Member Info for Bozi

Happy to discuss any of the rubbish you think I've posted too Baku.

I'm not the guy who turned up a month ago and has said nothing but "4 years to production"

Worth bearing that in mind.

I haven't posted any deals Bakuraku.

I posted a price prediction, which was only off by a couple of days considering we early breached 24p yesterday.

Those that know me know I make very few predictions. I just felt like it last week. I couldn't care what anyone thinks of what I say, so no ego stroking here.

You meanwhile, have contributed absolutely nothing of any use, substance or consequence since you appeared on the scene in July.

Toddle on.

Munchbox - nobody cares if you're buying or selling.

Why do you feel the need to post your deals? Does your ego need a stroking?

Good luck getting 17p. I'll doff my cap. We had another looking for 15p. Didn't materialise.

The market can't stay asleep on this one as long as you need it to. People overseas are waking up to the fact that IRR have a viable and credible partner willing to fund the project right through to production having also chucked in a fair wad of cash to expand the resource.

This is on the cusp of no longer being a London centric stock for spivvy traders and retail investors. All that is needed is some meat on the bones of the plan to demerge the lithium and a plan on how the company plans to utilise the money already pledged towards Ghana. Both news items give investors direction and we'll then see positions taken as gold investors make their own play.

Fair enough Addicknt. I suppose i was looking for some confirmation, and this appears to be it.

Rcgl2 - good balanced assessment, as usual.

I don't see eye to eye with Zak on much of the naff he promotes buf he's spot on where IRR is concerned.

Piedmont have just taken 9% via private subscription at 20p. Their next move is to top up at 25p.

It's abundantly clear to me what purpose this serves.

They now have a tidy buffer above the threshold 9% so were there to be any further (minimal) dilution, say from those director options or performance rights (think back to where they are priced), Piedmont should be able to stay above the 9%.

Why is holding at least 9% important you say? Well look at what it allows Piedmont to do - restated again yesterday's RNS.

I'm just juggling a few dots here. Hopefully the savvy amongst us can join them.

To quote our esteemed friend TheWorks, "Tick tock." Indeed.

Maybe Addicknt, maybe not.

We'll learn a lot of BHP's actual position when we find out whether they have raised Wyloo's offer or left them to it.

It might well end up being the case that BHP were simply posturing to their competitors during their recent interview. Hands off anything that they show an interest in or already have one.

I'm not really sure about the hidden value point where SOLG is concerned, if that's what you are getting at. Noront has shown that BHP are willing and able to move quickly in those scenarios, the complete opposite of their slowly slowly strategy with SOLG.

Mike - i dont disagree with your SC6% forecast nor your view on where the resource could be after some more drilling and other exploration work.

But IRRs first priority should be to show the robust (excellent in fact) economic nature of the project at a very conservative price point. This applies to any company in the sector regardless of the mineral/metal they are exploiting. It will really pay us back later on when the company is looking for offtakers for the other 50%.

We as investors can work out the potential upside should the company get it's product into the market at anything like current prices (or better). I know there's bits and pieces of this analysis floating around already.

You want to (IMO) ensure there's that continuous upside for investors at all stages of the development cycle. Many won't even have heard of IronRidge yet but will get on board once the company becomes revenue generating and profit making.

Having a fantastic project at 650 with spot at 1300+ and not necessarily topping out with Piedmont on board is a fantastic set up of fundamentals. I don't know about anyone else but i sleep incredibly well at night where this stock is concerned.

Ironridge should continue to use $650. The idea should be to demonstrate an industry leading asset economically at a much lower SC6% price.

That doesn't mean the company can't illustrate how 800/900/1000 impacts the trajectory of revenues and EBITDA, but personally, I'd be keeping the official scoping study and DFS numbers based on $650.

The first projects to be financed are the ones that work in all macro environments. Ewoyaa fits the bill.

Must admit i expected a bit more Dean.

No bother. It will come.

24p finish on the cards?

28p to close off the week?

IronRidge is about to have it's time in the sun.

You're absolutely right Addicknt. That was why I found the BHP view and comments from Mike Henry strange to say the least.

By the same token, and with regards to SOLG given the copper macro picture heading towards the production deficit, surely it makes sense for SOLG to try and stave off a change of control for as long as possible, provided any finance from here on in is done correctly?

At the perils of teaching a hen to suck eggs here, copper prices running away during a deficit scenario only increases the appeal of Cascabel and Porvenir and thus makes SOLG more valuable as a commodity itself or it makes SOLGs route to profit generating financial freedom all the more realistic?

BCN have sold out at precisely the wrong time and to a company with a questionable motive. SOLG selling up now would be making as big a mistake as BCN in some ways.

Ooooops. :-D

Red - am i to understand that you hsve filtered me?

Why?

All i did was correct your earlier statement that BHP had previously bid for SolGold.

By the way, Market Watch is more algorithm driven codswallop. As someone who valued the prestige and reliability of Reuters back in the day, it is strange that you're citing such a poor source. But as you are, from the article you linked.

"LONDON--Shares in SolGold PLC (SOLG.LN) rose Monday after the miner rejected an offer from mining giant BHP Billiton Ltd BHP, 0.57% to invest in the company and develop its flagship Cascabel copper-gold project in Ecuador, preferring a competing investment by Australia-based Newcrest Mining Ltd. (NCM.AU) and Maxit Capital LP."

The key extract being,

...to invest in the company and develop its flagship Cascabel copper-gold project in Ecuador...

Read the RNS fella and stop getting so stroppy.

And just for the record, i derive zero value from your posts either, particularly the ones following your enlightening discussions with your "key player contact". As long as someone rubs that though eh!

Sorry Mog, i thought that was clear. The offer was to SOLG. Nothing to do with Cornerstone.

Red - BHP never did bid for SOLG. They offered to buy 10% for $30m and then earn-in up to 70% of ENSA.

Thst sounds like joint ownership to me.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SOLG/investment-proposal-from-bhp-billiton-7trthnkb0t8qfl9.html

Absolutely CD. Both much bigger firms at the moment and whilst you're right that it will take more £ to move the dial, the behaviour itself is very similar to what has happened at SOLG.

Understandably so, as BlackRock manage various funds that all work independent of one another.

Just wanted to allay fears of a SOLG specific manipulation.

CD

I refer you to Howden Joinery Group HWDN and Pennon Group PLC PNN where similar practices have been followed by BlackRock in recent days.

Both companies have multiple recent TR1s from the firm.

This isn't a SolGold specific issue, as annoying as it is. I gsve the correct explanation when they were raised last week.

Panda - it's cold hard cash to IRR. They get a further 27.5% stake in the project in return.

It's an earn in agreement. IRR have to meet the DFS criteria and Piedmont have the choice to pony up or relinquish the stake back to IronRidge.

SM - I'm well thanks - hope you are too.

I don't disagree with anything you have said in terms of the state of play but i have some doubts that IRR becoming a lithium pure play opens the door to new institutions. I take your point about the geopolitical risk of our lesser priority project in Chad where the company are understandably playing the long game.

Institutions don't just invest in pure plays. They invest wherever they see value. Our register is already fairly institutionalised with Piedmont, Assore, Sumitomo, DGR etc. We're probably going to be at a stage where the top 20 shareholders hold 70-75% with some long term PIs who have built up decent holdings on the downturn and from the last couple of capital raises.

I was trying to play down the demerger slightly because i sense in our hour of consolidation this summer a couple of posters seem to be hanging their hat on it, so to speak. Thst said i would be disappointed if it wasn't a share price catalyst in the sense that i expect traders on the sidelines to buy IRR for shares in the gold newco.

I think what will prove crucial to the short to medium term travel of direction is what happens in the 12 months post demerger. I have some thoughts on that and i expect that will be the real value creator for both companies.

The chat on this board for a good 6-12 months before the Piedmont JV announcement was generally that a deal would benefit IRR. Whilst i was in the camp of pushing on ahead as far as we could, Vince did a deal that works for both us and Piedmont and therefore i have no complaints.

We know where lithium is and where it is going now as ducks appear to be re-aligning. The London market is hugely asleep on IRR but what is new? Vince had to do a 'raise to go' at 7p last May to get people interested, such as many only look as far as the end of their nose. What a deal that was for them.

Sometimes the "good things come to those that wait" saying can be misplaced but not here. I'm sure we'll see that as market interest returns.

Not at all Costa.

We're just talking the finer points of the BHP SSA.

Metal prices will do whatever they do. We're a way off until they impact our bottom line.