Member Info for addicknt

Q, jeez! Their announcement today follows that of yesterday which gave details of a book-building exercise (read my last paragraph). You simply don't understand anything about this do you? You are 100% wrong and are really making yourself look like a gigantic arse.

Q, sorry, but you really are talking complete nonsense. You are the only person who thinks what you're saying is correct and you are deliberately ignoring the evidence, which is strange because it's supported by what the company has announced.
Anyway, you carry on with your grand delusion and don't be surprised when I remind you of this conversation once the next fund raise is announced as a done deal. (the only caveat here is if we end up doing a book-building exercise as GGP did yesterday, or if the package includes an open offer to us cannon fodder)

Q, it seems I'm going to have to explain it again. Of the nine fund raises undertaken since June 2016 two were offers to all shareholders and were pre-announced accordingly; seven were not. For your benefit I'll re-iterate - if it's an offer open to all the details will be announced, if it isn't, they won't and never have been.
Your obstinacy on this matter is quite extraordinary.

Quady, I thought I'd comprehensively proved that your "no fund raise attempt" was nonsense the other day. It appears you may not have understood the facts I produced.

Eish, couldn't agree more.

snowman, that's my understanding as well. It explains why BHP/NCM were so opposed to the Franco deal and objected to a repeat. A business can't keep throwing away percentages of revenue.

Tesla, what "maybe in a stable country, not Ecuador"?
As you're aware, BHP have already invested millions in SOLG and are expanding their exposure to the country. They constantly refer to the country as being of great interest to them.
Perhaps you should drop them an email and tell them how stupid they are.

Fort, no they are not. However, they are taken more seriously than we are and if they choose to be activist investors I'm all for it.

I wonder if Berry Street will issue another missive? They can't be happy bunnies.

That's not like you Bozi!

Bozi, I wonder if he's waiting for for a discounted placing? It wouldn't surprise me.

Fort, you make a good point about DC's lack of investment here.
Personally, I find it unacceptable that he hasn't spent a penny of his own cash buying shares in the market and it offers me no comfort whatsoever. The fact he's been awarded a shed load of options is equally unpalatable, particularly bearing in mind he's produced no enhanced shareholder value. He needs to lead by example and demonstrate some faith and optimism by putting his hand in his pocket.

lostagain, I think Irwins silence combined with that of CGP, is very good news. If either party were feeling aggrieved I'm pretty sure we'd know about it.

Perhaps we could put this issue of public information relating to a fund raise to bed.
As far as I can see, since June 2016 there have been nine separate fund raising exercises; two involved the offer of shares to all share holders, and it goes without saying full details were revealed beforehand. Seven were private placings or other forms of financing and no details were announced in advance. Obviously, no details of failed attempts have ever been released, although it's my view that until two /three weeks ago there have been no such failures.
So, there you have it; if a fund raise involves the public i.e an open offer or rights issue, details are announced (but we all knew that anyway), if it's a private deal no details are announced - the clue is in the word "private". This is true for every company I've ever come across and the process is dictated by Stock Exchange rules.
The whole world knows we attempted to raise money and failed - what should concern us is the reason why it failed, and it's my belief that DC has provided the reason. The resignations provide further uncertainty.
Anyway, what's important now is that the company deals with the cash issue asap. It's all very well saying we've got enough cash until the end of the year, but time passes incredibly quickly and we cannot afford to wait until November or December, particularly as capital markets are getting much, much tighter at the moment.

Q, total nonsense, I'm afraid.

The idea that the company would release details of a failed fund raise is simply ridiculous.

Apparently, there never was a failed fund raise and it's all made up. Perhaps this explains why Berry Street were fully aware of what was going on (they had probably been asked to participate) and publicly stated that it had failed.
Q, there are certain battles you should continue fighting, such as your production argument, but your denial of certain others simply makes you look daft.
Separately, we now have a pretty clear idea of what happened, but I remain totally mystified as to why it should have led to the departure of Ingo and Ayten. Surely it can't simply have related to the failed fund raise?

RK, that was last year. I'm not saying they are definitely sellers, just that their latest announcements must cast some doubt as to their position.

smick, I'm not so sure they did.
When they came onboard the strategy was as I described. It was NM who changed tack. DC has been more open and is obviously receptive to a deal, but even he has run into problems.

smick, yes, agreed, it's a fine balance. It all looks great to start with, but the inevitable tensions and conflicts of interests don't take long to emerge.
I suspect had we been straightforward with BHP and said:"look, we'll do the exploration stuff, prove the concept and then it's over to you...for a price", life may have been different. But instead we went down the route of banging-on about taking it to production and have ended up butting heads with them ever since.