Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. Watch the 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.
Quite possibly red, you're right it's just a copy of the press release.
That must be someones sense of humour. It's not an article it's a RNSand is bylines Bishopsgate London...
Good find though...
redknight1, appreciate your forward looking concerns regarding cash spend before end of 2023 or might be 24 due to covid issues. But at what point do you draw the line? As in 2023, surely you'll be saying the same thing about the impending $3bln+ required to move from DFS to full production. Do you stop at the likely $200m or so for the block cave pilot mine shaft tests in 2024? Or the $500m required for the build 2025/26 phase. Then we have the $430m required to be spent simply just to retain the 60 block licences.
I think it's fairly obvious to all that once SOLG get to the end of this year and deliver PFS2 and Porvenir PEA... there will be a deal on Alpala done. Could be an IPO or JV or sale etc but I wouldn't worry yourself with funding commitments through to 2023 end. It's the next 4 to 8 months that matters most and after that they really must or have to get some monetisation done as there's no way they can afford to hang onto those 60 licence blocks for $430m spend and all the other costs. It's a fecking joke and reality is a tough pill to take but it's being swallowed by Mather and Darryl et al on a daily basis and will be so for next 4 months with a critical dosage given out at the AGM I suspect.
Kat2008, maybe so. But as mentioned, that is going to annoy BHP.
Back in October 2020 I was told that there were rumours in London that BHP was looking to offload its stake in SOLG following the end of the lock in period.
What had happened just one month prior? We had finalised the royalty deal with Franco Nevada.
Finally, an Easter egg for the die hards. It seems the article below reporting that news from September 2020 was written by none other than our now current CEO, Darryl Cuzzubbo. How odd.
https://www.juniorminingnetwork.com/junior-miner-news/press-releases/2150-tsx/solg/83953-solgold-plc-announces-completion-of-franco-nevada-royalty-financing.html
SM. At the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious, according to your well gamed scenario, Cuzz HAS to force BHP's hand by instituting a deal, streaming or whatever, which they find unacceptable, so they have to make a move and bid.
Sure there are some details to be ironed out, and Cuzz won't be on BHP's Xmas list, but it is the logical thing to do. Have to it, sir.
Drilling was suspended in January this year because oilfield “covid” as I understood…. Maybe a shrewder move than I thought in retrospect
Fort...I agree they only need a small raise for the time being but they've still got to find another $168m for Cascabel before the big fund raise...
Cant disagree with any of that SharketMare...
And if Darryl 'tested the market's he clearly found there was insufficient appetite...at the price or in general?
The agreement was November 2021...COVID was pretty much finished.
It's the "Cascabel Investment Protection Agreement"
My all time favourite is Puligny Montrachet but these days we drink Saint Veran...we spent 10 days in Chardonnay in June, 6km from Lugny which we absolutely love...
It's a comin'.......all $100m of it.
Z
A small fund raise at 20p to see them through to PFS2 and Porvenir PEA is all that's required. If they add $1bln+ to Alpala through that process then they should command a much higher equity price if seeking larger amounts of cash for the full DFS process. It's almost like we are back to where we were pre PFS1... with the idea being to raise cash after that good news dropped and sp had strength. But now it looks like PFS2 will be the catalyst that derisks the asset further and should secure better value finance for DFS. Basically, you don't want to raise too much cash at a low price as it's overly dilutive especially when the purpose of it is to bolster the share price. As Slug said a day or so ago... you end up diluting to raise cash and then deploy that cash to raise the share price and end up in some middle ground achieving zilch. Far better to phase the funding requirements in based on milestones reached a project being derisked. That started with PFS1 and should end with PFS2.
Colonel, I disagree with you when you say that BHP/NCM would not be happy with a capital raise at a low price. In fact, I think this is their preferred way forward. It allows them to maintain or increase their ownership of SOLG (we have to offer them the chance to participate in any raise), and, in the event that he does not have funds to keep up, dilutes the % of the company controlled by Nick Mather through his various holdings.
Cuzzubbo is in a difficult position at the moment as he attempts to follow a strategy and raise funds that placate his biggest investors: BHP, NCM and Nick Mather, who by virtue of his combined various holdings is actually our biggest shareholder (DGR, Mather, Tenstar = 17.6%). The problem is they clearly don't agree.
Mather would much rather we did another Franco-type deal as he wants to bring in funds with minimal dilution, to progress the work at Cascabel and prove up the regional portfolio. This allows him to extract a higher offer from whoever ends up buying SOLG. He spelt it out quite clearly 2 weeks ago - he wants this sold. The issue Cuzzubbo has, as he half alluded to in the MiningNews piece, is that to do that type of deal, with Boliden or whoever, risks the ire of the two majors we have on board - BHP and NCM.
I don't think we as investors should underestimate the possibility of both of these players 'going nuclear' if they see the profitability of the mine be sold off bit by bit in royalty or streaming agreements. Ultimately they (or at least BHP) want to own the project and reap all of the rewards, if we continue to eat into the profitability of Cascabel, would they bother hanging around owning just 13% of it (less given it's 13% of 85%)? Cuzzubbo will be all too aware of what happened to the other Directors who fell foul of the majors - they lost their jobs.
I have no idea how Darryl plans to balance the interests of BHP, NCM and Mather over the mid-long term.
This year, unfortunately, I think we'll see a fundraise at 20p, followed by the delivery of the Porvenir PEA and Cascabel PFS addendum before the AGM. I also expect to see, as Ortherncopper mentioned on here the other day, Mather to make a play of sorts with his holdings.
I think the reason PIs have been in the dark about what SOLG's actual strategy is, pretty much ever since Nick stepped down, is because the two CEOs since have been somewhat hamstrung by their biggest shareholders.
I did say they would have to hand them back ,they need this management to get their act together imho or lose the lot
Redknight, are you sure the $430m is for ENSA alone? I thought it was a summary of the 60 concessions which required minimal $7.5m spend or they have to hand the blocks back.
I also understand that due to covid, commitment timelines have been extended.
Red.
My only point it's not all doom & gloom.
P.s. I am prone to the occasional drop of white Burgundy myself. Maybe a bottle of Meursault when the bid lands :-)
Come on Damers. I've simply stated that timelines have slipped again since his arrival.
Whatever the reason, whether it be PFS2 or whatever, that is a fact and is based on decisions he has made.
And the $155m quoted earlier has to be spent on "minerals exploration activities" (from the IPA)
Meanwhile, I've checked back the last MD&A which states that Total Capitalised expenditure on Cascabel to 31st March 2022 was $255.15m. This equates to 'minerals exploration activities'. Planned expenditure for the quarter to 30 June 2022 was $6.91m, so the Total to that date would be $262m.
But the commitment under the IPA was for $430m by end 2023. This means there is still $168 million not $155 million to be spent on Cascabel exploration alone.
Add to this the costs of the DFS (which has also slipped under Darryl to end Q4 2023); further permitting for the mine; the cost of fiscal negotiations; the cost of the Porvenir PEA; further drilling at Porvenir and Helipuerto and quarterly admin costs all lead me to revise my estimate of the total spending by end 2023 (even before negotiations for the Project funding) up to c$200m which means that to achieve a cash balance as low as $6m another $180 million would be needed.
Of course this is assuming Solgold is still independent at the end of 2023, so it comes down to how much is required to move Cascabel forward towards the $430m; the costs of the Porvenir PEA and any drilling costs for exploration other than Cascabel before the end of 2022.
"Cascabel project Definitive Feasibility Study (“DFS”) planned for completion in H2 CY23"
Ffs damers
Is hopping for a rabbit out of a hat an investment strategy or a way to run a a business?
Get back in your burrow
Red.
Cuzzubbo started in Dec '21 - going back to statements issued in Sept '21 and accounting them to his tenure is ridiculous.
None of us clowns have a clue what's happening in the background, so I think there should be a little more balance when debating where we are at.
Am I happy with the current situation & SP - not in the slightest. However, there is the skill set at Solgold to hopefully pull a rabbit out of a hat in the form of a Bid or JV in the near term.
Damers.
There goes red again.
What happened to the greatest hole in the universe?
Nothing more than a cheap window salesman trying to con decent folk out of their hard earned.
Scummy
Annual Report September 2021
"Access to open pit material will enable initial production to potentially start as early as 2026."
August Presentation:
"Production Start q3 2029"
Chin up Sean, it's always darkest before dawn.
Something will happen when we least expect.
Not if it’s sold