Member Info for Eck71

Not my figure:

https://tdi.sos-dev.co.uk/first-scottish-gold-sale-to-jewellery-industry-agreed/

I don't expect that Shurething. I do however expect >30% over spot on the 25% of production which will carry the single origin chain of custody and be sold as 'Scottish Gold'.

yayay you have clearly trained your canine friend well, not to allow irrational exuberance to take hold. Thankfully Bellers seems to be redressing some of the damage you've done over the last decade with your ill-conceived artificial grass gambit. It is magnanimous of you belatedly to acknowledge responsibility for my ulcers.

It has been an uncomfortable couple of months watching both the gold price and SGZ head south. Let's hope for a brighter Spring. Worth noting that some of the recent gold price weakness has been due to dollar strength - even after recent declines we are still at £1230/oz which is far from shabby if your average operating cost is £439/oz.

Allez Scotgold!
Eck (back at his average again and sweating a bit as a result)

Steady now. Any more of this buying nonsense and we will be back over my average, and that would never do...

Some delayed chunky buys there around 11.35 to add to some at the start of the day, all showing as sells.

At this rate the 80p 2016 BPT placement will be back in profit again in no time...

Samson, as per usual with your posts, I completely agree.

Fair point yayay. The tragedy is that after years of total lack of market interest and/or massive scepticism regarding the likelihood of getting Cononish into production and future potential, that ship had been turned around and we had a real sense of momentum.

And now we've totally and unnecessarily Hibsed it.

Alright Baz. The plant is the plant (kind of, though now with pumps that work etc), the resource is the resource (or is in all likelihood 2 x the resource, but that's another story). RG and others were heavily incentivised to get Cononish 'into production' by the end of 2020. I suspect (but don't know) that the Board agreed to the 30 Nov 'pour' with some reservations, but on the basis of assurances from RG that 'real' production would follow PDQ.

TB1872 makes relevant points about the impact of Covid but that should have been factored in to expectations (and Covid-related install problems don't account, for example, for the original mis-speccing of the pumps).

They weren't, production didn't follow, the CEO has disappointed the Board and the market and the suspicion is that his own self-interest played a part in that. The incentives have at least in part proved perverse.

So yes we agree that in the short term the boys and girls will get to work with the same plant, on the same resource(s). But hopefully in the medium term (ie the next few months) the company under the new CEO will be able to restore some credibility with the market, and therefore some shareholder value.

Baz, I respectfully disagree. From shareholders' perspective (including, obviously the Board), the leadership issue has not so much been production snagging which to an extent is to be expected, though as others have pointed out it seems odd not to have anticipated the nature of the ore under crushing, or the pump mis-spec, given the BPT was in part supposed to provide guidance on precisely these types of production questions.

It's the setting of expectations in official market communications which have left RG's credibility in tatters:

'Gold pour' 30 November. Disastrous and clearly not a gold pour at all. Could only have got away with it if followed up immediately with meaningful processing volume
December production update: 'Everything is rosy in the garden'. Outrageous in retrospect, given the January news.
January production update: wouldn't have been that bad, if it hadn't been preceded by two months of 'we're pouring gold and everything is peachy.'

So, the Board and market are left to draw one of two conclusions. Either RG knew in November and December that production snags were going to cause problems, in which case he was misleading the market. Or he didn't, in which case his grip on the production process was not competent. Either way, gotta go.

The new CEO has a ton of engineering experience and, let us hope, will improve communications to the market. They could hardly be any worse. Credibility had to be restored and that's why the change has been made. We will have to wait and see how the new CEO performs, but it's nonsense to say it won't make any difference.

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened if you 'retire' with one month's notice with someone waiting to step into your shoes at the end of that month. I doubt media reporting of the change will stick to the coy wording of the RNS.

No, the Chair and Board demonstrating they have a grip and prepared to take the necessary action. Too many missteps from the CEO over the last few months. I think the market will ultimately view this as positive.

A great effort to get the project to this point, with all the challenges along the way. But I’m not surprised the Board has lost patience. As the CEO of a public company you cannot keep setting expectations which you fail to meet.

The ‘gold pour that wasn’t’ was an unforgivably bad piece of investor comms and he had to go.

This Phillip Day chap looks like he’s been around the block a bit and knows his engineering.

As hoped, good news re crusher chokes and pumps, less so re filter press.

A huge buying opportunity this morning I would suggest.

Samson, gold bulls/bugs tend to be very vocal about gold price manipulation when it’s falling, less so when it’s rising.

Having said that, the rash of institutions and corporates declaring their ‘investment’ in BTC might more honestly- I suspect- describe their activity as trading. There is more than a whiff of a market-wide pump (with apologies to Scottish viewers).

No there isn't. Impressed by your confidence in being able to move global metals markets though. Gold could do with your assistance, please do pile in with the physical stacking!

Well I’m happy we’re now back below my average again. It’s where I’m comfortable. All is right with the world.

Have you started early Baz? I guess the sun is starting to get over the yardarm a bit more quickly now ;-)

RM re Calgary, had an email from a contact there yesterday. Minus 30. They have three metrics for temperature in the weather forecasts: temp, wind chill temp, number of minutes to frostbite. Proper weather. Was there last March just before lockdown. It was...fresh.

A mere dusting! We’ve got more in Fife. That’s encouraging, the last retweet from the company smacked a bit of getting your excuses in early...

Bigoiler, we expect an update towards the end of February. Lots of understandable frustration on here at the 29 Jan update, including pessimism on sourcing of pumps with the correct spec. Language in the 29 Jan update is a little vague, saying that the production teething issues are expected to be 'addressed' by the end of Feb. Well I've 'addressed' my issue that Scarlet Johansson doesn't appear to be interested in me, but that doesn't mean my issue is solved.

You may get more from people on here who a) attended the AGM b) have engineering expertise but having done a bit of research it doesn't look to me as though the type of pump they need is a particularly rare beast, and I would expect them to be pulling out all the stops to source them from within the UK.

My expectation is that at end of Feb we will get a positive update on the resolution of the production teething issues including replacement pump installation, but factoring in some harsh (though hardly unexpected) weather, I am not expecting any great shakes on tonnage processed by that point. I think we are looking at end of March at least for full Phase 1 throughput.

None of that is based on anything much other than hunch, and as I say others may be able to add more. I'd be delighted for Scotgold to surprise us to the upside, for once.

I don't have L2 but I think we are blue for real at 82/84. LSE has developed an interesting habit recently of posting uncrossing trades above the ask, then leaving the UT price as the mid-price. As if the late trades etc etc weren't enough to keep everyone confused...