George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. 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.
Bozi, as an investor of SOLG, hearing things like Lasso talking with Barrick fills me with confidence and demonstrates that Barrick are interested in Ecuador. You implied that there was little interest from these companies. They were according to you preoccupied elsewhere. Barrick might not bid for SOLG - so what? The fact that they are interested in Ecuador is a good endorsement.
At present, all you seem to be spouting is negative views. It's the trait of someone that is NOT invested. I don't mind contrarian views, that's healthy but I think you've made your stance clear. You see very little positives which is why I asked you why you are apparently still invested here and I'm still waiting for an answer. So Bozi... why are you invested in SOLG right now. What upside do you expect. Should be easy enough for you to confirm?
Any raise at 20p-25p now, after a 'successful' PFS and progress at Porvenir, would be embarassing.
‘I appreciate external factors influence the market and hence ease of raising funds. But I suspect there was an opportunity to raise earlier in year, including after PFS, on better terms.‘
I totally agree with this sentiment….. even Alastair Campbell would blush at trying to claim the boards success in any equity raise in the mid/low 20s at this stage.
DBW, Im also of the view Mathers holding, and what he chooses to do with it before December is key… I would like to see him execute the DGR corporate event and sell their share to anyone but BHP, however I believe it will be far below many peoples long touted £1 plus valuations.
Lunch.....I think this December's AGM certainly draws a line in the sand.
With cash burn last quarter at circa 12m we still have some headroom though very little by way of wiggle room. All the time the shadow of a raise looms over us the price will struggle so we need it sorted ASAP.
As for the deadlines for the Cascabel Addendum & Porvenir PEA , I'm confident they'ii be delivered on time ..... what they my contain is up for debate. Ayton has been hired to fund the company and then potentially the project itself..... though I don't see it getting that far. Like Red I can't see any other outcome than an offer preceding the AGM or one immediately thereafter.
Once someone finally makes a play the share price will be rendered totally irrelevant ....NM still has a big role to play here and he could easily sell shares in DGR/Samuels to a third party at any point if he felt so inclined and that's what I believe he was referring to in his recent presentation whilst talking on behalf of DGR
Red, good and interesting post. Think that ties in with the point I was making about market soundings the other day.
Lunch I think it was addicknt who said that raises do fail all the time.
My view can suggest what you like Fortissimo. I clarified my position last night.
It's really conjecture and an irrelevance to anyone but me.
Barrick meeting with Lasso doesn't necessarily mean they're in the frame for taking over SolGold. They could be looking for their own exploration portfolio for example. They could have their eye on a Filo or Solaris or Lundin even.
You seem to want to provide speculation that every event has a bullish outcome for SolGold.
Red - Barrick are restarting Reko Diq in addition to their myriad of other interests. They're also spending £2bn on capital expenditure across their portfolio.
LSE won't let me copy the links but it's all available in their factsheet and the relevant press releases.
Not a company I think will go toe to toe with BHP unfortunately.
Redknight, many are aware of the transparency requirements and that's hardly 'getting to the bottom' of the reason it failed. I'm surprised the city insiders don't know what amount was going to be raised? And at what price. More over, why it failed? As I said, pre agreements are always sought before finally taking the little piggy to market. So something happened with one of the main players for it to fail. Was that deliberate? It's very rare for a professional book runner or advisor to collectively get everyones agreement and then proceed toward the market only then to have something go wrong. That's why it's likely something changed and it may have been a deliberate ploy by an entity keen on causing disruption and leaving SOLG in a weaker position.
As for 20p? The argument could also follow that now the SP has fallen almost 20% from the 27p/28p pre equity raise level, it no longer suits SOLG to go ahead with that option thus BHP and co shooting themselves in foot. Now the royalty option looks better for SOLG investors (majority of them). Franco has $50m ready for when we needed it. So perhaps SOLG are now being forced to avoid equity issue and seek alternative funding which may well deliver treater shareholder value to majority??
It's not all about raising cash via equity share issues. And the lower the sp the less likely that scenario imho.
Thank you smickster, we can look at another offtake agreement if we are required. However I believe interested parties may offer a higher price, to stop the offtake taking place.
We can raise the cash for DFS and BFS and the money to construct Alpala.
Quady, spot on.
Each and every year that we require a raise solg has delivered, often surprising us with deals like the Franco streaming deal.
Why should it be any different now.
It's always the same names trying to spout negativity.
Onwards we march solgers
Bhp f@ck you pay me
stitch up...
Thanks Lunch...
Meanwhile surely SOLG wouldn't have tried to hawk the whole deal to BHP because that could have increased their percentage holding to almost 29%...inviting a bid...
Please don't say you're also part of the 'this is all a stitch pop by Darryl the BHP stooge' conspiracy group...
Very impressive post redknight1..........!
Fortissimo....if I'm 'talking my book' why do I keep referring to the inevitability of a bid...?
Also, well before you joined, we've already more than doubled our money twice by taking a view at a point in time.
I have never set out with the intention of trading Solgold, but I take a view on our holdings of everything in our portfolio all the time, based on content research and a narrow strategic focus centred around copper, gold and silver (accounting for 80% of my portfolio).
And remember, I didn't SELL Solgold, I SWITCHED into ATYM as appearing to be a better prospect at the time, with an operating mine and a yield of 10% plus at the current price. Since July 8 SOLG has fallen 22%; ATYM 4.6%...
I recognise some people don't like me saying what we've done, but since being challenged as to the veracity of my stated dealings and having to produce screenshots of actual trades, I have tried to be transparent at all appropriate times.
I have not said people should sell SOLG since I di last week. People like MAX have made their own decisions.
And yes we may miss out if there is a bid before we can reinvest, but we won't have LOST any money, we will have GAINED on our existing holding if there is a bid, but obviously not as much as if we still had 800k or even 1.1 million shares.
With very best wishes
RK, that's very interesting, thanks.
Very simple seanhunter, if you believe what you say sell up.
We can raise the money, and when we do, everyone who doesn't think we will now. Will pretend this is because a bid is around the corner.
When the complete opposite is true.
Quady you may have noticed that no one is queueing up to fund us, not for production and not even for short term survival. Banging on about the diverse book seems to be a comfort blanket for you but it has heehaw relevance.
With the dust having settled, I've taken the opportunity to speak to my contact in the City and, while she has no direct relationship she is very well connected with market participants, including those who advise prospective subscribers. Also anyone who works in the City knows it is a village and you can't keep a secret, viz the two 'informed' articles in the last couple of years saying there will be a takeover bid, e.g. "the hottest takeover story in town..."
I have some understanding of FCA regulations, having been both a broker and a principal in capital markets, but its moved on a great deal since my time and it was refreshing to catch up on stuff relevant to last week's debacle...so...
We need to put the TWO RNSs together (the 'inept' one and the 'voting rights' one).
They are BOTH clarifying statements required under FCA regulations as a result of the failed equity issue.
So...because certain parties would have been approached and some might even have indicated or made a commitment, they would have been precluded from dealing in Solgold shares while the issue was 'live'. Furthermore, they will have been given an up to date story of where SOLG is at because in the absence of a Prospectus they would have needed a rationale to buy.
Once the issue failed, they remained in that privileged information position and would continue to be precluded until these clarifying statements were released. So the first RNS simply summarised everything the prospective investors would have been told and nothing more that wasn't already in the public domain. The second confirms no shares were issued. Together they release those prospective investors to deal again in the market.
I referred to the first RNS being inept, but the ineptitude was in being persuaded by a bank to embark on the issue and then having it fail. We may never know whether it failed completely, I think it is more likely that it was pulled because the terms weren't sufficiently attractive for enough investors to commit and fill the subscription.
That is the ineptitude: an ill judged and failed fundraise; and then the requirement to as good as admit that to the world (later confirmed by Berry Street).
So where does it leave Solgold and us?
Any prospective investors that were approached are left in no doubt that Solgold needs a raise, which makes the company a 'hostage to fortune'. The SP has already fallen as a result. There may well be sufficient interest from existing investors such as Norge, Blackrock, Valuestone and of course BHP and Newcrest (and DGR and CGP if they can raise the cash) to be the bedrock of a successful issue which I believe would have to be pitched at c20p.
For some there is a sound logic in holding on for a bid(s) that surely cannot be later than end December.
Others, like Max, may already have sold with the intention of buying back; others may have spare firepower, waiting for their target entry point. Good luck to all of you whatever you
Bozi it's not what I claim, some people on here know who I am.
When I say nothing has changed, I mean the major holdings .
The diverse book remains diverse, that is what needs to change for a bid.
The only interesting snippet amongst all the dross, was DGR's latest webinar.
If DGR was to sell it's holding in Solgold, that would change things.
Quady - how can you say nothing has changed but then deviate and talk about us being picked up for pennies in the same post?
These boards are for talking about past decisions, the current situation and analysing future headwinds and potential catalysts. Nothing stands still.
One part of a technical analyst's job is to evaluate the impact of an upcoming set of events. You demonstrate a lack of willingness to want to consider anything until it has happened, which I'm afraid is fundamentally flawed relative to the job you claim to have held and skills you claim to have.
Jezzoo that has been my point all along.
I am puzzled by those that want a bid and say we cannot do this ourselves, as their position makes no sense.
You can tell the people who lack investment knowledge on this forum, not by how they talk, but by the position they take.
Quady:
>>After all if we cannot do this ourselves, then no one will bid, as they will just wait till we fail and pick us up for pennies.<<
For once we agree, I said the same yesterday.
Redknight, you trade away, it's entirely down to individual investors to play with their holdings. I have no problem with that and fully understand how mentality (when selling 500k+) alters the way you post. But seriously... if you think a bid is coming why would you bother taking the risk of waking up one morning and finding you are 100k down rather than 16k up on your 'trade'.??
A bid could come at any time and if anything is way more likely now than ever before.
Each to their own. I've been adding on every dip sub 25p (and there have been a few) and every time the stock ends up at least 10p to 15p higher as some point. I imagine it will again. But am hoping much higher. I think this all this 'noise' is designed as a precursor to a bid and SOLG management are part and parcel to it in some way. Sometimes you have to soften up investors a little before you drop the 'strategic review' eg SALE process rns.
Bozi....with the continuing You Tolgui delays, there is no significant copper c coming on stream before the inevitable demand/supply crunch in a minimum of two years.
And there is only 9 years of gold in the ground of existing mines (meanwhile big prospects like EQX are valued at a song).
Bristow has publicly stated Barrick are looking at copper/gold porphyrys...
Ecuador is the next Peru/Chile...buying Solgold would give any one of these majors an armlock on some of the best prospects in the world...
Tick tock...
Bozi, many of these super majors are already active in Ecuador. Your dismissive view of the super majors interest in Ecuador suggests to me yet again you are looking to be negative rather than positive. WHY??
As reported recently, Lasso and Barrick had a cosy meeting.
Super majors will have interests all over the globe. And as for your comments on NCM... Havieron is peanuts to them. $300m spend isn't it? Hardly preoccupied ...for a multi billion dollar company.
Your negativity is giving you away I'm afraid. You seem to ignore all the news out there. Go do some googling and see who's already in Ecuador and ask yourself why?
I can't comment on the individual merits, many indeed boasting great track records, but it's clear the current lot have been in place long enough for any good they might have done and the cupboard is now bare. We seemed to have sleepwalked to where we are now which is incredible given the energy and sure sense of direction Solg showed as a young company. Sad times.