Member Info for AgArCu

How long will I have to wait before you admit I was correct when I said no TO bid is imminent? Will you apologize in the new year, or this time next year? I'm a patient man 🤣

Him saying bids just aren't happening from majors is the biggest clue yet that we're not getting a meaningful TO bid anytime soon. If you believe otherwise, I can't help you x

If that's your interpretation that's great 🥱

In the meantime, shall we see what the SR says? Because we're not sold yet, and we haven't been for years, so... 🤷‍♂️

Anyway, I'm sure we'll come up with a cheaper way to mine some of the minerals, that's not really up for discussion.

As I've said before, I've done plenty of reading on the subject 👍

Think this is another one where we won't change each other's minds. Unlike the rampy claims of imminent TO though, I'm not promising jam anytime soon (nor promising anything, it's not a likely scenario), so I think exploring the possibility is probably fine.

Do you know much of the route to the petaquilla region's production? Knowing what successive concession owners and governments were saying about deals there, in the decades leading to production, will teach you a thing or two. I'm guessing you're not familiar. Lot of statements similar to those made by the last two administrations here, and we know the outcome (or I assume you do as a mining investor).

Obviously not a lesson in how to do funding, but notice what happened to the government's efforts there. Now can you see why I'm not claiming anything far-fetched?

Ecuador will say they want 50% right up until they realise they need fixed income and don't really want to be seen to co-sponsor private company investment. Hence FN example- look how much they've taken out of pre-conditioned contracts everywhere they operate. It's all just talk until the rock gets crushed.

As I say, we only need clear £45-60m a year to make very good money here. What that would equate to as a percentage depends on all reset denominators, obviously.

As I say- not likely but more likely than an sr that says we'll wait for a bid, which in the absence of a bid (and WI has put a nail in that) appears to be most people's preferred outcome?!

Really enjoy it with you speak so decisively, add. Complete rubbish, but soooo manly 😂

Nice attempt to close down discussion. How many royalty deals have FN done where they weren't first to the party? Answer? The majority of them. They don't care if less than 5% is already sworn away- they know they will be majority investors and able to drive design. Look at panama. Deep pockets don't get screwed.

1) every previous creditor only gets their money back if the minerals come out of the ground.

2) the percentages they've acquired for their money are capped, so no future royalty sponsor would be worried about changing terms

We don't have a credit rating hampered by multiple credit cards. We have a f-ton of hard to get at ore with a fairly stable cash value that's only realised when it's out of the ground. Those who buy royalties have a little insight into how mines should be built. They will want a clear plan linking how their money is spent to how they get it back.

Is 2bn cheap for 25% of the product from cascabel? Yes. Would they get their money back if the mine plan is right? Multiples. If we mess it up and need more cash, can we go up to 75% and still get rich? Sure. We only need a tiny fraction of what's in the ground to see decent long term dividends. So long as you own a few 100k here, you're sorted.

Not particularly likely, but a more likely outcome option from the SR than 'wait for a bid'.

Fully aware it was a royalty deal, add. How much product did we have to give away for $50m? Aside from the copper price not performing as we'd like recently, what's changed? The terms of a similar, considerably bigger deal would be no more punishing today than I'm times of lower interest, because the sorts of companies paying royalty deals aren't involved in short term interest-rate linked finance. They are more akin to venture, and some have very deep pockets. So I ask again, what % for $50? And what percentage would we need to agree to for an installment-lead $2b? That ought to either get the diggers digging or the majors bidding. They thought the last round was 'expensive' - I doubt they'd like 25% written out of the equation.

Again, we make decent money in a few years even off a £60m a year income. We don't need the full billions.

Add: what percentage did we have to give up for $50m? What has changed since, aside from 100% ownership?

What is 'final' about a new mine plan? Strange statement.

Lots of arguments here about 'facts', that then turn out to be people's biased interpretations of tid bits of information. If we look at what we can know for sure, Solgold has not received a TO bid, despite lots of important work on cascabel since initial discovery. So, besides sitting and waiting for a bid, all the company can do is plan to make the most of the asset. Data room parties, benevolent bids from state-backed conglomerates, unprecedented bidding wars for a LatAm jurisdiction... It's just wishful thinking at the moment. But rampers have to do their job, I suppose

Okay. I think you've had your say now 👍

Add, NaL: I think this is one where you won't change anyone's mind.

Points 1, 3 and 5 that add makes are hard to evidence, but many will agree with him. NaL, you clearly dislike NM but there aren't many people here suggesting we start a fan club.

So shall we let it go?

Calling him a two-hat seems harsh, we don't know the poor guy...

Cool. Sid said he emailed Scott and that 'he' replied, so I thought it was Scott who replied. But it must have been the CFO replying to the CEO's emails. 👍

Does Scott sign a lot of his communications as Chris? May just be a professional vs personal name thing?

Interesting to see how this return to planning will play out at the AGM. NCM (if still in) and BHP will be predictable in trying to destabilize to board. Jiangxi will, on assumes, not rock the boat for now. Will PIs try to vent their frustrations with dissenting votes, or will the SR be sufficiently attractive that most folks go for it? Time will tell - it might be a timely bellwether of support for Plan A.

That's your opinion, Sean. Absolutely legitimate, but one you can see today is not shared by all. I have as much tangible evidence that we might be able to finance a simpler mine as others here do that we're due an imminent takeover - very little.

SC seems to have reverted to the same playbook as DC and NM: you'll only attract a bid if you have a plausible Plan A to mine the minerals, with all the licences and procedural steps that entails. It's a shame we had this sp-knackering wobble in the middle, where people who should know better pretended a sale was imminent, and the market showed just how much it disagreed. Hopefully the SR will restore some credibility, and some value, and then next year we can work on progressing things whilst secretly hoping for a bidding war.

If nothing else today has served to showcase how thoroughly entrenched every poster here is. No minds are going to be changed. Lots want to impose their views on others, or be validated by seeing similar thinking. Sean asked for feedback, got some opinions and then said 'it is clear', which quite evidently it isn't!

I think we'd almost be better with two boards operating as uncontested echo chambers, and for news, people can just set up a search alert on the word 'solg' (which is all some posters here do, copying and pasting articles that all tech-savy members have already read)?

It would save fort and red feeling the need to tell us everything is rosy when the SP is half what it was a year ago, and it would save Quady having to explain why he thinks production is more likely than a TO at least twice a week.

What percentage did we have to give up for $50m? Granted people can now see how unlikely a block cave is anytime soon, but the numbers are there. I don't think the SR will advocate going it alone on a multi-billion block cave, by the way. I assume it will be simpler, cheaper means to lower hanging fruit and faster revenue.

Maybe that will catalyse a bid, but if it doesn't I think we'll find the cash to start small. All of this is 2024 and beyond though, once we've got the exploitation licence. As I might have mentioned once or twice before...

No doubt financing will be tricky, but we've had several other moments in our history where that's been true. JV, royalty deal, offtake... All of them could be awful or, if the terms are right, decent.

Remember that, as a company, we only need to may £30m per year from our assets to pay 1p on each 16p share. If it's worth the billions the 'sale imminent' crowd believe it is, then we only need to keep a tiny fraction of the profits

"it is important to be crystal clear here. Solgold have made a great discovery in Alpala and cascabel, but we are not and will never be in a position to mine these concessions. It is therefore important to us as an explored and an active party within the local community that we find a suitable company capable of continuing our great work to take construction forward in the interests of all Ecuadorians. This will be our focus in the coming months, as we also seek to streamline our operations to increase efficiency in our discovery and development model".

Something like that, maybe.