Member Info for Spikeyj

Hi crypto, in my PJs now with mug of ovaltine, climbing the wooden hill to bedfordshire, but as i go, i just wondered, did EUA attempt to explain *why* putin’s war in ukraine meant they didn’t want to publish the DFS?? — it doesn’t make sense to me as a rationale.

[21:24, lol, gecko not a fan of free speech, i see. odd from such a maga fanboy.]

(if you think it’s OK for people to claim now that EUA definitely does have something, simply because it could in theory eventually be revealed in an unpublished DFS, then presumably wilco and friends could equally well claim that EUA has vast amounts of rocking horse poo and unobtainium.)

night, all honest and polite folks.

(on a slightly different note, Treadingcarefully, what do you think about the company now claiming that they don’t want to publish the DFS because of the war, when the previous explanation bandied about on this chatboard has been that the russian state won’t allow the company to publish the DFS? … amusing imv how the story has changed, but the rampers all seem to have developed a selective amnesia about that)

(? do you seriously think that wilco has some kind of insider access to the unpublished DFS, and is choosing to reveal previously unpublished price-sensitive info to the world on LSE’s chatboard, that the company itself has kept secret in all its RNSs??)

Treadingcarefully, this company describes itself in its own RNSs and reports in terms of the metals it mines.

take a look back at the RNS history see what metals it names (allowing yourself a little chuckle about the inconsistencies regarding osmium and ruthenium).

there has been *zero* publicised evidence whatsoever that EUA has any rare earth metals —> but wilco claimed specifically at 11/4, 11:58, that “EUA DO have rare earth metals…”.

—- ? so what evidence was wilco basing that specific claim on?

…. but no reply from wilco about his rare earth metals claim. ah well.

so far as i can see from the RNS history etc, wilco and gecko were just making blatantly dishonest, false claims about EUA having rare earth metals.

but since it’s always possible to overlook something in this busy world, i figure it’s usually best & fair to give people an opportunity to explain what their evidence is, before concluding that they are simply deliberate liars seeking to mislead others.

Not too much to say in short-term, i think. well managed company, with real and sound underlying business, but (a) very out of favour as trump and friends sneer at renewables and net zero, and (b) looming risks of global recession make markets nervous about demands from energy (of any source).

peaceful board to snooze on in the meantime.

Hi wilco, now that you’ve popped back in again, please explain on what basis you claimed that EUA has rare earth metals? — previously, you made that claim then disappeared when asked to provide any evidence for that assertion.

08:43, hopeso, roger that.

22:02, “+Truce agreed”

deliberately false information.

C’mon, welcher, explain which institutions you had in mind, and what your evidence was for the claim, when you said at 19:41, “…many institutions were invested at many levels”.

(? or perhaps you were just fibbing? - plus ca change.)

20:28, the rampers are being very vague indeed about which institutional investors have stakes in EUA.

… looking back over the RNS history ….

1) back when the mcap was ridiculously over-inflated by the flagrant misuse of that fictional ACF ‘report’, some index tracker funds were obligated to hold some EUA as part of their basket … but there is zero evidence that they held EUA for any other reason, and zero evidence that they still hold any EUA shares now.

2) sanderson’s have had an interest, as the wonga loan provider of last resort ….but zero evidence that they have retained any significant current shareholding.

3) EUA used bucket shops to sell their placings onto flippers who forward sold the placing shares. … but those bucket shops are not ‘institutional investors’ who have held onto significant stakes in EUA for their own trading positions out of conviction / view on fundamental valuation.

…. no-one will know which non-directors might currently hold stakes under 3%. for all we know, warren buffet, winona ryder, lord lucan, shergar, spartacus, bez from the happy mondays and the ghost of jeffrey epston might all hold 1% or 2% of EUA … but then again, they probably don’t.

… if EUA rampers want to claim that institutional investors hold lots of sub 3% stakes in EUA shares, then imv it’s really up to them to evidence that, rather than burden of proof resting on sceptics.

ajimho.

…. still waiting for that list of investing institutions from the welcher … maybe he’s still having his tea.

anyway, off to binge on a box-set, see some of you tomorrow, no doubt.

Gecko, no suggestions from you why EUA assets would be worth more now, compared with their value during the failed FSP that led to zero asset sales?

… strange how you seem so interested in EUA yet so reluctant to discuss the company itself…

GLG, this is a share chat board, for discussing EUA, the company and it’s shares, open to all, whether holders or not.

its function is to allow people to ask questions / suggest possible answers relevant to EUA … that is precisely the point of it.

? why does it bother you so much that some people, myself included, don’t share your rosy view of EUA? — the posts on this board make no difference whatsoever to the underlying value (or lack of it) at this company.

[… here’s the list of current shareholders owning 3%+ … which institutions did you have in mind?]

https://www.eurasiamining.co.uk/investors/share-capital

“Many institutions were invested at many levels”

? which institutions have any significant currentinvestment? — please specify, with reference to RNSs, TR1s, declarations on the company’s own website.

Welcher, 19:38, EUA shareholders own shares in a particular company, with particular licences etc … the issue is not whether russia as a whole contains valuable minerals/metals, or even whether kola area still has such to exploit … the specific issue is what *this company* owns the rights to.

EUA is just a licence-squatting scavenger that ended up with the sloppy seconds (/thirds) that no-one else wanted.

[* ‘remotely similar’]