Member Info for Dreamboatwarrior

Jerry
I’m fairly confident they basically still support the original plan , but there are many variations and upsides which need looking at first.
The open cut option looks very interesting too easier, cheaper and quicker.... they’d be mad not to explore all these things.
Sadly in my opinion the most immediate threat comes from two of our own biggest shareholders and this needs a watching eye Worst case scenario would be they end up controlling the company without ever having to make a bid .... this needs avoiding at all cost.

Add
What I don’t totally get is cgp’s position. They must know that BHP / CGP carry the main threat when it comes to dilution yet they aligned themselves with them. They also turned down Solgold’s offer out of hand ..... so they must be confident of a bigger pay day?

Add
I agree financing needs sorting . We have shown recently ( under NM) that BHP & NCM are not our only options and I hope the future board can see this. They want Solgold on a leash and once they have that we will never realise anywhere near our potential value. By the time we get anywhere near production they will have diluted the life out of Solg if we are not careful. This is what makes our current drilling programme so important in the near term as well as the need to find a more cost effective way of developing Cascabel ( shallow cuts are faster and cheaper)

Was meant to read “one day in the future” he may well be .......

Unfortunately it’s a self fulfilling prophecy in a way.
He may well be back on board and fully bullish but will his posts ever carry the weight they used to?
As everyone knows Q & I don’t get along but one thing I could never question is his position, I may not agree with him but I do believe he is basically honest.
The only reason I filtered him was to save everyone else here yet more squabbling

Fastjet
Probably only worth asking a straight question if you’re expecting a straight answer

My main issue is that nothing would suit BHP/ NCM better than a cheap placing .... so is it really right that we have two ( at least) major shareholders who would be potentially benefit greatly by a depressed share price?
Still can’t see CGP‘S angle here

Thanks Troajan
Don’t suppose you could post the whole article?

Smick exactly right
CGP must know that by backing BHP/ NCM they are potentially voting to dilute their own holding .... so what is their angle?
Whether pi’s like it or bot our interests are very much aligned with Nick’s .
The main danger is the board majority just doing a cheap placing favouring BHP / NCM.... Nick has recently proved twice that there are other options, this clearly hasn’t gone down well but demonstrates that punitive dilution is not the only way.

I’ve had it confirmed that the Franco money (100m) can be used for any license that falls within the Cascabel concession (ie Tandayama) ..... though I think we’d reached that conclusion anyway .

Plus Add it probably cost him his job simply because he was trying to do the right thing ..... NM now knows he can’t push the big boys around.... on the other hand BHP/NCM now know there are plenty of alternatives to their sub value placings which has been confirmed recently.... twice .
My take is we will need money again at some point basically BHP/NCM can put up or shut up

Add you may be right but I’m fairly sure there was a trade off

Hi Lunch
Like him or not NM took the Franco money and subsequent (smaller ) placing to the Chinese to demonstrate to BHP/ NCM that there are alternatives and they simply can’t have it all their own way.
This is one of the big benefits of having a CEO with big skin in the game. As a result by best serving his own interests smaller pi’s were likewise liked out for.
Of course I’m not saying mistakes weren’t made but I believe intentions were good.
By the way Nick fully intends to stick around “looking after shareholders “ as best he can.

“ Although I can see why BHP/NCM were unhappy to be giving away 1% of ALL Cascabel!”
They’d have been happy for us to give it away to them.

Crew was talking to someone at SOLG yesterday.
I commented on the quarterlies and they mentioned “the comments from Newcrest were also very helpful?”
Have I missed something?

https://www.mining.com/featured-article/ranked-worlds-top-10-copper-projects/

We appear to be 7th now

Hey Smick
This is the bit I liked best
“ The Committee has determined that additional work is required to sufficiently address a number of mine development and metallurgical alternatives and potential upsides, including resource potential on other targets within the Cascabel concession”
Plenty more to come

Reads ok to me

Maybe his W key just isn’t working?

Eish Hi
Remember some posters you only have to read one my friend