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.
Good afternoon rcgl2, as you say we can launch a cashbox offer, and nobody can do anything about it. It's just about pitching it right.
I would prefer if NCM and BHP didn't take part. I am pretty sure Valuestone and others would.
I however wonder if we might get another offtake deal.
My preference would be for a placing higher than we currently are. It's not impossible.
rcgl, very good post.
JG1964 this is a share with very little exposure. We trade very small volumes.
We cannot even get to ten million shares a day every day, as a minimum.
So with little interest we slowly drift until we get some news, then its up a bit.
I hope we have a base of around 20p ( I know we are lower at the moment ).
But we need to attribute value by increasing the NPV.
This I feel with the enhanced PFS for Alpala and the PEA for Porvenir may help the situation.
So it's a long journey and patience required.
When I bought in a few months later my investment more than halved to under 2p a share. Those days are long gone.
Lot's of news to come, but it takes time.
This time next year I feel we will have a clearer path, as we will the year after.
Well I’ve put another £5k on this horse all in at 19.57p Rather hoping serious corporate moves begins in the next couple of months .. which doesn’t rely on the board doing more than mounting an only mildly effective defence. I think they’re up for that challenge at least.
If you take the penultimate sentence at face value, it implies what SM just said that BHP/NCM declined to participate in a pre-emptive placing and then vetoed a non pre-emptive cashbox raise. However, if that were the case it raises some another question, namely are there enough other investors willing to invest the amounts that Solg needed, or are Solg actually dependent on BHP/NCM to contribute their 26% of any funding round in order to secure enough funds?
If they did try a pre-emptive placing, provided they offered the opportunity to BHP/NCM to invest, there's no reason other investors can't step in and take up those allocations if BHP/NCM don't want them. And if BHP/NCM had just outright declined to invest and Solg then tried to get a cash-box placing done, it suggests that there were enough commitments from other investors to raise the amount that Solg wanted... but it was vetoed by existing holders.
Which is to say, BHP/NCM can't have it both ways. They can't insist on an equity raise that includes them and refuse to participate, and then block an equity raise that doesn't include them.
So I wonder if the writer of the article has slightly misreported the events, and the penultimate sentence should read something like "BHP and Newcrest were apparently unwilling to invest again, BECAUSE a second raising that would circumvent pre-emption rights was ultimately seen by shareholders as not appropriate".
Also, in my view Solg didn't "test the market" as some sort of fact finding exercise. They "tested the market" with a view to raising funds via whatever method they "tested". Therefore there is no material distinction between 1) Solg asked investors if they would support a cashbox placing that they intended to launch, were told no and therefore didn't proceed with the placing and 2) Sold launched a cashbox placing (irrespective of whether shareholders supported it or not) and then failed to secure sufficient commitments in order to close the placing. The outcome is the same in both scenarios - Solg need funds, wanted to raise funds, and have not raised any funds.
And anyway, even if this was not a failed fund raise but a mere "discussion" with Shareholders, a "discussion" that results in the resignation of your funding executive and your new CFO at the same time is not a success, it's probably worse than just launching a placing that is undersubscribed due to poor market sentiment.
Quady - why has the share price fallen over 50% in a few months - I guess the market has full faith in our mgmt - the board should allow shareholders to question them - at the last AGM that opportunity didn't take place - where are the Regional partners ? It's been over a year maybe 2
Quady you have more faith in the mgmt than I do - to lose one FD is careless, to lose 2 in such a short time under the same CEO who has been in place for less than a year speaks volumes - even McDonald's wouldn't employ these clowns - of course the company are going to say we are going to production - but who will be the owner when it happens - how will they raise the capex when they seem to have failed in a "small" fund raise - everyone says they have the expertise in house or with 3rd parties - I am sure Rio said the same with the Mongolia mine and what happened there
They were probably offered a good chunk at a much higher sp than where we are now but said no thanks we will wait and get even more at a now much lower sp !
SM, ultimately they cannot prevent us from raising cash, but they can make life uncomfortable.
My fear is that if that article is correct, existing and potential new shareholders will be put off by the fact that BHP and NCM have said no.
What we would all love to know is what, if anything, BHP have suggested as an alternative to the failed fund raise structure.
Mathersfinger
I'm sure some circus must be looking for you..
The clowns department!!.
Anyone who believes every word the company says is naive in the extreme. I should add this is true for all companies.
A board of directors will ALWAYS attempt to frame every snippet in as positive a light as possible. PR folk exist for a reason...unfortunately.
addicknt, agree. My inference is that we tried to do a standard equity raise and BHP/NCM said we don't want to put in any more cash. SOLG then went down the cashbox route and BHP/NCM said you're not doing that either.
Let's just hope that our major shareholders are sitting around the table and hammering out a deal to put us all out of our misery and deliver a return of sorts for shareholders.
Mathers - who has instructed SolGold to reduce their mine life?
You can't very well start casting aspersions like that on the one hand and then on the other say that you're only going to listen to SolGold and not associated media or another entity releasing statements via official channels (BSC).
The mine life is reduced in my view because this is just the first phase PFS using only 21% of the resource. The full project inclusive of expansion will extend longer than the 26 years. I'm pretty sure of that...
Bozi,
That is for a 26 year life of mine reduced by Solgold as instructed by????
Does make you wonder when life of mine was 55 years plus, anyway enough for today as some tools have turned up to ruin the board
Atb
Sorry, I should say that the actual life of mine figure is $14.4bn. That's circa $550m per year based on current exchange rates.
OK Bozi, I can see that but history shows us that in a siege situation it nearly always the people inside run out of food and options first. Then the userpers get it for a percentage of it's true worth.
You hit the nail on the head with your last paragraph and all the previous post is nothing without it.
I'm going to try my best to stay quiet and watch this pan out, all this going around in circles is not very productive.
No guarantees though.
SM, the penultimate sentence of the AFR article is the most puzzling, and the most worrying. In its most literal sense it's very worrying indeed, but I rather suspect it doesn't actually mean that. That one sentence encapsulates the entire conundrum and the truth behind it will dictate what happens next.
Bozi,
Good post and yes they want it for a dime
Atb
That's exactly the type of response you get from a fool.
Thank you for highlighting, that fact for all to see ..
Giro,
It’s a bit early to be p:ssed isn’t it?
Atb
It is what I believe obviously.
I haven't sold Mather, I'm stuck here over 40% down mainly because the BOD are a car crash.
Show me where it's tosh ? Get your head out of the sand.
And Bubble how the hell can this tinpot BB affect the SP ?
Jezzoo-can't agree whatsoever.
All this wrangling we're watching before us is for good reason.
An economic base case at a measly $3.60p/lb of copper shows that over a 26 year mine life, Cascabel will, on average, yield $550m of post tax free cash flow.
That's almost half a billion pounds a year.
SOLG could issue another 1.7bn shares for arguments sake to cover ongoing G&A, exploration and Alpala build equity and end up with a 4bn share capital.
Now start looking at your P/E and how that free cash flow explodes at copper prices of $4+.
Even with 4bn shares in issue a share price of 10x higher than where we are now is supported.
The risk, as we know, is getting to the final destination in one piece. That is why BHP and others will go to the effort to wrestle this off SOLG for a relative dime.
Mathers finger
The CFO
Has history of leaving jobs.
And maybe she jumped before being pushed. We don't know the real story behind the scenes.
You seem like a day trader trying desperately to pull price down .
You change views like the weather .
Sharketmare
You go by AFR, I will go by the company RNS’s and what the CEO says.
Like I said, BHP play games and have a lot of clout, so how would you undermine the company you want, my thoughts with head out of the sand.
Anyway, I’m not changing my mind, I will stick with the news from Solgold
Atb