SolGold Share Chat (SOLG)

To be honest Quady I'm not particularly convinced that it will ever happen either. I just think the whole thing is intended to light a fire under the current board to try to force them into either upping their offer for CGP, or arranging/accepting/engineering a fairly quick takeover of Solg by one or several majors, at a price that will by extension massively increase CGP's value (or the value of its Solg stake).

The message to the current board is, you are on borrowed time now so chuck us a huge load of cash asap or you're gone... and we have NCM and (by implication) BHP on our side, so chop chop.

In terms of if it ever did happen and who the new board would be, I don't really know or understand myself how their proposal would be favourable to the other major holders. All they seem to be proposing is a new "independent" board that will "independently" come to a pre-determined conclusion that the FN deal is bad and must be stopped...

"Cornerstone intends to propose that all members of the current board be replaced with five new nominees, each with the requisite skill set and independence to direct SolGold for the benefit of all shareholders. Cornerstone further intends to vote its entire 7.58% equity stake in SolGold in favour of such proposals at the requisitioned General Meeting.

Cornerstone expects that any new board would seek to conduct a strategic review to maximize value for all SolGold shareholders. As part of that process, we expect that the new board would carefully review the terms of the Franco-Nevada Royalty Financing and take appropriate action to terminate the deal if, as we expect, the board determines that the financing is not in the best interests of SolGold and its shareholders. In light of the foregoing, Cornerstone expects that the current SolGold board will not proceed to completion of the Franco-Nevada Royalty Financing"

Copperpot

Told him does he understand comments like that are libellous.......

Thing is they just spout the same cr-ap - he's got to go blah blah blah - they dont say why, they dont propose a solution/plan - they dont offer an alternative [then again I dont suppose they will til just prior to the EGM actually being called......

A-Holes the lot of em

r's
BN.c

They wouldn’t and bhp couldn’t even be asked in time for their opinion as cgp would need to give notice as to who they nominated.

Rcg yes it’s me. And if this guy in twitter even talks about Facebook bias and the deep state, a real wacko who probably run a loss making tax dodge operation as nobody could lose as much money as him and be professional certified.

Good morning rcl2, as you know I don't believe this will happen. However I am unclear on one point.
If the EGM goes ahead, I believe that CGP will put forward Directors to replace them.
Is that correct, and if so, why would the major shareholders vote for this.
Not something I know about, so would be interested who would appoint who, and at what time, if this went ahead, and was successful. All the best.

Hi ToS - yes CGP have virtually said as much if you read the various releases, the dates are deliberate. In the formal rejection of the Solg takeover offer they state:

"SolGold Has Neutralized its Largest Independent Shareholder until October while SolGold’s Second Largest Independent Shareholder has Clearly Lost Confidence in the SolGold Board
BHP is SolGold’s largest independent shareholder, holding 13.64% of SolGold’s ordinary shares. BHP is required to vote alongside the non-independent SolGold Board until October 19, 2020 on certain matters. This arrangement provides Mr. Mather and his associates with significant influence over SolGold until that date and provides one obvious reason for why the Hostile Bid expires on October 14, 2020."

I don't think we can know for sure one way or another what BHP thinks. CGP are just trying to create the impression that BHP are unhappy with the board. The fact they are waiting to call the meeting very pointedly until after the standstill agreement comes to an end is just intended to imply that they know BHP will vote down the board once they are legally allowed to.

Which may be true... but equally may not be true at all.

Nincompoop wants to be very careful throwing comments like that around!

FTJNY.... we all have different strategies, levels and circumstances, needs..... I agree, this is worth way, way more than 40p, and I sincerely hope we all get it. I believe we will. However, it’s not for me to tell anyone else how to play this share. It’s been the biggest disappointment in my portfolio for too many years for that. Although I strongly believe NM will achieve way above 40p ( I don’t believe he’ll take it to production) I am also fully aware of the strength of the majors, BHP in particular, and the risk of him being out manoeuvred here. For that reason, I recently upped my stake at these prices in order that I won’t be too disappointed by 40-50p.

Just had a look at what Willem Middelkoop (he of loss making, insanely high fee commodity fund fame) posted on twi tter again, the discussion is very interesting... several responders really press him on what his and WI's alternative proposals will be for funding Alpala and realising SOLG value and he simply does not answer! All he can say is "replace the board" again.

And then, he throws in a completely scandalous #metoo allegation about Nick Mather!!

"(.. and women warn each other for his behavior)"

What is that all about? Absolutely appalling tactics, lobbing that sort of unfounded rumour around.

https://twitter.com/wmiddelkoop/status/1287612320856899584

BTW I assume that's you TheIceberg getting stuck into him there.

Miagi, stick to what you think you know about eh? O'Connor is the top rated gold analyst in Oz and the Paterson is the hottest area in Oz, which is quite a well known mining country. Ecuador on the other hand is literally a banana republic.
I would characterise the Paterson as maybe a Leeds Utd and Alpala as Twente Eschede if you want a footballing analogy.

.... and from the same agreement terms.....

Under the terms of the new share subscription agreement, BHP will also receive options over 19.25 million SolGold shares which are exercisable until 25 November 2024 at a price of 37 pence per share.

So in theory BHP could, if they wish, up their stake a bit before then, albeit at 37p. They are not at a complete standstill.

TBTT - Your problem is that your thinking is too short term ( a bit like that of a trader) you just want a quick sale at 40p to make about 20p which under normal circumstances may seem reasonable. However what we have in Alpala is a Tier 1 mine which has a life of 55 years and as in most other finds of this nature will only grow as it is mined and other extensions evolve which would put Alpala into one of the largest and richest mines ever found! And here’s the funny bit - you want to sell this (along with all the other exciting prospects Solg have in the pipeline) for a mere 40p to make a measly 20p!!!! You clearly have very little vision or ambition and thank god someone like NM is running Solg and not someone like you (or Irwin et al) who would sell us down the river for a few measly shekels! In NM we trust to deliver fair and proper value for Solg and all its shareholders!

TBTT, what's your take on royalty streaming then? FN have stated that they'd be interested in a $1b stream in Alpala and I am convinced that they are serious. The beauty about having an NSR is that it doesn't matter who builds or owns the mine - Alpala will get built, 100%. Therefore, FN will get their money 100%. Why would FN then demand any other conditions beyond that? Seems to be a great business model and one that is proven to work. I assume there are plenty of other financiers who would like to get in on similar terms too.

Yes ToS

CGP [well WI BS et al] have tabled this deliberately for this date implying they'll have/get BHP on board.

BHP to their credit have not been vocal at all re these matters so we don't actually know what they think - we're just hear noises from the other camp hinting they know - so at best it's hearsay - it may be true - we just don't know!

R's
BN.c

Hopefully this is the last of the tiger post and come back when it hits ur 40p target

tabled an offer even

is that the unbuilt mine that FN have just valued at $3bln & tabled an off to loan $100-150mln?

smickster

i did larf at the mother jibe lmao

bn.c

I deserve 100p per share, lol

I give up.
The groupthink on this board is unbelievable. And there are some pretty unpleasant and clueless people here as well.
I'll take my profit in due course, and that's all I care about.
To most of you - good luck. To a few of you - I hope you get what you deserve.

others would beg to differ lol however my view is BOTH are significantly undervalued! Nothing like a fence sitter is there !! Best MFU

Just reread the agreement when BHP last upped their stake, and I had forgotten this clause.....

(iii) Board Recommendations
BHP agreed for a period of two years (to 15 October 2020) to follow the recommendations of the Board of Directors of SolGold which are supported by an independent expert appointed by the SolGold Board of Directors to opine in respect of any proposed change of control transactions in respect of the SolGold share capital or its assets, and in circumstances where it is demonstrable that holders of 60% of SolGold shares (disregarding BHP) voting at a meeting or lodging acceptances are supportive of the particular formal proposal. BHP also agreed, for a period of two years (to 15 October 2020), to support capital change resolutions put to SolGold shareholders at SolGold's AGM affecting authorised capital limits and pre-emption waivers under the LSE rules, in the event that 60% of the votes validly cast at a meeting of SolGold shareholders approve the same and the pre-emption waivers are within certain limits.

So that made me think.... given the date given in the recent CGP release, do they believe they have BHP on board, but have to wait until after 15th October to allow BHP to vote with them? Pure speculation on my part, and I have certainly not seen anything to suggest it.... but the dates are a bit of a coincidence.

Nick Mather not Nicks mother lol

Over the years I've heard the following from tbtt and the like.
We have no funds
There will be a placing more dilution
Mine to deep
Grades not good enough
Not open pit
No institutional investors
Mining taxes
Unfriendly mining country
Unstable government or country
Cv19
The worlds coming to an end
Mine is too big
Nickn mother is crap
Anyone care to add.
Yet all can be pretty proven to be untrue and here we are with the biggest find in a decade a Franco deal to take us to dfs with opportunity to fund a mine, 18mth regional fund, 13 other prospects, Nick still doing a cap job, open pit possibilities lol really tbtt give it a rest

MFU, that's true - one is fully valued and the other is hugely undervalued...

Swazzers, have you got it up and working yet? We could use a bit of input on where you see this going from here...