Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Bozi, I'm hazarding a guess that your post was directed at me? If not, I apologise.
I'm sorry to say I disagree with virtually everything you say.
There is something fundamentally wrong with where the company is at the moment and specifically with the governance of the company. We are leaderless, and have been for most of this year - this is totally unacceptable and perhaps you could give an example of another main market listed company which has failed similarly.
The announcement of shareholder engagement on the issue is simultaneously a recognition that something is amiss (normal, happy companies don't feel obliged to do this sort of thing and particularly not in response to a public letter from a small disgruntled shareholder) and was also mishandled very badly indeed.
You may be critical of my/others analysis of the situation, but I'd suggest our criticism is absolutely justified.
Hi again Bozi, depending on how much you believe his posts (and I do believe what RK posts even if I disagree with the way in which he positioned it, and the way in which the company is choosing to engage him), redknight stated the below:
"while I still think much has been achieved in the last year, especially on CG, there are still some key actions to be completed and the AGM could be challenging while 'the elephant remains in the room'..."
If we're dealing in facts we have:
1. Berry St publicly raising concerns over NM and governance
2. No CEO in place during pivotal period for SOLG
3. The above from RK which I think we can safely say is about Nick
4. Fawzi's choosing not to refute/deny TheItalian's question about Nick & his influence
We're far beyond the point of speculation - things are clearly still not right at the top of SOLG towers.
*IR has any interest in answering.
Not sure I really agree SM.
Berry Capital are a bunch of Johnny Come Lately's to the SOLG share register and a bit of looking into their corporate and individual backgrounds might provide some colour on why they're getting quite chirpy.
Governance roadshows in group settings are not really the arenas where you start asking of favours from investors, as many have speculated. If you need to ask anything of anyone then you do it on a 1-2-1 basis. This could just be a simple case of the company wanting to show progress on it's various initiatives which often gets lost amongst the nitty gritty of exploration and asset development. Sustainability is key to institutions as is governance, and SOLG clearly want to take this opportunity to tell as much of their register as they can.
As for Fawzi commenting on that question from TheItalian, I can't say I'm surprised. It's not a question that IR has any interest in asking regardless of the position. Making a comment of any sort leaves him on rocky ground and it's off the beaten track from the company's activities. I certainly wouldn't be reading anything into it.
ATB.
Hi Bozi, broadly agree with your sentiments here and have probably been guilty myself of the speculation around Nick. What I would say in response is that referring to it as 'pathetic unsubstantiated tosh' might be a little strong. One of our institutional shareholders has mentioned him by name in an RNS of their own expressing concern around corporate governance. I would be amazed if they have done this if this wasn't indicative of broader sentiment on the street. The company is also courting major shareholders on a corporate governance roadshow that only really came to light through RK's relationship with the business. We can only really speculate on what the real purpose of this is. Finally, TheItalian emailed Fawzi directly regarding Mather and his influence and received a response that dodged the question - this in itself is quite telling IMO.
What I am struggling with is how this tallies up with CGP's apparent contentment with how the company is being run and the RNS of June 2nd this year expressing a more positive working relationship. (https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SOLG/solgold-cornerstone-agree-to-work-cooperatively-f95hmggtv02ztca.html). I guess that was 4 months ago. It will be interesting to see if anything extraordinary is tabled at this year's AGM.
It's a puzzle at the moment for me, both fascinating and frustrating. I am coming round to the view that we won't see a bid before more and very substantial dilution, allowing BHP/NCM to increase their control over the company and dilute Mather, who will not be able to go toe-to-toe with these guys for much longer. It's speculated on the Telegram group that Mather, DGR and Tencent are reducing their exposure to IRR, perhaps in preparation for an upcoming capital raise here. We just don't know. Dependent on market reaction to the PFS, I may well sell up here and look elsewhere as I get the impression that a many manhours are being wasted on issues unrelated to the advancement of the company and its assets.
All best
SM
... On this bulletin board.
Firstly, I was not surprised to witness the drama of earlier in the week, nor the rage towards the company that followed. It was behaviour from one member that was simply 'par for their course'. The same applies with regards the many positional pivots that followed along with the woe is me argument taken to anyone who had anything less than positive to feedback.
You out yourself on that parapet then you must expect to be shot down.
I'll add that the reaction that followed towards the company and it's chairman from posters who really should know better despite there being absolutely no evidence that any rules had been broken was poor to say the least. That sentiment has unbelievably continued as the week has progressed and one does wonder as to the motives of those concerned.
A milestone announcement from the company, ahead of expected release, was unfortunately lost amongst the attempted attention grabbing and subsequent rage induced carry on, the result being a story of stale bulls hitting out at whoever they could reach.
As for all this chat about Nick being the elephant in the room, the problem, the reason we don't have a new CEO, is etc etc etc is all pathetic unsubstantiated tosh. None of you run the company, none of you work for the company, none of you sit on the board of directors. You have no idea what happens day to day and what is happening within the business!
Stop peddling ridiculous agendas towards certain individuals because we haven't had our takeover offer yet. It is tiresome, childish and rather transparent.
Stick to the facts please and ignore those who are repeatedly acting for their own gain.