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:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
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 and Verified Members
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
no, I don't accept it. It wasn't the investors that forced him out, it was the company. He was doing a bad job.
Nick Mather IS the company, and he is doing a good job.
3 shareholders can bleat impotently all they like. If they only make up 1 or 2% of the *shareholders* they can shut the f up, until they make up a majority of the *shareholding*. Until then, and whilst he has the support of the board (which your example did not) he is firmly in place and firmly in charge.
ohwhatanight, NM is in the driving position there is nothing that BHP can do except make a hostile bid, NM is free to bring on whoever he wants and potentially tie BHP into contracts that they will hate but will benefit SOLG.
TBTT, please sit down and read my entire posting history, and then tell me why on Earth you think we will get a hostile takeover. I have been here 8 years, with uninformed posters saying week on week, that we will get a takeover in one form or other. We have not had a takeover so far, and the uninformed posters keep posting I am wrong, and that one will happen. They twist every bit of news and call it fact. IT'S NOT FACT. A fact is an observable event that is either directly or indirectly observed ( Scientific explanation ) So what did we observe yesterday. Well we observed that poor little defenseless Solgold win over the Big boys. We observed a working defense strategy. We observed parties trying to get us on the cheap. We observed that Solgold can defend against any interference. Those are the facts.
Now the non factual. ( I believe these statements to be true, but are not facts yet, as we have not had the observations yet ) We are going to get a PFS, that has a greater NPV than the PEA. We are going to get a PFS with an even better payback period than the PEA. We are going to get a CFP with minimal dilution. We are going to construct and build Alpala. We are going to carry on exploration and build other mines. We are going to become a major mining company in the world. We are going to become a FTSE 100 company.
I don't see any FACTS that say we are going to do none of the things and sell out cheap. because a bunch of uninformed posters, are desperate for the money.
I strongly have to disagree - the evidence says otherwise.
Solg reaching out to all PI's in an unusual way was the only thing that swayed it for NM. If you really think the majors were simply sending out a warning shot I'd have to say think again. They wanted control, plain and simple.
waka, I suggest since if you're so interested you google the subject. I take it you accept the single example I mentioned? Hundreds of thousands of small investors may have wanted him to stay, but the institutions didn't - game over for Patterson- which also neatly explains why steve's point is so irrelevant.
Don't be fooled. If BHP and NCM really want Mather out he will be gone. This was just a reminder too him that they will send him packing if they want. BHP and NCM know exactly what they are doing and currently are comfortable with NM being at the helm. They will remove him if and when they feel the time is right. JMHO
Is now been and gone...( with no major changes except the close call to re elect NM....) time to move on with the big job ahead..... With so much news in the pipeline (any time really...) I will be the first to say the cliche.... Just wouldn't want to be out of this one.... 2021, bring it on GLA.
NM is in the driving seat, if BHP want alpala then NM will be saying that you need to make a sensible offer. If you don't then there are others that will support this company and other explorations and I have options available, your choice, put up or get in line.
Hopefully we will get some clarity soon, after yesterday's assassination attempt. Will the majors now attempt to finish NM off, with a bid? Or will NM purge his enemies by revealing the route forward that excludes BHP and NCM from the operation of the mines?
steve, perhaps I should have said nearly 50% of shares were voted against, but I kind of assumed you'd understand the point. The number of shareholders is totally irrelevant and it matters not one jot what you and I think.
Hi Q. If we are collating professional backgrounds, I’m a chartered mechanical engineer steeped in projects, manufacturing, operations and to a lesser degree, business administration. That probably leaves me slightly schizophrenic at times :)
Smickster thats true some might feel inclined to vote for him. I just think that most PIs think their vote is a waste of time. Now they know it isnt. If they want change (either in direction or leadership) they have a real chance to effect that change. People like me who are fed up to the back teeth with NM, will change their vote. Maybe it will just get more people to vote, but my 2.5m will switch from in favour to against. FTJNY. Yours is a valid opinion. As is mine.
I think the amount of cash in the bank Solg has and how well it will be spent is more important than anything else. I wonder how BHP and NCM would react if Nick offers another 0.5% to FN should the need arise?
adick "steve, you really are daft. It's not the number of shareholders which is important, it's the number of shares they own. What don't you understand about that?" Oh yes, so why did you write "...a situation where nearly 50% of shareholders vote against a CEO ..."
Agreed FTJNY, I don't believe some of the rubbish spouted this morning. But to suggest that voters would change their vote, because they believe the sell us cheap brigade, over the judgement of NM and the current BOD, is beyond delusional.
Hi Dlwright! Yes, IMO the most likely outcome is now a hostile takeover bid from BHP and / or Newcrest. (I have an idea that BHP will buy out Newcrest and Cornerstone and bid on their own, but that's only a hunch). Give it six weeks to materialise. It's possible that, if Nick Mather changes direction fast, he can agree a farm-out of Alpala to BHP / Newcrest. This would be a better result for current shareholders of Solgold, and why it hasn't been done already is beyond me. There is also the possibility that the Chinese / Barrick make a bid. Of course a bidding war would be the best result of all, but they don't happen very often.
>> steve, you really are daft. It's not the number of shareholders which is important, it's the number of shares they own. What don't you understand about that?
OK, one more time with feeling. Obviously the number of shares is the important factor in voting. However, your statement that almost 50% of shareholders voted against NM is patently false and an attempt to mislead anyone not paying attention to the detail.
1) The vast majority of individual shareholders backed NM, which is a great sign of confidence in the CEO from private investors 2) The tiny minority of shareholders who voted against NM have a lot of shares so their individual impact on the outcome is far greater.
It's like on this board. There are a small minority who want Mather gone so they can sell quickly, but they make a disproportionate amount of noise.
With all due respect Jerry that’s the kind of assertion made by remainers s against brexiteers who didn’t like the result and then kept claiming that if they knew then what we know now they would have voted differently! Errr absolutely NOT! I voted for Nick and nothing has changed in my mind and I will happily do so again and again until we small shareholders get fair value for our investment in Solg
Exactly lesliez, I don't think half the people on this chatroom have the experience they say they have. I think the biggest reveal after the AGM has been this morning. We have people on here with Geology experience, they don't seem phased by the results. We have people on here with engineering experience, they don't seem phased by the result. Then we have people who understand cooperate law and finance, we shall call these people accountants. They are throwing their toys out the pram this morning with ridiculous assertions, like NM has to give a clear message. He has given a clear message, we are are going to become a mining company. The accountants don't understand what a clear message is. When we where in the early stages of Alpala, I listened to the people with geology experience. When we get the CFP, we should listen to the accountants. When we get the HLD and LLD we listen to the engineers. We now need to increase our defense and give NM and the BOD free reign. I am amazed how many posters on here think they can do a better job than NM and the BOD, and scream how they would run Solgold. You guys wouldn't even get an interview to feed and water our Donkeys. I would like to issue an apology at this stage to any accountants that have not thrown their toys out the pram this morning.