Member Info for Bozi

But 1984, you said all immigration is a problem.

How do you square that circle?

Where is the upside in your view then Orthern if we are just a punt?

Orthern - the day Scott announced that the company was committed to Making Cascabel turnkey was the day the strategic review was shelved.

It was announced indirectly to avoid a huge write down in the value of the stock, as is typically the case where a company announces the result of a strategic review that doesn't involve a value creating transaction.

It was quite clever as the statement gave enough information on future strategy without closing other doors.

We still suffered a markdown of sorts, dipping under 6p, but it was actually good communication from SolGold. Those still waiting for closure on the strategic review have taken their eye off the ball somewhat.

Fort - it could simply be linked to increased redemptions. Hard to know without looking at the FMs commentary.

It's difficult to market a company going through the nitty gritty to make this project turn key. It's something Tufford can probably help with, as long as we stay away from fun facts and porphryries for toddlers.

As Jerry S says, it's a case of being patient.

Everyone is aware of SOLG but not many believe it's the best opportunity out there at the current time.

The company has lost the plot from an IR point of view which is a shame because operationally performance is as strong as it has been for a good while.

The priority for me if I was Scott would be to have a small team who knew what they were doing assembled with a defined strategy that would be executable when money starts flowing back into the markets.

*V-shaped

Fort - when you start benchmarking against previous narratives you're just assessing against your own view of what happened in the past, so forgive me for asking but what is the difference?

The fact is that the Covid lows saw a lot of cash move to the sidelines over a couple of short weeks until the markets bottomed out, at which point the cash returned and we saw the B-shaped recovery pretty much across the board.

Yes, my view is that the market was happier with the story in DC PFS days than it is right now. We weren't far off the back of the Porvenir sub-plot and market was clearly happier to buy the shares up. History tells us that.

Of course I think the market is wrong now. We only have to look at the Cascabel economics at these spot prices, but as you alluded to yesterday, a lot of cash is still happy to sit on the sidelines taking the interest on offer.

That's why I agree with your view of where price will end up going once rates have peeled further.

Fort - the market is not bonkers just because SOLG is at the same share price that it was at Covid lows.

NMMs explanation about shares in issue is part of the story. The other part is that the market believes SolGold's investment case is weaker now than it was in 2020. A takeover isn't expected in the near term and there is no funding available for regional exploration, therefore there's little reason perceived to buy the shares.

If SolGold raised £20m tomorrow and said they were going to drill the highest priority regionals I expect we'd see some share price appreciation.

If they don't, then I expect we'll see very much what you posted yesterday... some sideways action for another couple or months with an uptrend taking shape as we edge towards phases 2 and 3 of the Cascabel plan.

1984 - I'd ask you to remember your wisdom from last night the next time you post something along the lines of,

"I'm right about pretty much everything I comment on."

Add - your post of 7:25 doesn't make sense to me.

I'm going to trust you're more up to speed on the circumstances around DC than I because I've not really looked at it but I'm struggling to reconcile the supposed chain of events.

What do we have to suggest Mather wanted to pursue a sale in the DC days? Surely the strategy change came about at the point of merger and announcement of the strategic review?

Why would you bring on board the likes of DC, KM and KO'K with plenty of BHP representation amongst them, if the strategy being pursued was a sale? Makes no sense.

Why would anyone do a royalty during the exploration/study stage if the strategy was to sell? Makes no sense.

We've been told BHP are on board this time around but we don't know this. They were vocal and critical with it with regards the initial deal so there's no reason they'd take a different view now. Their actions on the market with their own M&A, attempted and successful, lends weight to the concept that they are treating their SOLG holding as a strategic investment and they'll be willing to write it off if it came to it.

Utterly grim if that's the case Jerry.

Lets keep kicking the regionals can down the road and hope the signing of the odd agreement here and there is going to help position the business ready for a sale.

If that's the strategy then sack the lot.

We've seen the market say "fair play, here's +1.5 (+£45m) for your funding agreement.

Where does management suppose that value is going to be returned to shareholders?

*The lack of exploration is one of the things that were pointed out around the point of merger as being a concern for some shareholders.

We need to. The lack of exploration is one of the things that were pointed out around the point of merger as being important for the company.

Many disagreed at the time because folks thought it was a case of Scott and Bob pulling chairs up at the table to discuss a swashbuckling deal.

An explorer that isn't exploring is a dormant company. A developer that has extensive licence areas but isn't exploring is essentially just carrying out desktop work.

That's a dangerous position to be in and it goes some way to explaining why the company has lost the over 2/3 of its value the last couple of years.

We know the Cascabel path and we know it extends 18-24 months. That time has got to be filled adding value in the field elsewhere.

Add - there wasn't a myriad of options for progressing to turnkey, I concede that. All I was saying is that by doing as we have we have maybe made ourselves a little less appealing versus our peers like Filo.

It's a price we're paying and will have to pay. Not all stories are the same. All we can do is support Scott to keep pushing it on.

Metoooo - it's a bit late now but it would have been a topic worth researching a couple of years ago.

The perceived benefits of Filo include the fact that FDS is an epithermal deposit with a copper gold porphry within it. It's mineable by open pit methods with a LOM strip ratio of 1.57:1.

Filo have also stuck to raising equity. This is easier to do if all the heavyweights are in cheaper as I suspect they are.

Benefits of SolGold probably revolve around the fact that more of our resource has been delineated and sufficient drilling has taken place to allocate it to measured and indicated status.

That's about it really. Explains why two companies have partnered up to push FDS along while leaving SolGold and the world class Cascabel on the shelf.

We can point to Noboa or interest rates as much as we like but maybe it's time we look at ourselves. Big majors don't need catalysts to make a bid. They just go out and do it if they truly want it.

SolGold is rather tainted/soiled goods so there's zero chance of 33x from Covid lows. We'll do well to get 5x and extremely well to get 8x. That's the price of bending over to Franco and Osisko. Attaboy Bob!

Fanciful claptrap from Fort but it's what people want to hear so it picks up 20 likes.

I see no commentary on the Filo SP in the lead to the offer in the face of market uncertainty. Oh but it's all supposed to happen out of the blue!

It's a shame ST was the third party Add.

But ultimately it doesn't matter. Further indication of what we've known for 12 months won't stop those on here with certain agendas.

I'm not sure I'm so keen to find out. A nice earner for someone that is for certain.

I think you're being unfair to Chris Stackhouse to say Bob was behind the financing, Add.

Bob obviously brought Osisko to the table so I'm sure he had some involvement on their behalf but my reading between the lines is that it's CS that has been pulling a lot of levers and getting things done.

BSR - It is quite clearly set out in the news release. BHP and Lundin believe that there's two projects that can share the same infrastructure and that both have district scale expansion potential.

It's therefore important for them to take the punt now before Filo proved it and the price went up.

SolGold isn't the same. Cascabel is quite mature from an exploration perspective although it's clear some of the satellite targets haven't been fully drilled.

It's all set out in the announcement. So constantly baiting folks, droning on with the same question repeatedly, it just doesn't reflect well on you.