Member Info for Bozi

*produce facts (4th para)

You haven't Redknight1.

You factually stated Moller's remuneration.

You then stated he didn't deserve it. That's an opinion.

I don't need to produce to support our board selections and neither do you for what it's worth. We're voting on who we think will achieve the best result for SolGold investors in the future based on our interpretation of events to come.

I am however saying that if you are portraying yourself as a relayer of factual information, please ensure that information is 100% factual and not laced with your opinions. Thanks.

I find it truly staggering that so many SolGold investors, with experienced and knowledgeable people amongst the group, think it is in everyone's best interests to remove 4 members of the current BoD now.

We can surely all admit that we are potentially approaching the time where there's the highest risk that we are predated? If so, what do you think we have to gain by sacking the Chairman of the board?!

I shouldn't really be surprised. You look at the political landscape in the UK for example and that shows that enough people are only thinking about their own pockets or simply have sawdust between their ears.

There also seems to be the held view that a new board gives us a clean start and a fresh route to upside. Be very careful with that. It's very clearly a coin with two sides.

A final point, I'm across a few different SOLG investor channels and I've never seen Darryl Cazzubbo referred to as a megastar. I'd love to know the source for that, particularly bearing in mind that the great, illustrious, noble, mining behemoth that is Warren Irwin had never heard of him until after the SOLG news release!

Cherryburn - a question if i may, and I'm really asking jsust for context.

Are you an investor in Liontown and did you find Vincent's comments arrogant because they were at odds with your own thoughts?

I ask because i struggle to be dismissive of Kathleeen Valley in particular, which is large tonnage and with good grades and promising economics.

Maybe any comments were with the valuation in mind? At £1.8bn it's certainly carrying fairer value.

I think, as a long term holder of ALL and IRR as it was known, that Atlantic Lithium represents a fantastic pivot play for lithium bulls who have played the Liontown story nicely. I believe that drilling results from the most recent campaign will add nicely to the current resource and once the scoping study is updated accordingly we're going to see Ewoyaa story for what it is... an up and coming challenger for the best hard rock projects out there.

It will take further drilling of course to catch up further to the Liontown tonnage and it's foolish to do anything other than dream of getting there but ultimately Ewoyaa doesn't need to. The quality infrastructure and lowest quartile costs mean this project is going to be prioritised through construction and the high quality product should position us nicely for premium pricing.

I'm not RK1. That is purely my opinion and my suspicions as I clearly say. It's a direction of travel I see as very plausible and nobody has yet to convince me otherwise.

Admittedly I have little to justify it and no evidence to corroborate it. So it can be taken or left by all.

RK - I think investors will show apathy towards Marshall and Ward.

Mather was up for a vote 12 months ago, so the view is that by rotating those up for re-election that shareholders have had the opportunity to vote on everyone over a 12 month period.

You could put Mather up again if you wanted to but why give shareholders two opportunities over the period? That makes even less sense, unless you were hell bent on throwing the company away that is...

I can't say why they never appointed a director for certain? Maybe they were happy to let Newcrest take the load with Craig Jones. Maybe they wanted to play the longer game in the shadows for a couple of years. I don't know. I'm speculating.

But if they managed to chop the current board at it's knees this time then I would suspect they'll have engaged interested individuals (not necessarily with working histories at BHP) and be incentivising them should they join SOLG as a NED.

Nobody would ever detect that until its far too late and there will be loads of mining bods who would be interested in a SOLG board position I'd have thought. But ultimately it becomes a case of nobbling whoever SOLG select.

With respect RK, how do you know anyone was blocking it?

There's a whole raft of potential reasons why we did not make the hire and announcement sooner, is there not?

Seeking unanimity is one thing but as someone who has held senior positions on or around boards, surely you must acknowledge that unanimity is not a widely carried concept? We're talking about big decisions relating to business and there's always going to be disagreements, factions amongst the board even.

Do you think the scenario Twigger finds himself in here is extra-ordinary? I would be confident it is quite common in the business world.

Just imagine we were the SOLG board of directors for example... we'd agree nothing!

DBW - I think there was an element of bravado within the letter.

Does anyone think the London markets are going to support SOLG to the tune of $60m+ in 2022 for equity when they have had very little opportunity to trade their 2021 subscriptions above the 25.5p raise price?

I personally have reservations and I think Mr Twigger does too, evidenced by his admission that we need to do more work with US investors going forwards.

If the fail at the AGM, which frankly I am not convinced they will, then I'd expect them to become more aggressive and turn the notch up further. How remains to be seen.

Surely you can't make that statement DBW whilst nobody is doing precisely that?

We don't have an example of this since the small Valuestone subscription well over 12 months ago.

RK1.

BHP have not bought more open market because they're trying the AGM route to usurp the current board. They'll then try and arrange replacements who they can influence sufficiently to engineer the price even cheaper.

As much cheap cheap equity as they can get is the order of the day.

Only then will they turn to the open market for anything that remains.

Surely this is quite obvious?

Thanks RK1. I'm aware of the Barrick strategy change but that doesn't sway my thinking.

To answer your question, you may well have been told that half a dozen household names have been in the frame for lower priority projects. I don't dispute that. But unless you have been told that one such party is Barrick then you are simply assuming, are you not?

Also, I would only be mildly encouraged were Barrick to get involved at regional level for the reasons I mentioned earlier. I'd still consider them to be too far behind the 8 ball to come through at a more meaningful level.

I'm my view, and I consider this quite fair, you post some fact. You post some research and your own conclusions of that study and you post significant levels of opinion. I won't go back and start citing each as I don't have the time available now but I can give you some really quick examples:

1. You have mentioned Mather blocking the CEO for months on end through his role on the nominations committee. I struggle immensely with this notion for reasons that I'm not willing to expand on.
2. You have cited Liam Twigger as a Mather stooge from the days of the old boys based on little discernible evidence. Twigger is there to mediate the directors and manage the various governance processes, so again, your views are based on your opinion which you have formed from nothing that is publicly available fact.

I have picked you up on certain posts in the past and you've obviously not seen those replies. That's fine. Very similar line of enquiry to Smickster so not worth doubling back on.

Thanks for your time.

Precisely that SM.

Addicknt - I wouldn't say Berry was just a symptom, no.

In my view there were specific reasons why they made their views public, and those reasons centre around not just the lobbying of SOLG management but also the register.

So, not a symptom but admittedly not the cause either.

So you did. Apologies Addicknt.

I know BBG is the yardstick but I wouldn't rush to mark all similar comments down as inane.

There's a distinct undercurrent on this bulletin board that has manifested itself following the release of the Berry Capital letter and Twigger's BHP rebuke.

I'm not the only one who senses it.

No insanity here Addicknt.

Merely saying RK1 is overzealous with his filter. He has binned most apart from the names mentioned.

What did you find so outlandish about that comment?

You continue to make a helluva lot of assumptions Redknight1 and portray them as fact.

Someone who isn't filtered... ask him what his thesis is behind Barrick winning out at £1-2.

I wouldn't back that if you offered me 100/1 on account of:

-No prior holdings in the company
-Would need to out muscle BHP, NCM and the other players
-Little to no history in Ecuador
-Lower hanging fruit elsewhere in places like Canada, BC and even Africa

Pigs will fly before Barrick get involved IMO.

It's just a trader or flighty PI of the view they can buy back lower IMO.

Good luck to them.

It's OK Slug. Redknight1 runs an echo chamber here with his trusty sidekicks

Dreamboatwarrior
Bubble2021
JerrySpaniel
Addicknt

And one or two others.

Keep posting. You're bang on the money to my mind.

Ignore that last bit. 1 year 9 months.

Still shows the strength of the short to medium term investment case. I just can't count...

Completely agree ShearClass.

Vincent has in the past been criticised for a lack of stimulating AIM punters during quieter news periods so it's only fair he gets praise now.

Rebrand looks spot on and there's been plenty of media pushing the investment case.

Today's option award is quite interesting shall we say. Let's not forget this is to a firm for their ongoing services and therefore the company will want to ensure those options get nicely in the money.

When do they expire again? Less than 9 months time...