Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone 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.
Waiting on a pick-up and finished reading the news, so here's a new quiz. Based on clicking a random page of a ramper's history:
1) who said, in December 2020 "the next few weeks will be box office"?
2) what happened to the share price in the next few weeks?
Just those questions this week, don't want to clutter the board on another no news day. Plentiful source material though!
I've said multiple times that our short term plan should be to rebuild credibility with the markets: prove we have a workable phased extraction plan, use that to support transition to an exploitation licence, deal with funding issues when they arise (hopefully back in the 20s by then to lessen dilution). Or continue to use royalty streams, as SC's reassurance to potential buyers of no further deal isn't needed when it's clearly not the barrier to a TO.
Now, are you going to have a guess, or are you worried just how many of these I could do for you? You've been wrong about this share so many dozens of times it almost doesn't deserve a quiz question.
As for why I'm here, that's the same question one could demand of any poster. There hasn't been any 'news' broken here in years- just links to sites that all get caught by a news alert anyway. Maybe it's populated by luddites who can't use the internet, waiting for copy/paste articles, but the rest of the speculation here is demonstrable nonsense.
Spot on as usual DM.
We can tell we're dealing with an above average IQ, but it's one that is obsessed with winning the debate rather than joining the stomping herd of SOLG bulls, and that's a shame for us all.
I wonder when the penny will finally drop with regard to further royalty deals? It seems to be taking a very long time.
You don't think there will be further royalty deals because of what SC has said previously, add. I admire that. I personally feel that we might reverse that promise, as many explorers have before, but I certainly don't think it's likely (eg: greater than 50% chance). I'd say a royalty deal is more likely to be announced in the next 12 months than a TO deal though. If we differ on this- fabulous! I'm not married to any opinion, I change my mind when new evidence is presented.
Aggie, it's not only based upon what the company has said, it's driven by the economics. When you take the government's cut into account, we simply cannot give away any more of our top line. To do so would seriously endanger the viability of the project.
I don't think you've done the maths right there add: feel free to lay out your calculations if you want them checked over by people here. The government top slice won't be fixed, either, and it won't be scripted until each renegotiation. Look at literally any multi-decade project for confirmation of that. Gov will squeeze in good times and waive in tougher times, same as it ever was. And the metrics are fine for many more percentage points than we're at currently, I'd say. Also, what are you using as the denominator? Because, in favour of your argument, the slide moves on a reduced output cf. the PFS. Still think we're plenty clear of tipping though.
You're right to say it's a question of economics: that's exactly why solg could well leverage the minerals for some years to come. But this is just speculation, and I don't want to be accused of 'deramping(?)'. Maybe we'll sell a load more shares at 16p to raise cash instead.
Interesting that neither the company nor our two largest shareholders agree with you. But I'm sure you know best.
Absolutely sure BHP and NCM don't want any more royalty deals, why would they? But they didn't want the last ones either.
They've said it is too expensive, because they want other holders to side with them in opposing such deals. But that's about their economics, not ours. I've said it before, I'll say it again- £60m cleared is plenty for us to get wealthy. What's your calc based on? What percentage do we need to maintain for that?
Come on- no sarcastic remarks: put your numbers up and I'll show you where the mistakes are. Unless you've not actually done any calculations, and you're making totalitarian comments based on jack?
A full calculation is not possible, for the simple reason we have no current projections upon which to base it. However, we are currently committed to 1.6% in NSR payments and the latest figures we have seen relating to the possible government take is between 6-8%, although I seem to recall you suggesting it will be much higher.
So, are you really trying to suggest we could give away an even greater number without it impacting the return and therefore the attractiveness of the project? My contention is that we cannot, yours is that we can; the difference being the company seemingly agrees with my stance.
In any event, I don't wish to see us raising any more funds of any description and sincerely hope we don't get to the point where have to.
DM, I agree with most of what you say. However the effect of these agreements is material, particularly when you bear in mind the average net margin for the major miners was 14% last year. Assuming we load with debt to get to production our margin would be considerably less. This is why we won't be going to production, so we won't need more royalty funding.
Add, of course we can't increase royalty deals without decreasing our attractiveness. Who would suggest that? However, lots of investors don't care about solg being attractive. We care about getting minerals out of the ground and making some cash. We may get a TO bid, but wishful thinking isn't a business plan. So, on we go.
'lots of investors don't care about solg being attractive'. Really?! So people seek out unattractive investments, do they?
If you're interested in a yield, you'd be far better off buying LGEN. 9% from one of the safest bets on the market.
Attractive for a TO. At these prices it is a very attractive investment. I've added to my holding in the 15s. Long term prospects are good if management rediscover their sensibilities.
Would you say you're quite an angry man, add? Firing off unsolicited investment advice first thing in the morning is not normal. I hold lots of dividend stocks, but thank you anyway, I guess?
I also agree with AgArCu.
Getting pretty attractive for an attempt now. How low will they let it go? If we still work on the basis that M&A kicks up at cycle lows then we could be in or approaching the right ball park.
I'm still disappointed because operating from this semi-distressed position was something a few of us were concerned about. As it happens, I don't think we could have avoided it per se, but the company could certainly have insulated shareholders better by factoring in some targeted regional drilling - simply for the reason that every metal discovery opens up the potential for an additional property with an MRE thus plumping up the pig.
But what's done is done. Leave some (in this case a lot) on the table for the next lot.
If that's what your post meant Ag, it certainly didn't read that way. Still, you were posting late at night, so perhaps you were under the weather. Incidentally, I completely agree it's an attractive prospect at these prices and I'm pleased you also see it that way.
And btw, I'm not remotely angry and am looking forward to seeing how things pan out in the coming week.
Throughout the time I've held this share I've often tried to figure out what exactly could Solg management have done differently. If the ultimate goal was always to get taken over/sell Cascabel and no one was willing to make an offer, what could they have done differently...
Lots has been said about the PFS and the multiple false starts. But then again, depending on who the eventual buyer is, how important is Solg's PFS really no matter what form it took.
I keep coming back now to the CGP merger and the resultant dilution. I think when I invested there were 2-2.2bn shares issued. Now there are about 3bn. The SP now seems to reflect the dilution in terms of number of shares without much uplift for the fact the company owns 100% of Cascabel not 85%.
I wonder if the real mistake was not paying up to consolidate years ago. Everyone seems to think consolidating 100% of Cascabel was the right move, from Mather to Cuzzubo to CGP management. Maybe if Mather had been less aggressive and hubristic a few years back and hadn't launched that insulting hostile offer that was doomed to fail from the outset, we'd be in a better position today. If CGP's 15% really did make Solg a much more attractive takeover prospect then it was worth paying up for. By trying to get it on the cheap, we ended up paying up for it later on from a worse financial position at a lower SP and with much more dilution. We also failed to consolidate during the bull market post covid and now find ourselves languishing here trying to sell in unfavorable market conditions.
No research behind this post by the way, just my top of the head musings as I sit watching my kids in soft play on holiday...
From the other board...
'kingslug: Exploitation agreement imminent, and that's the trigger for a bid'
If this is the case, it's a big step in the right direction.
Rgcl2
Owning 100% or 85% makes zero difference to the saleability of Cascabel/solg etc no matter what anyone posts about corporate structure etc
That 15 % is minuscule in the greater scheme of things .
Mather was way too arrogant years ago when he was spouting solg could get funded for anything and holders believed his BS. Subsequent CEO’s carried on the same mantra. I remember one of the preventions alluded to investors throwing money at them before the first royalty deal when they weee running out of cash and this was when finance was cheap and plentiful. The outlook has changed massively on the finance front and not for the better but most holders on here still think they’ll get top dollar in any deal.
When will investors realise corporate employees are there to promote the company so everything is always rosy, it never ceases to amaze me how holders are desperate to hear positive news from company personnel and their close contacts.
You’d think holders would realise after years of disappointment that CEO’s always big up the company no matter what the news is and the news is never as good as what is promised nudge nudge wink wink
Rcgl...last time Nick tried a bid the CGP Board insisted the shares were worth at least $12.50CDN and up to $20 while dismissing the SOLG approach ass derisory...
In the event we got CGP for not much more than $4 and 100% of Cascabel to boot (plus CGP's properties)...
Seems like a much better deal to me...
He coming week? Absolute snooze fest. But don't let that realism dampen your excitement. Maybe just accept you're wrong by Friday?
And I'm sorry if you can't understand me. I'm fairly confident that's not my issue though.
And as for your anger or apparent lack thereof, I don't mind either way. But please don't feel the need to fire off any more unsolicited investment advice. Okay?
Afternoon Red
Hope all good with you ?
I agree with Add ( or one of his scenarios ) the release of another Q&A session would make no sense unless it’s all part of the big reveal and Scott is in a position to say way more this time . It could be to clarify our path moving forward and by default settle some long running arguments here.
The extraction licenses or an updated investment protection agreement could also be key. The new website is due to launch this week so maybe it’s all tied in somehow.
I was told by “ the company “ recently, when questioning them on the lack of comms,” news would only be released when either they were obliged to or it was significant “
Here’s hoping for a good few days and some significant news next week
Aggie, I'll post whatever I like and feel free to do the same. You won't see me telling people what they can and can't say.
Okay big man 💪 very assertive 🤭
Post all the investment advice you would like. We're all very impressed that you can name dividend paying ftse companies 👏 anything else for us?
I've just seen dreamers email to "scotty" ref "comms"
Dbw to scott.....
Hi scotty old mate. It's DBW here.
Be assured it's not me mate, but some of the philistines on the lse board are kicking off again about no news.
As I said scotty you know its not me. You know you can do no wrong in my eyes. It's them restless clowns on here who don't understand that it's all going to the solg master plan.
Must go mate lots of love Dreamy.
Scott to dbw.
Hi D B.
Sorry I've not been in touch lately.
I can tell you in confidence Dreamy, because I know that no matter what, you will keep the faith.
But in all honestly Dreamy we haven't put out any comms, because we're floating round completely clueless as to what to do next.
We thought we would spin a story about a packed data room. But only the lse board swallowed that one.
But I know I can trust you to keep posting positive news to those fools on the lse board. After all you've been doing it for 8 years.
Love Scotty