Member Info for Dreamboatwarrior

Afternoon Red
Long time no speak
All on low volume on the face of it …. Maybe a few late reported trades this evening?

Snug I agree
All not perfect here but I’ve added and now have an extra 400k ….. god help me lol
Nick has circa 293m shares ( inc DGR) he won’t let this go for peanuts

Ha Fort …. Was just talking to someone who said the exact same thing ( Almost)
“Don’t be surprised to see Darryl resign. His work is just about done ”

well picked up another 75k for better or worse

This is what we've had in the last 3 months ......
1st June ....Cascabel technical report filed on SEDAR
6th June....Notice of general meeting
17th June....Price monitoring extension
17th June.... 2nd Price monitoring extension
20th June....Holdings in company
24th June .... Amendments to EGM resolutions
30th June....Results of general meeting
5th July....Director shareholding
14th July....Appointment of key executives
28th July.... Business activity update
1st August....Updated share capital and voting rights
11th August....Director and management change
30th August....Director/PDMR shareholding

For a supposed exploration company looking to encourage further investment this is about as bad as it gets. As it happens I think we'll be fine here despite the company's total disregard for it's investors .....simply because we have something that people want and the world needs.

Bubbles CGP now up another 10%

https://www.google.com/finance/quote/CGP:CVE?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjUsaqN9u75AhXbMMAKHdnJDtQQ3ecFegQICRAc

CGP recovery continues

BHP’s CEO needs a win ( as Red said recently ) having publicly lost face twice recently. Solgold may be petty cash to them but I’ll bet they want it. If they bid low they’ll fail again …. They may well just sit on their hands ….. my view is that. to be taken seriously, they’ll need to offer 65p+ Alternatively they could see an easier way would be to buy NCM’s stake ( or NCM itself ) …. So many possibilities here just wonder what the catalyst will be

BNC yep more coverage needed …. Summer out of the way and covid wearing thin, it’s time they made clear their intentions moving forward….what we have in the ground is pretty much unique at the moment and what all explores dream of …. Now let’s see some value realised

Tootsie?

Lunch I agree 20% at most but we don’t know .
Mather might have to take less than he once wanted but he can certainly put a stick in BHP’s spokes .
If Mather , NCM, DGR & Tenstar we’re to accept say only 40p-50p for their stock in principle I’d bet good money it’d be countered pretty damn quickly….Do you think BHP would take a new player with 25% lying down? I’m not saying this would happen but it’s a decent line of defence

I disagree lol
Only kidding ….. let’s move on
I’ve made 3 attempts to bring this back on topic today …. With little success

Sort of …. I would support the board ahead of BHP but their performance/ communications and lack of progress on the finance and exploration front have been woeful recently.
BHP won’t make a low ball bid because they know it won’t succeed, they also know we are incapable of taking this anywhere near production ( a point on which we disagree).
Nick , CGP etc hold the key here and have the capability of lightning a fire under this if they chose and if there are indeed other interested parties , I’m guessing there are plenty

Q what I was saying I’d do we vote with the underperforming BOD
Or do we vote with BHP and the inevitable dilution BHP would bring

Nick, CGP, DGR & Tenstar can muster at least 25% of the shares plus other bits and pieces we know about ( Valuestone etc).
We don’t know how many other shares are held by institutions under the declarable level (3%?)
Add to that the likes of Norges are looking for a good return on their investment and would not necessarily vote with BHP and the inevitable dilution they would bring.
We know pi’s could still hold anything up to 35% (ish) of the current shares in issue.
Therefore is it a given that Nick and the BOD would be ousted at the next AGM? I’m now not so sure. I believe they are fully aware they need to deliver big time before the general meeting and I think they will. Whether this comes in the form of a decent offer or something else who knows.
Everyone assumes BHP hold most of the cards here but Nick , CGP etc have the ability to allow a new player to enter the fray with a 25% stake and my hunch is they will if push comes to shove.
It’s the devil and the deep blue sea do we (if it gets that far) vote with the existing underperforming BOD or BHP and the inevitable dilution that will follow …..like being in a tractor beam being drawn towards the Death Star ??

Top

Quady I’ll happily say I don’t agree with plenty of what he says and your friends in admin will be able to confirm I have never ticked up any ****** or sexist post.
However when it comes to vile individuals I think you too the list

Bozi
Thanks but trying to stay on topic here seems fairly futile
My thoughts are as follows
The Slug (under his various) guises is clearly invested and very knowledgeable on both Solg and the market mechanics. He clearly oversteps the mark at times and leaves Admin no choice.

Quady may or may not be invested ( I couldn't care less) and knows **** all about anything
He continuously insults and condescends to other investors ... from the last day or so
"Good grief Jezzoo you really believe the rubbish you post"
"Jerry what absolute rubbish"
he has two tag lines .... going to production or diverse book .
Bozi .... surely you must see the refusal to see what's in front of you as slightly weird (we didn't get any money at the fund raising so we can't have failed ????)
Whilst I understand the reasons Slug has been removed time and time again I cannot honestly see a single decent thing Quady brings to this board other than stoking bad feeling wherever he/she/it can

Cont …
in its territory to indigenous communities and nationalities, Montubias, Afro-descendants. This has not been done due to lack of law. The companies carry out social responsibility work (information, communication and socialization). This does not replace the role of the State. However, it is important to emphasize that prior consultation does not represent a veto power; It is not asking the population if it allows or does not allow. In other countries such as Peru, prior consultation is carried out according to the parameters set by the International Labor Organization (ILO); that is, as a mechanism for citizen participation to inform. The economic future of an entire country cannot be consulted in a community. We would not only be contravening the Constitution; but also the principle of authority and sovereignty of the State.
Q. Are popular consultations the solution to resolve conflicts with those opposed to mining?

Local popular consultations cannot contradict the mandate of the Constitution. It is clearly established that mineral resources and their administration are the responsibility of the State.

The mining industry is not against regulations, controls and monitoring. What it asks, like any industry in the world, is that the rules of the game not change once the projects begin. Having a popular consultation in Quito is terrible because if what we want is to attract investment, for dollars to enter in a clean way to invest in social and development issues, a local consultation drives all that away.
Mining can coexist with other economic activities. The La Plata project in Sigchos (Cotopaxi) is carrying out an agricultural project so that the people of the area begin to grow competitive crops. They do it hand in hand with international organizations because the idea is that when the mine is finished, the populations are consolidated and have development options.
Formal mining does not displace populations; nor does it throw mercury into the rivers. Mercury is not even used now. That only happens with illegal mining. The amount of water that enters a mining project is that allowed by the environmental license. It is monitored and recirculated. In the end, it is treated before being returned to the ecosystem. (JS)

“We must all work for a better country. But, for that, a real development alternative is needed. You need money to face child malnutrition, poverty, unemployment. That money has to come from a sustainable source like mining.” María Eulalia Silva, Executive President of the Mining Chamber

End

Cont….
Q. How can mining be prevented from making the same mistakes as oil?

The country owes much of its development to oil. However, much of that development was not seen in the poorest areas. I don't think it was a problem of the oil industry, but of how the State distributed the wealth. It must be taken into account that the oil industry was developed 50 years ago. Today there is a greater exercise of citizenship and two years ago, Ecuador is part of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).
The Mining Law clearly establishes that 60% of the royalties have to go back to the areas of influence. Fruta del Norte and Mirador have already paid advance royalties of more than $165 million. That means that at least $90 million should be invested in the areas of influence. That is not up to the industry. What you have to do is pay and you already paid. Mining is the most sustainable option to replace oil wealth. If there are things that go wrong, solutions are sought; but the door to an activity with potential is not closed.

Q. How to deal with the fact that legal and illegal mining are often put in the same bag?
Illegal mining affects us all. Enormous environmental liabilities are created and drug trafficking mafias, extortionists, human trafficking, hitmen are involved. Illegal mining also affects formal ones due to a reputational issue. In a country where industrial mining has only been in operation for two years, people hardly know the difference. I am from the generation that still remembers the shots that appeared on television of Nambija. Shots of small children carrying sacks of stones. So, it is assumed that mining is Yutzupino, Buenos Aires, Zaruma. But nothing to see. The formal mining we are talking about is luxury. I was last week in Fruta del Norte, and they only occupy 8% of the concession territory. Everything else goes to conservation.
P. What is expected of the dialogue tables between the Government and the indigenous movement?

Hopefully the dialogue tables become an opportunity to do things right. This dialogue cannot go against the Constitution, legality and common sense. If what you want is to satisfy the social demands of communities, then you have to give those communities an alternative.Stopping mining is not an alternative. Not only that this would imply a series of legal contingents, which the country is not capable of dealing with; but above all that an option for development and improvement of their quality of life would be taken away from indigenous communities. One of the main criticisms against formal mining is that it does not comply with prior consultation. Who is responsible for this? Prior consultation is a duty of the Ecuadorian State, not of the mining companies. The 2008 Magna Carta establishes that it must be done in areas where extractive-type projects are planned and that contain indigenous, Montubio, Afro-descendant communities and nationalities in th