Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Eureka Mining LSE:EKA London Ordinary Share GB0033844118 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 50.00p 0.00p 0.00p - - - 0 05:00:10
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
- - - - 13.33

Eureka Mining (EKA) Latest News

Real-Time news about Eureka Mining (London Stock Exchange): 0 recent articles
More Eureka Mining News
Eureka Mining Takeover Rumours

Eureka Mining (EKA) Share Charts

1 Year Eureka Mining Chart

1 Year Eureka Mining Chart

1 Month Eureka Mining Chart

1 Month Eureka Mining Chart

Intraday Eureka Mining Chart

Intraday Eureka Mining Chart

Eureka Mining (EKA) Discussions and Chat

Eureka Mining Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
15/9/201113:58Eureka Energy (on the ASX)25
20/12/200615:57Eureka Mining, the prospects are good.2,060
19/12/200617:04Eureka Mining Plc EKA AIM387
07/11/200608:05EUREKA KA KA262
12/10/200606:58An idiot's guide to EPT Disclosures-

Add a New Thread

Eureka Mining (EKA) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Eureka Mining trades in real-time

Eureka Mining (EKA) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
30/9/2016
09:20
Eureka Mining Daily Update: Eureka Mining is listed in the sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker EKA. The last closing price for Eureka Mining was 50p.
Eureka Mining has a 4 week average price of - and a 12 week average price of -.
The 1 year high share price is - while the 1 year low share price is currently -.
There are currently 26,656,710 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 0 shares. The market capitalisation of Eureka Mining is £13,328,355.
07/11/2006
10:14
papalpower: susibe, they can, but CER can claim their loans back in 4 weeks, and if EKA defaults then CER "could" claim assets. The incestuous relationship between CER and EKA has come out to play, and so EKA holders have been screwed. JSB transfers over to CER. EKA employees have their pensions and benefits retained. Institutions will get their payback at a later date, either through VOG or CER or whatever with discount placings or special deals. EKA holders get mugged, and must now wait for their money back by holding CER. CER holders have done very well, but their share price has been walked down to offer something for poor EKA holders to look forward to. All in all EKA holders have been mugged for the moment, that its, BUT its best imo to hold through and get your shares as in 12 months time CER will have DFS for Chelyabinsk.
05/11/2006
07:11
papalpower: dave, events in Kyrgyz did not have any effect on stocks where the company is working there in Kyrgyz, its not even really major news. With regards to CER, the incestous relationship is already in the price, which is why the present EKA price in no way represents the true value of the assets. When Kevin Foo has openly said at 90p for EKA it grossly undervalued based on its assets, then thats quite clear. If he could get away with a below 90p offer after stating those things, well....do you really think so ? The fall on Friday is already explained, "badtime" has already said in for a quick turnaround, but the bid is dragging on a bit so sold out. With JSB back this coming week, firstly lets hope he has news of more Moly sales, and secondly if more Moly sales are done then we might get news on the bid not long after. To be honest, EKA has an asset producing revenue, decent revenue, in Skorshoye Moly plant. If they so wanted they could refinance that to alleviate short term cash worries. Everyone will have different opions, and yes CER is a public company and cannot go around dishing out cash on an unsecured basis, but I do hope all the loose ends are being tied up for a bid from CER sooner now rather than later. Do not forget 3 reports have to be written, EKA Nomad, CER Nomad and Indpenedent review on the worth of EKA. That is not possible unless they travel out and assess the assets and agreements and local conditions. That takes time, and is hopefully the time passed now.
03/10/2006
09:57
effortless cool: konil, You're missing the point rather. EKA owe CER money. CER can demand repayment of that money at any time, but EKA don't have any cash to repay it with. If that happens EKA are bust, pretty much immediately. I agree there's little doubt that EKA's assets are worth much more than the current share price, but that doesn't matter unless EKA can secure adequate working capital very quickly. To my mind, CER have EKA over a barrel. Al this talk about whether the takeover is at 175p or 200p, or whatever, is pure fantasy. Unless EKA can get alternative financing then EKA shareholders will end up giving away their assets for much less than they are worth. Given EKA is chaired by Foo and he put the EKA directors in place, I don't feel confident that the EKA Board will be working in the best interests of shareholders. Certainly, the current siuation puts a different perspective on the removal of David Bartlett. I've sold my entire holding for a substantial loss. EC
24/9/2006
14:37
stanfparker: Article from Thursday's Shares Magazine : Takeover target Eureka mining (EKA:AIM) has blamed its nominated adviser Cenkos for influencing a 40% slump in its share price in a single day last week. The mining company says Cenkos's choice of wording in a stock market announcement had shocked investors, as it 'wrongly' implied the company was on the verge of collapse unless suitor Celtic Resources (CER:AIM) succeeded in acquiring the business. The shares fell to an all-time low of 53p. Eureka 'says Cenkos had-insisted on a strict financial warning in the disclosure to the market of early stage talks with Celtic, despite the miner having just sold its first batch of molybdenum in Kazakhstan for $1.25 million. The announcement included the words, 'If further funds cannot be raised, in the absence of asset sales or a successful offer for the company, there can be no guarantee that the company will be able to continue to trade.' Chief executive Jonathan Scott-Barrett says Cenkos had stopped Eureka from announcing the concentrate sale until two days later when the cash was in the bank. He says, 'I'm upset that shareholder value 'has been completely wiped because of the uncertainties from the RNS announcement.' On 14 September, Eureka finally went public 'with the concentrate sale from its joint venture with state uranium company, KazAtomProm. Although the proceeds will be used to cover operating costs and repay local bank debt, market sources say the $1.25 million sale `certainly do not suggest a company in trouble given that it is in production'. Eureka disclosed to the markets in May that it would seek to raise:' additional finance this year. Scott-; Barrett says the company now has `a number of options' under consideration and is confident securing the necessary funds. Barclays Capital has promised. advice on financing Eureka Chelyabinsk copper/gold project in Southern Russia, once the company has carried out the bankable feasibility study, which is due to be completed by late 2007.: Celtic has already provided a secure loan of $1.65 million to Eureka. Institutional investors saw a buying opportunity following last week's slump, including share purchases from RAB Capital and Evolution Securities. Cenkos said it had `put the matter behind it' and was committed to having a good working relationship. A spokesperson said, Eureka has very attractive assets, notwithstanding its funding position. Cenkos remains supportive of the business and its management.'
15/9/2006
10:57
konil: still think it was just a huge pr disaster with an outside chance of a more sinister reading in that it may have been orchestrated for celtic's benefit. even the recent minews article is headed "Eureka Mining's Share Price Stymied By Its Advisers With Bid In Offing". just think where the share price might be were it not for that, especially after the moly news we had yesterday. with shorskoye revenues of $30m p.a. from 2007 and chely npv $179m, and the company not after all facing bankruptcy, any bid will have to properly account for that value. assuming there are c.28m shares (fully diluted?) then figures of 70p and 120p etc. just don't reflect those project values but they do show how far eka's perceived worth has fallen in investor's minds. let's hope that rab capital who appear to be the only significant institutional holder (is that correct?) can act as the guardian for all of us.
12/9/2006
09:14
jpeacock: James T Kirk - You start making bad investment calls when emotions creep in. If you are an investor in EKA I'm sorry that you have been caught out by their poor management decisions (who else is responsible, certainly not you)? The thread has been very interesting as a passive reader btw, just a shame that again almost everyone is proven wrong no matter how good their research, posts and articulate / rationale investment arguments. The facts remain today that there is only a fictitious negotiation; there is unlikely to be a "white knight" appearing to take over EKA at a premium; the FOO man is only negotiating with himself! That's bad news if you hold EKA. Today's RNS will have scared everyone off going near this company other than cheeky offers for licenses perhaps? Maybe there will be a bit of a rally short term but over the next few weeks the share price is going one way (and it isn't up). If I were a shareholder I'd take the hit and move on, at least I'd salvage some cash. I'm not an investor in EKA, never have been and never will be (make your own mind up why that is). I'm sure there are a number of small PIs on this board who will look at today's share price fall in disbelief, if there is anything we can do to help them in their future investment decisions then it is only fair to do that. Good luck and of course DYOR.
25/7/2006
08:58
tigerinvest: Novicedave: some more (but relatively old) info on Ambrian: http://www.minesite.com/storyFull5.php?storySeq=3265 Feature Story Date: January 26, 2006 Eureka Mining Moving Fast At Both Chelyabinsk And Shorskoye. By Jack Hammer What with recurring illness and deal-making across central Asia, Eureka Mining chief executive David Bartley didn't have much time to stay in touch with the City last year, except when he was announcing big deals. But although the newsflow was sometimes a bit thin, those long hard hours on the road are beginning to pay off. Eureka is shaping up nicely – full scale mining on the fifty per cent owned Shorksoye molybdenum project in Kazakhstan is imminent, and a pre-feasibility on the Chelyabinsk copper project in Russia is underway. So, late in December Mr Bartley promised to pay more attention to the deskbound folk in London, to be around more, and to provide regular updates. He was off alcohol back then, on account of his recurring bouts of malaria, putting him for the time being - and somewhat unusually - on a level with Joe Nally, the mining money-man at Cenkos who is a close ally, and who has given up the booze for January. But some resolutions are harder to keep than others - David Bartley is not currently in town, and nor is he in touch. One mining analyst is under the impression that he's lying in hospital in Australia with another attack of malaria, but a PR for Eureka eventually establishes that he's in Moscow – "so, sorry, can I get back to you in two weeks?" Fair enough – it's not so long since Mr Bartley visited London to update press and investors. But he also spent a fair bit of time on that visit moaning about weakness in Eureka's share price. There are moves afoot to rectify that weakness from the broking angle, but if Mr Bartley wants the shares to firm up someone needs to be here pushing the story full time. It's not clear either what exactly Mr Bartley is doing in Russia. With any luck though, it's something to do with the pre-feasibility study on Chelyabinsk, which is due to be delivered in the first quarter of this year. Chelyabinsk is a copper-gold project with a total resource 687 million tonnes at 0.7 % copper equivalent in the Russian C1 and C2 categories. Those numbers are derived from three deposits within Chelyabinsk, and a JORC calculation has been made – and verified by Snowden - for Miheevskjoye, the largest. It shows 405 million tonnes at average grades of 0.4 % copper and 0.22 g/t gold in the inferred category. "It's not world class", says Richard Chase, who continues to provide analysis for broker Ambrian, in spite of a recent move up the foodchain there, " but it's not bad either. It should be cheaper to develop than Montericco's bigger Rio Blanco project in Peru for example." Last year Eureka signed up Barclays Capital to act as advisor on financing. Barclays chief Gerard Holden went out to take a look for himself, was favourably impressed, and on current plans could be looking to put the finance in place before the year is out. Post tax, assuming 60 per cent debt finance, and on a 15 per cent discount, Ambrian's Mr Chase values Chelyabinsk at US$105 million. "This isn't going to be a £200 million company", he says, before adding, with one eye on future developments, "at least not on these assets". Eureka is not a one trick pony, however. In the summer David Bartley pulled off a deal in which the company gave up 50 per cent of Shorskoye in exchange for access to the plant and processing facilities of local operator Kazatomprom. That's a lot of a project to give away, but the point was to get producing fast. Molybdenum won't stay above US$30/lb forever – the long-term average is below US$10/lb. Ambrian's Richard Chase says: "I wouldn't be surprised if Shorskoye is all done and dusted in three years". But over those three years he forecasts nearly US$45 million in net cash flow, assuming a (currently) conservative US$20/lb molybdenum price. Those are reasonable numbers, and should sustain Mr Bartley nicely on his travels, as he works up other early stage exploration assets and hunts down more deals. Companies featured in this Story Eureka Mining Plc (AIM-EKA)
21/7/2006
13:11
novicedave: A few of my notes, and my rationale for adding 2.5k shares just now (not yet reported, oddly). Chelyabinsk, Kentau and Dostyk have had $22.7m spent on mineral exploration between them. Shorskoye, rather than being capitalised as an 'intangible asset' is classed as an 'investment' due to the 50:50 JV structure (EKA do not have a controlling interest so rather than a subsidiary the JV is classed as an associated company); its value (that is, the acquisition and exploration costs for EKA's share of the JV) is reported at $16.9m. The company also has tax losses worth $850,000 which can be considered as an asset. Thus, a simplistic valuation would be $40.45m (or £21.9m, a share price of 83p). This is now my limit buying price, i'll keep adding whenever i have profits from elsewhere up to a limit i have set myself for small punts like EKA. Dostyk and Kentau, in my opinion, are of virtually no 'potential' value to EKA at the moment, they are 5+ years away from production and so should only be considered as potential for the future (beyond that provided by Shorskoye and Chekyabinsk). Chelyabinsk, on the other hand, is well progressed as an exploration licence. The economic scoping study (using low metals prices of $1/lb copper and $400/oz gold) suggested an NPV (10%) to Eureka of $257m back in February (so $266m currently), assuming a late 2008 start. I have gone through the numbers and they are conservative enough for me (which is saying something). This valuation would, of course, ignore the remaining risks which will have to be negotiated to get the project to production, as well as the dilution which will be necessary pre-construction (i.e: this summer's rights issue). To account for this I assign a risk-discount for each of the remaining components which will lead to production (Bankable resource, due now, 10%; pre-feasibility, now, 10%; BFS, Q107, 25%; Financing and construction contracts, Q207, 30%; Construction, sales contracts and commissioning, Q408, 35%), so for me a fair valuation right now for Chelyabinsk would be $71m. As for the dilution, the maximum (without an EGM) has been set by the company at 25% of the current issued share capital. This should be plenty to progress to BFS at Chelyabinsk. Shorskoye was 'producing first concentrates from commissioning' on the second of May this year, leaving only two remaining risks (the completion of commissioning and sales contracts), which I will discount for at 25%. There have been significant changes to the project since the Fox-Davies report last June, so I did a simplistic 3-year 10% NPV valuation myself (assuming moly prices $20 this year, $15 next, $12 next, sub-economic thereafter) which came to $22.1m, giving a fair current valuation of $16.6m. So, for me, a fair valuation for Eureka at the moment would be $105.6m (£57m). Assuming the dilution is 25% when funds are required later this summer that would give a fair share price of £1.72. That's a potential reward of 135% over today's buy price, even before the company progresses its projects further! There is no news in the public domain which would explain the disparity between the share price and a fair valuation, and judging by the volume on which the price has been going down there is no information circulating privately which is causing people to sell. In addition to this the directors hold over 2.5m shares between them and have not sold any (or at least have not informed the market of any sales). I'm reasonably confident, therefore, that there is nothing amiss (bar the usual delays as with any miner); with the impending ramp-up of news-flow (pre-FS and JORC for Chelyabinsk, sales agreements and completion of commissioning at Shorskoye are overdue) I consider the current price a good opportunity to open some positions. NOVICEDave
01/4/2006
15:43
tamref: Mattybuoy, I agree that the Chely copper project appears to be massively discounted at present and will remain so until copper production actually begins. Although in the months ahead, we should see Chely having a progressively larger influence on the share price. Why? (1) Well, moly production should be well underway in a few weeks demonstrating that EKA has the ability to operate a mining project profitably. (2) Two feasibility studies are due this year which should start the market salivating at the prospect of mega profits from Chely. (3) People will begin to realise that EKA and CER are in very different situations. Firstly, it appears that EKA now have 100% ownership of the copper project unlike CER who had 50% or 20% of Nez (depending on who you speak to) and had problems trying to acquire the remainder. Nez is a giant deposit, one of the largest in Russia and thus featured prominently on the radar screens of miners and politicians alike. By constrast, the Chely copper project is much smaller in terms of size and potential value. Thus, the CER stake in NEZ was always going to be at risk while Chely, though certainly not riskless, appears to be a much safer proposition. Without more information, it's difficult to estimate fair value for the share price once moly production begins. Your prediction of 150p may well turn out to be correct. But, looking at where the share price was last year (160p) and where it was recently when 100% ownership of Chely was announced (142p), I feel the share price could easily reach 175p+ once production is announced. edit: I didn't really mean "fair value" above, I meant the value of the share price at the time, which can be expected to be well shy of "fair value"
25/1/2006
18:09
silverthorn: . News Commodities Features Brokers Mining Calendar Contact Us Links Story Archives Oil Barrel Golden Prospect Intierra Mining Companies Printer Friendly Version Feature Story Date: January 26, 2006 Eureka Mining Moving Fast At Both Chelyabinsk And Shorskoye. By Jack Hammer What with recurring illness and deal-making across central Asia, Eureka Mining chief executive David Bartley didn't have much time to stay in touch with the City last year, except when he was announcing big deals. But although the newsflow was sometimes a bit thin, those long hard hours on the road are beginning to pay off. Eureka is shaping up nicely – full scale mining on the fifty per cent owned Shorksoye molybdenum project in Kazakhstan is imminent, and a pre-feasibility on the Chelyabinsk copper project in Russia is underway. So, late in December Mr Bartley promised to pay more attention to the deskbound folk in London, to be around more, and to provide regular updates. He was off alcohol back then, on account of his recurring bouts of malaria, putting him for the time being - and somewhat unusually - on a level with Joe Nally, the mining money-man at Cenkos who is a close ally, and who has given up the booze for January. But some resolutions are harder to keep than others - David Bartley is not currently in town, and nor is he in touch. One mining analyst is under the impression that he's lying in hospital in Australia with another attack of malaria, but a PR for Eureka eventually establishes that he's in Moscow – "so, sorry, can I get back to you in two weeks?" Fair enough – it's not so long since Mr Bartley visited London to update press and investors. But he also spent a fair bit of time on that visit moaning about weakness in Eureka's share price. There are moves afoot to rectify that weakness from the broking angle, but if Mr Bartley wants the shares to firm up someone needs to be here pushing the story full time. It's not clear either what exactly Mr Bartley is doing in Russia. With any luck though, it's something to do with the pre-feasibility study on Chelyabinsk, which is due to be delivered in the first quarter of this year. Chelyabinsk is a copper-gold project with a total resource 687 million tonnes at 0.7 % copper equivalent in the Russian C1 and C2 categories. Those numbers are derived from three deposits within Chelyabinsk, and a JORC calculation has been made – and verified by Snowden - for Miheevskjoye, the largest. It shows 405 million tonnes at average grades of 0.4 % copper and 0.22 g/t gold in the inferred category. "It's not world class", says Richard Chase, who continues to provide analysis for broker Ambrian, in spite of a recent move up the foodchain there, " but it's not bad either. It should be cheaper to develop than Montericco's bigger Rio Blanco project in Peru for example." Last year Eureka signed up Barclays Capital to act as advisor on financing. Barclays chief Gerard Holden went out to take a look for himself, was favourably impressed, and on current plans could be looking to put the finance in place before the year is out. Post tax, assuming 60 per cent debt finance, and on a 15 per cent discount, Ambrian's Mr Chase values Chelyabinsk at US$105 million. "This isn't going to be a £200 million company", he says, before adding, with one eye on future developments, "at least not on these assets". Eureka is not a one trick pony, however. In the summer David Bartley pulled off a deal in which the company gave up 50 per cent of Shorskoye in exchange for access to the plant and processing facilities of local operator Kazatomprom. That's a lot of a project to give away, but the point was to get producing fast. Molybdenum won't stay above US$30/lb forever – the long-term average is below US$10/lb. Ambrian's Richard Chase says: "I wouldn't be surprised if Shorskoye is all done and dusted in three years". But over those three years he forecasts nearly US$45 million in net cash flow, assuming a (currently) conservative US$20/lb molybdenum price. Those are reasonable numbers, and should sustain Mr Bartley nicely on his travels, as he works up other early stage exploration assets and hunts down more deals. Companies featured in this Story Eureka Mining Plc (AIM-EKA) Previous Page | Disclaimer | Join Us | Contact Us | Links Copyright ©2003 MINESITE. All rights reserved.
Eureka Mining share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:32 V: D:20160930 22:04:04