Member Info for Bozi

All good because nobody believes you anyway Fortissimo.

By which point we'll have less than 12 months remaining on the EMP. Hopefully the process is straightforward to renew it.

Everything still points to the KCB being our company maker. It really is that clear cut.

So would you agree with the diverse book argument made by a frequent contributor by the name of Quady?

I'm not interested in 45p Lisa. I've said as much on this forum for years.

But it's not about what I want.

We'll revisit this I'm sure.

Well done Lisa getting all of your dormant accounts to tick that up.

Who will you come back as next? Pat from Bromley?

Absolutely Smickster. I've tried to be clear about that I am dearly hoping I'm going to be wrong.

Just like investment performance, historic resilience is no guarantee of the same in the future.

Resilience in the last few years hasn't been in the face of an economic meltdown where many investors will be contemplating pulling funds out of the markets to either wait for new opportunities or make day to day living more comfortable in the face of quite sickening inflation. I'm aware of a couple of shareholders who have imposed a deadline for a price recovery with no alternative but to sell up if it doesn't materialise.

What we can do is say to everyone reading is to tick this post up if you would accept a takeover offer of 45p during the month of August.

We'll see about that Lisa.

Lisa - do you think BHP will give two hoots what everyone's book costs are?

If they can position themselves where they need to be without forcing the price up in the open market then Newcrest are on the same sticky wicket that the rest of us are.

Being a big business doesn't mean you get it right all the time.

Addicknt - agree with your 9:38 post more than I do the 7:31.

I'm finding the Fortissimo rumour mill is working overdrive right now. Boliden, Norges, Barrick etc etc...bending the perceived circumstances into a positive narrative, which is honourable.

I do think the second half of his post is spot n however. Classic mental re-conditioning is quite possibly on the menu for the next few weeks before BHP ride in as those white knights with their 40-50p. By that time we'll be in such a state that we'll accept it with relief.

The question is, will our BoD facilitate this and if so, why? It'll also serve as a reminder that if we want those premium takeovers then buy the companies that haven't been stitched up and not the ones with top notch resources that will be played dirty and nicked for a song.

And I do apologise to all if I'm coming across a bit glass half empty at the moment, but bear in mind:

1. Is the market sufficiently excited by Helipuerto to justify a multi-million dollar raise for regional exploration? It should be in my opinion but the wider macro picture isn't helping our cause.

2. We don't know how much a sale of Porvenir would generate without a PEA. That report would be quite welcome ASAP as a means to at least give shareholders an indicative value.

3. How does selling some or all of Cascabel help us right now? A partial sale complicates the ownership structure further and does nothing for our strategy with Cornerstone. A full sale would cash us up to an extent but doesn't deal with the poor outcomes the company and its management has produced the last 12 months or so.

I hope there's an option but nothing is anything remotely like ideal in my view.

No BM3121UK. It isn't Mather and Co.

You're digging a guy out here for paying himself a wage. Was he not allowed to take a salary and was that salary not allowed to increase upon the discovery of a potential tier 1 asset in Ecuador?

Please, show me any companies you know where management works for free and I'll be happy to buy them. Pretty damned close to the holy grail as we're likely to get.

As for taking a year to appoint Darryl... you have to take into account that the selection process took place with a Covid backdrop which will have impacted travel, face to face meetings and site visits. You just don't appoint a new CEO over Zoom. Add to this the fact the company has offices in Brisbane, London, Quito and taking into account the time difference challenges, it just wasn't a straight forward 6-8 process some expected.

Lets not forget we had the steady hand of Keith Marshall guiding the ship. This meant we could take our time over the next appointment. It's a complete non-issue.

I'm not sure what influence you think Mather is exerting now. He's a NED who has lost his closest supporters in Ward and Moller. He'll be alienated as far as the old guard vs new management is concerned. Yes he can vote with his and his indirect shares at meetings but he's likely to be outnumbered by BHP/NCM/CGP by roughly 2.5:1 on general matters where there's no agreement.

To assume he's pulling strings still now is pretty farfetched to me. The means to do so just aren't there. It's so easy for him to get out manoeuvred at every turn. His days as a NED are also numbered.

Time to look elsewhere. Time to look at our major shareholder that was making unsolicited approaches to our directors trying to exert influence last September/October, so much so the company penned a letter to shareholders.

The evidence is right in front of our noses.

Rcgl2 14:41 - quite right.

Time for them to show themselves. We've all been very patient.

Fortissimo - I have discounted a bidding war unfortunately because I don't think it's very likely.

A third party has to come right over the top and usurp the biggest miner in the world, or at the very least bid them up.

Do you think this is realistic?

It's easy to bid them up on something relatively small fry like Noront, but what happens if BHP say £1bn and Barrick says £1.2bn and so on and so forth? It's BHP that holds 14% of the stock and they know they have any rival on strings. They also have the interest in Filo and can clearly look at other players for emerging projects. There's a reason why it's their strategy to move first and take those early positions in juniors and if I'm the CEO of Barrick then I'm seriously considering leaving a politically frought Ecuador to BHP in favour of slimmer pickings elsewhere.

As a SolGold shareholder I'm urging them to get involved. Hopefully I'm wrong and they do.

Fortissimo - I find your 11:51 post very naive for someone who knows the story in the detail you do.

The share price isn't anywhere near 40p because the market knows, and has known for some time, that SOLG needs funds. The market also knows of the previous AGM tussles, that the Alpala PFS needs enhancing and that Porvenir is drifting towards a PEA in a few months time and that's in the event there's no postponement. As a result, the goodwill is seeping away and this is a process that has been ongoing for months now.

Add the misappropriation of funds into the fray and SolGold is a fantastic rags to half rihes story that is struggling to take the next steps.

There will be a raise if there's no other suitable proposals forthcoming but we know who has control on the terms. Clue - it isn't SOLG for the reasons mentioned above.

People are losing their heads because the company can't put one foot in front of the other without tripping up.

As for securing more funds via stream, whilst less dilutive this would be extremely dangerous. We're already on the hook with Franco and the 1st phrase PFS has an IRR sub 20%. Adding another slice of stream finance now would only harm those economics further and would ultimately be quite reckless.

Rcgl2 - fantastic post at 11:49. A post that includes many interesting snippets, the level of detail clearly at a level you'd expect from an experienced professional in the industry.

Very useful.

You could read it that way Quady but when you consider they are also considering alternatives with strategic investors, that tells me that whatever their funding plan A was, they haven't been able to execute it.

On regional JVs, whilst we'd expect them to be in discussions, how long should this realistically take? SolGold first mentioned speaking to potential partners over 12 months ago now and let's be honest, one prospecting licence is contiguous with another major (and growing) discovery in the country. How hard should it be to do a deal with Solaris and why have we not prioritised getting permits for this licence so that we can demonstrate mineralisation in our ground, should that be a pre-requisite to any agreement?

Not to mention Porvenir - we're surely looking at a 3mt copper and 3m ounce gold project here from surface. How are we struggling to get a partner?

Something doesn't smell right here now I'm afraid.

Quady - my own opinion is that SolGold are working with the interests of BHP at heart.

Someone on here suggested yesterday that Mather was still exerting influence but I don't believe BSC are referring to him for the simple reason that Nick's interests are more closely aligned to other shareholders (in that he wants full value or as close to as possible) . Moreso than BHPs are anyway.

We need to ask ourselves why SolGold didn't do a raise for further studies and regional exploration upon release of the Alpala PFS? That would have made much more sense than raising into weak summer markets and it didn't require hindsight. Those who weren't transfixed by TMJs "June bid" story asked the question publicly and the market even voted with it's feet in the days after the PFS.

To attempt to answer your point about the attempted fundraise, and please consider the following selection of quotes from yesterday's RNS:

"SolGold is investigating a number of strategic initiatives to provide the Company with funding options for the development of Cascabel and progression of regional projects."

"... SolGold continues to consider, and has had discussions with its major shareholders regarding possible financing structures and options to obtain funding to further progress the Cascabel development, including a potential equity raise."

" SolGold also continues to assess potential alternative funding structures which may involve strategic investors."

Quote two basically confirms that an equity raise has been attempted and the use of the word 'alternative' suggests that other options are being explored.

It's just a question of joining the dots.

Quady - You have made the assertion that BSC are angered at not being offered a fundraise.

I am saying here and now that is completely incorrect.

There are separate paragraphs in the Berry Street letter of yesterday. One paragraph (the 2nd) says they are disappointed with the attempted raise and management's lack of understanding of capital markets. The next paragraph (the 3rd) says that they are disappointed with how SolGold are only representing a small group of shareholders.

You need to explain your assertion. You appear to have amalgamated their separate points and twisted it into a fairly trivial matter.

My own interpretation is that SolGold have unsuccessfully attempted to raise and that BSC, separately, remain unhappy with the motives of SolGold management. It's unclear in my view who they are referring to. I'd be willing to have a guess but many won't like the answer.

Quady - I'm sorry but it's time to read between the lines rather than treating a cobbled together SOLG RNS and the subsequent BSC response as absolute fact.

At the end of the day, you can't solve the problem of you're incapable of working out what it is.

SolGold are running out of cash. We have, at a guess, 3-5 months runway at current burn rates which is based on little more than a care and maintenance schedule.

It is one of the worst kept secrets in the City that a fundraise was attempted.

SolGold confirming that it is now consulting with major shareholders suggests that it is seeking alternative options and that a capital raise has, as is rumoured, failed.

My reading is that we're in fairly major strife here. The ATM is empty and we're unable to just print new shares unless someone else is capable of carrying out a raise on our behalf. That means we're going to have to look at selling off an asset or interest in an asset but our position means any potential buyer has a stronger hand at the negotiating table.

BHP don't need to strike yet. We're about 6 weeks from the real sweet spot and I suspect they know it.

I take no pleasure from this as a shareholder but the coming weeks are likely to be quite perilous. I signposted us a few weeks ago towards the worsening market conditions we're seeing albeit in respect to the financing of Alpala construction but the same absolutely applies to fundraisers for working capital and exploration. You can take the view from BSC that the market has had enough with the treatment of some shareholders over others.

So where do we go from here? I suspect we'll either see a smaller raise on disappointing terms, an asset sale on poor terms or a recommended offer for the company, again on poor terms.

The company's management hasn't shown that it can deliver value for a good couple of years now (since the Porvenir discovery). Hard to see that changing now. We're approaching Hail Mary territory.

Twiggy will do nothing.

Nothing Fortissimo.

The goose is cooked. The turkeys have been voting for Christmas for years here and we're now at Christmas eve.

All those who have constantly called for a sale at a price that won't reflect a fair return are going to get their way unfortunately. Berry Street are as equally culpable.

Plenty of learnings here. Good management is just as if not more important than the quality of the asset and fellow investors will be desperate to eat their cake before time.