Member Info for addicknt

As far as I can tell from the Special Resolutions as detailed at the AGM, they are only valid for 12/15 months. ( I may have misunderstood this, but it is referred to in the Resolutions)

If I've got this right, it seems to provide a deadline for some form of corporate action relating to a significant share issue prior to the next AGM. If nothing happens they'll have to run the risk of getting the Specials approved again in December and given the narrowness of the vote, I'm sure they'd prefer to avoid doing so.

How about this as a theory:

We are going to spin-off Porv and various other exploration targets into Newco and simultaneously bring in new investors. We will need cash to stand our corner and the Resolutions will allow us to do so.

This will dilute our current holding in Solg, but we'll be 'compensated' by our holding in Newco.

Damers, you may recall that SC has said previously that the failure to get these Resolutions through had prevented him from pursuing a number of important strategic developments. Exactly what he was referring to remains cryptic, but he now needs to show us what he was talking about.

Just like it is with all junior explorers.

Re: Orosur - agreed. But it's worth keeping an eye on it.

Let's hope he does. Continuity will greatly assist us.

No, but I've been keeping an eye on it.

Pity, because this board could do with your insight into local developments.

Darren, are you still in SOLG? I miss your local news updates.

Q, kind of you to say so.

Killjoy, trying to predict the share price of any company is a fools mission, particularly this one. However, on the face of it, there will/should be plenty of potential catalysts.

Here we on the 8th of January and already people are writing the year off as being yet another where nothing will happen.

We know what workflow needs to be delivered to access more finance - a first for this company - and have no evidence to suggest the company isn't getting on with the task in hand.

However, this isn't the only issue which needs addressing and for me, we are in dire need of progress on our other prospects. Hopefully, Caldwell will reveal something in due course.

NMM, yes, I think you're right.

NMM, Norges dropped to 2.8% following the dilution which resulted from the Chinese investment in Dec '22.

Q, your post brings us back to the question of whether BHP would want us to construct when, in all likelihood, they would build a far more ambitious and costly mine?

It's my view that BHP were pursuing the siege approach as outlined by the ex-CEO of Glencore i.e sit back and watch us starve to death. I think when they originally invested we unwittingly opened the door for them to squeeze us. So far this hasn't worked, and the question is, have they now lost interest? Or if, further down the line, someone bids will they be prompted to react?

Only one of BHP and Newmont bothered to vote at the AGM, which one was it? My bet is on BHP, who simply wanted to make it plain they don't support the company and are still very keen to get NM off the board. It was, as Fort suggests, a fit of pique.

Q, how do you know that BHP/Newmont aren't sellers at a price they believe to be reasonable?

The SR process revealed that no one was willing to put a decent offer on the table, although I suspect we had plenty of interest at a knockdown valuation, but we were not willing sellers at those levels.

On the face of it, over the past two years BHP's interest appears to have waned, and Newmont's position simply looks like a "hold" as they sit back and watch how things unfold. Given this scenario, does it not suggest that both parties may well be sellers at the right price? In other words, their holdings will not be an obstacle to a decent offer.

RK, it looks as if BBG has been given the boot.

Eloro, haven't we all moved on from believing any of these stories? Over the years there's been so many of them.

Do you know if Tufford is still working for us? The last accounts suggested no one is on a retainer at the moment and I don't imagine he's doing it for free.

Pbow, I shall follow your advice.

Q, we'll never agree about the nature of Mayther's departure, but the market narrative at the time was crystal clear...he was effectively given the heave-ho.

BTW, of course you're right about the moron's comment, but I'm afraid it's way beyond his level of understanding.

This may come as a huge shock to you, but BHP isn't the only miner in the world. Indeed, it isn't even the only miner on our share register. So what I said is a fact. Second, BHP's ambitions were to dilute everyone out of sight, and Mather made sure they didn't get their way, even though it cost him his job. This isn't speculation, it's fact. Perhaps you thought BHP's ambitions would have been a good thing? Fair enough if that is your view, but not many people on here share your opinion.

With regard to my second paragraph, I couldn't have been clearer that I was expressing an opinion.

The problem you have is one of English comprehension - you simply don't understand what people are saying. Instead, you see whose post it was and your bias and general unpleasantness kicks-in and you make an assumption about what the poster was saying without bothering to sit back and think about it for a moment.

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to explain what was wrong with my post?

The first and third paragraphs are facts. The second paragraph is my opinion, which for some reason you appear to believe I'm not entitled to express.

Who knows, maybe 2025 will be the year when you actually post something about the company rather than your daily ad hominem attacks. I look forward to the prospect with mounting excitement. Btw, what happened to your statement that a bid was on the way and this time it looked real?