Rainbow Rare Earths Phalaborwa project shaping up to be one of the lowest cost producers globally. 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.
On twitter i asked for Warren's comment on last week's article regarding possible bidders and this is what he said:
"I am sure there are multiple parties looking at SolGold, which one moves and when, who knows? It is an excellent deposit, I think Scott's new plan to mine it will light things up. I am looking forward to seeing his plan."
Interesting.
We know SC has talked about advancing engineering works at Cascabel, but when did he announce his intention to mine it? And how does this fit in with interested parties doing dd in the data room? What happened to 'not (being) mine builders'?
Has Caldwell tied himself in the same knots as NM and DC? I sincerely hope not. Time for a bit of clarity, Mr Caldwell.
Morning Add …. I took it as meaning his approach on how to mine it rather than any intention to get involved in the process himself….. all down to interpretation I guess
I haven't seen an announcement either. Not about that we are going to mine it or from any engineering company working on a (feasibility) study. I am not against moving forward towards building the mine. It should add value and Solg can still be picked up along the way while the project is being de-risked.
Dbw, exactly. But the thing is we, and the market, should not be put in the position of having to interpret matters - there should be a very clear strategy which, after all, is what the SR was meant to deliver.
Snowman, we know the DFS has been put on ice, so how this fits in with mining is beyond my comprehension.
The lack of communication and clarity has become a real issue and I confess I expected better from Caldwell.
'not mine builders'. At this time we are an explorer. We can't sit around forever waiting for a TO that might not come (far cheaper for majors to have us burn through cash and fail government spending agreement, then pick up the repo concession. Don't believe the deficit deadline nonsense peddled by ramper fort- majors have other options medium term ). So we have to do something, which means re-evaluating the engineering and bringing in some mine builders (engineers) to pick off the easiest fruit. Pretty sure lots of others have tried to explain this simple logic to you fantasists multiple times before - does it take your golden boy on Twitter reiterating it for you to finally understand? Seems so. Nice if reality starts to set in for some of you though.
Engineering project's are undertaken all over the world every day.
The company doesn't need the expertise.
They buy it in.
Civil engineering project's are undertaken on a basis of continuous improvement, on costs and time to deploy.
All Solgold has to do is raise the funds.
Either you believe what we have in the ground is big enough to attract funding or you don't.
Personally I do.
We await the strategic review.
Q, the thing which concerns me is the suggestion the SR will be an 'ongoing process' with no conclusion and therefore no clear direction of travel that's comprehensible to all. That is NOT the object of an SR.
If the company now thinks it can mine , just say so and we can then make our minds up as to wether we wish to continue being invested.
Add hopefully all part of a “big reveal” could be around the same time as the website relaunch .. towards end of this month …. Who know ?
And to add to addicknt's point. How many strategic options can there actually be to evaluate? Surely this doesn't have to take half a year or more.
Perhaps one of you Twitter people could ask Irwin where he got his information from? Specifically, the reference to mining.
Good morning addicknt.
I believe the problem we have is that in the past we have said that if an offer was tabled that was fair value, then we would look at it.
People on this forum have taken this out of context and for years they have expected this to be sold.
That's crazy thinking.
From the outset Nick Mather has kept the book diverse.
No company can dictate the terms on how Solgold moves forward.
Those decisions are taken by Solgold.
We have defended successfully on all fronts.
I have always said that production was the most likely outcome given the evidence we have.
To cover your point on why we don't just say we are constructing Alpala.
Well for the same reason.
If we got a fair offer, I feel we would sell Alpala.
However the diverse book makes this expensive for a hostile bid. So that's a non starter.
So we require an agreed takeover.
Well that means paying fair value.
I just don't see that happening at the last minute.
However the means for us to construct Alpala are many.
We can fund this in so many ways. Including a JV in which we maintain the controlling interest.
The strategic review is about the best way to advance Cascabel.
That's exactly what is is going to say.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a start up for under 1 billion for say Tandy.
This part is more your area than mine.
If we can raise 1 billion in staged funding from a JV partner, royalty and loans. Probably a mixture with maybe some equity at a higher price because the question of we will build this or not has been removed.
Then do we require a DFS at this stage.
After all we have got an offtake agreement already without a DFS.
The DFS is not a problem, as we redid the PFS in a format that can be used in the DFS, thus producing the DFS on a quicker basis.
I asked him for clarification. Will update when I receive a reply .
For me there is one objective and the important words are “ new plan to mine it will light things up” So I think Scott is trying to improve both the tonnage in the plan and the financials and use this to light a fire under the negotiations around any sale or JV
You still can't see that WI isn't the oracle, can you? We were on point 2.99 of his 3 point plan to sell solg, now we're mining in hopes of "lighting things up". The man is no more clued in them some of the other rampers on here- he just shifts his narrative most weeks. Classic billy big balls stuff, but easy to do when you're as cashed up as he is.
RE: not just coming out and saying we are going for Tandy or similar. Shareholders aren't the priority for the moment- leave that to the month before the AGM when the hyperbole hits. For now it's about matching what we say to the incoming political landscape. Don't release an SR that then contradicts the direction of new government. See if they want huge, big ticket mining or smaller, less headline grabbing projects, then adjust wording accordingly.
Sid. Been on here 2 weeks, and already chatting to irwin. Even better the likes of adic are chatting to you about you chatting to irwin.
Jeeeeeeeez, it gets better.
Perhaps they don't have Twitter in the wastelands of Australia, because it's quite clear you don't understand how it works.
There was a time when Warren Irwin used to repeatedly say that any potential major miner, thinking of buying Cascabel would have their own plan of how to build it…. That they would just bin our PFS and start it again themselves…. And I agreed..
Now he seems to have changed his position and Solgolds mining plan, headed by his mate…. is gonna blow the doors off…… hmmmmmm. I can’t stop feeling he is just trying to stay positive, in the face of disappointment..
Ortherncopper
The trouble on here is investors have been waiting a very long time and take ever morsel fed to them as the lighting of the touch paper to ignite the sp, that just isn’t going to happen.
No one is going to fight over this, no matter how much the rampers hope they will because of the many pouts raised in Quady’s earlier post.
Posters like DBW are desperate to see anything positive in any comment because they were adding at every dip on the way down from the 40s because they believe all the BS.
I suspect Solg are caught between a rock and a hard place and and need to take some tough decisions moving forward and can’t make a decision on that currently……..hence the stalemate
We have it addict. But your correct. I have absolutely no idea how it works.
Just a bit odd, sid being the man of the moment.
If I join twitter, would I be able to log into sids conversation with irwin. Who by the way went from hero to zero on here a few years ago. Obviously sids bought him back into the fold
Q, the debt markets are as tight as a gnat's chuff at the moment and any fund raising would come at a high price. And the equity markets aren't much better.
As you know, I don't subscribe to your view of the 'diverse book' and have always felt this would be an agreed deal - and still do.
My beef is lack of clarity. It simply isn't good enough to mutter about going to production whilst simultaneously stating we are not miners - it's total balls. If mining is the preferred option, drop all pretence of it being for sale and crack on with the task in hand. If a buyer subsequently emerges and makes a good offer, that's fine, but the focus should be made crystal clear. No one sensible running a business can do so with one eye over their shoulder; set the strategy, announce it to shareholders are get on with it.
Northen. Exactly what I've been saying. I just wish I was more educated, so I could put it as eloquently as yourself. None the less, no matter your post is 100% on the ball. Just standby for the indignation and offence your post will bring. None so blind etc, etc
Add, there isn't really a lack of clarity RE: sale or mining. When has Scott ever said we are for sale? Rampers here got excited about WI, Bob et al. but you must not listen to idiots like fort and red. DYOR add. Basic stuff.
Hi sid. ive just joined twitter, as I was interested in what W I has to say. problem is mate ive gone back over his posts for the last several weeks. and I can't for the life of me find your tweet with him. (not sure if tweet is the right word.).
as has been pointed out im a bit on the thick side. so im sure im missing something. I wonder if you could give me the date you tweeted him, or the date you tweeted asking for clarification.. or maybe give me your tweet address.
thanks in advance mate
Addict. ive just read back over your posts around the time W I FELL OUT WITH SOLG.
You was pretty vitriolic about him then mate. in fact downright abusive. curious to know when and what changed your mind, to now be interested in his tweets. me personally, if you go back over my posts, have always thought of him as a smart cookie.