Member Info for Bozi

I'm not rubbing anything in.

All these shares are traded on a stock market. People are entitled to take whichever side of the trade they like.

Someone could say they're going to short SolGold. Would you complain about that too? Go ahead is what I say to them.

I've lost money on shares before. Do I need anyone's sympathy? No. I take responsibility for my investments.

And finally, just to make myself crystal clear, I don't want anyone to lose money. Of course I don't. However, I realise that this is a virtue of the market as unfortunate as it is. For every buy there's a sell and for every winner there's a loser. It's just the way things are.

EUA could easily recover tomorrow and people claw funds back.

Leave them Quady.

These people need someone to blame.

Worse still they want Nick and the SolGold board to go on a similar ramping spree to what the EUA board did.

We're dealing with people who don't have a clue.

What do you want me to say CovGaz?

I'm really really sorry for anyone who lost a few quid today?

Look. It's part and parcel of investing. If people want to go and buy a crap company being pumped to high heaven by it's BoD they can do that but I'll have no time when the house of cards comes crashing down, as it has today.

And worse still, people are advocating a similar communication from the SolGold board. Ramp the sale and JV so people can trade a few shares... well it's just a bit tough.

Our wealth is decided by our investments. Those who wanted to see EUA for what it is did so. Of course it's unfortunate for those who did not.

Rich3r - I have bought twice over the last week and have another buy order set.

No problem Z.

You know I'm right but it's not as entertaining as coming on here every day looking for someone to berate and blame.

That's because different forms have been used for some of the directors.

It was pretty confusing. I was looking at them all for a good 10 minutes to work out what was going on.

Ideally there should be some sort of comments from the directors to shareholders, particularly where a director sells. TR1s on their own simply don't cut the mustard.

Not really Rich3r.

The comment is there for anyone who is that way inclined and it remains my opinion.

It doesn't mean I endorse shorting as a strategy. I only hold the physical stock I buy but who am I to stop people from borrowing if they are reliable?

All

I'm well aware that I provide a conflicting viewpoint to many here and am vociferous in my views.

However, in the midst of todays posts that I've just had a quick skim of I feel the need to say a few words.

Now is the time for calm. Now is not the time to lose your heads because we haven't had a drilling update for a few weeks or the PFS for Alpala is behind.

Revisit the investment case that prompted you to invest in this company. If you no longer subscribe to it then ask yourself why you continue to hold.

But, if you do continue to believe, now is the time for calm, for a clear head and a boost of your resolve.

The company will release news when it is able to. If you feel the need to reach out to IR and they don't respond and that is out of character, take the hint!

We know what the deliverables are for 2021. The Alpala PFS will land, the regional exploration will continue, the drilling of different prospects at Cascabel will continue. The BFS and conditional funding should progress to an advanced stage.

The macro picture couldn't really look much better. Be grateful we're not in a big bear market. The boom time for commodities is coming and there's absolutely no reason why we need to peak too early.

Good things will come here to those who calm down, wait, and let this play out.

I don't endorse it Rich3r. I've never done it myself.

I'm merely saying that EUA is not a buy at this level. Nothing more.

EUA is a cracking short here Novicehunter.

Sub 12p tomorrow.

Michael Foster has decreased.

Mssrs Wright, Moles and Gumbo have all increased.

This "rinse and repeat" strategy that many are calling for... can I just check my thinking...

Surely with such a strategy there becomes a much lower ceiling in the share price /company valuation, because in essence, the company is developing an asset, selling it (partly or fully) and with the proceeds it makes a large special dividend to investors (let's face it there would be some fume on here if the company kept all the funds for future exploration).

With the remaining funds it doesn't distribute it develops the next asset and then repeats the tender process (the rinse).

So with this in mind, many of the SOLG shareholders on this board hold for the first rinsing, sell the shares or receive their first dividend" and then proceed to trade the stock like billio depending on whether they rate the next asset in the development chain... all at the expense of the company pursuing it's strategy of becoming a major miner, just so traders can trade it for the next 50 years...

And who said the strategy is wrong? You and the other "i want my money now-ers".

Most exploration juniors never make it off the ground, let alone have one tier one project and potentially a whole pipeline coming through behind.

The share price is just a cursor at any given point in time. It's meaningless almost.

I don't think you can reasonably say the strategy is wrong. What we can say is that it doesn't suit your time horizon/ trading goals.

I'm able to recognise that. Maybe it is you who needs to take a step into the real world?

It's unlikely to materialise CD.

The company will drop some good news, as it did with Porvenir, and the Blunderbus traders of Solgold will hurriedly sell their shares. Then when the price starts peeling back towards support they'll criticise management whilst buying back in for the nest run up. Then the process will repeat all over again.

It's all pretty tedious.

I get enough whinging off the blunderbus traders of SolGold to then go to church and give my services all over again.

I never said that a CEO isn't tasked with making a business more valuable, but it is through the delivering of, well, deliverables vs a share price management, all so Uncle Monte can turn a few quid at the end of the day.

Zoros - nice effort on the d*ck swinging there. You're no better.

Your logic that you find a few other people to share your point and you can't all be wrong is utter bunkum. How do you test that theory against the dotcom bubble or the US housing crash of 2007/08?

It's about time people stopped hanging off every word of Warren Irwin, Sandeep Biswas and the folks of BHP. They all have motives and they directly impact your investment.

I've never known so many people own a share and just berate management. Why put yourself through all that negativity? Is money that important?

Montecristo - you couldn't have been more wrong at 11:48.

A CEO's job is to manage the company to achieve it's strategy and business model. A CEO is not their to manage the share price for my, yours or anyone else's benefit unfortunately.

I know, DBW.

Correct me if I'm wromg but there was no amendment to the terms in relation to the $50m. The agreement was set out as suc that we got $100m solely for the use of Alpala studies and activities etc etc and then separately there was a clause where an extra $50m was available for an additional 0.5% on the same terms, i.e. Alpala only.

In the aftermsth the company raised over £25m and even more recent than that took an extra £5m from Valuestone.

They should be plenty cashed up for now.

Yes, but don't let it get in the way of a good DBW ramp, FTF.

Thanks for the info Jerry. I honestly wasn't aware of that (or had forgotten).

I'll look forward to seeing how much GGP get for that 5%.