Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. 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.
Rcgl2 - you also make a good point there. And it's the same logic that I applied to the BHP takeover of SOLG and then sweating out CGP, for eventual purchase of $3.5m.
I suppose the difference is size. If BHP buy SOLG, they then own 85% of ENSA (yes there are shareholders within that, i.e. NCM/CGP but BHP will be the managing directors, making the decisions). There then remains 15% of ENSA outside of their control under CGP.
So, in that situation you have 85% vs 15%. In the situation in which you get an NCM/BHP/CGP ****tail, that's just shy of 50% of ENSA vs 50% freefloat. BHP is the muscle in that situation again (I don't rate NCM's firepower - they had to go to the market only recently to raise cash), as it is in the 85%/15% scenario. But clearly, there's a huge difference between the two - will Barrick/Rio sit idly by while BHP takes out 50% of one of the best prospects out there by a country mile? Serious competitors will make BHP pay top dollar for it (if I were in their shoes, say Barrick, I would internally set the highest bid price that I'd be willing to pay - I would then push BHP up to that level - if BHP back down, hey presto I get what I wanted anyway).
I'd like to see NCM sell their stake to Barrick or another then duff up Sangha Irwin & Chamandry - [SIC for short - which is about right] aka CGP.
Feel a bit sorry for Brook MacDonald putting his name to this bs...........
Shame really - I think they make him & CGP look poor & CGP have a great relationship with the Ecuadorian gov't - they have a jv with Enami.......
One thing we keep missing on this bb is that Sangha & Irwin are not short of a bob or two, so it is not beyond the realms of possibility they could support CGP through the funding issues associated with costs reimbursement & ongoing mine development costs.........if they chose to do so.........and it doesnt necessarily need to be equity..........although as I write I think I'm correcting myself here as Nick definitely said something about CGP NOT being able to debt finance their stake in Cascabel.....
r's
BN.c
ps - Copperpot - hope you get your power back soon buddy!
Good point Miagi... Do you think the other majors will want to get involved in a bidding war against two other majors who are already invested and therefore have a lot of incentive to keep bidding up to secure the prize? Will Barrick etc realistically think they can win the fight against BHP? I hope they do of course, because a 3 or 4 way bidding war between majors is exactly what we want to see to get the final price up into the £1+ range isn't it.
rcgl2, even if this board does get ousted (and I'm of the mind that it won't) and they install NCM/BHP stooges, do you imagine the likes of Barrick etc won't be interested in offering a bid higher than 30p for one the best Cu/Au porphyries available, plus a world class pipeline of projects?
Sorry to hear, Copperpot, please let me know, what fixes it.
It’s all a gamble. Red or Black.
Hi Quady, I've had a terrible day with a power outage :-( and not looked in here all day. Not sure what has been discussed. I know I'm being vague but I've still got an electrician here sorting things so will have to get back and sort the mess out.
What I was alluding to in my last post was that Solg hold the largest and possibly the best acreage? Solgold must be near the top of the Christmas card list of the gov't if you get my drift? It could be a case of upset my friend and you upset me scenario from the gov't. I bet FN aren't too impressed either, who knows?
Take care Q, must dash mate.
A good point Copperpot, if BHP or NCM, supported this, can't see the Government looking favorably at this, and may push them down the list for future licenses.
I wonder what the Ecuadorian gov't are thinking of CGP's behaviour? Would NCM tarnish their relationship with the gov't by getting involved in this tizzy fit? I would be very surprised if they did. I just think it's all wind and wazz.....who knows? I wonder if the Solgold legal team are looking at libel?
We have an AGM next month, so will it not be presented, as a measure at this time. Means BHP are voting with Nick, but let's say it goes past 15th October, BHP would still support Nick.
Hello rcgl2, A thought experiment for you, if you were going to oust the board, then you would plan it, and at the time of calling an EGM, would name the support you had, and have in place a replacement BOD. Haven't seen that.
Hi Quady, I totally agree this may never actually come to a vote, there is lots more to happen between now and any potential EGM if it ever gets called. However, I just felt that the things Phat mentioned (people from SOLG said they need PI support to fend off the attack, they will need everyone's support) suggests that the SOLG management themselves are not so sure that this would be a slam dunk for them if it actually came to a vote.
CGP only own about 7% of the shares... if they are already thinking that victory in a vote would come down to PI support, then doesn't that suggest they must think several of the other major shareholders would vote against the current board?
And I agree we don't know that NCM would support it, but the general feeling here is that their MO is to try to squeeze potential acquisitions very hard to get them for well under value, they have already very publicly criticised NM and the management over their recent funding and they desperately wanted the next stage funded by more equity (i.e. more equity bought by them)... That to me suggests they would be more than happy to see the back of NM.
I agree quad if this was pretext to remove the bid the legal action in response would be more than just a pain for BHP and newcrest...there are so many reasons why it s just bluff from Irwin and sangha et al who are just really miffed with the price and the bluff of massive cornerstone dilution 're poison pill has been blown.
Good afternoon rcgl2, it's not going to happen, as far as I know, this came out yesterday, but they still haven't asked for an EGM. ( someone please correct me if I am wrong ) No one has come out in support of CGP, frankly the terms that they want to remove the board on are lies. So ask yourself, if you were BHP or NCM, would you even associate yourself with this action. Sure they can call the meeting, as it's 5%, ( I thought it was 10%, but my info out of date ) but what are they going to do. They will have to prove NM and the BOD withheld information that would materially would affect the share price, and then their are accusing Solgold of not representing Shareholders with the FN deal. Good luck with that.
For those of us who think that NM is doing a decent job, who want the current board to stay and who are not impressed by CGP's rather desperate and bitter attempt to upset the apple cart at what is possibly the most decisive 6 months in the SOLG story... the fact they feel they need to rely on PI support to fend off the attack doesn't sound great does it?
As already pointed out, many PIs don't even vote their shares and I'm not convinced the majority are as thoughtful or considered as the people who post on this board. I would have hoped that the current board would already know they had enough support to win this vote from major shareholders, i.e. combined NM and associates, BHP (due to agreement terms), some of the other asset managers. Does the fact they are reliant on PI support suggest quite a few institutional holders apart from CGP and NCM will also vote to remove them?
Realistically what will happen if the board are ousted? Who will appoint a new board? Presumably the major shareholders so it will be largely packed with directors who are patsies for the majors? And a new CEO and management team that will be compliant to the wishes of BHP and NCM. Isn't the only outcome if that happens that the new manangement will do everything in their power to serve SOLG up to the majors on a silver platter with a bow on it? BHP and NCM combine forces to buy out SOLG for 30p a share and run it as a massive JV between the two of them... the new BoD having recommended the sale after they concluded that it was the best way to get Alpala built and producing asap (after pulling the plug on FN funding)? Or am I missing something?
I wouldn’t be surprised if cornerstone end up making a public apology. He defended his actions very well during the webinar. There’s a lot of hate towards NM even tho he’s doing a great job, it just makes me think we are getting closer to a takeover. I do wonder if he has withheld information though. There doesn’t seem to have been any rise in the broker views for some time which doesn’t really represent how far the company has come since first issue.
okay thanks
Nick stated yesterday With regards to the recent raising, that he wanted to broaden the institutional investors on the register ..... my guess is that they’ll all be friendly and hand picked
Without Nick in Power this really leaves BHP to bid for SOLG and the board to accept a bid
Hello Phat
Can you clarify did your contacts says Solgold board or Cornerstone board had made a great mistake?
Good afternoon Colonel, agree with your analysis, but not the bit about us being brought out. Nicely summed up, CGP will accept NM's offer.
BNC, a lot can change subsequent to listing though: salaries, bonuses etc. Strikes me that the Chairman and a couple of others on there (obviously excluding NM, JW and Whistler) are somewhat surplus to requirements? Haven't looked into what they get paid though.
colonel et al,
any views on my 12:03pm post?
r's
BN.c
Wise choice BNC...
So CGP are bleating bout SOLG's corporate governance.
SOLG's company structure that CGP are bleating about has not changed other than newer appointments (which CGP are not belating about) since the TSX listing.
So surely if there were a genuine issue with SOLG's corporate strutcture then SOLG would not have been granted the TSX listing in the first place............
Just my thoughts on the subject - sorry if others have posted the same - not really read this bb since Mon/Tue
r's
bn.c