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.
'Rumour in the market is that todays statement from SolGold was triggered by a failed capital raise. Where this leaves the company now I’ve no idea and one also wonders who is pulling the strings here.'
Natural Resources Editor, Financial Times
https://twitter.com/humenm
Someone's gonna nick SOLG for less than its true worth. Games afoot and it feels political
schlem, that is the very real danger.
Our board has over-played its hand and has placed itself in a precarious situation, which could easily be exploited. The saving grace is that we have Norges and BR on the register, and I don't see Norges in particular, walking away from this.
The Berry Street letter was spot-on and if the board fail to take note we should join them in agitating for a sale.
RK, did your information source have any idea why the fund raise failed?
Addicknt we have not failed to fund raise.
This is about one avenue of funding.
This is a non story.
People on here are just exaggerating this story to confirm their bias.
Let's wait for an official announcement.
It most certainly is not a "non-story". The company was obliged to issue a highly unusual RNS, which was clearly done in order to calm nerves and deal with market rumours - which were obviously correct.
It is not me and most of the others on here (and Berry Street) who are guilty of confirmation bias.
Okay addicknt your last comment is just silly.
Where in the RNS does it say we failed on funding.
If you read it, it says the complete opposite.
It says we are looking at options to take Cascabel to DFS including talking about an issue of shares.
It makes it clear that it is not our only option.
Where does it say we failed to raise funds.
Where does any official communication say we failed to raise funds.
As ever Quady, you fail to apply any interpretation of what we are being told.
Why did they produce the RNS? They've never done it before and to say it's unusual is a gross understatement.
Why did Berry Street refer directly to it? They would undoubtedly know far more than you and I.
Why has the FT referred to it?
Why have two people, including someone who occupied a key role, left the company?
Come on Q, wake up and smell the coffee.
Addicknt I am very good at reading between the lines, and as an ex technical analyst, I understand why as a problem solver you first identify the problem you are trying to solve and not the symptoms.
In your 05.41 post you ask RK why the fund raise failed.
Yet we have zero evidence that a fund raise has even taken place let about failed.
They are in discussion, the RNS clearly states that.
Try reading it.
We have an RNS laying out the direction of the company. You should know by now that RK, tries to stretch points to sound authorative.
Nothing has failed.
Q, in which case please explain Berry's letter.
I am not saying funding discussions are not ongoing, I'm saying an attempt at so doing failed and Berry's letter proves it. No company likes it to become known a funding attempt has failed and the RNS was an attempt to ameliorate the negative impact - it failed. We have never had anything similar and that on its own should tell you something.
I'd totally disagree with your comment Add.
The door has always been open for a sale at a fair price for all, yet no approach has bee made.
What you are suggesting is we follow Berry St Into selling a tier 1( possibly 2) for peanuts and essentially hand it over to Bhp.
I'd rather go down fighting than give it up and I expect my board to do the same so progress with funding via streaming/royalty is the option for me.
Bhp you want it make an offer, simplz.
Gla
Addicknt read the berry capital letter.
It says the opposite of what you are saying.
It is upset that the wider ownership of shareholders is not included in the fundraise.
Nothing has failed.
That is their point.
It's the way it's being proposed that they disagree with.
Morning smickster on Berry Street capital, their is no indication that they are selling Solgold. In fact the letter says in the past they have increased their position.
It is upset that it hasn't been invited to take part in the latest fund raise. ( That's me reading between the lines ).
People on here are so desperate for a sale, that they are now blatantly making things up.
They should just relax and let the Solgold story play out.
This is a long term investment, it always was and still is.
Afraid not addickt but I would guess overpriced...who knows...?
Smickster, who said anything about selling for peanuts? We should start the process now before we either run out of money, thus putting our backs against the wall, or we sell once we've been diluted even further.
We currently have cash and our negotiating position is okay.
Q, re: Berry Street, you are wrong and I have no idea how you can reach your conclusion. You may be good at interpreting technical data - as you often remind us, but you are not so good when it comes to understanding top level corporate stuff.
Addicknt we are not running out of money.
We are going to raise more.
That's the whole point.
As you know I have never held a top level job, never even been a manager.
But the skill I bring to this forum are my investing skills and my problem solving skills.
Read the letter from Berry Street capital and point out the parts that support what you are saying.
I have given people here a blow by blow account of what the letter says.
I have been factual and accurate.
Modest, as ever.
Morning Quady,
Yes I can see from the letter Berry St are upset from the method of funding which would probably see them miss out and nothing else.
I'm not sure where the speculation is coming from but I can guess why.
Add imo by putting the for sale sign up because a shareholder is unhappy would basically be putting it up for peanuts. Let the bhp make an offer and we see where it goes not because Berry St want to kick off....again pffff
And we have always managed funding in the past and with the likes of Norge and Berry St openly building their stakes why should we not raise again.
Unfortunately I fear the price of the raise won't be the price we all hope it will/should, let's see .
Add I also believe this is the prime time for Bhp or another major to strike, so think you will get your wish soon enough.
Indeed we have Smickster, which is why I said earlier that the presence of Norge and BR should give us some comfort. I would add Valuestone to that list.
Smickster, I agree, but if we manage the process it gives us a far greater chance of widening the pool of potential buyers. It is far more difficult to control a situation if you receive an unsolicited bid, particularly if the bidder is the largest shareholder on the register and the world's largest miner.
Add I understand the point you are making about being in control but do you think by offering up it would attract more people?
I honestly believe if your interested you already know and are probably watching solg closely.
It surely is available to anyone who has the means buy it regardless the stake you hold ?
Morning Quady, addicknt
I refrained from posting yesterday due to work commitments and overwhelming disappointment with the quality of the RNS we put out.
I think rather than people making things up because they are desperate for a sale, Quady, shareholders are genuinely concerned about the management and direction of this company, and whether or not they will see a decent return on their investment. One of the key players in delivering the Cascabel PFS has just been pushed out of SOLG, along with the chap who was responsible for sourcing finance to build the mine.
With the PFS addendum due later this year, to suggest it’s business as usual for this company is well.. misguided at best in my opinion.
That and an investor publicly expressing its disquiet (again) after what must have been a failed capital raise.
Yesterday’s RNS was one of the worst the company has issued since I’ve been invested here.
The world's largest shareholder is not the world's largest miner.
It's Nick Mather through various holdings.
Surely addicknt not only are you admitting that the diverse book is not only an asset, but by attracting more bidders and potentially more shareholders, that this strengthens our position by making the book more diverse and making low bids near on impossible.
Who knows addicknt, you may start to show some potential as an investor.
Good morning SharketMare you are making the same mistake as addicknt.
We have not had a failed funding raise.
The only evidence being quoted on here is the Berry Street capital statement.
Read it, it clearly states that it is unhappy with the way it's being raised. Nothing has failed.
We are raising the money to advance to the next stage of production, which is the DFS. We are progressing as planned. Just a few more years to see us to production.
The last few days on this forum have been mad.
All because of the DGR presentation which saw NM state we are going to prove up and sell.
Sure that has always been the plan. Along with our mission statement that we are going to become a producer.
The statements are not mutually exclusive.
Take some time to work through what has been said over the past couple of years.
Nothing has changed.