Member Info for Bozi

Smickster- cannot agree at all. This is going to BHP. BHP knows it and our board knows it.

Nick doesn't make the hires any more and with Moller now removed we're now in the position where Mather can be readily overruled on the committees he sits on.

Moller offers the company little operationally but he was a useful figure in the boardroom and his forced retirement was not the irrelevance certain people would have you believe.

The talk here in recent days and weeks has been about the emergence of a third party and some competition for the favourites (BHP). Noront being used as a case in point, frivolously in my view.

The fact is that there is nothing to suggest a third party will enter the fray here unfortunately. In fact, the with each moves that BHP makes, constricting the board, placing their executives in senior positions, etc, the chances of third party competition diminishes significantly. A third party simply is not going to take that on and will look for other targets, be that in country with Solaris, Sunstone etc or in another territory.

There has been a huge over reliance on the premise of a bidding war here, when in actual fact the likeliest outcome is that Newcrest and CGP collude with BHP and get a golden handshake later on, presumably via a favourable deal on a regional asset, say Porvenir for example. I could certainly see BHP selling that asset to Newcrest for less than book value and CGP end up with a tasty free carry of some sort.

Only then will real SOLG investors realise how royally shafted we have been and will eventually be.

We'll see CD. We will see.

As for any notion of Noront MKII, I hope for all our sakes that you're right.

I've not said he's influential. But what he is, is a backer of the guy who is concerned only with achieving true value for the company and it's shareholders.

You chip away at that guy's allies and what's he left with? A controlling interest that will be eroded further with 2022's capital raise.

I'm at a loss as to what your view of the end game is here now. It's as clear as day to me.

Well he's an ally of Mather for one which adds more weight to board and committee matters.

I'll be back for your view Addicknt when this goes for a song.

Addicknt - a quite ridiculous conclusion.

Nothing that weakens the bid defence be that board position or shareholding is irrelevant.

And there goes any notion of getting fair value for this company.

BHP no doubt rubbing their hands with glee.

Deary me. The thickness of some...

TheSlug - "swivel eyed loons" talking about production eh?

Stick around here and listen to the same accounts tell us someone is taking SOLG over, first it was 2017, then 2018, then 2019.... you get the drift.

Make no mistake, I'm well aware that the odds are stacked against SOLG but I'm also acutely aware that certain suitors are only interested in strong-arming these assets off the company on their terms, hence the recent todo with BHP over the re-election of board members.

It's this side of the story that is being missed by those insistently calling for a takeover, and it's an element that really shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

That's fair enough Sharketmare.

You're entitled to stick to your guns (your fixed price targets) and there's always a chance that your (or my) exit point won't be triggered.

I'm sure if you asked Nick his exit points would be 80p,150p,250p etc. But if we're going to be honest, after everything we've observed and all the learning we've done, were those prices ever on the table pre production? Probably not the 80p and definitely not the higher ones.

I'm not necessarily advocating selling the tops and buying the bottoms either. It's a lot harder than some of the self-proclaimed master-traders on here would have you believe.

I suppose I'm just saying that we've had a few good runs on the SP for anyone who didn't buy the initial 2017 top, but that seems to be missed on many who bemoan the exit points or shock and awe comments...

I'd say SOLG and ALL are in the minority of resource companies who have done well, made significant discoveries and will ultimately be successful.

Sharketmare - have you not had multiple exit opportunities? The share price has risen into the 40s on a few occasions, most recently following the Porvenir discovery.

People pan Mather for a number of reasons and that's fine but in my view he and indeed the company has orchestrated many exit points.

Hot take - claiming to be able to "read L2" is just as big a misnoma as claiming trading patterns behave entirely in line with EWT.

;-)

We did try to tell you that your 4yr figure wa spie in the sky Dhanteras but would you listen?

Nah. That's just the echo chamber you prefer to live in.

Open your mind. People are allowed to hold a different view to you.

ByronBayGold and the 5 minions who recommended this thread.

You're all deranged. Seek help.

Rich3r - not at all. I'm no saint and give out as much as I get, which may stir tensions for those reading but not necessarily contributing.

I never mean anything malicious but I have been vociferous, purely because I don't think there are many resource company stories like this and I hope we can all squeeze this for as much as we can get away with.

I suppose you could say I'm frustrated. I'm certainly not as supportive of the company and strategy as I have been in the past. I backed the company on the Dec 2020 PFS push back and advocated general patience (in what aren't usual times) and so the recent miss was disappointing.

I believe Solgold is very undervalued and I hope the upcoming study and MRE will show this. But the only route out of the undervalued wilderness is to start delivering on milestones that add value. That isn't drill down results (long term) anymore, so as you said earlier.

So RK1, same question to you.

Who wants to hold Cascabel and babysit two fledgling juniors who may have issues raising significant finance?

A major going halves with another major is completely different. It shares the risks and allows each company to achieve growth without overatretching.

DBW - apologies I'm not well across Irwin's more recent views and I haven't read the Ambrian report yet, so correct me if I'm wrong, but they're talking about Cascabel being takeover potential?

If so, that doesn't suggest anything explicitly about any third parties.

My point is solely in the context of someone else/new entering the fray. I'm not saying Cascabel isn't attractive or anything like that.

Say for example you're actually the CEO of Barrick Gold. How does it suit your company to pay £1bn for 50% of Cascabel? I know you agree by the way but want to know if you have any thoughts.

Whilst that may be the case Rich3r it doesn't mean you can't have an opinion.

As some members have commented previously, the big mining houses aren't interested in part stakes. They want control of the lot. Farming out Cascabel dilutes the partnership further and you only have to look at the Tullow/Eco Atlantic/ Total JV in Guyana which is parked and has been for some time due to the priorities of Tullow who are operator.

Convoluted ownership structures for an asset of this nature make no sense. Everyone needs to arrange their own funding otherwise everything is held up, for example.

I suspect that is why we haven't seen a third party come in for say 50% of Cascabel despite some posters saying they feel a third party involvement is close. Zero evidence and in fact, common sense points away from it.

Forgetting the tribulations of SolGold for a minute, why has nobody picked up Cornerstone yet?
Surely they are low hanging fruit? A third party could muscle in on Cascabel quite easily with a swift knockout blow to our Canadian partners, yet it hasn't happened. BHP have no foothold where that form is concerned.

Someone could buy Cornerstone now and if they lose out in the battle for SOLG they can still likely flog their stake in Cascabel for a profit to the eventual buyer of SOLG. Why hasn't anybody done this?

I don't buy that it's because we don't have a PFS. Any of these major miners can model the resource, take enough data from a site visit to make their own mine plans and then do the research which forms the basis for their economic assumptions. That should give them something fairly reliable to make a decision on. They can also trade with other shareholders off book and place a large iceberg order through the market if they are interested in the shares, but they haven't.

We have to start wondering what the true elephant in the room is. People would tell you it's Mather and Moller but come on, let's be serious now.

What makes you think that selling a slice of Cascabel will change things Rich3r?

Private investor capital isn't in the markets to the degree it once was. A few things have seen to that.

Institutional investor capital is shrewder than it ever has been before. There is collective belt tightening going on and has been for some time.

I've watched other companies announce transformational news and not receive the recognition they deserve, so I'm not convinced SOLG will be any different.

Do you think it's likely that SOLG will agree a deal to sell some or all of Cascabel given how certain people have valued the project in the past and their reluctance to release the PFS? You wouldn't buy a house without looking at the surveyor comments and valuation.

In my view, SOLG recaptured credibility by publishing the studies and resource estimations due and then coming clean on company strategy from there. ATB

It's often the blatant and obvious that's overlooked, Z.

But as you mention it, yeah I am the messiah.... ??

We don't know for sure yet that there's anything significant at Rio.

Selling part of Cascabel now is akin to selling the family silver. We're left with 100% of the smaller Porvenir whilst still being on the hook for Cascabel capital requirements.

You simply have to hold on to exceptional projects like this for dear life and let them go at the right time.