We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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.
Colonel... agree with all that.
ToS1963 - Yes programmed handover moved from 2Q25 to 4Q25 but I assume this is very much related to the unprecedented covid situation. My experience is cost management of construction projects, I just felt your sweeping generalisation that they ALWAYS overrun is misinformation.
Everlong50.... yes, but if you compare the March presentation to the June one, the handover to production milestone.... which was over 5 years away... slipped by over 6 months.
I too have worked on some large scale projects. Granted, not construction. However, slipping a key milestone that sits over 5 years away by 6 months is not a great indication that things are on track. Nor is it a good indication that project management believe any present day slippage can be recouped.... I.e. it tells an experienced eye that the project plan is a very tight / best case scenario one.
"Construction projects on this scale always overrun"
Been involved in many construction projects on this scale over the years. Yes, some overrun but equally some are completed ahead of programme especially if contractors are given incentives.
Points taken Miagi.... however Solg latest presentation, on the website, from July slide 25 has handover to operations milestone after Q4 2025.... so over 5 years from now. But yes, 8 was still my own spin on it.
TOS, wrt to your 9:52 post, I and I'm sure many others on here and NM himself do not "desperately" need the share price to be higher. Yes, it is extremely unlikely that a first bid will be 4 times the current price - there is no numpty on earth who would open with a bid like that at auction. We all know, however, that the initial bid at auction is almost always way off the final sale price...plenty of Majors will be attending on auction day without a doubt.
Construction projects can overrun, but an almost doubling of the timeline is very rich. Many big ticket items are already in place - water source, power, transport links.
SOLG is evidently new to this, being an explorer historically. That is why they have and are strengthening the board.
Come FD for the mine, I don't think it will be delayed beyond the end of next year. Covid will be well under control by then - or by that stage there will be significant herd immunity.
Tos, can you seriously say with a straight face the sp will hover at this level if we get to the point(and let's face it there are many hurdles)where we build a mine and start producing. I'm no expert but I pretty sure there will be many more highs from here if that is the case.
Sorry if it comes across rude but a lot ****e gets spouted here as soon as we see 1p drop.
Yup dyor indeed
Miagi yep, I know, and perhaps a bit naughty. But my 8 year belief is based on several factors
Solgold almost never meet a deadline
Construction projects on this scale always overrun
Both Solgold and Ecuador are pretty new to this
Covid will already be delaying things
And the stated timeframe (July corporate presentation slide 25) is to a handing over to production milestone. You’ve still to start digging and processing before you realise any income.
"I think a minimum of 8 years before any mine is producing."
Eh? That's nigh on double the current timeline. The Ecuadorian goverment, in all likelihood, will be doing everything they can to facilitate the build (i.e. granting permits), and they will expect a fast build too.
Smickster..... now that’s just rude. However, in the spirit of healthy debate for the forum, and to answer your points in my opinion only though.....
I am comfortable with my investment
I think Solgold has a great future as an explorer, unsure regarding potential as a miner
Resource at Alpala is spectacularly good... others to be proven, but great potential
If we don’t or won’t sell anything, we will face significant future dilution in the coming years
I think a minimum of 8 years before any mine is producing.
Cliche I hate, but DYOR.
debate? you mean constantly try to feed negative sentiment.
If I was so unsure of my investment I would of sold out long ago yet we have a number of unsure investors who love to tell everyone how they feel solg has no future or rubbish resource, or diluted to hell and back, or will be 245 years old before the mine is built.
Really? Give it a rest sunshine
Quady... agree with the first part, although I am concerned about the 12% rate of the small bridging loan, seems penal to me. However, debt is debt, and whilst there’s no way to build a mine without it, there is also no guarantees Cu and Au prices will service it quite as readily once we get to production. But yes, NM has specifically indicated he wants to minimise dilution.
The second part.... I think history of this share shows us that £1 is a bit ambitious. I don’t see us surpassing 40-45p, and dilution will be required more than once I suspect, each time resetting the SP.
Add in to that the risks of delays and cost overruns on the mine build in the same timeframe, you see where “glass half empty” ToS is coming from. I would like to see some of those risks clearly stated, better still documented in the annual report, and what the mitigation strategies are.
Good morning ToS1963, I would like to offer a counter view. I don't believe we need to sell anything. Hopefully we agree on the fact, that Alpala can be built with little or zero dilution, through offtake, loans and who knows maybe issue bonds.
We are left with the issue, how do we fund further exploration. I don't believe anyone can answer that question. However if our continuing proving up and PFS and DFS, cause a rise in the share price, our next fund raise, maybe over 1 pound a share.
Impossible to question the board, or the corporate strategy on here without accusations of deliberately attempting to harm the SP for personal gain. Complete and utter rubbish, and damaging to decent debate. I, along with most others, NM included, desperately need the SP to be way higher than it currently is. We will never get a fair value offer otherwise. No major is going to bid 4 times our market cap or above. So please.... by all means disagree, and provide counter arguments, but accusing every poster in this fashion is tiresome and unnecessary.
looks like our resident traders are looking for an entry point and would like to see this drop a couple more pence.