Member Info for Spikeyj

Https://www.thetimes.com/article/0c6e895a-c849-4dbd-9f4c-b7e8121c7d2c?shareToken=226025b8eb3a315f0767d455faa5f544

&

https://www.thetimes.com/article/20fe5355-7c12-45d0-97a1-fc651fd92cde?shareToken=daa333abc1e28ddf553c3f0a2e4e9976

[Soz, father’s post at 00:15, not 01:15.]

Good post from father hackett at 01:15.

interesting imv to note how father invites folks to consider the effects of PGM prices on the mining economics, whereas by contrast at 19:01 yesterday sean was trying to argue that REM prices were especially significant for EUA.

PGMs vs REMs … which matter more for EUA?

… from my perspective, ohmni, asking someone a straightforward on-topic question about a on-topic post someone else has made about the company, on a share chat board, ain’t trolling.

it’s simply discussing the company, which is meant to be the point of a share chat board.

if someone doesn’t want to chat about EUA, they don’t need to be on this board, nobody is forcing anyone to take part.

(or if you just don’t like reading my posts, please do feel free to filter me, it’s free and easy to do, and i can assure you i won’t mind.)

night all, enjoy your weekends.

Ohmni, i was asking sean about a post that he made at 17:43, in which he asserted something about analyst consensus targets.

i don’t know which analysts sean had in mind when he wrote that post. that was why i was asking him.

(not sure why you are so certain that you know which analysts sean had in mind, unless that’s a duplicate ID of yours?)

Ohmni, why are you trying to make something of nothing? … i asked a very simple question, who are the analysts who provided those targets?

if you can name ‘em, great, let’s hear it. & if you can’t, you can’t.

[one of the many very dodgy things about EUA, from my perspective, is the utter lack of published detailed *costs* … rampy folks on these boards do love to chat about assets ‘in the ground’, but when considering mining businesses, it actually does matter how feasible it is to precisely locate, extract and process, and what the realistic costs are of doing such.]

Sean is claiming that it’s significant that rare earth metal prices have “massively increased” … but what quantities of proven rare earth metal reserves do EUA have, and what has been published about actual costs to extract … published DFS details, anyone?

REM prices … well, gosh…

…. and just what currently proven rare earth metal reserves does EUA have the rights to?

& what are the publicly declared costs and feasibility for mining those out of the ground? (y’know, costings from published DFS, that kinda numbers thang)

Ohmi, nope. i asked who those analysts are? — the link you posted does not answer that.

(…& if you read it yourself, it also seems to be referencing predictions made back in 2022…)

Lol, and which ‘analysts’ are those?? - name the names…

Largely the former is my guess.

EUA …”it’s a perception game”

one of the most accurate posts on this board ever.

(never mind the fundamentals, eh.)

Added, small, waiting for 250s now for a little more.

If i see 230s, adding larger.

Crypto, i do think there is something genuinely different underway, namely that the clock is imv indeed ticking for some kind of resolution to the current war in ukraine (i don’t say ‘peace’, since i think much more likely heading for some kind of simmering, bitter, highly problematic freezing of frontlines / cessation of hot kinetic action). trump’s ascendancy changes the game on that, whether one likes it or not .

i think the recent price action on EUA is largely driven by the story that some kind of impending resolution of the war in ukraine will then lead to an EUA asset sale.

my own view is, that EUA was unable to sell its ‘assets’ for any significant sum before the way because the assets are actually fairly low quality, and i do not believe that a cessation of kinetic hostilities in the ukraine will make even the slightest difference to the underlying value of EUA’s so called assets — i.e. they were worth b****** all before the war, and they will be worth b***** all after the war.

but of course, price vs value are two very different things!

night all.

No rant, sj, just factual.

& my own consistent & honest opinion.

(… waiting to see how the fund-raise will be organised, as the cash drains away, with that outstanding loan to be re-financed in due course … but placing/raise maybe still a few weeks yet. popcorn & deckchair ready)

That was a nice day.

… just when i was almost about to feel a tad jealous of GSK, phew.

11:57, yup,

zero news update,

zero mining (loss-making mine, therefore mothballed since operating it actually loses them even more money when they try to dig anything up)

zero asset sales, after many years, including well *before* the war

cash running out, still zero news yet on how they will raise more cash to keep the lights on and keep the snouts in the trough.

plus ca change.

Iknownuffin 16:55: “past performance isn’t an indication of future performance.”

… thereby illustrating a rather typical double standard on this chatboard amongst the rampers; i.e. Iknownuffin wants to argue that it’s totally irrelevant that EUA could not sell any assets at all even *before* the war, as that’s ‘in the past’ … but plenty of the rampers on here like to refer back to the heights the share price here once reached, back in the 30s/low 40s, as though that specific kind of past performance somehow is very relevant indeed.

doublethink, lol.

Soz, typo, meant, “EUA couldn’t sell its assets *before* the war.”