Member Info for Spikeyj

Doug, i’m pretty doubtful anything will come of it, but if you can get a UK regulator onto amit’s case, good on you!

“… the conservative ACF value…”

? seriously?

Speaking kindly, the st vincent regulator is not exactly world famous for having sharp teeth used in defence of pis.

(UK regulators are pretty irrelevant in this situation imv … it’s just a tiny private, unlisted overseas registered company, not listed or trading or operating commercially in the UK).

Occam’s razor, amit ben-haim.

Perhaps the lottery analogy is quite a good one for shares like EUA; they are shares for gambling and gaming, rather than investment. (buying lottery tickets is not usually part of a balanced total return portfolio strategy, lol.)

have a nice weekend, all honest and polite folks.

… before the p&d, EUA had a DFS approved, but contents unknown to market …

… during the p&d, EUA still had a DFS approved, but contents still unknown to market …

plenty of excitement amongst the trader types, understandably given that it’s bagged this week, but no evidence so far of any meaningful commercial change to drive that.

(meanwhile, timing seems very helpful for CS re-election prospects, coincidentally.)

Seems to be very little recent chat about the company itself, or its prospects as an ‘investment’ (LOL!!!!) .. just personal insults back and forth, pointless.

i suspect amit is finding it slightly more challenging to find defensible wording for upbeat updates, after the unacknowledged retraction of the CIBS escrow funds claim, and after various pis apparently making reports to SFO, FCA, Actionfraud, financial ombudsman, etc etc. … I think he will find something to say something eventually, but perhaps being rather more circumspect. aimho.

It remains unclear — £1 billion was indeed being discussed in media as a possible bid, and maybe someone would bid up over that — but no public confirmation that any bid at all has been received, so it also remains possible of course that no-one will actually table any proper offer. … guess it will become a lot clearer at or before the capital markets day.

( meant to add, stonk, thanks as ever for your polite and on-topic responses tho’ our views on EUA clearly differ, appreciated.)

Stonk, i suppose what i am trying to comment on concerns apparent differences between pi vs wider market perceptions / calculation regarding risk levels and types, rather than risk appetite per se. atb.

Mizman, since when did ‘political correctness’ stop KSA, sultanate, chinese sovereign wealth proxies, rapacious london & NY hedgies, etc, etc, turning a fast (or even slow) buck? - lol!

— no shortage of professional and institutional investors in the west and elsewhere prepared to make their money from some very morally dubious enterprises.

Stonk, many pi posters here keep saying that they think worst case is 15p, 20p, etc. …. that is not about “appetite for risk”, that’s about perceived certainty of multi-bagging.

Mizman, EUA is a UK company, london listed, still actively trading — it remains perfectly possible for the vast majority of institutional & professional companies in the west and elsewhere to buy big wodges of EUA shares if they believe that will return them high profit.

10:46, hi stonk, no, i’m viewing the prevailing share price as a current best collective guesstimate by market as a whole of likely overall investment returns, weighted across the range of different outcomes & their perceived probabilities, weighted also by the timescales for those and the various kinds of cost of carry and opportunity cost different actors have.

Johnboi, jarv is certainly right that all sorts of outcomes are *possible*, and sometime miners etc hit the jackpot ( - remember the REM spike on lithium discovery?- ) but that’s different from how *likely* those different outcomes are. ….

…if it’s so completely “defo” that this share is worth a lot more than it’s currently being priced at by the wider market, then how come the equity analysts and mining specialists with folks like KSA, berkshire hathaway, norwegian sovereign investment fund etc etc haven’t spotted that and splurged on as many EUA shares as they can buy? — what do the optimist pis here know that KSA & their ilk don’t?

There seems to be a renewed flurry of posts from EUA optimists bandying around figures that they think the assets will eventually be sold for … too many to comment on individually, but a relatively common theme is along the lines of, maybe £1 a share payout is too much to hope for given putin’s war etc, but 40p - 60p is possible and likely, while 15p-20p would be a worst case scenario.

… but EUA is not a ‘secret’, unknown share that only a few in the world have ever heard of, with buy-in restricted to highly selected HNWI private offices, sovereign wealth funds, and private equity funds with the right connections. it’s a listed share on the london stock exchange, trading on AIM, has been for many years, with public accounts and updates via RNS & companies house etc, that’s been widely discussed and viewed for years across plenty of chatboards etc.

… so it seems rather odd that so many IDs posting on this board seem so certain that a worst case payout is going to be 15p+ per share, when the wider market is so very clearly assigning a very much lower weighted value ….

? why do the pis on this board think they are so much better at valuing russian mining companies than the wider professional investment community!?

Situation before the pump and dump: EUA said it had a DFS, but contents were not shared with the market.

situation during the pump and dump: EUA said it had a DFS, but contents were not shared with the market.

situation as the pump and dump subsides: EUA said it had a DFS, but contents were not shared with the market.

… simply having a DFS doesn’t change the quantity and quality of mining assets held by a company, nor does it change the project economics and viability. … the contents of a DFS, if ever published, would simply make clearer, for better *or* for worse, what the quality and financial viability are.

Day before yesterday, market didn’t know contents of the DFS …. i.e. what do the actual numbers say about the economic viability, or otherwise, of EUA ‘assets’?

& yesterday market still didn’t know contents of the DFS …

& today, market still doesn’t know contents of the DFS …

& tomorrow, market …

Crypto 17:50: “The board did state that the DFS added value to the asset at the time”

… but on the other hand, it’s never been clear what the value pre-DFS was… so if, for example, the real underlying value of EUA assets pre-DFS was tuppence in toto, then the board’s statement would still have been true even if the DFS had only added a ha’penny…

it’s not really ‘new news’ to know that there is a DFS, as the company had stated that long ago… the question is, what do the (detailed, numeric) contents of the DFS show about the economics of trying to mine? (a DFS might show that a.n.other mining company has astoundingly good economics and will make all its stake holders rich, but conversely a DFS might show that the economics of a project are lousy.)

As ever, issue should be what the DFS actually says, rather than whether there is one or not.

someone could obtain and publish a DFS concerning the precious metals under their aunt gertie’s allotment, but it would matter what the actual numbers are, good or bad.

( meanwhile, fund-raising in prospect before too long?)