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.
Where does it say they wont be committing addicknt
By demanding state support private investors and banks seek special protection for their investment. Everyone's a winner.
But how does that square with the statement that the government will not be committing to any direct expenditure? Protection, yes, but direct funding?
Before you accuse me of deramping, I'm not. It's just that I think we'd all like a better understanding of what the announcement really means and the implications for us.
The article is very clear:
'the government is providing protection + funding which is to be signed off in Ecuador in the near future.'
Chinese copper smelters really need copper
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-07/china-s-copper-smelters-to-discuss-production-cut-as-fees-slump?srnd=homepage-uk
Does anyone actually believe that this article is accurate?
Q, may be right in as much as the government may be guaranteeing the sum, but again we don't know that as fact.
My own view is that they've agreed to offer investment protection in the same way as the previous IPA, but they will not be investing directly, nor will they be guaranteeing any loans. However, it's obviously a great demonstration of confidence which I imagine was bolstered by whatever it is we have told the government and which is, as yet, undisclosed to shareholders.
Further clarity is required.
Https://www.mining.com/solgold-soars-after-securing-3-2bn-investment-largest-in-ecuador-history/
Ignore him he’s a bingo player he’s trying to pin the tail on the donkey and he might just get lucky
Biggest Moron on the forum after stacked low and quadswallop
Yes Redknight the mining.com article got it the wrong way round. I mean who on earth could think that threEcuadorian government would fund a mine...... whilst stating that its not costing the Ecuadorian government any money. Oops you did.
Same the world over, young unemployed basically waiting to be TikTok stars or handed a living on a plate by governments. Reality will bite
Noboa seems willing to advance business which will of course benefit his own family’s affairs
Ned a shyte greetings from the U.K. if you hold you’re in a great position.
Hfh . when I say you appear to have your feet more on the ground ref the news.
l was referring to your earlier post today.
" I may be wrong but I'm not expecting major developments on this as soon as others are expecting it"
not to sure what I miss interperated.
sorry about the spelling 1984. at least I can spell hysterical and wishful thinking. I think
also I don't tell lies to impress
A few comments from Noboa's presentation that I thought may be of interest:
*less than 6% of Ecuadorians are retirement age
* the largest demographic is 14-35 year olds
* the unemployment rate of this demographic is 50%
Noboa sees mining as a primary solution to this problem.
* protection of the environment is key
* he wants to streamline all of the interdepartmental delays in mining applications/permits etc into one single group giving rapid decisions
All in all seems really calm and balanced guy, and as pro mining as you could wish for. Let's hope he can drive through the constitutional changes that are required
I tried googling it and all that comes up is the solg announcement! Does it mean the governments are going to put in 3bill?
I'm expecting two things...
1 A non dilutive funding that will remove all cash worries for at least 2 years...no equity issue and no sale of CGP's former 5%
2 A Conditional financing deal for Cascabel, from either Jiangxi or FNV/Osisko/Wheaton/Trafigura/Glencore etc financing the whole of Cascabel but with no firm commitment to proceed
The latter alone will trigger a bidding war because the majors who are interested do not want SOLG to go it alone with Cascabel which, with the gold price soaring has never looked so viable as it does now...
"SolGold PLC - Ecuador-focused copper and gold exploration company - Signs a joint declaration in preparation of a complementary investment protection agreement with the government of Ecuador. SolGold says in addition to the USD311 million investment addressed by the current investment protection agreement, the complementary IPA there is a commitment to invest a total of USD3.2 billion over the subsequent years. Chief Executive Officer Scott Caldwell says: "The complementary investment protection agreement not only reinforces the protections for our key investment in Ecuador but also symbolizes a deepening of our relationship with the Ecuadorian State. President Noboa's attendance and insightful speech at the PDAC convention were warmly welcomed by the mining community and underscores the significant support of his administration for responsible mining in Ecuador."
PBOW...the article got it completely the wrong way round...
But its still good news because it clearly marks out Cascabel as by far the biggest new project in Ecuador...
So far 11 people disagree with you tiger...
2 posts in 30 days...my case rests...
Is there a special course you go on to learn to spell that badly need a shyte?
Thanks for the clarification, apologies for misunderstanding it.
180 excited hysterical posts.
8, level headed posts seeing things as they are.
Hfh and one or two others on here deserve credit for there level headed approach to the news.
Although it's good news, it doesn't warrant the hysteria displayed yet again on here.
Despite the ridiculous claims of sp manipulation, the money markets, are not usually far out with there assessments.
The sp is still in the 7s.
If only hysteria and wishfull thinking move share prices. If only
My understanding is the Cadastre
Is for issuing new tenements.
Hence none have been issued since its been closed.
I don't see how the mining Cadastre impacts us at this stage for cascabel.
The 1.55 is just the first lump to production but the whole first phase is 3.2 which is was we’re committing to
The reduced initial capex just opens up easier financing and more suitors. Ultimately one of the big faces will still take it though
I would suggest the 3.2 billion refers to the CAPEX plus the OPEX for the term of the IPA.
Not wishing to put a damper on the obvious excitement but wouldn't Ecuador have to open the Mining Cadastre before investment was secured and deals are signed off? I may be wrong but I'm not expecting major developments on this as soon as others are expecting it.