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.
I believe this will start any day now and the news will be persistent through to and beyond the AGM .... as they say the best form of defence......only question is whether it should be changed to shock and ore ??
Afternoon addicknt, just noticing the slight shift in your opinion, which if I am right was Solgold cannot be defended, and BHP could take us out anytime they wanted. Now, it has shifted to we could circumvent rule 21, which you told me couldn't be done, and using the way I suggested. Also shifting to this could be defended. Another year, and we may make a convert out of you, and see that production is the most likely outcome. All the best.
rcgl, my guess is that they may not wish to see the extension of these powers, given that we've now moved into a phase when they could be used against them. In other words, as part of a defence against a takeover which could circumvent Rule 21. We know that NCM were unhappy with the interim funding package and I don't imagine that either they or BHP were happy to see the arrival of the Chinese on the Register, which they probably see as a hostile move by NM. So, if it is indeed the case that it's these Resolutions which are causing concern (and it may not be), you can understand why they want to prevent it.
Whether or not this is technical or strategic, one of the keys to good management is the ability to react to developing situations. Being by far the largest PI, I would say that NM is more motivated to get value for SOLG than any of us and if that means changing the goal posts when necessary, that's fine by me. It makes no sense to me for investors to put their money into companies if they don't have faith in the BOD. Changing the BOD here would have a catastrophic effect on SP and lead to us being swallowed up on the cheap IMO.
So a few days or a week ago you had CGP informing their shareholders that PFS would not be ready until q1 2021. Where did that intel come from is a question I want NM or Jason or anyone at SOLG to answer and it better be a good answer.
Then apply common sense and you soon end up with the following:
1. CGP have inside knowledge of what is going on behind scenes. How much knowledge is anyones guess. 2. NCM and CGP are already in partnership 3. Shortly after learning about PFS delays and Chinese interest, CGP insiders bought $7.7m of their own stock in mates rates $5 placing.
And some of you think PFS delays is a bad thing? Some of you think it's a management mess up? I think you need to look at it again and start to question whether Porvenir has better economics. Whether Porvenir might be the better project to develop first. Whether Alpala needs a rethink due to what they've discovered at Porvenir. Whether Alpala is being redesigned to suit a particular interest of a future partner before they agree to fund it. Basically a bespoke solution for an interested party that wants to crack on with the project at pace and not waste time.
I think SOLG wanted to design the mine plan for themselves but when Porvenir came along they suddenly thought... we can sell off Alpala and use funds to deliver Porvenir ourselves... mmm lets go down that route.
CGP know what's happening and they know it bodes well for them. They wouldn't have stuffed $7.7m into CGP stock if they thought otherwise.
I think we'll see Alpala sold or JV'd out in March / April 2021 after Ecuadorian Elections. By then we'll have data in on Porvenir holes 1, 2, 3 and 4 plus Rio holes 1 and 2 is my guess.
PFS - more like FFS! Tactics or not, I'm sure I'm not the only one that doesn't appreciate games and being lied to.
At best, this is deceit and broken promises. At worst it's just plain incompetence.
Belief in the long term value of this stock is one thing, but if instead of waiting for that one day when it will suddenly rise 300-500%, NM actually helped to build the price over time, then perhaps we wouldnt be so vulnerable to these "low-ball" offers that everyone seems so afraid of? The only reason to sell out to a low ball offer is if you have no faith that the current management can deliver something better.
HI Addicknt, when it comes to dilution, aren't this year's resolutions actually more favourable to the major holders than last year's (i.e. the power the company already has as of today)? From last year the company is authorised to issue up to 1/3 additional shares which could be by way of an open offer (and a load more for the CGP offer but that was a one off). But they are also authorised by special resolution to disapply pre-emption rights on up to 15% of the share capital.
This year's resolutions would authorise up to 1/3 capital again by way of open offer or up to 2/3 with the extra being a rights issue. And the disapplication of pre-emption rights this year is only in relation to 5%, with an additional 5% if it's for a takeover or investment. So the end result will be that the company could do a placing of the same size as it already has power to do, but the amount that can be offered to a new holder without pre-emption is smaller. Or they can do a larger equity raise, but with the extra being a rights issue so again the existing shareholders have the right to participate.
We as PIs may face dilution in these scenarios because we might not have the funds or the desire to participate, but as the largest shareholders and with deep pockets, it seems that BHP and NCM are actually in a better position in respect of any equity raises than they would be under the current powers, in terms of dilution. So would BHP and NCM really be against this year's resolutions?
Well, taking the RNS on face value or otherwise, at least we've had an update on the PFS now and it can be put on the back burner for a while. I'm looking forward to more operational news this week - fingers crossed.
Thank you RS5hedgefund, that is a must see for bacon lovers everywhere. However that is the worst bacon bap ever, he managed to burn every rasher of bacon, and although I know some people like crispy bacon, these rashers were just burnt. Still laughing.
OK emergency is over, so now will deliver another update. Sorry for the delay in obtaining the bacon, there was a further delay and got some freshly made hot rolls from the baker 4 doors away. As I felt this was a better outcome, than my leftover sourdough bread. So everything is back on track, and emergency is over, so onwards with production of not one, but two tasty bacon rolls.
Once you have voted, don't forget to go to the next screen where you confirm your vote. Also make sure you have voted with all your different accounts. It isn't clear on the platform whether voting in your isa will also count as a vote in your sipp and jisas
Sharketmare......excellent post. I said the same thing last week, but nowhere near as eloquent....lol. It looks like indecision and backtracking from Nick and the team. It's not, it's a good defence to a early low ball offer wiping us all out. We have to trust the man and let him get on with what he knows best! At times it can be a pain in the butt.....but that's investing for ya!
We all know there's anxiety at SOLG Towers about the outcome of the various resolutions and specifically those relating to dilution and which require 75% approval. I'm not sure I see either the success, or otherwise, of getting approval as being a catalyst for anything in particular. Similarly, nor do I see the issuing of the PFS as being a critical date. My view is that the interested parties will already have evolved their plans and will do whatever it is they wish to do in their own time. The main dilution clause is, to some degree irrelevant (despite that, I voted against it). Any major issue of equity will accompany the eventual drawdown of the funding package which, in turn, will not happen for at least a year. The key issue is that none of our main shareholders will be prepared to allow NM the leeway to do something they don't approve of and especially if it impacts upon their strategy. The defeat of the resolution will, in effect, serve as a Golden Share. Some of you will think this is a bad thing, and you have a point. Others, like me, will disagree and wish to have a say in our future direction. My other contention is that I have no wish for the company to position itself as being difficult or impossible to take over. This is what's happened at BCN and, more or less, to GGP. I prefer flexibility and believe this is the way to greater shareholder value.