Member Info for AgArCu

Gino- it isn't the rns that suggests that, it's the mining regulations. Please people, do some reading before you put your money into a company! If you don't understand Ecuadorian mining law, you are mad to be invested here.

It is astonishing that some of you are invested in a mining stock. The things written here today reveal a total absence of research and understanding. Even from add, who spends a lot of time 'picking apart' the opinions of others, but in these moments shows he is utterly clueless. Incredible.

Okay big man 💪 very assertive 🤭

Post all the investment advice you would like. We're all very impressed that you can name dividend paying ftse companies 👏 anything else for us?

He coming week? Absolute snooze fest. But don't let that realism dampen your excitement. Maybe just accept you're wrong by Friday?

And I'm sorry if you can't understand me. I'm fairly confident that's not my issue though.

And as for your anger or apparent lack thereof, I don't mind either way. But please don't feel the need to fire off any more unsolicited investment advice. Okay?

Attractive for a TO. At these prices it is a very attractive investment. I've added to my holding in the 15s. Long term prospects are good if management rediscover their sensibilities.

Would you say you're quite an angry man, add? Firing off unsolicited investment advice first thing in the morning is not normal. I hold lots of dividend stocks, but thank you anyway, I guess?

Gosh, just seen slug's posts. Flattering though it is to be subject of his advances, it's a bit much, isn't it? Not going to get any love that way. Softly, softly, sluggy... 🤗

Add, of course we can't increase royalty deals without decreasing our attractiveness. Who would suggest that? However, lots of investors don't care about solg being attractive. We care about getting minerals out of the ground and making some cash. We may get a TO bid, but wishful thinking isn't a business plan. So, on we go.

Absolutely sure BHP and NCM don't want any more royalty deals, why would they? But they didn't want the last ones either.

They've said it is too expensive, because they want other holders to side with them in opposing such deals. But that's about their economics, not ours. I've said it before, I'll say it again- £60m cleared is plenty for us to get wealthy. What's your calc based on? What percentage do we need to maintain for that?

Come on- no sarcastic remarks: put your numbers up and I'll show you where the mistakes are. Unless you've not actually done any calculations, and you're making totalitarian comments based on jack?

I don't think you've done the maths right there add: feel free to lay out your calculations if you want them checked over by people here. The government top slice won't be fixed, either, and it won't be scripted until each renegotiation. Look at literally any multi-decade project for confirmation of that. Gov will squeeze in good times and waive in tougher times, same as it ever was. And the metrics are fine for many more percentage points than we're at currently, I'd say. Also, what are you using as the denominator? Because, in favour of your argument, the slide moves on a reduced output cf. the PFS. Still think we're plenty clear of tipping though.

You're right to say it's a question of economics: that's exactly why solg could well leverage the minerals for some years to come. But this is just speculation, and I don't want to be accused of 'deramping(?)'. Maybe we'll sell a load more shares at 16p to raise cash instead.

You don't think there will be further royalty deals because of what SC has said previously, add. I admire that. I personally feel that we might reverse that promise, as many explorers have before, but I certainly don't think it's likely (eg: greater than 50% chance). I'd say a royalty deal is more likely to be announced in the next 12 months than a TO deal though. If we differ on this- fabulous! I'm not married to any opinion, I change my mind when new evidence is presented.

I've said multiple times that our short term plan should be to rebuild credibility with the markets: prove we have a workable phased extraction plan, use that to support transition to an exploitation licence, deal with funding issues when they arise (hopefully back in the 20s by then to lessen dilution). Or continue to use royalty streams, as SC's reassurance to potential buyers of no further deal isn't needed when it's clearly not the barrier to a TO.

Now, are you going to have a guess, or are you worried just how many of these I could do for you? You've been wrong about this share so many dozens of times it almost doesn't deserve a quiz question.

As for why I'm here, that's the same question one could demand of any poster. There hasn't been any 'news' broken here in years- just links to sites that all get caught by a news alert anyway. Maybe it's populated by luddites who can't use the internet, waiting for copy/paste articles, but the rest of the speculation here is demonstrable nonsense.

Waiting on a pick-up and finished reading the news, so here's a new quiz. Based on clicking a random page of a ramper's history:

1) who said, in December 2020 "the next few weeks will be box office"?

2) what happened to the share price in the next few weeks?

Just those questions this week, don't want to clutter the board on another no news day. Plentiful source material though!

It not only occured to me, add, I assumed you had. Hence my reply: I thanked you for it!

Have a good weekend all.

Did you leave out the possessive apostrophe just for me? Thanks add, appreciate it 😊

Db, for reference please read the discussion Eloro and I have just had. Tell me who is reasoned. If you're not sure, look up 'reasoned'. It means "based on sensible reasons, rather than on appeal to emotions".

I asked for evidence and was told there was none. Instead, I was asked to provide evidence that something HASN'T happened. 🤣

If I were as pedantic as you I would point out that I didn't say you were hoping it was Jiangxi in the data room, but you've asked to stop so I'll happily do so.

For the record, I don't have any proof who isn't in the data room. And in case it leaves me exposed, I'll come out now and say I don't have any proof here isn't a tooth fairy, either 🙄

"Let's hope that the dam will break soon and we will be flooded with offers."

Right there. That's where you said you were hoping. Yesterday.

And as I say, that's fine. You do you. One of our cognitive models would lead to a better understanding of, say, evolution. The other would have us hoping there is a real Santa. But as I say, you do you and keep hoping 👍

Oh okay, so you were just hoping? That's fine, I wondered if there might be some evidence to support it, but no. That's okay!

I tend to favour a more scientific approach, where evidence informs reason. I like a bit of hopeful speculation, don't get me wrong, but I'm a bit more logical where money is concerned.

Hope your wish here comes true 👍

We know Jiangxi did DD before their initial print purchase, but so we know they are in the data room more recently? Part of the frustration on this board has come from not knowing which parties have been accessing PSI- do you have a source that tells you it's Jiangxi?

SM- I only post on Solg, correct. And I've not spent anywhere near as much time on here as others, also correct. But that doesn't make my views less worthy. If you don't like my pov, I'm afraid that's a problem for you, not me 🤷‍♂️

In English, the phrase 'i can see' followed by an adjective would typically denote foresight - something that might happen in the future. As in 'I can see it getting cooler' would be a forecast of upcoming weather rather than a commentary on the movement of a thermometer. So I guess it's more likely WI was saying he can envisage the Chinese buying solg. But there's no indication there that they've already offered, I wouldn't say.

Thanks for your reply though.