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.
From here: https://www.afr.com/rear-window/s-all-not-well-at-solgold-20220814-p5b9p0
"BHP and Newcrest were apparently unwilling to invest again, and a second raising that would circumvent pre-emption rights was ultimately seen by shareholders as not appropriate. And fair enough, it’s a £600 million company, not a Perth-based penny stock explorer, though it’s only got about $25 million left in the bank."
So we now know that SOLG wanted to raise $50m but BHP and NCM said they didn't want to participate in the raise. We don't know why that might be. Whether the price we tried to raise at was too high, or whether BHP and NCM simply don't want to invest anymore capital into this project under this management.
Where I'm struggling is the second part of the above, why a raise that would circumvent pre-emption rights was seen as "not appropriate". Surely this presents existing shareholders an opportunity to dilute the holdings of the two majors who are clearly only interested in getting their hands on our assets as cheap as possible? Or would the optics of BHP and NCM not taking part be detrimental to the share price?
When this is all over - and I struggle to see how SOLG will exist in 2023 - it will be fascinating to hear the stories of those who have lived and worked through this on the inside, Mather, Marshall, Ward, Twigger, and most recently Ayten Saridas. I bet there are some great tales to be told.
Is that accurate, Quinty? Are we in a situation whereby two majors that control 26% of our company are able to 1) refuse to participate in a fundraise and 2) prevent any fundraise that doesn't include them from taking place?
I'd have bitten their hand off again given the opportunity & not for the tiny amount they offered us last minute dot.com in the last raise either............
Then again my holdings are miniscule in comparison lols..........
r's
bn.c
What % of shareholders must be against a proposed fundraise in order to be able to block it? Sorry I might be being dim. I am tired after 6.5 hours in the car on the way back from Cornwall today, and wading through the posts on this BB.
I just find it both strange and concerning that BHP and NCM can say we're not going to cough up any more money, but also say to SOLG you can't go and raise capital (via equity at least) elsewhere, when they own less than a third of the company between them.
Exactly Quinty and this was NM's argument all the way..........
Just crunching some no's and reason for doing this is the clear objection to having NM on the bod - as it seems to remain widely reported........ + what was touched on re NM securing a seat on the bb via DGR Holdings moving up to 10%
So no's
SLOG Shares in issue 2.3bill
DGR hold 8.89% so would require 1.11% or circa 25.5m more shares to take them to 10%
If we use the 10% fund raise figs we discussed previously = 230m
If I'm not mistaken DGR would be entitled to 8.89% of this which is circa 20.5m
Leaving them only 5m short which could be bough on the open market with little disruption.........
I know there are a lot of assumptions in the above, but is this really the true issue?
BHP NCM CGP & allegedly B'ROCK want NM out of the way..................but he does not want to the the co given away death by equity dilution...........and neither do we as PI's one assumes (although some of the comments on here do make me wonder sometimes what some folks really do want)
So is this objection, really about stock holdings shareholding squabbles & the control of the bod / company???
I for one am sick of BHP and its cronies & their bully boy tactics - muscling in and trying to run our company...........if you want to take control the cough up and buy the damned thing and stop pi-ss-ing us about!
R's
BN.c
Thanks Quinty. Cornwall really is a great part of this country, excellent food, great beer, clear blue water, and good honest people who remain unfazed by the crap peddled by the media.
Great post BnC. It's all about control here - the drilling and the long term strategy are moot at this point in my opinion.
its all possible Quinty
Hi Quinty,
As you are new you will not know about the dynamic duo and their obsession with a former poster called the Slug.
They are scared to death of the Slug as he is much cleverer than they are so they try to get him banned all the time.
If you scroll back through the day they appear to be the c ock of the walk, gobbing off to all and sundry, revelling in their delusion of grandeur.
Then somebody comes along who they think is the Slug and they go nuts, imagine hitting a wasps nest with a baseball bat and you may get an idea as to their reaction.
They are also shi tting themselves to the point that one of them is posting the fact he's actively emailing the website to stop the threat to his perceived domination.
I genuinely believe he's about twelve years old and has a very small err....thing.
the W anchor .....
He also has a deletion crew on board as they are as thick as he his so my post won't be around long.
Never fear, I have a copy to paste at any time it's needed.
Where does it say that having a 10% shareholding entitles a party to a board seat? Is that in Solg's mem and arts? Or just an assumption? I thought NCM's and BHP's rights to nominate a board member were contractual, arising out of their subscription agreements when they made investments in the company.
Let's see if admin believe your 19 plus posts slug.
Good night.
rcgl2, it was an assumption I made the other day, but might not be right.