Member Info for Bozi

Fort - have you considered that when Osisko gave us $50m and Jiangxi did their subscription at 16p that both parties may have said "concentrate on ENSA - leave the regionals."

If they did, how happy would you have been with an extra 100m shares to give us £5m budget for 3 regional projects?

Genuine question.

Fort - we'll give you the keys to a company employing 500+ people and ask you to navigate the year.

You can make 490 redundant on day 1 but it's going to cost you.

Let me guess, you'd just bin them all with no severance like the Roy family on Succession?

BP1 - it absolutely would be this low.

Berry Street aside, the continual drift is likely because of an open ended strategic review with no self-imposed deadlines.

This was completely the right way to go.

Had they said "we're going to do the merger, shrink the company's cost base, get the government approvals, publish a phased development plan and complete the strategic review by 30/06/2024 then PIs would have headed for the exit and returned a week before the deadline. The price would have dropped from the low 20s to 7p over 2-3 days rather than over 12 months.

That's all that's different. People hate having dead money.

They're owned by SolGold Canada.

So they'll be for the officers of that company to vote I'd have thought.

Hi NMM

I agree the IPA is the more important.

I still think we'll see the phased plan in Q1 though. As I understand it, this isn't being timed to optimise the IRR it's a reworking of the plan into phased development and the company has no more time to sit and wait for interest rates to meander more favourably.

NMM - it's a different ball game though when you're waiting on a government, particularly one in the midst of change as is the case in Ecuador.

It's uncontrollable for the company as far as I'm concerned. That said, I'd hope they're putting every effort into it, and in future, I'd hope they only provide timeframes for things fully within their control.

You're spot on DBW. There definitely is a policy from some to make spurious claims that can't be substantiated.

There's enough to question the company about without making statements that can't be qualified and passing them off as fact.

Very poor show.

Are there any CEOs anywhere that you do like Eloro?

Fort about 12 months too late again. Horse bolted long ago.

Deary me.

Whilst I understand the disappointment, I wouldn't be reading too much into this.

SolGold actually went much further than most other companies during the Covid period to make AGMs interactive.

Most other companies never bothered and haven't moved that way since. I can understand SolGold reverting back given the awkwardness that making the meeting virtual caused.

Obviously there would be nothing stopping us jumping on a plane to Aus and turning up at the offices with our share certs if we so desired.

Personally, I think the company should keep the AGM purely for constitutional and voting matters and then run a couple of Q&As a year. There's dedicated platforms like Investor Meets for that.

Anon - the phased plan is looking to bring Capex in around $1bn. If someone wanted to go more aggressive in line with previous iterations of the PFS then you're probably looking at $3.3-3.5bn accounting for inflation since the studies were produced.

And I believe that is why we are where we are. You've got many stakeholders, primarily investors, and looking at NPV and resource in the ground and asking for 70-100p. Then you have the suitors who I'm guessing aren't willing to pay that.

That pushes us into this middle ground we find ourselves where we then need to complete more work to push their valuation closer to ours.

I think a few people envisage some frantic bidding war which would surprise me still. I suspect many teams at these majors are trying to find the right level to pitch at and it'll be difficult because anything 20p or less will be laughed at our side and anything 60p or more will be dismissed their side.

So the battleground may be that slice in between.

Based on what BBG?

What's your rationale?

#capitalism

Almost if of the century JP but we'll see.

It's the hope that kills you and all that...

Thanks Fort. I'm glad you have everyone's voting intentions.

Fort - so how does selling the treasury shares for 5p accomplish this?

It's clear from the AGM resolutions they have a single buyer in mind. Are you suggesting we're going to see a further drop and then a very large management purchase campaign? I can't see Mather being enthralled about that unless he's going to take part?

The trouble with voting them down is you're forcing them into delivering an outcome in a short timeframe. That makes for a sub-optimal result. If they are known for M&A that secures us 50p p/s, let them deliver it rather than voting them down, forcing them to recommend a bid of 15p and then sit their hoping someone else will emerge from the woodwork. That is a desperate, pathetic strategy.

Orthern - we've seen eye to eye on plenty the last couple of years but I'm afraid to say that you're forcing it a bit too much this morning.

OK Fort, let's humour you.

So let's say either Maxit or one of their associates want the treasury shares at say 5p. That values the company at £150m and raises a paltry £8.5m.

How does that enhance Scott's, Maxit's or Bob's personal case? Do they really want to go down in history as the charlatans who let a tier 1 deposit go for a pittance? I know I wouldn't.

There's no doubt that the RNS barrage is a poor show and investors should be vocal about this in any comms with those parties. Let them know it isn't acceptable but don't automatically vote them down for the simple reason that there isn't a creditable alternative individual or team to take this forward quickly.

There needs to be an element of trust. Mather's positions, personal and others, Bob's 5% etc offers comfort that they're not going to do what you're suggesting they will, and if they do, then you follow the money-it's quite simple.

More fantasy Fort.

How do you square all that with Scott and Bob's significant existing investment and, for example, Scott's option package at 17p.

Come on Fort, play the game for once.

Banditputin - right now, for me, the finish line is a sale of the company.

The work force has been rationalised right down to ensure costs are minimal. There is no longer the expertise or the resource to start building a block cave mine. That has been backed up by comments made shortly after the merger closed ("we're not mine builders").

The question is how they go about it, whether they get an outright sale or whether they sell ENSA and spin the regionals out.