion today to the powers that be which we may all share and that's with reference to these groups under NDA which while it's a positive that they're interested in us I'm sick of them sitting back requesting various workflows the latest apparently this specific plant location geotechnical drilling while not putting their money where their mouth is. It's got to the point where existing shareholders are seeing their investments shrink year on year so interested parties potentially get an option on a near de-risked asset without risking a bean of their own. Yes we have to suck it up to an extent as the de-risking is an essential part of making us an attractive proposition but I think it's gone on too long and it's time to play hardball, it feels now like they're walking all over us and the NDA relationships are simply not equitable as matters are being played out.

I agree wholeheartedly that regulation should be a lot more stringent Highside but I think we need to be careful not to confuse high risk investing with lack of regulation. You see it on these boards every time an AIM outfit gets in financial straits or goes belly up everyone starts crying foul blaming everyone but themselves for putting their capital at high risk. There is regulation - look at EUA, I think it was a Twitter leak that lead to their Nomad resigning and they remained suspended until they found another one. Okay in an ideal world the FCA would investigate every incident, leak etc but it is far from an ideal world especially in the murky world of financial jiggery pokery :) but let's keep emotions in check and not exaggerate the situation, there are regulations - absolute reams of them, is it 100% effectively implemented? No. On EUZ specifically they have never made me any promises either in official presentations or comms, they make the investment case as you would expect them to and we choose with our own freewill whether the potential rewards outweigh the risks. To date my decisions have largely been proved wrong along with everyone else who has stayed in and accumulated. That isn't to say I'm not bitterly disappointed that they have yet again failed to engineer a better funding solution than that which we're faced with, but they applied for the facility, got it and used it again. I knew about the resolution, I knew it was voted through and here we are. Is it the worst case scenario? No that would be liquidation and that's why they will put forward another resolution to authorise equity raises and it will be voted through. Lloyds needed a RI during the credit crunch to save the bank so even blue chips need recourse to issue equity. So all in all I do think Strand Hanson take their obligations seriously and so I remain faintly encouraged that they allowed 'that' comment through again. I'm certain this merest hint of positivity won't prove popular this weekend so apologies if I don't reply to any hate mail :) I'm currently isolating with my family but looking out the window at a (for once) sun drenched autumn garden my thoughts are with folk having to do it in more confined spaces. GLA

Teaye what do you make of Strand Hanson letting the 'value event' comment through again. The reason I ask is they've been very thorough with us in the past. I'm thinking about the speeding ticket when we were still below the broker's valuation (though I know things had run further on JSE), there was also the suspicion we were ticked off for shouting about mineralisation pre-assay in 2019. I'm hesitant to be positive about anything at the moment but they have a reputation to protect and they've let this through again, is that a glimmer......?

The burying bad news on a Friday theory is more a hangover from the days when it was only about print journalism and early Friday deadlines. All the gruesome details that you would expect from a mining explorer with no income are there in plain sight for everyone to see and react as they wish in the next trading session. Seems like we'll all continue to be talking about the soddin 'value event' for the forseeable. So it's either an incredibly careless bit of cut and past from the HYR's, a defiantly bullish statement of confidence from the CH or an unbelievably insensitive reiteration of a failed strategy. I'm sure others can add to the list.....

AH advisory role terminated, no traditional comment of thanks , wonder if that turned ugly?

Rumours of MC's demise greatly exaggerated - he's just reiterated the "Value Event" comment, what the heck!!

.......Unfortunately every time we get to the end there are double the amount of carriages.....

It's been well below 5p and up to almost almost 30p intraday on the current shares in issue so an even more stomach churning rollercoaster :)

Ha ha just received an invitation to be the new EUZ accountant - they must like my work!

I think it was £320 cash to acquire Goldquest hence Toral, plus the historic royalties due to Lundin shouldn't be forgotten though I'm assured that these are baked into the economic report.
On a wider note folks the board has been pretty civilised given the recent disappointment so I think let's put the crowing to one side. Yes Bobby was always negative and cautioning about placements but we also heard about every single top up along the way. The same with Highside, constant negativity then news that they're in and then topping up so the disguise was a very thin veil, but no problem you had your fun with it let's move on, I've been more negative of late but have also been very bullish in the past so am happy to take my share of humble pie. We've been talking all year about the obscurity of only been financed for 'certain key......' (you know, I don't need to finish.....) so in the light of that and as the 'value event' comment became more and more flaky I have topped up and feel let down that it's the same miserable method of keeping this going yet again. To be fair to LR I have pressed him on what it meant and have never been told anything other than it is a statement of strategy and not a promise so my decision to top up, my risk, my mistake. That doesn't mean I / we also have a right to expect better from management. As I mentioned yesterday MC was talking about us having non-dilutive options as long ago as Dec 19 so we can't be too hard on ourselves for being guilty of optimism bias when on one hand we've been expressing concerns about funds and then being tempted to get in the market yet again. As most of us need the Board to find a practical path out of this, a less combative approach to debate on here might be more helpful so I'm happy to try and play my part in that having enjoyed a right old ding dong in the past. Lastly it seems there are going to be changes and the new investors will be visibly active, not sure exactly what that means as yet but it's ludicrous in the current market that we can't find better funding solutions for a quality asset so I guess this group must agree and see an opportunity.

36 code, Billy Twelvetrees buying?