Stefan Bernstein explains how the EU/Greenland critical raw materials partnership benefits GreenRoc. Watch the full 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.
Eloro, I suggest the best way to express your concern is to ask questions at the AGM and to email the company as they have outlined in the Circular. I admit their track record in this respect is not great, but they'll certainly get your drift, particularly as you will not be a lone voice.
I'm not sure where your reference to three years comes from?
As previously stated Add, I appreciate your pragmatism. Like Fort eloquently stated, they've burned through the cash with little to show for it. I have lost count of the months, if not years, since the company indicated that they would look to do something with the other concessions. They have done nothing to bring money in and are taking us for granted that we will vote for them and accept raise after raise. I am disappointed that we have had no news leading up to the agm. As far as I am concerned, things cannot get any worst than they are already and they are expecting us to vote for more of the same.
I feel that if we don't show our displeasure, we will still be here in 2025 no further a long. All of the reasoned arguments put forward when Cornerstone took over hasn't led to any meaningful outcomes. I would rather see things get shaken up than passively wait another 3 years for more of the same.
Eloro, you say we're 'comfortable' waiting - we are not (or most of us aren't). However, we are realistic and understand this is taking much longer than anyone hoped. We also understand that if we loose our CEO it would be a raging disaster. It's a matter of pragmatism.
Bozi, of course it's not easy as big price tag asset require more intense levels of due diligence as witnessed by the near 12months it apparently took Franco before they were happy. And they were happy... the asset is prime time stuff. But as a management team, you sit down and do an SR... that doesn't need to take 3 months nor 12 months... it could take a few weeks. But even if it takes 8 to 9 months... by then the reality should be made clear to all. We are going to need to get 'exploration' back underway as ENSA sale will take time.
That's the it. That realisation should have been acted upon. Instead Scott and team thought it best to conserve cash and render the company a zombie in investment terms. No development ... and no exploration. Zero. But the reason why I've come out punching lately is due to the following:
1. They've burned through nearly $70m and delivered zero
2. They could have and should have done deals on regionals to get some 'free' plays on a number of targets. Eg cash carry on % earn in etc etc.
3. They've destroyed the share rice due to their poor management decisions.
That's why they need voting off. No management team would be arrogant enough to think they can do that and swan into an AGM and expect to come out with loads of votes.
Most management teams would be doing their best to deliver 'growth' catalysts for the business and finding alternative ways to fund that activity that does not require cash raises/cash burn. Free carry deals etc.
They 60 odd licence blocks we hold are costing about $6m a year I believe... what's the xxxcking point ???
As for the staff cuts and cost savings??? Mmm... seems like we have 200 security guards protecting cascabel these days. Can't see the need for anyone else!
Rant over... but ias you can see t has little to do with wanting a sale done in 12months. Much more than it.
When is the AGM voting open?? I'll be getting stuck in early doors that's for sure and I am not the only one.
Bozi …… pretty much agree with all of that
fort, well done on outlining our frustrations (immense) of how poor the current management have performed over the past year! not much to be proud of, sorry to say!
yours truly also ****ed off!
At least SM, the SP falling from 8p to 0p is a lot less distance to fall than the 40p to 8p which we have already endured and none of the wise pontificating here arrested that fall.
Fort - you've given new management, i.e. Caldwell a year to produce an event bearing in mind he has started with a bloated company, a PFS that didn't really wow anybody and a geopolitical position thrown up into the air by questionable government practices.
Do you have any real appreciation for how long things take?
It was never ever a case of walking in here, putting a bow on the company and prepping for sale in 3 months. That just isn't realistic.
Communication to the market has been less than what we all want but the strategy taken meant that newsflow was going to shrink. Would you have rather he gone the other way and fluffed the market with news all whilst going round in circles in the background?
To be fair to Scott he is trying to break the SolGold wheel. With the monster that is Cascabel that is no mean feat but some investors are completely misreading what is involved in getting this from where it was to where we'd all like it to be.
Reading between the lines, I'd say we're closer than we (you) think.
TheItalian - resolutions 10, 11 & 12 are explained in the AGM Information Circular. Pages 13-16.
Re: use of funds, I don't think any chance they will elaborate on that. It is basically asking them to confirm their strategy and corporate events over the next 6 months. Doubt they know themselves!
There is little new in 10-12. Just the usual flexibility to raise funds, with flexibility to dis-apply pre-emption rights.
Always a good option to have. I just trust the CGP boys less with this option vs. previous management.
With BHP in control the share price would be decimated and we'd all be diluted to oblivion. So far the only alternative I've seen you present, Fort, amounts to 'sticking Cascabel on eBay'. I am glad you are not running the show.
Guys, if I was young, I perhaps wouldn't object to spending another 3 years waiting. So far, 3 years of waiting, late PFS, muddled fund raising, and now mudfled SR. I don't understand how some folks can be comfortable waiting and waiting? If everyone are comfortable waiting another 3 years while guessing here, then so be it. I should be happy to leave at my break even price. Sadly, that price isn't 8p.
I don't mind being called whatever label cones to mind. I don't believe that you are all happy with the terrible SP, aside from the long timers who bought at 3p.
TheItalian,
To be fair, Eloro is correct. Lets face it, you've been in touch with SOLG several times and learned zero. Why? Because they can't tell you anything that is new material to market. And as you are fininding now, be careful with cosy chats as it's a bit like snake eyes... you can feel comfortable when you really shouldn't be.
Management are to be tested and proven on what they have achieved over 12 months period. And SOLG new BoD's have failed miserably. They've achieved absolutey zero. Here's my summary...
1. They've achieved share price destruction
2. They have failed to deliver outcome of promised SR
3. They have failed to deliver a monetisation event
4. They have failed to deliver the promised cost savings
5. They have failed to communicate the business direction to the markets
6. They have failed to deliver any shareholder value or growth in the period
The worst thing of all is point 5. They have told the markets that we are not a developer. They have told the markets that we are a mine finder and explorer.
They have told the markets by mothballing all exploration that we are no longer a mine finder or explorer and also not a developer. So what are we Scott? We are a bunch of inexperienced SOLG shareholders who are trying to sell a world class Tier1 mine which quite frankly could be stuck on ebay and sold in a week for market rate.
You can't vote that incompetence back in?? You are out of your mind.
Pre AGM...in next 4 weeks) they should have outlined the plan to 'return' to being an exploration company. Outline the plan to sell ENSA... as result of SR etc etc.
These are the minmum commitments expected. Instead... it's just ... vote us in as you have no alternative (oh but we do Scott!) and we'll drag things out to Q1 and then do bit more dragging out to H2. By then we'll have the shareprice to 3p and shares in issue around 7bln of which CGP boys will have 30%. See how it goes? No way. Vote these idiots out and you'll be better off with BHP as at least the market would believe someone is in control and the asset is going somewhere.
Eloro - at this stage, I disagree.
I would guess that someone could make a move upon the publishing of an attractive phased development plan and the indication of financing being achievable.
If we sided with BHP then you'd have to wait whilst they pushed people into the positions that matter. More wrangling, more politics, more heave and more ho.
And that's without begging the question of how much BHP would buy us for.
If getting sold pronto no matter the outcome matters so much to you then you might want to review your position.
Eloro, my young friend, once again you show how inexperienced you are as an investor. Genuinely, if I were you I would seriously question myself and my way of understanding the companies I invest in.
I don't mean to patronize but that was a very unintelligent post.
Only folks who need reassurance will need to email the company. Folks who have made up their minds based on the principle that past behaviour being indicative of future behaviour have no need to email the company. What are they going to say rather than the usual platitudes?
DBW, I am struggling to see what Scott will be able to deliver in the next few months when hasn't delivered much in the approx year since he became ceo!!
For one thing, instead of ranting here, I have emailed Solgold asking for a clarification about the rationale for resolutions 10,11 ad 12, the intended use of the funds and a good reason for existing shareholders who would be diluted in case of capital raise.
Let's see if they answer.
I seriously think you should all email them asking similar questions, prior to the AGM, which might be the only way to make them aware that there is an unhappy group of shareholders.
Eloro
I’m fairly certain BHP would be far worse.
Scott had a lot to put right and it takes time. Voting him out would be utterly stupid IMO Let’s see what fruit his work may bear in the coming few months.
Orth, the SP hit 40p last year because the Japanese and the Norwegians were buying if I recall correctly.
Typo...they can't be any worse...
People keep mentioning the share price being 40p back then… but it only hit 40p off the back of some very promising first drill results at Porvenir.. when we were an exploration company.. We have become a textbook lifestyle company now.. there is nothing at all to push us back to even 20p. The level of value destruction brought here by the CGP takeover has certainly surprised me… an open ended strategy review has been catastrophic.
Prior to that, it hit circa 45p years back when BHP bought shares…. But there was only 1.7 billion shares back then when they paid that.. we are almost double that now.. so even the possibility of another huge supermajor arriving and paying a huge premium to market to get a foot in, isn’t getting us back even close to 40p now.
We have become a textbook lifestyle company.. many may not like to admit it.
Fort, I am fairly certain that the SP started to fall after DC's failed raise.
I just want this sold so that I can move on while I am still young enough. If BHP can get that done, so be it. They can be any worse than the current and previous management who got us to where we are today.
Fort, you seem to have forgotten the comments made by the ex-CEO of Glencore who recently said the modus operandi of the majors was to 'screw the junior explorers'. Do you think he was wrong? The idea that we'd be in 'safer hands', as you describe it, with BHP is laughable.
You mean he was indanger of being 'accountable'.
Directors that 'dodge' accountabiity are not to be trusted and need to be voted down.
You are safer in hand sof BHP than these CGP tools. For the last time... BHP cannot steal this from you as they don't have enough ownerships and they would never get away with any underhand tactics. But they might have a plan and stock some bods in there that the market respects and likes and believes. That could see SP double in no time.
You need to have a sumper major visibly seen to be involved and driving things to some extent as the project is Tier1 and the market expects that. Having some clowns tool around who have zero experience of Tier1 mines while they depsrately scratch around trying to line their own pockets is a joke.
The market actually believed under DC as he had a CV to back it up. He didn't mess things up at all. The sp was 40p+ post his PFS. I wonder what the sp will be after Scott's imaginery PFS?? 4p? Scott hasn't even employed n external auditor team to review the PFS yet. Vote the him down and get a proper CEO in. And make sure those CGP boys cannot issue those 157m shares to themselves... pro rata my @rse.
Permits to commence construction and an end date to the SR is what we need. Hopefully end of Q1. C