Member Info for addicknt

Mather and others.

Two green boxes can only mean the Aussie moron has decided to make more of his fatuous observations. What an absolute champion ar5e that bloke is.

Eloro, no he didn't. He merely observed that the 'entire board will be under pressure' and then went on to say he thinks SC is doing a good job. He did not give the impression he had any inside info on the matter and was responding to my question about the situation. It's interesting how quickly he was proved correct.

I remain baffled about who is aggrieved and why.

I wonder if the AGM circular to be released next week will contain any explanation of the situation, accompanied by what has now become a regular event, a plea for our support?

Orthern, thanks for this, but I'm confused. Is it good, bad or indifferent news? Are there implications for Cascabel?

I'm pretty certain the only people capable of constructing this is one of the majors. It most definitely isn't a company with 7 full time executives.

Jerry, good to see you back on here.

With regard to your neighbour's comments, I wonder why they conflict with many other reports, including Irwin's reference to the mining experts he spoke to recently?

Is the answer that yes, it is complex, but it's such a significant deposit that someone will find a way to mine it?

Bozi, I agree. If the price for keeping Caldwell in situ was the removal of Twigger, I've got no quibbles. I've never forgiven him for his execrable performance at the 2020 AGM. In fact, he should have been sacked immediately thereafter.

Fort, indeed they were not happy - it cost Mather his job. However, the deals have been done and, as it stands, can't be unwound, so I doubt history is the explanation, particularly as Newmont are new to the game.

It's possible BHP are fed up with BS ridiculing them - a foolish thing to do in my book - but is that reason enough? They only have 10%, so I can't see them being sufficiently powerful protagonists.

As to your last point, putting to one side the fact a company can't simply suspend its shares under those circumstances, do you really feel an auction now would maximise value? Surely we need our ducks in a row ie the IPA etc before we can sell?

Eloro, yes, it was a serious question.

The people who matter are the large shareholders and they won't be fretting about the current sp. Indeed, if you believe Fort's conspiracy theory this is exactly where Caldwell wants it to be (that's complete nonsense, btw).

The key question is; is Caldwell pursuing the right objectives and is he going about it the right way? If you have any better ideas of how to achieve our goals, I'm all ears.

The board is sufficiently concerned about the AGM that they've ditched two directors, so I return to the question; what do they object to and why? Are BHP worried that SC will sell the business to the wrong people? Are The Chinese afraid of being sidelined? What's Newmont's view? These are the people who matter and it's clear that one or more of them have serious issues and it's got nothing to do with the share price.

So yes, my questions are serious and any enquiring mind should also be asking them. They go to the very heart of what's going on and we private shareholders are completely in the dark.

Twigger and Clare lost their jobs as a result of shareholder pressure and were probably sacrificial lambs. The questions is, who wanted board change and why?

Was it people who aren't happy with how long the SR is taking? Or did it come from those who don't approve of the direction the SR is taking? What else could it be? Are some of them anti-Caldwell, as was suggested by him not long after the merger completed? If so, why?

If there really are serious objections out there from shareholders who matter, why haven't they voiced their opinions publicly ? Or will they do so in the coming weeks? What is exactly that they don't approve of? Because, apart from having our patience tested, I'm struggling to see what Caldwell's doing wrong.

RK, yes, SM has already provided clarification on that point.

As for the rest of your post, was it directed at me?

One thing is for sure, the resignations were not planned and something has most definitely forced their hand. You don't get yourself in a situation of announcing the resignation of a chairman without having a replacement lined-up. And as someone else pointed out, Twigger has only recently ponied up more cash for a share purchase. As ever with Solgold, nothing is straightforward.

SM, yes it was, so thanks for clarifying. And I agree with your comment about Mather - it's not typical for an NED to make this sort of comment in an RNS.

My main point is that if a new PFS/MRE/mine design etc is critical to maximising value, why did we commence the SR simultaneously? Wouldn't it have made sense to wait until we had all the info available?

Bozi, do you not think we're pursuing two separate and contradictory paths at the moment? On the one hand we've opened the doors to all comers and have said we're open to anything, and on the other we're supposedly working on a new PFS, funding etc. The matter was further complicated by the suggestion in the MD&A that we're not actually doing any work on the PFS. Which is it? A question for the AGM, I think.

I understand Fort's frustration, but I do think he's terribly mistaken about SC, notwithstanding what I've just said.

'Well, I'm not happy losing two directors...' In fact, I'm so unhappy I'm going to vote get rid of another one. Hmm.

You've given us five points suggesting the company is being lined-up for a bargain basement sale, but appear to be happy to trash the sp completely by getting rid of the CEO. Another hmm.

In an earlier post you also seemed to be implying you want the Chinese to bid for us at a negligible value just to provide you with an exit. Another hmm.

You really do seem to be very confused at the moment.

Fort, for the first time in months I agree with something you've said. I reckon the company has been sounding out major shareholders who wanted to remove Twigs and SC agreed to do so in return for ongoing support for him. Clare is irrelevant.

As to your point about GGP interests controlling the company, it's hardly news, is it? As I said the other day, this is, to all intents and purposes, a Canadian company.

Notice of AGM and Circular to be sent to shareholders next week.

Au revoir Twigger, I'm afraid I won't miss you.

There's an interesting interview with Middlekoop and VRIC. It really is worth a listen. He discusses the broader commodity market - he believes we're on the cusp of a lengthy bull run, especially copper and gold.

At 17 minutes he describes us as being the most attractive option available in the market and says it 'really is for sale' and he can't believe we are so cheap.

If you want cheering up I'd recommend spending 20 minutes listening to the guy.

SM, interesting to note Caldwell's observation that on average we've had daily volume equating to 0.1% of the issued share capital and that it's taking 10 days to churn just 1%. (obviously this excludes the Berry Street disposal) This share is hyper-sensitive to very small buys and sells and has been for a very long time.

Given Twigger's involvement with both companies, you'd assume he proof read the document before it was released - but what does the reference mean? It's not related to the NAV as that is not a "price tag".

Incidentally, before anyone accuses me of reading too much into this, I'm not. My view is that it's simply a sloppy throw-away observation by the author - although I'd love it to be true.