Member Info for Bozi

Fort has had his hopium this afternoon...

Haha DBW. Touche.

Welcome news. Well done SOLG.

I've been giving this more thought and I'm still of the mind that something more substantive is coming. I just don't see why you'd present again so soon after the last if nothing had changed, particularly given the last meeting wa just 3 weeks ago.

Unfortunately it also poses the question of what the company's plans are. To me, you wouldn't schedule a meeting if you were receiving change of control proposals, but you might if you'd carried out a revised mine plan and wanted to present it to the market.

I suspect, and this is nothing more than speculation on my part admittedly, but I'm of the view the company is going to bring the strategic review to a close and push on with the new study, potentially with an indicative financing strategy too.

This will send one or two for the hills I expect, and that's fair enough, but I can only assume at this stage that Bob's bat has not connected and it's back to the drawing board in order to advertise the new figures for those not in the data room.

I also agree with AgArCu.

Getting pretty attractive for an attempt now. How low will they let it go? If we still work on the basis that M&A kicks up at cycle lows then we could be in or approaching the right ball park.

I'm still disappointed because operating from this semi-distressed position was something a few of us were concerned about. As it happens, I don't think we could have avoided it per se, but the company could certainly have insulated shareholders better by factoring in some targeted regional drilling - simply for the reason that every metal discovery opens up the potential for an additional property with an MRE thus plumping up the pig.

But what's done is done. Leave some (in this case a lot) on the table for the next lot.

I think the bear argument would be extremely weak in this case Add.

Why double down and compound the initial dogs dinner? Surely you'd just sit, wait and try again when you did have something to say...

Spot on as usual DM.

We can tell we're dealing with an above average IQ, but it's one that is obsessed with winning the debate rather than joining the stomping herd of SOLG bulls, and that's a shame for us all.

Thanks for the summary Metalhead.

I'm yet to listen to the interview but I'd be pretty incredulous with what you've said at point 3. I see it as a way of clearing the decks in a desperate attempt to keep the story alive and to be frank, if i was a geologist, I'd see it as a pathetic effort from a snake oil salesman.

Another way for Ben to claim he has been responsible for bringing the right skills and connections to the company.

Instead, I'd be very keen to hear what was misguided about the previous programmes and how he allowed that to happen as CEO. Why was a review of the work conducted before his time with the company not carried out and a pause taken if it was so poor? What confidence should we have this time that better work is going to be carried out when our KSZ campaigns have proved fruitless and our Ditau work only moderately encouraging?

Add a 0.

Did LOL at that Add.

Not sure it is rubbish AgArCu.

With 1.6% NSR already accounted for, how far do you think SolGold could go?

Another 3.4% might fetch them £250-300m at a guess. That's incredibly expensive to shareholders over the life of mine.

Bonds and bank loans... forget them right now and for some time to come.

There's a good reason that Scott is looking for cost efficiencies now and it's because the runway isn't there for financing without them.

0.6% AgArCu.

The point wasn't that royalty is interest linked finance. It's obviously not. But do you not think that SolGold's creditworthiness with conventional lenders changes if the company layers on 3 or 4 royalty deals?

There's obviously a multitude of factors that can impact the sort of deal that a royalty company wants to offer.

That line of credit is now closed IMO.

Interesting that both Add and DBW have made noises about dumping these shares if the outcome of the SR isn't what they want, i.e. a full sale.

I suspect they won't be the only ones if SOLG push some sort of JV. No other financing structure works. Further royalties will be expensive, will squeeze project economics and will be difficult to source without traditional debt that will come with a hefty cost of capital.

There's only one real option remaining and I hate to say that because I was open to SOLG pursuing production, but it's no longer realistic and it hasn't been for 12/18months now.

Nope.

Well before my time as it happens.

Apotheki - What do people's ages have to do with anything?

Age is no barometer of ability. But, if Foster wanted to hand the reigns on then absolutely fine, but Turney was not the right option.

As well as the reasons I've mentioned it's worth me pointing out that Turney has a few enemies in the markets who would love to see him fail. The London markets are a small place and ultimately its us shareholders who can feel the brunt.

I agree Orthern but with that in mind, what is the solution?

You say it yourself we're going to a small business. Between two small businesses we've found a globally significant asset. An asset which is too big for us to finance and probably too complex for us to build without significant outside contract work.

Now factor in that CGP and many SOLG PIs have been baying for a sale for 4 or 5 years now. The outcome is a soft strategic review.

It's probably worth as well that other resource companies in London (Eurasia and Landore) have undertaken strategic reviews and none of them went to a set timeframe. I mean how do you set a timeframe for one? You can set a firm deadline for expressions of interest but in the event you receive none you have to announce that developing is the best strategy and that craters a share price by 30-50%, so you only end up cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I'm still confident the strategic review is genuine and I'd hoped it would be done by around now but clearly some latam politics have thrown a spanner in the works.

I think it's just a case of being patient for a little longer.

The company certainly never received $1bn, unless I missed it.

Those investors back then certainly won't be investors now, I think that is fair to say.

Financing now is a no no. Three years ago however when we were talking about the PEA, the first draft PFS, etc I still think it would have been viable with some good execution.

I also did a post on this some months ago and a few of us discussed the increasing cost of capital, and well, that has happened and some.

So pigs will fly before we secure Cascabel funding.

It needs to be absorbed by a huge organisation with free cash flow to manage the build without debt financing, unless of course it can be secured by them on attractive terms.

There's no chance of SOLG achieving that without any revenues or near term path to revenue generation.

SOLG have used a couple of royalties to extend the runway but it now has to be full sale or Cascabel sale and spin out.

JP2000 - he was just never a credible CEO of a company that had ideas about being a serious junior explorer with a tidy land package out in Botswana.

His history was a private investor who knew a bit about shareholder activism.

He was in the right role, if there ever was one for him, as investor relations/comms, but for me personally I was not happy to see Mike Foster exiting stage left at his expense with Mike Moles not far behind.

The job needed an experienced CEO in the space who had a record of success. The KSZ isn't straightforward and the KCB needs more attention than we've given it.

As such we're now drifting aimlessly.

Add - it was your post that I didn't quite agree with but I wasn't having a dig back at anyone really, just making a broad comment which DBW picked up on as well.