Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. 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.
Mainly a near 3m sell.
I’m showing 3.2m traded already ??
Fort, your position sometimes mystifies me. You want a sale, as do I, and yet are implacably opposed to the bloke who is most likely to deliver it.
Caldwell inherited a steaming pile of inefficient and directionless effluent and he's doing his best to rectify the position and to deliver value to shareholders. The idea of returning to the 'old days' is genuinely concerning and, in my opinion, wholly misguided.
Forte, I also try to measure companies and management just based on bottom line and performance, and usually nothing beats the share price as a proxy of that.
However, and that might be just my opinion, SOLG would be priced at 2 to 2.5 times the current level just based on the macro outlook changing positively, and then whatever else on top based on the specific performance of the company.
So I would not blame him 100% for being at 10p.
And by the way, when we were talking about the share price and the shares he bought, upon me asking he seemed quite genuine for his comment that he thought the worst may be over for the price and while he could not guarantee a given share price for obvious reasons, SOLG was so fundamentally undervalued and its fair value would eventually be realized. Now, he pointed out again, which he does at these calls, that the catalysts are the revised phased plan, which should align the technical feasibility aspects of Alpala with the financial aspects and the marketability of the project, and the completion of the necessary permits and government agreements.
It might just be me, but having worked in corporations in C-level capacity with CEOs for many years, Scott just seems like a considerate and pragmatic man trying to bring all the relevant drivers of growth and shareholder value to the level where they need to be. Whether he succeeds or not is a different story, but I don't think he is making significant mistakes outside of the comms strategy (which I also covered with him, he said he was taking notes.....)
"If he's booted out and the sp drops by 50% the next day, how would you feel about your decision?"
Ermmm... he was voted 'in' last year and the share price has fallen by over 50%.
If he was a premier league manager, he'd have been sacked 4 months ago. And those sacking him would be looking forward to a better team performance from the new manager and new impetus that the club would have etc etc.
The fact is... 'shareholders' did not vote or ask for the CGP boys to takeover SOLG. It happened because of the forced merger. CGP had achieved almost zero at CGP for years and years while just sitting on their SOLG stake and 15% ENSA. Lets face it... they were just sitting back doing sweet FA. Now... the question is... has anything changed? Looking at the last 12months+ it looks and feels like they think they are still CGP only this time they have 100% ENSA.
I know the above is harsh and probably out of order by that's the reality laid bear. The CGP boys were given the cars keys for a year and I'm afraid, it's time to return it and the sad thing is... the tyres look like no dounuts were done. IN fact it barely looks like its been out the garage but they've blown $50m+ on pizza deliveries??
Add…. Exactly
Thanks Italian
Don't disagree Add. I was just starting from what their position was known to be last year but as you say the situation may have improved.
I suppose I'm working on a worst case scenario basis.
DBW, I think a closed period is applicable for 30 days prior to any price sensitive news. So if they are indeed in another one, it doesn't relate to the AGM.
Eloro - someone can only be good at PR when they have lots thst is positive to say. This just happens to have been a year where SOLG hasn't had much in the way of positive news to report. The political situation in Ecuador has hovered over us like a dark cloud and interested parties have held off completing their due diligence.
You're e guilty of falling into this trap because you want/need a change of control now. The decision you're making isn't who you think has most chance of delivering that because you have no way of influencing the decision on who would replace Scott. By voting against him you're just wielding a rebellious vote and giving the company a problem.
This is really something that all investors who aren't happy with Scott should look to Bob and Warren for a guide on. These fellas want the same as you and if they believe Scott can deliver that, then frankly so should you.
Dream, Scott did say something during my call about the close period but I did not take a note about it. I just remember that he talked about the shares he bought via his broker in Canada for his retirement account while he could, then he could not buy more because of the close period, but then he was planning to buy more after the AGM when the window was open again. I had other questions to ask him so I did not go in more detail about it.
Also interested to know why they are in a closed period again?
Add agreed
Last thing we need is more disruption at board level.
On top of that ( comms aside) I actually think Scott is doing a decent job getting this thing saleable. (As do his peers) Scott, Bob,Warren & Nick are all heavily invested and therefore aligned with pi’s in wanting a decent return.
Happy to sit and wait here and expect news (licenses/agreements) to start flowing shortly.
Eloro, and I think you're mistaken.
If he's booted out and the sp drops by 50% the next day, how would you feel about your decision?
Eloro, whilst I agree the comms have been terrible, I most certainly don't want a CEO whose key strength is PR. I want someone who knows what he's doing and can negotiate well. This is far more valuable than someone who's good at blather...just look at that ludicrous character James Parsons who was at SOU. He won the AIM market corporate comms award, just before he flogged his shares, buggered-off into the sunset and watched the company disappear up its own fundament.
Add, if there is problem in a marriage and both sides wants to reconcile, always bring up the bad old days isn't a good start to restoring harmony. Scott keep on about how both companies voted against him, instead of looking forward and extending an olive branch. I think, from listening to him, BHP remains alienated. I want him gone because either way, I feel we will still be here next year this time still no further along.
Bozi, my concern is that we will here next year this time no further along. At that point it wouldn't have mattered whether Scott stayed or go because the end result would be the same. We will be diluted if he hasn't sold the company by next June. He is doing nothing to address the falling SP. Instead, he is filling his boots while folks here at higher averages are hurting. If the outcome will be the same, ie more dilution, then better Scott go and we get someone more capable and who is good at PR. Not destroying the SP every time he opens his mouth.
Bozi, re voting intentions; I'd suggest BHP and Newmont are the unknowns. Has he done enough to repair the relationship with BHP? Have Newmont been persuaded by the argument? What has he promised them both in return for their support?
SM - I think he'll be OK but dissenting PIs will make it closer than it ought to be.
I don't have the major shareholders to hand but let's assume that Mather and his interests, Sangha, Irwin and many of the Cornerstone investors vote for him. That could secure him 25-30%. He'll then need some of the chunky institutions to join his cause and plenty of PIs.
That's on the basis that BHP and Newmont vote against, which the latter may not do.
I get people want their takeover and like I say this has consumed many for a while now, but a year that has been needed to reset the business and complete much of the thankless work doesn't appear to be the one to remove him. Ecuador again has political certainty and for me he has a clear run now until the AGM in Dec 2024.
Fort - so you're giving Scott a month or 6 weeks from the election to close out any deals and get them publicised?
Bit unrealistic that I feel.
If elections were a stopper for certain partners then discussions could be just resuming now. They could take place all the way up to EoY.
Q1 2024 could conceivably be the golden news period for the company. Booting Scott now would be a major misjudgement.
If he doesn't deliver the grandstand finish that many are baying for by next December then do what you must but to say he has already had enough time isn't quite true IMO.
In terms of his options, I'm not sure why he'd lose them, particularly those granted based on conditions being met in previous company years. They should be locked in. Any that are contingent on employment however, may be cut and awarded to a replacement.
Addicknt
I suspect one, or two, of the rampers are trying to put pressure on Scott to release positive news pre AGM to get themselves out of the hole they have dug for themselves.
As the sp has dropped further posters like fort have got more and more desperate, in their ramping, indicating a highly leveraged position.
How can one poster continually post so much rubbish he is almost rivalling the narcissistic red ramper
Interesting to read people's views that Caldwell is doing 'nothing' and specifically that a lack of exploration proves the point.
Out of interest, would those people support another round of fund raising and further dilution? Because that's what would be needed if we were to launch a new programme of drilling.
It seems to me that we've stopped all exploration activity not only to preserve cash, but because the management team believe that something will emerge from the SR which will mean additional exploration would be unnecessary and that they wish to avoid further shareholder dilution in the short term.
I'd also argue that he's busy enough negotiating with government officials and dealing with the SR process.
Incidentally, the idea of voting against him at the AGM is an act of considerable self-harm. Our sp would be further decimated; what remains of our credibility would be shattered and we'd become incredibly vulnerable to all the low ball predators out there.
SC is involved in a process of 'prettying-up' the company for an eventual sale and he must be given time to complete the task.
Covgaz
The problem is no matter what the news, even dilution, it’s always positive according to dreamer….
He can’t be negative when you are as leveraged as he is…..
Scott is a professional corporate gibberer nothing more, he will string shareholders along with promises of much action in the new year. Saving Scott at the AGM will have no bearing on the monetisation of SOLG, if someone wants to make a bid they will make a bid, its got nothing to do with needing to save Scott as CEO. In fact one might even argue that a company is more likely to take advantage of management change to make a bid. Just like what happened at Newcrest, Biswas resigned, they appointed an interim CEO and low and behold a bid emerged.
Interested to read the poster telling us it must of been Scott's day to phone private investers.
Also think it bloody marvelous that on his call day, with 56000000000 private share holders, he always seems to phone someone on the solg forum. How lucky are we.
Novice, I've told the kids you may come over to play with them. Hope your sporty.
Do you want me to write a note for your mum.
Don't worry about long trousers, it's hot here. Your school shorts will be fine.
You may need to up the anti with your one liners and emoji though mate. The kids are all around 13, and have grown out of those English schoolboy jokes