Member Info for Spikeyj

good morning A1EX. one guess only please, so which
do you think is more likely overall at c.o.b., 45p or 15p?

(all bets null & void if no return from suspension)

lamtree 0.25p
Spikeyj 0.75p
jarosg 0.81p
Aubrey 3.1p
Buckeye 3.6p
Mincho 4.7p
wasarunner 4.9p
D_W_Fleas 5.6p
MarkA8178 6.35p
Numbers 7.37p
Harts 8.6p
Smiler888 9.3p
Moneymaker2015 9.8p
Krispy 10p
Antha 10p
TheBeastofBodmin 10p
RR1889 10.7p
Musso74 10.8p
bluenotred 11p
nathdomb 11p
Pompeyrod 11.7p
B1ll 12p
stockdale 12p
DIMITRYsCOUSIN 12p
belstaff 12.2p
tcxman 12.2p
drthomas 15p
Thesharpercarper 15p
8thOctrecovery 15.2p
ItsAllBalls 16p
pakstarr 16.8p
squashman 17.5p
Dale02 18.9p
kuffer72 19p
Aandi 20p
mornington-oz 20.8p
Theroller 21.5p
Boosh 21.6p
Tillywhiz 22p
Herbie53 25p
bry4n 27p
lfc2020 28p
Torham 29.75
lbye 30p
D0berman 30.6p
Alansugareatyour 32p
Romek 32p
Illbetabuck2 33p
Emmystar 34p
Watson003 34.5p
Oilandga 36p
avo333 37p
Pradameinhof 48p
littlebricks 62p
Seadogsteve 72.4p
GeckoLovesGreed 80p+
Chrisparker1981 £1.20
chriso66 £1.25
Weathergeek £9.00
DanielC43R £9.18

no problemo. stay well and be lucky/make money.

sure, np.

A1EX, so far as I’m aware, people can’t do ‘typo
correct’ on posts already made on lse’s website,
(though that is possible on some competitor sites.)

hi RMR, i wouldn’t put it so definitely... i.e. I’m not ‘stating’ that they will
announce a new nomad, simply that i am guessing that they probably will.

my own guess for next week,

- i do think they will announce a new nomad
- i think they will announce a BoD resignation
- i think they will clarify the CITIC ‘relationship’
- i think the shares will then resume trading.

( 2 & 3 above as part of conditions from new nomad.)

just my own speculation.

23:11 - no view on that, doesn’t clarify CITIC relationship.

22:46 - that doesn’t say anything at all about CITIC involvement.

23:15 - EUA doesn’t just get to choose to stay suspended if the stated
reason for suspension has been resolved. it is a very understandable
priority within AIM regulation that companies should not be suspended
any longer than necessary. it’simportant that investors are able to trade.

23:05 - if that quote from the RNS *last* year explained the ‘relationship’ with
CITIC sufficiently, then the shares would not have been suspended *this* year.

daily exercise calls. i will repost that list of projects share prices
COB later, in readiness for another exciting week ahead with EUA.

... OK, one last post for this evening ...

angry wife: “so what the f*** have you been up to?”

sweating husband: “i am willing to clarify that i have been having some
conversations with the blonde secretary, not the red-headed secretary.”

wife, no less angry: “but what do you mean, having conversations?”

(knowing which particular secretary the man has been having conversations
with doesn’t really clarify at all the nature of that relationship, does it?)

meanwhile, vino beckons, a domani.

... put it this way, given the last RNS, what do you think is
the nature of the relationship is between EUA and CITIC?

“conversations” ... clear, i think not.

no, i don’t think it was.

carpfisher, i think it is quite likely that there are
at least ‘one or two’ insiders posting here... jmv.

“.... help me fill in the blanks here ...”

i dunno, PP. I’m just watching with interest to see if such answers emerge :)

it was certainly convenient that the rising share price helped get some cash in
from warrants, wasn’t it? maybe EUA will finally explain what’s really going on
through RNS, or maybe we’ll eventually learn from regulators, or a new nomad.

there will certainly be at least some news soon, eh.

“The only logical conclusion they haven’t fully clarified a relationship with a CITIC [sic] is that an NDA prevents them from doing so ...”

nope. some other explanations are plausible too, altho’ perhaps less palatable.

hi carpfisher.

i expect that there are at least one or two posters on this board who
could answer that question. but i don’t think that they want to. jmv.

“... following social media speculation ...”

EUA made a lot of tweets about banks, didn’t they?
i guess that probably fuelled quite a bit of speculation.
- which contributed to a pretty impressive s/price rise.

wonder why they won’t clarify the relationship with CITIC...

thanks for the link, and to others for their comments.

still seems, so far as i can see, that >1 month without
a nomad leads to delisting. H happy to see other links
if others can spot something specific about that issue.

i have noticed some posters suggesting that if EUA does not manage
to secure another nomad by the end of may, rather than automatically
becoming delisted, they could ask for an extension of the time allowed
to get a replacement nomad because of the covid-19 situation. i have
not noticed any change to the regulations that would permit that, altho’
i am aware AIM are allowing stuff like not having to do full on-site visits.

does anyone have a good link to the special arrangements
that AIM regulation are permitting because of covid-19? tia.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/will-desperate-times-put-oil-dividends-on-hold-z9td5z63s?shareToken=ba24b1f930e6b245bd45d56342ad250f