Member Info for addicknt

Filthy, very well said.

Hi, Quady, yes, I know we haven't differing opinions but mine is driven by a number of factors:
1. The nature of our asset. It is simply too important for the major mining companies to ignore and those who are currently not on the register have only one way to do so. (buying a significant stake via open-market purchases is not an option)
2. Despite Mather's blithe assurances that funding the development will be a walk in the park, I don't believe him.The funding environment is still very difficult and the perceived political risk will be a major deterrent for risk averse lenders.
3. Mather's age and ego. It is entirely natural that he should want to trouser a nine figure fortune, thus making him one of the richest men in Australia.
4. The stated strategic plans of BHP and others. In other words, let others prove an asset and then buy it. BHP and RTZ could not have been any clearer in their recent statements. The PEA will do this and i don't think we'll have to wait for a PFS, let alone a DFS.

I'm afraid I simply don't believe this will get anywhere near production under the aegis of our ownership.

Quady, we are in a period of stasis due to the shareholder agreements with New and BHP and unless one of them is prepared to risk breaking those terms (BHP) you would assume not much will happen until later in the year.
However, the Cornerstone situation has kicked-off much earlier than I thought it would and has thrown a cat amongst the pigeons.
They have opened the door to the sale of their business and any corporate financier would tell you it is now "in play" and those with clients in the sector will be running the slide rule over the company, in particular RTZ. The sale of Cornerstone will be the catalyst for the gloves coming off. It is the only way in for someone other than our current shareholders and the prize is simply too great to be ignored. Whether it was intentional or not, by launching this approach to Cornerstone, Mather has accelerated the whole future of SOLG.
We could be on the cusp of one of the more exciting bits of M&A the market will see this year.

They have also proposed a formal sale process of Cascabel.
So, what can we conclude?
1. Our offer was 'opportunistic' based upon what our board already knows is coming i.e the magnitude of the PEA.
2. Cornerstone is for sale and has expressed a clear view of how much it is prepared to sell for.
3. It believes BHP is the best purchaser.
4. It believes SOLG should sell Cascabel.
6. It doesn't much like Mather.

This has really opened up the whole thing, as was to be expected, and provides the clearest possible reasons why SOLG is a stonking "Buy".

This is a fascinating response. I particularly enjoyed the statement that Cornerstone believes the offer to undervalue the current value of its holding by three times.

Quady, Cornerstone have been crystal clear; they are for sale. They'll be gone from the register by summer.

Hmmm...so how does this fit in with their sale of BCN shares?

Oh well, I tried.

Dose, investors need to be aware of the political risks associated with this share, and my guess is that most are.
And personally, I have no problem with you posting the various links etc. However, your problem is that you overplay your hand. You create mountains out of every molehill you stumble across and in consequence you invalidate your argument.
If you took a more objective view of matters and avoided posting stuff that does not relate to Solg's position, you would be making a valuable contribution. As it stands, you are not.

Newboy, if only that were the case! This has been pretty awful for me as well.
The first time I sold I was just about okay, but then I made the mistake of ignoring my own views and bought back. This has hurt. However, I don't regret having sold. Of course, like many, what I really regret is not having sold at £1.50. At that moment in time I was about 130k in profit, so how stupid do you think I feel now?!
As you know, I have been a long term adherent of this company and firmly believe in the prospects. Where things come unstuck is with regard to Secker's ability to get this across the line. I sincerely hope he does, but the uncertainty is too great.
I know full well that if funding is announced I won't be able to get in at the bottom, but if I miss it by 20 or 25%, I believe there will still be a really good upside (depending on what the finance package looks like), and I'm happy to live with this.
It's not easy to pinpoint exactly what has gone wrong, but a key element is Secker not taking the money when it was available at the beginning of last year. He made the mistake of getting too greedy on valuations and the result has been disastrous. As for the aborted placing, words fail!
As for Secker's future, I really don't know. Could anyone else do a better job? Or is the current financing environment simply too difficult?
Anyway, let's hope his seeming confidence (which always comes across as cockiness) is well placed and that he can deliver to shareholders what they deserve.

ha, ha! We have a very "Woke" algorithm controlling this site.

If they bought shares 'behind the scenes', they have to announce it and in any event the various agreements prohibit it.
Of course, if one of them gets to 30%, they have to make a mandatory cash offer for the whole company, which would set the cat amongst the pigeons.
I agree with your final point.
I've said it before, but if things heat-up I simply do not expect BHP to abide by the agreement and this specifically relates to New buying Cornerstone. It will be gloves-off.

zoros, I think you could usefully spend two minutes looking at the latest presentation to get the answers.
However, the point you make is exactly why I said this morning that NM is aware of the problems that could occur and that this explains why he is proposing to bid for Cornerstone. But, even if one of them did get hold of the shares, they would still only have circa 20% of the company and although that may prove to be an impediment to a takeover, it most certainly doesn't put them in the position of 'calling the shots'.

wolfi, I think you've answered your own question; there is no confidence.
I sincerely hope the company can pull the rabbit out of the hat and I'll re-invest the moment it happens. But until that time, I'm on the sidelines.

well, that's one interpretation, Zoros. But I'm not sure it's shared by many.

It's not the diversity of the shareholder base that makes it difficult (that's normally a good thing), it's who those shareholders are that adds a layer of complexity.
However, I do not share your conclusion. There are simply too many things which predicate against us taking this to production, not least of which is the imperative of the majors to replenish their asset base.

"Cascabel is the type of asset that will end up in the hands of a well capitalized group..."
They couldn't make it any clearer, could they?

BBG, yes I did.

A further comment: In simple M&A terms, we should not wish for either New or BHP to get hold of Cornerstone. Should either of them do so it will deter any other outside bidder. The ideal purchaser, from our point of view, would be RTZ.
NM knows this and this explains why he's announced his intention to bid. It is all about keeping those shares out of the hands of New or BHP.

Sav, indeed. But, if New get Cornerstones holding, BHP will regard this as being a real threat to their chances of winning the overall prize; therefore, they may argue that it constitutes a bid and be prepared to risk breaking the agreement with SOLG.
One thing is for sure, if New do get hold of those shares, it will make it almost impossible for BHP to gain overall control. This is why I'm saying BHP may be forced to act, regardless of the agreement.