The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust 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.
That's fair enough Bozi - we're interpreting the same piece of news differently. Personally, I think the inclusion of the term "strategic options" was 1) the first time I've seen this communicated and 2) a signpost to investors that we are now actively exploring opportunities other than financing the route the production for Alpala.
I appreciate that from the RNS itself no *firm* conclusions can be drawn. But I think in combination with WI's comments (who, as mentioned, has a pretty good track record with SOLG predictions) that the business is now seriously considering offloading Cascabel.
Time will tell which one of us is right - I'm not overly fussed either way. Hope you're well.
the route TO production*
Bozi, I'm assuming you are not a novice investor? That being the case you ought to have understood by now that when a company includes the phrase strategic options it has a very clear and accepted meaning. It's included in order to convey a message; I ought to know, I've written it enough times.
The other thing you should bear in mind is the context of this RNS; if you care to think about it in an objective way, you'll understand the meaning. As it stands, your judgement is being clouded by your own preference.
Agree. In almost all cases the phrase ‘strategic options’ means ‘sell’ in stockex speak.
Maybe in this case the term means what Quady thinks ie ‘production’. But I think that would be the first time in the history of stock exchange announcements….
'Strategic options' does not include production, because that is already a given.
But is does include every other possibility, including J/Vs and outright sale of any or all of the properties or indeed the company itself...
UT 402,445 at 30.65...still pretty meaty, but...
Bring on the roadshow and the RNSs...please....?
Yet again Addicknt you take the patronising "I should know because I've done it countless times" tone.
I'm well aware of what is meant by the term "strategic options". I'm also well aware that SolGold hasn't publicly admitted to pursuing a different strategy from the one it has in recent years, unless the current investor roadshow is to get that message across.
As i said earlier and you didn't see fit to pick me up on, the company has simply said it will explore and evaluate / review and analyse. It has provided no guarantees or assurances. Any change in strategy or take up of a different option will only be done should there be a viable proposal on the table that creates value for shareholders.
If you all want to speculate that this will happen, as you have been for the last number of months/years then go ahead, but picking out minute phrases in announcements is clutching at the proverbial straw it must be said.
I don't have a preference by the way. I recognise that advanced development and production has many risks, but I'm not going to sit here and say that a full company offer of 60-90p or some sort of exit from Cascabel is a good deal until i see the detail. Some people, like RedKnight i think it was, think it's just a case of going investing in thr "next big thing" like theybare tenapenny in the market. They are not. I want proper value.
Hello Bozi and Dart, I unfiltered addicknt to see what the discussion was. ( waste of time, he's now filtered again ).
In an earlier post I made the point that the path that Solgold have announced for Alpala is a revised PFS with higher Gold and Copper prices, and build Alpala.
I also mentioned some people try to twist any announcement to we are selling. What utter tosh.
As you guys correctly say strategic options could mean anything, and doesn't necessarily apply to Alpala.
We are JV'ing 20 tenements, which converts to 10 sites, we are advancing Porvenir, We are preparing the PSF for Alpala, and looking to create a CFP. Many strategic options are already happening on many fronts, with more to come.
For me the interesting part is we didn't take up the extra 50 million from Franco Nevada. I think this is because we don't require it to get to DFS for Alpala, as this money could only have been spent on Cascabel.
Also it means that in the future we can still reduce Franco Nevada's 1% to 0.5%, which is a desirable position, if we can achieve it.
In short the company is doing exactly what the company is saying it's doing.
All the best.
Bozi, I'm sorry you felt I was being patronizing, I wasn't, I was merely stating the truth.
You say the company hasn't changed its tune, and in part that's true. The RNS also stated it would continue looking for finance; so in that respect it's been consistent. But surely you recognize the significance of the other part? It's a sra change.
Quady's comments are, yet again, beneath contempt.