Member Info for TheMadStork

The UK box office figures for January are looking disastrous, as are the US figures. Looking at around 50% of 2019 or 45% of 2020, which is especially bad since Jan 2022 has 5 weekends vs 4 for 2019/20.

What's going on here? Well just have a look and see if you can find an example of a listed company announcing it was up for sale and that there was a bidder, but providing no information on who is bidding, what they are bidding for or any guidance on price. For 28 months. With three placings. If you step back it is extremely obvious what has happened.

The market twigged that the rampy figures resource figures were a)Inferred and therefore worthless and b)Already known. In fact, the stricter JORC standards meant there was actually a reduction in what was already known from the P2 figures.

It also twigged that the dollar NPV was completely meaningless. Not sure how that could even be calculated tbh given that, as an Inferred resource, it is really impossible to give accurate cost and recovery figures.

Also, where's the sale update?

I mean, you can't blame the BoD for thinking they were onto a placing ramp winner here. The previous ramp RNS was also worded to make it sound like things matter that didn't, and that ramp managed a 150% spike in the space of a couple of weeks. This ramp has a big dollar figure in it, but the market seems to have actually twigged that it is entirely meaningless. I have to admit I'm surprised.

CINE are going to breach their debt covenants in June even if the judgement is magically reduced to $0 (it won't be). Debt for equity swap was inevitable even before today's news; this just means it needs to be done sooner and at a lower price. The equity is pretty much worthless here as you can see by the big discount the debt trades at.

You may not have noticed, but I don't think CINE are in much of position to bargain here.

Been buying gradually since the tender offer announcement as seemed like a decent place to park cash for a 12% return for 2 months holding. I didn't go all the way to 500k shares as thought there was a chance of scaleback but apparently it is now guaranteed that all holders under 500k will be tendered in full.

Still 5% pretty much risk free on offer in exchange for a month holding if anyone fancies it.

Brilliant news. Wish I'd bought more than I did pre suspension. Will be interesting to see what price the equity is raised at, but I imagine it will be at a significant premium.

When this is eventually over, there are going to be a lot of people kicking themselves about having missed some very, very obvious warning signs. Hindsight is 20/20, but just remember, one doesn't need to be Nostradamus to see that a sales process that includes three placings to raise cash is, shall we say, somewhat unusual.

You're absolutely right. My average is actually 28.8, 3.5k/point. First short went on at 40 but spreadex closed new shorts for ages and only reallowed them when the price was lower. They stopped allowing them again a while back so now AFAIK there is no way no open new shorts on EUA anywhere.

And re risks, my short is around 5% of my PF and I'm comfortable with a spike anywhere up to 40-45p. Since I believe there is literally zero chance of a sale, and any ramp spike will be placed into before 40p.

You trade enough AIM ****e, you are going to get quite a lot of longs wrong. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar.

I will say that I have never got a *conviction* short wrong, ever. And EUA is my highest ever conviction short. And since I started shorting at 40p, it's going pretty well so far.

There will never be a sale, there will be more placings, and the share price will eventually collapse sub 10p. I'll look to close between 5 and 10.

You all think there will be a sale for presumably 40p+. I'll bookmark this thread; let's see who is right in the end!

Er, EUA will be paying 75% of the auction value because they will be getting... 75% of the license.

And I would love to hear your reasoning as to why the auction value is somehow less than market value.

They have no obligation to release the full report. After all, the WK DFS was never released, likely because it shows WK to have a negative NPV.

If the full JORC report is not released then shareholders should be up in arms demanding it, since the only reason not to release it would be if the figures make unpleasant reading.

Then again, EUA holders have blithely accepted no less than three placings by a company supposedly on the verge of a huge sale, so I'm pretty sure most will be able to rationalize anything and everything, no matter how obvious a warning sign.

"There was a short diamond core drilling campaign at MT last year "

Please point to the RNS announcing this and a second one announcing assay results.

"EUA pay 75% of the expected auction value for the JV exploration areas not 75% of what value JORC says is there. "

??? The CPR will not express an opinion as to the monetary value of the resource. EUA will pay 75% of the auction value set by the state, which will be the market value of 75% of the license. Again, unless you can come up with some mechanism by which EUA could pay for their 75% and then turn around and sell it for more, ***the license transfers can only be value neutral**

"The basic logic behind buying exploration licenses is that through exploration they can become worth significantly more than the license ever cost. Their value at the point they are transferred to EUA is largely irrelevant, their potential future value is."

Completely agreed. And once EUA actually do some exploration work on the licenses, they may at some point be worth more than they paid for them. I absolutely acknowledge that. What I refuse to accept, however, is this absurd notion that the *current value and post license transfer value* of the JV is worth any more than the net cost of the option. Let alone tens or hundreds of million, or even billions. It's just completely nonsensical and delusional.

The JORC CPR cannot add a single net dollar in saleable value to EUA. There has been no drilling to expand the resource on licenses that EUA actually own, so the CPR can only restate what is already there.

And as we have just established, EUA do not own any the JV licenses and will have to pay market value for 75% of whatever JORC standard resource is there, bearing in mind that again, WA will simply be reclassifying existing Russian standard resources. There may well be a spike if the CPR is rampy enough, but basic logic and common sense tells you that it cannot change the fundamental market value of the company.

The cost of any drilling done by Rosgeo will be included the price they charge EUA for their 75%. Again, unless you believe that the Russian state will gift value to British PIs, then EUA will pay market value for their share of the licenses. Cannot understand why this is so hard for some to grasp.

The net value of the JV to EUA cannot exceed the value of the option, until such time as they
not only actually own the licenses, but have *added value beyond the price they paid for them*. This is basic, basic common sense.

That is to say, before any more work has been done to prove up reserves. There's no suggestion whatsoever that Polyus could have immediately sold their 75% for more than $2.7m to a third party.

And Polyus' interest 75% is worth more than $2.7m on market because...?

Right, but EUA will pay market price for their 75%, thereby making the transaction value neutral, ie EUA cannot immediately turn round and sell it for more than they bought it for. Unsure why so many seem to be having problems grasping this simple piece of maths.

So market price, then. Unless you believe that the Russian state is going to set the auction price such that any winning bidder could immediately turn round and sell the license interest for more than they bought it for? If you do believe that, then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.