Utilico Insights - Jacqueline Broers assesses why Vietnam could be the darling of Asia for investors. 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.
Bozi, I sincerely hope so.
Nal, perhaps you could point me in the direction of my 'hysterically offended reply'? As for the rest of your typically incoherent post, we'll see how the weeks pans out, shall we?
Good morning MassiveRay .
Slug didn't give any reason, just as he has given no reason for his 51p prediction.
He talks utter tosh.
If that's what your post meant Ag, it certainly didn't read that way. Still, you were posting late at night, so perhaps you were under the weather. Incidentally, I completely agree it's an attractive prospect at these prices and I'm pleased you also see it that way.
And btw, I'm not remotely angry and am looking forward to seeing how things pan out in the coming week.
Adickt. I posted last week that mather stlll had his foot in the solg door, and nothing had changed.
Your hysterically offended reply, clearly disagreed with me.
I think this latest 2 q and a sessions debacle in 3 weeks, enforces my opinion, and weakens yours.
Be interested in how you spin yet another solg debacle
I also agree with AgArCu.
Getting pretty attractive for an attempt now. How low will they let it go? If we still work on the basis that M&A kicks up at cycle lows then we could be in or approaching the right ball park.
I'm still disappointed because operating from this semi-distressed position was something a few of us were concerned about. As it happens, I don't think we could have avoided it per se, but the company could certainly have insulated shareholders better by factoring in some targeted regional drilling - simply for the reason that every metal discovery opens up the potential for an additional property with an MRE thus plumping up the pig.
But what's done is done. Leave some (in this case a lot) on the table for the next lot.
I think the bear argument would be extremely weak in this case Add.
Why double down and compound the initial dogs dinner? Surely you'd just sit, wait and try again when you did have something to say...
"I gave you the reason for this meeting earlier. Quady deleted"
What was the reason I missed it?
Cheers
Attractive for a TO. At these prices it is a very attractive investment. I've added to my holding in the 15s. Long term prospects are good if management rediscover their sensibilities.
Would you say you're quite an angry man, add? Firing off unsolicited investment advice first thing in the morning is not normal. I hold lots of dividend stocks, but thank you anyway, I guess?
'lots of investors don't care about solg being attractive'. Really?! So people seek out unattractive investments, do they?
If you're interested in a yield, you'd be far better off buying LGEN. 9% from one of the safest bets on the market.
The bullish argument says the presentation is to discuss something substantial; the bear argument says it's merely a recognition that the last effort was so utterly useless , and they received so much flack, they've been forced into doing it again but with more detail of what it actually meant. I pray to god it's the former. If there's no RNS on Thursday morning we may as well stay in bed.
Anyway, one thing's for sure - the argument will rage all week.
This is why Slug is the most unintelligent poster on here.
Quady doesn't delete anything.
Slug gets his posts deleted by admin because he is a vile individual.
But he is so unintelligent he can't even work that out.
Indeed, there was the usual BS ( I.e. Great asset, great metallurgy,right time blah ) ... then the actual interesting points about multiple NDAs and a busy data room which was encouraging. What's the confidence level though dude?
Surely if they were made to look a bit stupid last time thanks to the suitors playing games they wouldn't be so naive to make the same mistake again. After all, what did Sleepy Joe signpost last time that would change in the next three weeks that would warrant going in front of investors again?
C
Interesting Watson..... What's your confidence level / source ( might as well go full disclosure as this will be deleted by morning ) ATB, c
What's the reason Slug? 51 p???
BISHOPSGATE, LONDON / ACCESSWIRE / July 14, 2023 / SolGold is pleased to announce that Scott Caldwell, CEO of SolGold and President of SolGold Ecuador, will provide a live presentation and answer questions relating to the Company's recent activities via the 6ix.com platform on 20 July 2023, at 8:00 a.m. (EST), 1:00 p.m. (BST), and 10:00 p.m. (AEST).
Interested parties can register for SolGold's webcast for free via the following link:
https://my.6ix.com/2kg-oijy
The presentation is open to all existing and potential shareholders.
The presentation material will also be available on the Company website on the day of the presentation at: https://www.solgold.com.au/investors-center.
Questions can be submitted during the live presentation.
Gosh, just seen slug's posts. Flattering though it is to be subject of his advances, it's a bit much, isn't it? Not going to get any love that way. Softly, softly, sluggy... 🤗
Add, of course we can't increase royalty deals without decreasing our attractiveness. Who would suggest that? However, lots of investors don't care about solg being attractive. We care about getting minerals out of the ground and making some cash. We may get a TO bid, but wishful thinking isn't a business plan. So, on we go.
I always knew Slug was a bit backwards.
But writing backwards, just shows how unintelligent he really is.
Goodbye Slug.
Of course there will be no bid next week.
DM, I agree with most of what you say. However the effect of these agreements is material, particularly when you bear in mind the average net margin for the major miners was 14% last year. Assuming we load with debt to get to production our margin would be considerably less. This is why we won't be going to production, so we won't need more royalty funding.
A full calculation is not possible, for the simple reason we have no current projections upon which to base it. However, we are currently committed to 1.6% in NSR payments and the latest figures we have seen relating to the possible government take is between 6-8%, although I seem to recall you suggesting it will be much higher.
So, are you really trying to suggest we could give away an even greater number without it impacting the return and therefore the attractiveness of the project? My contention is that we cannot, yours is that we can; the difference being the company seemingly agrees with my stance.
In any event, I don't wish to see us raising any more funds of any description and sincerely hope we don't get to the point where have to.
Absolutely sure BHP and NCM don't want any more royalty deals, why would they? But they didn't want the last ones either.
They've said it is too expensive, because they want other holders to side with them in opposing such deals. But that's about their economics, not ours. I've said it before, I'll say it again- £60m cleared is plenty for us to get wealthy. What's your calc based on? What percentage do we need to maintain for that?
Come on- no sarcastic remarks: put your numbers up and I'll show you where the mistakes are. Unless you've not actually done any calculations, and you're making totalitarian comments based on jack?
Interesting that neither the company nor our two largest shareholders agree with you. But I'm sure you know best.
I don't think you've done the maths right there add: feel free to lay out your calculations if you want them checked over by people here. The government top slice won't be fixed, either, and it won't be scripted until each renegotiation. Look at literally any multi-decade project for confirmation of that. Gov will squeeze in good times and waive in tougher times, same as it ever was. And the metrics are fine for many more percentage points than we're at currently, I'd say. Also, what are you using as the denominator? Because, in favour of your argument, the slide moves on a reduced output cf. the PFS. Still think we're plenty clear of tipping though.
You're right to say it's a question of economics: that's exactly why solg could well leverage the minerals for some years to come. But this is just speculation, and I don't want to be accused of 'deramping(?)'. Maybe we'll sell a load more shares at 16p to raise cash instead.
Aggie, it's not only based upon what the company has said, it's driven by the economics. When you take the government's cut into account, we simply cannot give away any more of our top line. To do so would seriously endanger the viability of the project.