The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
Forward looking information is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward looking information, including but not limited to: transaction risks; general business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties; future prices of mineral prices; accidents, labour disputes and shortages and other risks of the mining industry. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking information include, but are not limited to, risks relating to the ability of exploration activities (including assay results) to accurately predict mineralization; errors in management's geological modelling and/or mine development plan; capital and operating costs varying significantly from estimates; the preliminary nature of visual assessments; delays in obtaining or failures to obtain required governmental, environmental or other required approvals; uncertainties relating to the availability and costs of financing needed in the future; changes in equity markets; inflation; the global economic climate; fluctuations in commodity prices; the ability of the Company to complete further exploration activities, including drilling; delays in the development of projects; environmental risks; community and non-governmental actions; other risks involved in the mineral exploration and development industry; the ability of the Company to retain its key management employees and skilled and experienced personnel; and those risks set out in the Company's public documents filed on SEDAR at www.sedar.com. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward looking information. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except in accordance with applicable securities laws.
An opportunity in Ecuador
The most under-explored and prospective section of the Andean Copper Belt, the world’s biggest and richest area for copper production. SolGold has first mover advantage and is the largest concession holder throughout Ecuador.
t1
A Tier 1 project
Long-life and expandable project with 26-year initial mine life
First decile costs and negative AISC of -$1.38/lb Cu (first 5 years post ramp-up)
Post Tax US$2.9bn NPV and 19.3% IRR (at US$3.60 /lb Cu)
Clear roadmap to becoming one of the world’s first net zero copper mines to be built
feature_icon_4
Potential for
Troll-proof facts:
Highlights of the period include:
• The Company ended the quarter with strong liquidity, a cash balance of $48.1M, plus $25.4M shares held, which can be sold at the election of a wholly owned subsidiary.
• SolGold successfully merged with Cornerstone Capital Resources Inc. (formerly TSX: CGP), which has led to SolGold securing 100% ownership of the Cascabel project, along with additional exploration properties.
• With the ongoing restructuring efforts described below, management expects current cash balances to last beyond June 2024.
• The Company's management has conducted a thorough assessment of its operations, with a focus on streamlining the organization to increase effectiveness and manage costs. Consequently, the Company has restructured its offices in Brisbane, Australia, London, United Kingdom, and Quito, Ecuador, to generate significant cost reductions while enhancing operational efficiency. As part of the restructuring, Mr. Scott Caldwell, who previously served as Interim CEO, has been appointed as the Company's Chief Executive Officer and President of SolGold Ecuador. Additionally, the Company announced the appointment of Mr. Chris Stackhouse as its Chief Financial Officer, effective 17 April 2023.
• Management is internally evaluating a phased approach to the development of Cascabel with the intent to reduce upfront capital and shorten the development schedule.
Trool-proof facts:
SOLOMON GOLD plc, is a copper and gold specialist with exploration tenements in Solomon Islands and Australia. Their strategy; to prove world class deposits by exploring sites near to some of the worlds leading gold mines. Click here to find out more about the company.
Solomon Gold carries a diverse portfolio of higher risk high reward exploration projects in Solomon Islands and lower risk projects which are more advanced towards resource definition in Queensland, where exploration costs are approximately one third of that in Melanesia. Solomon Gold's projects include Guadalcanal and Fauro (Solomon Islands) and Rannes and Mt Perry (Queensland, Australia).
And go on, report my post. happy to get banned along with you.
Remember what I also said in that post - that your parents, especially your dad, would be ashamed if they knew this is how you've ended up spending your days.
For what it’s worth .. if the board wanted to do something faintly exciting, then the strategic review would be the audit trail when recommending to shareholders that x y x would be a really sensible way forward. So that covers all the scenarios routinely debated (?) here. Just wish they’d hurry up, I have a cash flow challenge coming in November!
SM, I've been banging that particular drum for a long time and it seems odd to me that people are ignoring what the company has said on this issue: No more royalty deals. A company can't simply continue reducing the gross profit margin without it impacting the viability of a project. Our board knows this, hence the statement.
NAL, AgArCu, let's make this interaction our last as clogging up the board with tripe is just what you pair seem to want for some reason.
All I've done is call out a false statement made by AgArCu, politely backed it up with facts then provided my opinion.
In terms of my lies regarding my holding NAL, if you fail to believe me then maybe that's down to the fact you cannot get your head around the amount of capital one can accumulate if you are driven, smart and sometimes in the right place at the right time. I'll give the pair of you some advice as above all I'm a kind person ( a trait of my character NAL ), spend less time on here making £2.50 an hour from whoever pays you to flood this board and dilute sensible posts. Get out there be courageous, seek out opportunity, be mindful of others and make some decent money doing something worthwhile that means my holding and the posts of others don't wind you up to the point you both come across in a less than desirable way. C
Lol…..and within the last week you’ve been asking everyone to be civil, yet her you are…….AGAIN…….hurling insults left right and centre.
People don’t believe you because you lie and you’ve been caught lying and you just aren’t man enough to own up.
If trading this share was as easy as you make out it is, everyone on here would be doing it, but it’s obvious you have no idea how markets work judging from your posts on here and the anther side,
I suspect you might be bi polar as mental health issues run in your family as you have already admitted.
That would explain a lot!!!!!
You should seek help with your fantasy trading and gambling……….
I have not contributed for some time.
I have tended to be in the “this will go to production” camp with the proviso that it might be sold along the way. Unfortunately, there has been rather a lot of procrastination along the way and currently we are getting nowhere fast with the share price recognising this.
As everything has stopped pending the results of the strategic review, we can only wait to see what it contains. My view is that we need to start, subject to the receipt of the necessary extraction licences, open cut mining of the near surface deposits in the Cascabel area which would provide income towards building the main block cave mine, i.e. it would improve Solgold’s credit worthiness such that lenders would be more willing to provide finance than is, perhaps, the case at present. Also, moving the mine to production might add interest or stimulation to companies who might be looking at Solgold but not been going any further.
I would also like to see Porvenir taken forward as, potentially, that would be another source of finance for Cascabel.
Unfortunately, everything has stopped pending the result of the strategic review so that we need to see what the company’s view of the way forward is. However, I don’t believe sitting around waiting for someone to make a bid is an option!
Frog
People seem to be ignoring or misunderstanding the point Bozi is making, which is that further royalty financing further squeezes the economics of the project and therefore its attractiveness to a potential buyer. I agree with him that it's unlikely SOLG will look to pursue this option again.
And Quady, for the millionth time, the strategic review is not just about "advancing Cascabel" and it may well involve a sale of the asset or the whole company. As per the below, which the company have stated on multiple occasions:
"The Strategic Review includes, among other things, evaluating and pursuing value-enhancing opportunities for the Company, such as:
· evaluating financing alternatives for the Company;
· a spin-out of assets, other than the Cascabel project, to all shareholders;
· the direct or indirect sale of an interest in the Cascabel project howsoever effected; or
· any other transaction or series of related transactions."
Bozi, royalty deals are very much alive and kicking and way way better than the dilution that the big boys like BHP and NCM thrive on and try and push onto the minnows. The two royalties made by SOLG were masterstrokes and have kept BHP in their box and rather embarrassingly saw them chuck their toys out of the pram... quite odd considering the size of BHP and how little they apparently care about SOLG lol!
The royalties do come with buy out clauses which allow a future partner or super major to reduce the ongoing expense. So they are in some cases reversible to some extent.
If SOLG needed to (in the future) to do a royalty deal and that was better than dilution, then they would do it. I remember a similar conversation some moons ago whereby certain posters said a royalty deal was not going to happen again after the Franco deal. And what happened?... mmm.
At end of the day... I think SOLG will be sold before the next royalty deal is done so not really an issue. But don't right one off as I can assure you... the CGP boys have no intention of massively diluting their equity holdings. That's the absolute opposite of their game plan.
Oh needalife... I get accused about telling porky pies about a tiny £1200 trade I did with a £33 profit yet here you are telling investment whoppers that would sink a battleship.
I think I speak for all-on here when I say no one believes you've ever made a profit in your life, on Solg or any other share. You are and out and out loser in every sense of the word and in everything you've ever tried. That's what you are here, a crusty little scab on this board, bitter, angry, with unstoppable rage and fury, lashing out 24/7.
Have you ever wondered how different your life might have been like if anyone had ever loved you?
Hfm. I've nothing better to do on a sunny Sunday afternoon. Out of curiosity to see what sort of character you are. I went back over your posts.... didn't have to go back far.
You my friend spout more rubbish than most on here.
There becomes a pattern of every few weeks you spout you've bought another million or 1.3 million for your wife or put 2 million in a silp?.
I couldn't read anymore it was like a test for a 3 year old to spot the liar.
I can't believe even the desperate positive news seekers on here. would give you the time of day.
Hfm, I assume you will bottle this but I'll ask anyway: who do you believe will buy us? I'm not asking who will actually buy us, because there may not be a TO and even if there is, you can't know who it would come from. But, based on what WI has said and what you believe, who do YOU think will buy solg? Nail your colours to the mast: you must be able to picture it, as you seem so sure?
Also shares were $2 when I got in. Now $20.
Not bad 10 fold profit or nearly a dollar a share dividend. So all this talk of massive dilution and massive debt. Is all it is talk, from a bunch of armchair experts who haven't a clue.
Adickt. Not to sure where all the panic talk is about massive debt.
FMG started up about 15 years ago with F A.
Now paying us shareholders 75 c a share. You really haven't a clue
I agree AgArCu, no meaningful TO is imminent., Scott and Bob need time to open up further options. Just read the words and then read them again before posting. I'm good for help thanks 😊
How long will I have to wait before you admit I was correct when I said no TO bid is imminent? Will you apologize in the new year, or this time next year? I'm a patient man 🤣
Him saying bids just aren't happening from majors is the biggest clue yet that we're not getting a meaningful TO bid anytime soon. If you believe otherwise, I can't help you x
This is not my interpretation AgArCu, I've quoted the interview verbatim, hence the quotes.
You'll find Warren extremely engaging on Twitter so by all means contact him and ask him if his recent quotes mean he's 'put a nail in' the fact that there is no bid coming. I'm sure he'll confirm his recent quote 'we'll get sold' ... just might take a few months from here is my take.
I'll keep an eye out for your tweet and look forward to him correcting you. My interpretation is that his patience is being tested with SOLG, but the asset is great and this will get sold in the medium term and he, like I trusts this management team to do the right thing by all us LTH's.
C.
If that's your interpretation that's great 🥱
In the meantime, shall we see what the SR says? Because we're not sold yet, and we haven't been for years, so... 🤷♂️
Anyway, I'm sure we'll come up with a cheaper way to mine some of the minerals, that's not really up for discussion.
@AgArCu Re: 'in the absence of a bid (and WI has put a nail in that) ' This is simply not true....
WI merely expressed his opinion that copper wasn't living up to the hype that was around at the start of the year and cited the lack of interest by the majors such as BHP and Rio in SOLG as one such anecdotal observation of his. He did state there are fundamentals are however in favor of copper though for sure, but it's just not impacting the copper price.
He went on to say that the 'Chinese are wanting to buy' (unclear that was correlated to SOLG) and 'we'll get sold' ( relating to SOLG), so it's untrue to say 'WI has put a nail in that'. We will get sold AgArCu.
Comments started arising about looking at a new mine plan early June so I think limited interest has resulted in Scott and the team looking a lower capex alternatives to entice suitors with smaller budgets into the ring with a view to getting more of an auction style sale of the main asset going as that the best way to extract the best price. They must be a couple of months into that review now so let's hope for some news in a few weeks.
It's frustrating and could be a fair while longer to get this sold but Bob, Scott and the team are on it and the long term fundamentals are there, so it's just a question of patience. I personally don't think we'll get near to the NAV of circa 72p or even Peels 65p target, but anything north of 50p and they are welcome to my holding.
ATB, C.
May have been posted before, apple if so, not been in for a few days.
https://apple.news/A5mrC8p3rQxayTsA4QlpT2g
As I've said before, I've done plenty of reading on the subject 👍
Think this is another one where we won't change each other's minds. Unlike the rampy claims of imminent TO though, I'm not promising jam anytime soon (nor promising anything, it's not a likely scenario), so I think exploring the possibility is probably fine.
Do you know much of the route to the petaquilla region's production? Knowing what successive concession owners and governments were saying about deals there, in the decades leading to production, will teach you a thing or two. I'm guessing you're not familiar. Lot of statements similar to those made by the last two administrations here, and we know the outcome (or I assume you do as a mining investor).
Obviously not a lesson in how to do funding, but notice what happened to the government's efforts there. Now can you see why I'm not claiming anything far-fetched?
You should read some of the recent comments on this subject. 6/8 percent has been the level mentioned by the government.