Member Info for TheMadStork

As has been repeatedly explained (See the "Blackrock's pile" thread), Blackrock's purchases and sales are entirely automated and do not reflect their opinion of the value of EUA.

Please quote where it says UBS are working on a "no deal no fee" basis. No IB in the world would ever agree to such terms as there is absolutely no guarantee of any transaction completing, no matter how much of a slam dunk it seems. A CEO could get up on the wrong side of the bed and boom deal's off with no recourse.

It's standard practice to have a *success fee*, but that's effectively a bonus paid on deal completion.

I'd suggest it would look no different if in fact nothing was going on and nobody is interested (at this price anyway). For those saying "UBS and DLA Piper would not still be there if there was no transaction", I can guarantee you that bankers and lawyers will happily stay as long as their retainer is being paid. Why wouldn't they? It's money for nothing.

At some stage the Takeover Panel will step in and force EUA to issue an update either way.

If someone puts in a formal offer under the FSP then that has to be RNSed whether the board like it or not. They are of course free to recommend that shareholders vote against it. However, given the share structure here, it would be pointless for anyone to put in a bid that didn't have the support of the board, or more specifically DS and his mates.

95 million as at 30 November. The revised agreement with LaFarge won't kick in til January, which I assume is when the $20m will be paid.

That video is from July 2019

https://www.**********.co.uk/articles/q-a-with-dmitry-suschov-of-eurasia-mining-eua--c4a8e60/

There is 2m odd mostly C2 resources at Monchetundra. Anything more is highly speculative and has not been independently verified.

There is just over 2moz PGM of state booked resources, of which the vast majority is C2/inferred. The 40m number bandied about has not and cannot be independently verified without a massive drilling campaign.

CITIC are on a success fee basis, but they will also be charging a retainer. This is standard practice.

"FSPs don't just drag on with lawyers and bankers involved if there is nothing to sell." Lawyers and bankers are more than happy to hang around as long as there is money to pay their retainers.

Actually I think it was 250bn rubles or US$340m

Also they once again emphasised organic growth. I understand people wanting NN to be interested in acquisitions, but it is simply not the case. Any NDA with EUA would be limited to that specfic deal and would definitely not require NN to mislead their own shareholders re general growth strategy.

I believe the actual figure is 250bn rubles, or about $340m

He's an NED; it's standard to hold multiple NED positions in addition to other jobs as they only do 20 odd days work a year. Him getting a new job means nothing either way, and if he was leaving EUA it would have had to have been RNSed immediately.

Rostec bought Barrick's license over the 12m oz for $60m

Sounds like a pretty sweet gig if you ask me. I've sent my CV off to every Massive Evil Shorter I can think of but unfortunately none will have me.

They cannot sell any even if they wanted to due to the FSP.

Right, except that none of the iShares (ie Blackrock) ETF index trackers with positions in EUA are equal weighted.

For example, the biggest individual ETF with a holding is the iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF

If you look here under 'Holdings' you will see it is not equal weighted:

https://www.ishares.com/us/products/244049/ishares-core-msci-eafe-etf

Amanensia is entirely correct. Index tracking is not a difficult concept to grasp. The holdings of index trackers in index components are only be affected by either:

A)Purchases/withdrawals from the tracker fund or

B)Changes to the composition of the index the fund is tracking.

Changes in the price of the index component itself (in this case EUA) has *no bearing whatsoever* on the holdings of index tracker funds. The only exception to this would be if EUA's market cap falls to the extent that it is booted out of the indices it has just been added into. In that case obviously the tracker funds would be forced to sell.

Mannamead: yes that's exactly right. Equally, Blackrock *buying* shares should not be taken as *good* news. Either way, their purchases are completely automated and Blackrock themselves hold no view either way.