Member Info for Spikeyj

(my impression is that for many LTHs on this board, their faith that EUA has great assets tends to be a much harder belief to question than the issue of the BoD’s competence and comms; presumably because the latter could in principle be challenged / changed, but the assets simply are whatever they are.)

Also about harsher interest rate climate - worries world is facing higher rates for longer — projected value of the future earnings stream from AZN is lower there is a higher discount rate. so part of the drop from those middling results re lung cancer meds recently, but some re wider market too.

beechknot, another way of looking at all this? —> ‘When price rises some time they go back down’, lol.

Toffers 09:32: “… this is the only option left to youall, to call an EGM,”

ElE01 07:20: “The problem isn’t what the BoD want to do, it’s are the [sic] up to the task of doing it.”

two different issues in play. one concerns the competence & communication skills of the BoD, but the other is the underlying value of the company’s assets & business. (not entirely separate issues, but obviously even the universe’s best ever BoD can’t make a mining biz worth a fortune if it just doesn’t have decent grades & good project economics to begin with.)

so del’s questions are a very reasonable, sensible way to try to push the BoD to say more about what’s actually going on, and it’s a real pleasure to see this chatboard being used for thoughtful investing purposes.

but toffers is clearly wrong to say that calling an EGM is the ‘only option’; there is still an option for holders to choose to sell their shares into the market, if they think that the BoD will remain

too inept to get a good deal, or if they think that EUA’s underlying assets just ain’t that good.

this share is not yet suspended or delisted, so holders can still get some money back if they choose. some capital preservation is better than nil.

a possible snag with del’s excellent work putting together that list of questions is that it might simply encourage some shareholders to keep hanging on, longer than they should, in hope that the BoD’s answers will somehow solve the problems - i.e. waiting for those answers might influence some holders to keep putting off hard choices.

so a key question would be, does a holder still have full confidence in the BoD to respond positively to those questions *and also* have full confidence in the assets, or is it time just to walk away?

*NOT* in any way intended as advice to anyone, you’re all adults and it’s entirely up to you if you buy/sell/hold. gl & bw to all honest and polite folks.

Antha 07:16: “It was fraud the moment he took of all those poor pi’s for the relist knowing full well it was never going to happen.”

? was cloudtag all hunkdory and legit before that point?

(clumsy analogy, but if i am in an RTA, the other parties involved will want to see my motor insurance certificate, not just an insurance quote that i was given but never paid to take up.)

I have not really followed the detail about the litigation very closely, not my kinda thang.

as i understand it currently, some previous posters have said, EUA’s registrar (- but acting on behalf of EUA - ) asked Q to arrange some indemnity in order for a new share certificate to be issued.

Q then supposedly told EUA / registrar that it had secured an *offer* of indemnity insurance, with that quote being valid only for a short period. but that quote lapsed before EUA agreed to issue another certificate, and then after that Q was unable to secure a new quote for insurance.

? but surely, Q telling EUA that it had an *offer* of indemnity insurance — but where Q had not actually paid to take that up — is very different from Q showing EUA that it had indeed *obtained* an indemnity by accepting and paying the premium that the insurer was asking for ?

? surely, the onus would be on Q to have paid the premium and then shown EUA the insurance, rather than wait for EUA to tell Q whether they should pay that premium or not? …Q’s choice/problem, not EUA’s? (although i do think EUA should have told the market way earlier that litigation had been brought against it!)

happy to read any succinct correction /explanation of my possibly misunderstanding on this, genuine tia for such (‘though i will probably just switch off & not read on if answer takes the form of an extremely lengthy rant.)

It’s all under immensely strict NDAs! - but apparently everyone’s been told it’s a sale to JnJ!

yeah, right… ‘cos if you are under ultra-strict NDAs about a deal for a quarter of a billion dollars plus, with the buyer really really explicitly sensitive about the timing for announcements of the deal, then of course it’s going to perfectly fine to chitter-chatter to various pis about the buyer’s identity. that all makes sense…

“… improving Eurasia’s negotiating position…”

? - or getting ready to issue up to 500 million new shares, if they can work out how to wriggle round the sanctions to move the resultant funds legally?

(… last time round they had that kind of ‘negotiating position’, they issued many millions of new shares in placings and failed to sell any parts of the company or return anything to shareholders.)

“… pre-sale activities stage …”

in other words, they still haven’t sold it after years of trying.

i’ve been at pre-nup stage with winona for more than 20 years.

(& you could try asking them why they never published the full DFS for WK…)

I doubt the BoD will answer, but it would be interesting to know what kind of maturities they are holding in those US treasury bonds / notes as cash equivalents. longer dated bond prices moving quite differently to short dates in current global economic climate.

Hi del. your list of questions looks good.

#3 at 1:29 needs small reframe as a question to the BoD rather than statement (as they don’t have to ‘answer’ a statement.)

same tweak for #17.

re #15, it’s fair enough to ask when the BoD will review and offer their own thoughts on DFS, but i’d suggest it’s even more important to ask when they will publish the entire MT DFS contents, so that anyone (not just them) can read, analyse and comment on them independently of the BoD’s own view. … and if they are not intending to publish the DFS now, why not?

Pwlx 11:16: “WK DFS approval was two months before we found out what is said…”

? did EUA ever publish the full DFS contents re WK?

apologies if i’m just having another senior moment and overlooking something, tia to anyone who can point me to the link /RNS where the full WK DFS contents can be seen.

“We all know that Amit has stated the agreement is with JnJ…”

? why do you say that? - nothing in the public domain at all to that effect, and certainly nothing on cloudtag’s website about it. if amit’s been telling people that in 1:1 calls, it makes a bit of a mockery of the repeated claims on the website about NDAs, doesn’t it?

I’ve heard before that ‘quite soon’ is roughly half a ‘shortly’.

Jolly good, that seems clear enough, £200 bet it is between you. for clarity, was i remembering correctly that the cut-off date is 1st sept 2023?

Think his brother died more than a decade ago (brendan, not wulfstan)

“… will be made by during week ending 7th July 2023. The Company is working diligently to consider an earlier announcement date.”

- all that ‘considering’, but nowt yet. c’mon amit, crack on!

? serious or joking? - hard to tell in print sometimes. atb.

Mr_wolfe, out of interest, i remember that you and nuffin agreed a £100 charity bet about the EUA’s asset sale being done by this september (1st, if I recall correctly?) - he said it will happen by then, you said it wouldn’t.

i think you asked him if he wanted to double the size of the bet having seen the AR RNS. i wanted to ask, did you get a reply from nuffin about that, or is the bet still only for £100?