Member Info for Bozi

It's 3 months too late unfortunately NMM.

Rodney - upon a no vote and subsequent board spill, SOLG would need funding to continue developing Cascabel.

You can't just sit as a going concern with major shareholders either wanting out or planning how they can go hostile.

You might not be able to hire and fire personally but if you're representing 100m shares you need to be able to represent those shares as best as possible, and that doesn't mean trotting the same stuff out on LSE all day. It certain doesn't mean back slapping Arok and his AI copywriter.

If you're serious, mobilise shareholders to be ready to be vocal on the key decisions in the immediate aftermath of a no vote carrying. That is the type of activism it will need to have a material impact.

Otherwise, SOLG drifts and gets picked off by the vultures, then you'll all be saying you'd prefer to take 10p over 28p because at least you've had your say.

You're likely going to need a new CEO, possibly a new chairman and maybe some new NEDs too depending on the existing boardroom dynamics.

This management is tell you to accept and that fresh funding is required in weeks via new equity.

Have you guys got a plan? You can be sure Jiangxi do!

Thanks SunDrum.

I was missing that bit of context and was frantically combing previous news releases.

Who are Cascade?

Please can someone sum up the last few RNS about financings on top of financings and an increased stake in Ozango?

Recent communication from the company via RNS has been nothing short of appalling.

Rodney - at 05:55 today you said,

" I have never said a counterbid WILL come, I have said it COULD come."

That isn't true. Your comments in the aftermath of the recommended proposal were highly suggestive a rival proposal would come.

In 10 days, I look forward to you telling all western miners to "pack it in".

Rodney - at 05:55 today you said,

" I have never said a counterbid WILL come, I have said it COULD come."

That isn't true. Your comments in the afte

Both Rodney.

You made a statement this morning in response to Needy that wasn't true. That statement wasn't true because your views from December weren't quite correct.

No accusations of anything serious. Just an observation on my part.

Rodney - with respect, that's not quite true.

On Christmas Day at 15:47 you posted and I quote,

"Merry Christmas to all! I'm delighted with the news and interpret it as the starting gun. If Western businesses let this go for 28p then they might as well pack it in now."

This was despite some of us telling you back then that no counter would emerge.

Admittedly you have tempered your enthusiasm since, but you was initially overly bullish.

*quite

Rodney - you're quiet right that new management can be selected. However, you have to strongly consider what "pressing on" looks like.

On the register you've got Newmont who we know have been seeking an exit for anything they consider non-core.

You've got BHP that were happy to accept 28p and have their Filo JV with Lundin to scratch their LatAm itch.

You've got Maxit, Dan and Scott holding c.7% who, let's face it, have been looking for exit since the time they held Cornerstone shares.

DGR are heavily indebted to Mather who is advancing in years and probably favours a comfortable retirement over getting his boots back on.

The whole "not accepting 28p because you don't want the assets sold for a song" is admirable but you have to consider the flip side. If a no vote wins, SOLG doesn't continue from a position of strength IMO - it is left in one of weakness.

We all know 28p is poor, but if you're voting no, you must consider the ramifications of it passing for your own personal finances/portfolio, especially from a worst case scenario perspective, which undoubtedly is that the company is left extremely vulnerable. Voting no will feel rebellious to some and will be a matter of principle to others, but it could also be potentially destructive.

GLA.

Redacted - everyone hooped and hollered when Bob Sangha got involved and brought his trusty banker pal Dan Vujcic go the table.

Their attempts to firesale this under the placeholder of Scott Caldwell failed.

They"refreshed" the main man last March and the writing was on the wall. A bit of drilling and a bit of hype amidst a run for commodities.

You say its a sham and there's merit to that comment but it has existed in plain sight.

That's your prerogative Rodney.

I personally think it's foolish to vote no. The offer price is where I feared SolGold would be sold but hoped it wouldn't.

The issue with a no vote carrying, as I've articulated to a group of shareholders I formed a few years ago, is that the short to medium term investment case is severely harmed in precisely the way management has communicated this morning. BoD instability, funding uncertainty and lots of risk.

It's all very well saying no, but to do so you must have confidence that 28p can be surpassed clearly in the future. When you consider dilution required this year and possibly next, plus boardroom upheaval and the potential for Jiangxi to obtain control by other means, I believe the no vote is a miscalculation.

Sometimes you have to take your medicine and move on to the next in the realisation that the market and the manipulation of big cheese has beaten you on this occasion.

There you have it.

The no vote has clearly been felt by the company but the response couldn't be clearer. Vote yes, tender your shares in the scheme, or face a world of pain.

That's a very generous read Swanley.

They're saying in the absence of a superior proposal they're gone at 28.

Take them out of your no lists and add them to the yes vote.

Going to need a lot of retail here.

IP - is providing factual information to people who might not know better and might be inclined to believe you trolling now?

IP - voting rights are to be confirmed at the end of each month when there has been an event(s) that have changed them.

End of month was Saturday, hence RNS before market this morning.

You're wild.

FT - the DGR move is too late because it's a token moan a full month after the recommended offer, an offer the founder and chair has agreed to accept.

I know PIs that were collectively holding a few million shares that have sold up and gone elsewhere, so I can only assume a few tens of millions of shares, some of which could have been put towards the no vote, have been sold back to the market.

If the no vote fails by a small margin, I'd be looking at DGRs delay to choose a corner as a critical factor in retail not standing firm enough.

PS - last bit from me because I think you raise a good point.

I think my increased despondency in recent weeks is borne from fears of where this was going long ago. I've tussled with a few different characters down the year when they've offered uber bullish forecasts.

I've struggled a bit with those who have held onto hope, and admittedly with the likes of Rodney who I'm sure has tried his level best to get things where they are now in terms of retail opposition.

We all want to own those companies that create proper tension. I didn't believe SolGold ever truly did that, and if they did they lost it when amateur hour struck.

There's nothing personal with anyone, just some frustration from me that SolGold isn't going to provide the financial platform to my portfolio I hoped it might.

GLA.

They're not gone are they? They're pitching up at Reform plc by the boatload. Unless Suella, Jenrick and Co aren't the socialists that were in senior cabinet positions with the socialists.

With that said, I'm tired. I've only ever tried to contribute to the SolGold discussion. I'm not here to pick fights. It has been a useful lesson in how you can fall out with people you don't know just because you have a different take.

Enjoy your Bentley and your norks and maybe our paths will cross again.