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.
Good afternoon JungleJane, may I ask your opinion on next years elections in Feb. I think Moreno will lose, but this won't affect the mining industry. I agree with you on Oil and Gas. I invested in Oil and Gas for years, and don't see any recovery soon, as the world goes electric.
It’s a natural consequence of making the attractions of the offer greater to CGP shareholders that it might then appear less attractive to Solgold shareholders. But don’t forget Solgold would be a bigger company (100% of ENSA being the key part) and CGP already has around 6% of Solgold.
Rcgl why would bhp team up with cgp. Let's face it they will become a headache later for which they receive nothing from that relationship. As for solg we have brought the discoveries to where they are now with Bhp/Ncm and developed relationships in Ecuador all as we promised for the funding they provided. I don't buy Bhp wanting us out the way but time will tell. They have an opportunity to get rid of cgp now and then deal with solg direct thus keeping overall price down. Imo of course.
Thanks JungleJane, that is more in line what I was asking. Whilst understandably most people are obsessed with what price we may get, there are three aspects to this, (1) we want the highest price possible, (2) any major wants the lowest price possible, (3) Ecuador wants the best result possible for them to realise and unlock the resources they have whilst keeping the people happy and creating jobs.
BHP's anti dilution rights expire as of the 15th !!
Believe NCM has already lost theirs as they are over the 10% agreement, if it dilutes below the 10% holding then they will be allowed to take it to the 10% again. If NCM were to drop below 5% then the anti dilution rights are null and void
''what extent the government may sway how this ends up''...nail on head with that statement...the politics will have a significant influence on events. Ecuador wants to see an influx of international companies into Ecuador as this endorses Ecuador as a place for secure private investment.
Hi addicknt, I always believed this was a good offer and CGP should take it. Agreed we didn't have the evidence at the time, as we have only just started drilling recently. But to me, this has always been about the future. It I had been a CGP shareholder, there was a time during the offer, that I could have sold my CGP shares, and brought Solgold shares, as CGP were rising in price, and we were stagnant. And they would have got more than 11 shares a share. I believe they have missed this window of opportunity, but we will soon see what happens.
swsquires, I started my career in Ecuador and I have worked there thirteen years in total including being a director of the chamber of mines (a long time ago). I watched the government destroy the nascent exploration industry three times due to it's inability to understand the timescales and risk involved. I used to say that if the golden goose arrived in Ecuador they would kill it in the airport. NM and his team have taken the correct approach from the beginning. Stakeholder involvement is not for lip service, especially in Ecuador where they deposed 8 presidents in 13 years for not listening to them. I would say that the decline of the petroleum industry is responsible for the change of heart we have seen. In theory the government would prefer Solgold to do the project themselves, but in practice, the government is up to its neck in debt and they need large companies and massive production to escape. My view is that as long as Solgold don't scare the horses, the government will continue to support them whatever the decision. It's not like they have any choice. I would caution that the Ecuador government is prone to shooting itself in the foot near to elections so nothing is ever written in stone in this vibrant, infuriating place. DYOR and GLA
Quady, this was not a question about Apala as I fully understand the timescales involved. This is about the entire portfolio owned by Solgold and to what extent the government may sway how this ends up. As we know, Alpala is just the first one.
Good morning swsquires, this point has been brought up many times. The time scales for Alpala are in ENSA. NM and JW and the Ecuadorian mining minister, have all said, that no one can execute this faster than Solgold, to get it to production. My understanding is thus. Again two Scenario's .
First scenario: Alpala is sold, this is a right mess. You get a 10% tax immediately and the environmental licenses, have to be applied for again, including the water permit. This is a long process, as you have to prove what you say, and you need to change your Governance within the company. Maybe up to a years delay.
Second scenario: I got this wrong, but this is what makes this chatroom so good, as I was corrected, I checked the facts, and said sorry. Solgold is sold as a whole. The licences transfer, but, again this takes time, and the bidding and selling process takes the time. Especially if Solgold defend the bid.
So no one can build Alpala faster than Solgold. Hope this helps.
Thanks, Quady. So if we take Sav's point, it's likely to be circa 13.5/14%. Which brings me to my point. Given what's been going on with our other concessions and how amazingly exciting they look, why would we want to be diluted? Sure, Alpala is very important, but if we follow you rout to production and end up mining three/four or even more Tier 1 mines, it will begin to look a bit daft to have handed CGP this number of shares.
Good morning Savshare, the Solgold shares that CGP own are in the calculation, I didn't make it clear. Because the Solgold shares that CGP own are less than 10%. 7.6 % I believe, we absorb them into treasury. This makes a bid harder still, and we can sell these on the open market if needs be later on, to continue funding exploration on other targets. ( with no further dilution ) But well spotted. Thank you.
Solgold seem to have focused a huge part of their effort in getting the government and the people of Ecuador onside. They are hiring and training locally, investing in the environment and re-emphasize that this is for the Ecuadorian nation. The more I have read on this, the more impressed I am at how Solgold have really tried to be a partner in this venture.
That brings me to my question. From the perspective of the government, they want mining up and running and sending money to the treasury. This means that it is in many ways in their interests for majors to get involved as it accelerates production and thus revenues flowing through. But, in Solgold they have a partner who has made great efforts to work with them and the people. Taking the example of BHP destroying aboriginal sites recently, how much do we think Ecuador would trust the big boys? In my mind I think they have trust in Solgold and how they operate, but would like things moving faster. To what extent do we think the Ecuadorian government could play in how this ends up?