Member Info for Grimbergen

Look from 45 seconds in - the bits being quoted.

Here you go DBW, this should work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7OpIhNKhLE

Some of the regulars from #OperationFear getting their post counts up beyond their 20-a-day targets

Well done!! A sea of overblown negativity dressed up in the most meagre way as ‘balance’

And now volcanoes and earthquakes to drive fear into our investor hearts - thank you gawdelpus, you’ve made my day, I chuckled long and hard at that.

What next? Meteor strikes to end investment in surface-based technologies? The risk of sea level rise threatens mountain-tops

Come on try harder

Oh come on!! It’s spelt out in black and white in the RNS

It’s a philanthropic, charity supporting fund. Every year the foundation sells some like this to support its charitable causes. Look back and you’ll see similar in the past.

It’s a good thing - it’s a representation that the person that runs our company has a social conscience, important at a time like this when the operation of mining vs community is under scrutiny.

Shame on you for using this as negative collateral. NM has millions of personal shares. He’s not sold a single one.

How could anyone forget ericeric and his Gemfields play!

We’ve all seen this too many times

‘Another’ good news? Should have read to ‘bury’ good news

Blood fat thumbs

My post below must have hit a nerve over at #OperationFear HQ - classic tactics, another good news in 5 or 6 negative posts.

So much filtered nonsense.

Do your own research folks:
- watch the latest Jason Ward video - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HAWXCqN8FGc
- read Coldcut’s last few posts and read the local tweets for yourself - simply google #MineríaConResponsabilidad
- check out the links shared by Padmaster recently - https://www.marketscreener.com/SOLGOLD-PLC-4005870/news/SolGold-Ecuador-says-Cascabel-could-become-a-top-world-copper-mine-28748667/?utm_medium=RSS&utm_content=20190612

Try to see past the naked agendas, research the facts

Posted in the interest of balance vs the continual drip feed of (often spurious) negativity. GLA LTHs

Thanks Coldcut, again very interesting reading.

I know it’s a rough translation but I liked the final phrase: "The Constitutional Court has a responsibility ... to define on the request for Popular consultation in three cantons of Imbabura, not for issues of form, but background, as respect for the Constitution." I wish I could understand the local subtleties of that!

Also, in that string of tweets is another tweet from late yesterday/early today, translated:

“The Fruta del Norte project of @LundinGoldEC located in Zamora Chinchipe, will enter operations until the end of this year. The new mining policy guarantees the operation of the same.”

Interesting final phrase regarding the ‘guarantee’ that the national mining policy provides, regarding the future operation of the Lundin mine.

Tie that together with the timing of the mining policy’s launch vis-à-vis the deadline for representations to the CC and Imbabura referendum decision, the recent govt statements re the size and importance of Cascabel... hmmm

I’ve not got you filtered yet possywaves but you’re heading that way.

What a load of bull. Not 40p for months or years?! Now you’re a comedian!

If this goes to production there will be some dilution but the SP increase will dwarf that.

And what if the other 12 very promising prospects??

Your post is laughable. Must try harder

Stumpy, many thanks for sharing :)

I’ve thought the same possibility Lost. I pondered a few days ago how long the application to the CC has been known about - it must have been lodged some time agi, a constitutional court doesn’t just get petitioned and arrange a hearing with zero notice

The big players have political risk analysts combing local news wire for things like this - I wonder how long it’s been bubbling away without us PIs knowing about it.

Seems to have been a very coordinated and strong defence this time - let’s see what happens. I’m also heavily in here, based on good research, and I’ve not sold nor hedged. A positive result could give a very interesting impetus to this share.

However a negative result doesn’t flush your investment away. It would be the start of a process that may not come to pass. And even in the referendum that impacted INV it’s only changed their operation, not stopped it.

Still squawking away in their echo chamber I presume going by the number of filtered posts this morning.

Does anyone actually have them off filter now?

Looking forward to seeing the results of a proper, co-ordinated and deep legal response to the referendum request this time, unlike previous referendum request cases where it was argued too late, in the absence of a clear national policy (backed up by govt's statutory responsibility for natural resources), and in some highly sensitive and protected environmental areas.

Very different examples, with (what I expect will be) very different outcomes...

Superb find Pad, thanks as ever for sharing.

50p by end of June :)

This afternoon the SP recovers and suddenly the number of filtered posts in my view has diminished massively.

I presume the #OperationFear foot soldiers have gone home for an early tea? What a bunch of despicable bottom feeders they are. Altho I suspect they’ll be back.

Good post, thanks for sharing GV

and some shorts will be pulled down...!

The fall was way overdone. We might see same again over the coming days based on #OperationFear, but we’ll get a sniff of a result one or another soon enough...

This isn’t the same as the other recent examples - this has seen a concerted, joined up and local effort to debunk the court case. Plus Cascabel isn’t located in a protected environmentally designated region. Plus the claim itself seems much more spurious conjecture based on what may happen, and protecting the rights of illegal mining cartels

A positive result isn’t assured, but it’s more likely IMO than many on here would have you believe.

Let’s not wet our collective knickers

IF the court finds in favour of the plaintiff, then those in favour of holding a local referendum will have to gain 10% of the local population’s signatures to go ahead

And then there will be a referendum on mining in the local Canton

During this period I suspect the government and international mining community (and those who have been positively engaged, trained and employed by solgold) will be lobbying hard in favour of responsible mining and the govt (I suspect) looking at ways to reign in the courts’ right to preside over national issues like this.

The sky isn’t falling down, and there’s a long route to get there if it eventually does.

In the other areas that have already had a vote and voted down mining, there are already steps underway to overturn the decision.
Plus these areas were in designated environmental protection areas (Cascabel is not as far as I know)
Plus the mines in question were open pit, not the far less damaging block cave that we are exploring

The SP is a bloodbath, but do try to keep some perspective... the vote either way is not the end for anyone

I’m going to head for The Winchester and wait for all this to blow over

Fat thumbs / auto spell - ‘CIA’ is supposed to say ‘about’ :/

I probably missed it in the various articles, but I wondered if anyone knows when this court proposal was first raised by the plaintiff.

It’s being heard by a senior regional court, these types of hearings don’t come up in just a week or two, so presumably it’s been in the pipeline for some time.

Now we may only just have twigged on CIA the news of the hearing, but I don’t doubt big organisations and market watchers with local boots on the ground may have been aware of it much earlier, and the potential impact it could cause, on solgold’s plans, and therefore on the SP.

Much more common knowledge of the court case may have caused (been coordinated to cause??) the major dip last week. But the question I’m getting at - could earlier institutional knowledge of the impending case have been the cause of the very ‘flat’ reaction to the PEA?