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 guess my point is that we don't know yet and it seems a bit odd to start making assumptions about what someone may be prepared to pay when we have no idea one way or another. If we discount DC's comments, we also have no idea what our board thinks we're worth...so we really are in the dark.
Addicknt - it's not a case of nobody wanting what we have.
It is potentially a matter of nobody wanting to pay what many deem fair for what we have.
There's a big difference. I'm with you insofar as the strategic review and the intentions of Bob, Dan and Co.
But i can't fault anyone feeling resentment right now. We see the SP pinned to this 16p level ans for me, the action in the couple of weeks post Jan 9th will be enlightening. Why? Because ultimately this merger is seen as the common sense action. Stronger together and all that. Well, let's see if the market agrees by the end of Jan23.
Addicknt if it's about keeping the people employed at Cascabel, then it's year's. Nearly till 2029.
Understand your point about the DFS.
But maybe the strategic review is to short circuit the DFS and BFS and go straight to production with a JV .
Maybe more than one partner.
Q, have you worked out how much of that 50m will be spent on keeping our people employed? And what happened to the DFS? It's been firmly kicked into the long grass...hardly an indication of us preparing for production.
Morning addicknt, that's not the situation at all.
Yes people want what we have.
They just want it cheap.
The book has just become more diverse, so now it's harder to acquire.
This is because more parties to talk to. And none of them selling cheap.
We have no option but to continue with development at this moment in time.
I think this is what the strategic review is all about.
It's about the best way to proceed.
The fact that a bid hasn't emerged does not mean there's no interest.
There is now a formal channel through which to express an interest and our advisors will be keeping a very tight lid on things (that's not to say leaks don't occur, but so far it hasn't happened)
The company has signalled it's open to all approaches and if there are any interested bidders out there they'll be throwing their hats into the ring now.
I find it interesting that some people seem to be of the opinion no one wants what we have. It begs the question; why invest in something nobody else sees as being valuable. It also makes me think our trade investors must have made a tragic error.
The 50 million is to advance Cascabel. It cannot be used to advance Cascabel to a salable package.
The reason for this is it is a royalty deal or offtake at 0.6%
So the money can only be used to advance to production, so that they can start collecting on the 0.6%
I expect further information when we get the strategic review.
"We have raised 50 million which is ring fenced and can only be used to advance Cascabel."
They've had that a while, have they started using it yet ?
Advancing Cascabel is a broad description though, it could be interpreted in many ways.
"We have a further 36 million for exploration"
Is the 50 million not for exploration then, maybe it's for advancing Cascabel towards a saleable package.
I agree the SP demostrates there isn't a bid in the offing that is known about.
I've been guilty in the past of clinging onto "why would anyone sell to a bid of 30p when the SP has been at 40p twice in the last couple of years?"
The answer I guess is liquidity. Look at what happens each time Solg gets up to 40p levels, it sells off fairly quickly right back down to 30p and below. There are never any buyers at 40p to sustain the price. In fact it's been confirmed recently that most Solg shares are in sticky insider or institutional hands and are not being traded. It's largely PIs trading who drive the price swings up and down. SP gets to 40p and the canny PIs sell up, knowing it won't hold, and just that is enough to tank the SP back down to earth.
So maybe asking why would anyone sell at 30p is the wrong question... Perhaps a better question is "why can't everyone sell at 40p?" The answer is there is no liquidity.
The larger holders who own millions of shares know that the cannot ever sell at 40p on these spikes as things stand, because the SP will plummet. And not all of the shareholders can sell into any of these rises at the same time.
So if someone were to offer 30p for all shares, instead of feeling insulted and saying "but the SP was higher than that a few months ago," we need to be thinking that at the higher price there was very little liquidity and it wasn't achievable for many shareholders if they wanted to sell. If a bid is made for 30p every single shareholder can sell.
This is not me deramping. I don't think it will be sold for 30p. I'm just saying when we are talking about bids and past share prices, we need to be careful to remember what the market price based on a few million a day actually represents to most large holders (no exit) vs what a bid represents (an exit).
Agreed DartFrog.
As DBW says why let the facts get in the way of a good story.
But that's what most do on here.
So let's look at the facts.
Today the book is more diverse than it has been since I invested and this has meant no bid for all the obvious reasons.
The share price is in the doldrums and indicates no bid.
We have a strategic review which in part is looking how to bring Alpala to production cheaper and faster.
We have raised 50 million which is ring fenced and can only be used to advance Cascabel.
We have a further 36 million for exploration.
The one thing we do not have is any bid interest, not even a rumour of a bid.
I'll second that!
I wish that the share price is 40.35p!
Frog
You wish what, Frog?
I wish!
Frog
To remind Dart...
On 11 April SOLG was 40.35
Gold was $19.70
Copper was $4.70
They will return and so will the SOLG SP...
Exactly Add ….. but why let the facts get in the way of a good story eh
Dart, we do know - the timeline of the discussions was laid out in their circular to shareholders.
Obviously Warren Irwin and co by refusing NM’s bid for CGP rejected the opportunity to monetise their shareholders simply by putting them in a position to sell their SOLG shares. Now, of course, it is desperation stakes. It would not surprise me if CGP made the approach to SOLG. However, we will never know.
As the directors of CGP were unable to sell their company even with big “For Sale” notices posted, why do they think they will fare any better trying to sell the enlarged SOLG?
We will see, but I have to say that I am not convinced that they will be successful, and, if they are, then the price realised is anything above about 30p. I hope that I am wrong with this prediction!
Frog
If I remember correctly CGP valued themselves at $12.50 in their last aggressive rejection...
Currently $3.87 having been $5.23 when SOLG hit 40p in April...
Addicknt - I think it's a pretty safe assumption to make given the implied value of SOLGs offer vs their opinion of fair value the last time SOLG approached them. The two valuations were poles apart so that suggests to me a reluctant acceptance of the olive branch in order to pursue the ultimate goal.
But had an offer materialised from a party not connected to ENSA, I do believe they'd have taken that and left SOLG to parlay with the new minority owners.
Cornerstone obviously were well aware as well that SOLG had issued a PFS to time back in May and may have been operationally straightened out by DC thus bringing their own financial commitments to the Cascabel project into view.
It's an interesting one. Don't disagree with your point about the value opportunity of selling a minor stake but think it's possible to see it both ways.
Thanks Bozi and addickt. Those two erudite posts have created a worthy debate.
All sound.
Bozi, one quibble: We don't know that they weren't able to sell the company - it may simply be the case that they realised they'd get better value by being part of the larger entity. From a corporate finance perspective this makes perfect sense; you rarely receive full value by selling a minority stake. It's also worth bearing in mind that it was us who approached them, not the other way round. This hardly indicates desperation on their part.
The other side of this coin is that we realised we'd be making life more difficult for ourselves by having them outside the tent if we were to enter discussions with an interested party.
Redknight - just to pick up on your post from earlier raising various questions.
"Why on earth would CGP Directors and major shareholders, previously aggressively at loggerheads with Mather, now have bonded with him...do you really think they would have merged CGP with SOLG to settle for 33/40p...?"
There's two very good reasons for that. One is that they haven't been able to sell their company as a standalone entity. The second is because they can't cash out their chips on the ridiculously illiquid venture exchange over in Canada. So, barring a bit of corporate jiggerypokery with SOLG, they were stuck.
I don't think they're desperate to cash out for 30-40p by the way, but if that were the ballpark of the only serious offer on the table I do think they would take it. We know what their motivations have been from the start and with their SOLG stock tied in at this price level, a quick 100-150% on their takeover premium of 20odd % represents a quick win for them and importantly an exit.
"Why go to all this trouble and cost to settle for a takeout ;price that would be BELOW what the SP was on April 11th? Just nine months ago...the talks between the two parties have been going on at least that long..."
It's all circumstantial, surely? Haven't you been saying yourself that you want out before the markets tank in 2023? As such, we might all be forced to accept something sub-optimal. If we were moving into commodity bull markets then I think we could apply an infinitely more bullish outlook, but unfortunately we appear to be a couple of years away from this and we know it's darkest before the dawn.
"The idea that it might come down to a battle between Jiangxi and BHP doesn't hold water for me. I seriousluy expect that maybe more than a dozen serious contenders may have run a preliminary rule over Solgold...just count the number of players already in Ecuador and none have the total prospect that wehave."
The issue here is that we're no longer the only play in town. Over in Latin America alone we have Solaris Resources, Filo Mining, Regulus Resources and others with similar sorts of assets. Don't get me wrong, we might have the biggest tonnage but the other assets have their redeeming features. Our hand would be strengthened if there were no credible alternatives.
Tesla …. You plum
As usual completely deluded and no wonder with your desperate T20 gambling as admitted to by yourself yesterday.
This will never ever be sold for anywhere near a £1 and your reminiscing of Noront, in much better markets and geography, just highlights how deluded and desperate you are.
Keep on rolling over those T trades, oh sorry I mean bed and breakfast those T trades….lol…..and fill those mm’s pockets
They love clowns like you……