Member Info for AgArCu

QUITO, July 20 (Reuters) - Ecuador's government concluded negotiations with Australian miner SolGold (SOLG.L) to develop a major mine seen requiring a $4.9 billion investment

Where did I say they had to put up the money at the start, Quady? It was fort who tried to say £4bn was a total for buying solg and CapEx.

You can start by apologizing for that slur on me, quads, then we can go back to reasoned discussions. Hair trigger springs to mind!

Oh fort... As night follows day! Same old irrelevant claptrap.

£4bn all in? Really hope not, as Reuters reporting £3.8bn investment needed... £200m for us is about 6p a share!

This rampy nonsense is, at least, transparent enough that it won't cause anyone to invest their cash. Long road to go, don't let the snake oil sales team have you believe there are quick fixes or shortcuts.

Slug seems neutered (not that he was ever potent, lol). Maybe all of the banning is finally taking it's toll? He'll learn to live in civil society eventually, I guess.

I appreciate that the all caps will make me appear angry, when I'm actually quite sanguine despite what the management have done to the share price, but this needs saying:

SOLGOLD ARE NOT NORONT.

Honest to God there is absolutely no way that red doesn't understand the critical differences. This is the only proof we need that red is a disgusting ramper, prying on the less intelligent people using this board. Lying about his millions of shares is one thing, but pretending there's a link to an established Canadian miner is deliberate and unpleasant. Same thing fort does weekly.

2031 for what, Quady?

Quady, think you're going after the wrong guy here 🤣 I was taking the rampers arguments to their logical conclusion (eg:betting the farm) precisely because they were trying to make it sound like a certainty.

Solg have some geological data about a volume of rock. They have some very expensive drill cores. They have an agreement with an outgoing government that, if they can sort out some logistics, they can dig some minerals out of the ground. And they have, as yet, no credible plan to pay for getting the minerals out of the ground.

Anyone who shouts 'tier one asset' lays bare their lack of understanding of the mining industry. Fort is the worst for it, with his 'you never see tier one assets left on the shelf, will definitely go for a huge price'. Absolute tripe, but a pleasing soundbites for the other brainless rampers.

Aqui, I'm 100% confident you're not here to help people.

So smick, aqui: is it guaranteed money? 3 bag return? Have you taken out a big, high interest loan to buy another 400k shares, in the certainty that you're right and we're about to get a huge charitable TO?

No. Care to explain why not?

Tldr

😴

Back so soon, slug? You told me last weekend, under your last (predictably short-lived) incarnation, that I'd be made to look silly by this week's news ... Any update on that? 🤣

Be real for a minute: why do you keep coming back?

There isn't much to stop those things, rcgl, but there is even less suggesting they will happen any time soon. I'm not telling you how to invest, but it has served me very well to go off what is likely, not what is possible. It is possible that some philanthropic billionaire will swoop in and offer to buy solg for £1.5b, giving everyone a 3x return on current investment... But it's totally unlikely. So we need a return to prudent planning for the next stages, and I think that's what we're slowly starting to see now, albeit without any major announcements to confirm that yet (these term extension and exploitation licences are foreseen formalities).

I chose the Dec '23 deadline to encourage brainless rampers to nail their colours to the mast Q4 last year. They were posting with such laughable confidence that we'd be taken out soon, I asked them to see that we'd still be solg by our Dec '23 AGM. Most were apoplectic with rage at the idea... Mocking the very idea and branding me a deliberate de-ramper. And one by one they've either changed their tune or quietly climbed down as they've realised I was right. That's one thing I'm grateful for today.

Some shareholders want an exit sooner than others, Bozi, but we're back to the simple idea that some proposed exits require buyers who just don't seem to be there. Jiangxi seem to have stopped after re-establishing their pre-dilution levels, as predicted. All other parties sitting on their hands.

I think you're right about no one wanting more printing (unless it's unfairly cheap and mostly to the current board!). Makes it more likely that they will go back on their previous royalty statements, though as I've said before it's not the most likely play.

Do you mean patronizing, rather than pedantic? That's a joke, obviously.

I think it is embarrassing that some who have been here 10 years still don't understand the company. Perhaps, one might suggest, that is because they read this board rather than reading pertinent information relevant to solg and it's journey? There are not many other explanations for their totally misguided comments about takeovers and time-frames. Just a thought.

Have a good, too (?)

It is pleasant to read that the penny has dropped for a great many posters, that solg is not going to be taken over this year, and we need to plot a credible path to getting the minerals out of the ground, with significant funding coming from other parties. Only once that's in the public domain will the SP recover to anything like its levels last summer.

As most know I've been banging this particular drum for ages, drowned out at times by ridiculous claims and ramping, by 'fast and smart' and 'bob's bat'. Now we can have some reasoned discussions about how a sub-£500m company secures tranches of funding up to $3b. It certainly isn't coming from selling a few cornerstone shares!

Thanks. It's heartening to see the narrative become more logical.

Copperpot, would you say you are fairly good at reading between the lines with solg? Did you expect this presentation to contain new information or to be a damp squib?

Which year end, add? Just to be crystal clear.

Nothing there to suggest 'fast and smart', or any deviation from the expected long timeline.

Think he might be one of the 3 or 4 who went too far and I confess I resorted to the filter: mea culpa. Is that Needalife? Once again, apologies for jumping on what I thought was a deliberate misinterpretation of something I'd said.

I honestly don't know what you read, add, or if you can read? Who said we would be better off without either a term extension or an exploitation licence? Seriously man, you're off your rocker. Calm down, do some more reading, appreciate the very long path we still have to walk here and recognize that we all want the same thing.

If you have a problem with me personally, which you seem to, I can't help you. I just post realistic responses to information, and sensible speculation billed as such. I understand that those with an agenda might not like it, but please: do some reading, of my posts and of relevant third party information, and calm yourself down 😎

To read some of adds snipes, you'd think he has missed something fundament. When the share price goes up, my wealth grows. So I do want this to be selling for 30p a share. But I'm a realist. He seems to think I'm willing solg to fail, or to perform badly. Quite the opposite! Just don't want to see honest conversation hijacked by the same brainless rampers that have let this board down for years on end.