Member Info for Bozi

Add - I agree. I have no problem with individuals and companies producing objective analysis on listed stocks, nor am I against the practice of short selling despite it not being something I've done before.

Obviously I'd prefer said analysis to be reliable and worthy of scrutiny from investors.

Blue Orca are, by their own admission, sell side /short analysts and don't hide the fact they are biased. This is a far cry from Matt Gordon and his team at Crux who are much more reasonable and rational. As you say, whilst their view of SOLG stung in many respects at the time, they were on the right lines and a lot can be said for what deviations the company took in the aftermath of their report.

There's a clear difference to me between those impartial analysts who talk from no position long or short and the likes of BOC who are clearly trying to destabilise Piedmont by attacking their JV partner.

A good learning experience this last 24hrs or so nonetheless.

Add - I don't believe there to be any truth at all in the accusations made by Blue Orca and I fully expect the company to issue the strongest possible rebuttal.

However, what can't be denied are the links between Joy Transporters and the politically exposed people mentioned in the report. This is where a country like Ghana has to improve it's own governance in terms of it's conflict of interest disclosure laws.

Although we saw significant value wiped off the stock yesterday I've every belief it will recover.

It is a timely reminder however that geopolitical risk is always prevalent, in some companies more than others granted. Atlantic have long maintained a strong relationship with all levels of government, so much so that the Minerals Investment Fund of Ghana are close to taking a position.

Thanks for your wishes and I, along with numerous other holders of SOLG and ALL, hope for a strong response from ALL, and for SOLG to save our souls!

Well remembered Fort and no arguments from me concerning leveraged investors.

If anything my reliance on Bob Sangha has now grown exponentially.

Funny how the pendulum swings.

Completely agree on both scores Fort.

One or two in here think they're playing 4D chess this morning. They're not, but it's an amusing read all the same.

It depends on your perspective Add. One would hope that was a strategic play. In fact, we were told it was right from the very start.

ToS - Mustapha likes to leave a trail wherever he goes.

If you know you know...

1/2 for me. That's bad enough.

Monte - it's all fair game as long as nobody takes it too far. You admit that yourself. I think that's a good place to leave it.

You're entitled to stick to your opinion on value destruction, but that's all it is. It's not backed up by any facts, any evidence, etc. We can revisit this retrospectively when we know the outcome of the strategic review. Rather ironically I need an auction to support my point and the opposite for yourself which kind of goes against the two strategies we've actually supported during the last few years.

Monte - when you say it cost us dearly, what you meant to say is that it cost you dearly, or maybe some of you that fall into a certain (age) demographic.

If you think that ridiculing those you debate with is worthless then why do you do it? Have a read dog your posts - there's certainly an element of it. I have no problem with anyone ridiculing myy views by the way - I think it's all part of the game and the fun as long as it is done in the right way.

As for my tone, I'm really not sure what to say. I can't see it. As I say, nothing is ever personal. I really don't know what I've said that is condescending. I'm fact, it's the sort of thing that leads to certain people calling others woke and snowflakes, IMHO.

The production scenario became more and more unlikely as the company loaded up on an extra royalty deal and the cost of capital raise, but that doesn't mean I didn't think it was the right strategy to pursue. In fact, compared with a couple of MREs and a firesale, I was much happier to roll the dice on trying to develop Cascabel ourselves. The only ones who disagree with that are the ones who wanted the asset and the company effectively flipped as soon as the majors joined the register, but neither the company or it's officers intimated that was the plan.

I can't answer your last two questions until we receive offers and neither can you. That's part of the issue. We can trumpet a sale all we like but one has never materialised and for that reason we've had no option but to continue development, advertise the asset, etc.

The final point I'd like to make is that those favouring a sale have never shown any interest in a production case. They've focused on the negatives such as a lack of available capital, geopolitical challenges and a lack of mining expertise, when in actual fact the econonic case for building and operating a mine far far exceeds the mean sale price that shareholders believe we can achieve.

Add - performance has ebbed and flowed. 2H 2022 was unacceptable, but I think you'd have to admit you were quite content with Darryl's early exploits. He got his face out there, plan A begets plan B and he delivered the PFS to his timeframe.

2020 and 2021 had their moments but ultimately a disappointing backdrop in a chaotic world around us. Porvenir the silver lining.

Radical change was needed but is this it? The old Guyana Gold head honcho who was happy to sell us off before. What has Bob had to do to get him on board?

Monte - your question has zero relevance. We know that SolGold has no chance of becoming the next BHP.

To turn it back on you, how did all the major miners, the BHPs, the Freeport's, Rio's Glencore's etc etc become what they are today? Did they all start off as mining whales?

We know that the Ivanhoe path is not one that is well treaded. Juniors that make significant discoveries are usually snaffled before they can outgrow digestible size. But what you and others who derided Mather's attempts to follow in Friedland's footsteps is that SolGold had a better opportunity that 98% of their junior compatriots owing to the size of Alpala and the work done in country with the government.

It doesn't rain in the Sahara very often but does that mean it cannot happen?

Monte - you do realise that is how constructive debate works?

The whole process is centred around not just us making our own points but discrediting the arguments others are making that you disagree with. Whether you do that with statistics or empirical evidence or something else.

Have a read of your own posts Monte. The same mannerisms exist. I don't mean anything personal to anyone, but I'm here to say what I think, why I think it, and why I think I'm right and others are wrong.

You ought to hope we do Monte or it will turn very sour for whoever is left holding the baby.

Your negative view of Mather's behaviour is enlightening. He showed that he isn't a mug. He made and developed a tier 1 discovery and not many manage that. You tell me why there's a need for him to pander to others? It certainly doesn't suit him, me or you.

BnC - you keep fighting the good fight my friend.

All of those saying "get over it" or similar are blindly hoping that Bob and Dan are going to get the company in a position where it can be subject to an auction process. There's no guarantee of that of course, but for reasons unbeknown to me, these guys are recognised as the best chance for PIs to get their exit.

Personally, I think it's a risky strategy but at the same time I have to acknowledge that we've had to pivot course. Capital has become much more expensive to get hold of in the last 12 months and it's not a situation that will resolve itself any time soon.

The fact of the matter is that Bob and Warren could probably have paid the CGP wage bill for the next 5 years via an annual raise. So, forcing CGP into insolvency to nick their 15% stake wasn't as straightforward as I think we'd hoped it might be. Their share of exploration costs were also deferred until a DFS had been produced and as I think we saw with the PFS, this was becoming more difficult in this inflationary environment.

And so, here we are. A good compromise by the very virtue that it doesn't work for anybody. CGP have had to take a modest premium on a depressed share price and our shareholders have all been diluted. The only ones that are happy are those who believe new management delivers, but you can guarantee that if we're still here in this price range in 6 months time and takeover chatter has gone quiet then those voices that are positive now will become dissenting.

I wouldn't take much notice of those who said previous management never delivered either. The aim was never to be taken over, and lets be honest, that's what these shareholders are referring to. Yes they were sloppy keeping to their own timeframes and yes they took more than one false step, but they delivered a tier 1 resource, a royalty with Franco, two major shareholders, a second discovery in Porvenir and a regional portfolio full of potential and promise. They just didn't rubber stamp what the majority wanted, and so they were villified.

I will always maintain that SOLG shareholders were turkeys voting for Christmas ahead of the AGM in 2020. They helped remove the guy who was closest aligned and that itself has led to many of the delays we've seen since. It served to add more red tape, more bureaucracy and more in-fighting albeit from a position of less control. Will they take any responsibility themselves? Unlikely, but there you go.

Wouldn't want to be out of this one over the weekend...

Echo those sentiments Overtrader

You give as good as you get SM ;-)

Crikey 1981. You've got a full potato on your shoulder. Want any condiments for it?

Not on a school night Red.

Maybe at the weekend if we can hold these gains.

I know that Add. Speeding tickets tend to be more commonly seen from AIM stocks - that's all I was getting at.

I completely agree. I'd be telling them to do the same. We are biased though.