Member Info for Happytom

This is not a spike, it's a recovery that undoes one month of absolute nonsense caused by uncertainty and lack of news for too long.
The fall was picked up by shorters who the market makers were able to accommodate, some will try to re-enter from new level, but many will not wish to be burnt twice as the publicly visible information suggests that we will recover as the year goes by.

...and then Berenger decide that as we start to get more contracts confirmed, we must be worth less. Opportunity, or just ride it down?

Sorry, predictive text is getting over-enthusiastic and inserting extra words.

Can you sell more be tomorrow :)

Apologies if someone has already said this and I missed it, but I read this differently than what I see discussed.
There are two statements rolled into one, albeit that they are related: completion of deal, and confirmation that the board needs a shake up to remove such errors going forward, which leads to the other message; we are removing that which a future owner would not want, so that they can come in clean and garner immediate goodwill instead of bad will that would come from laying off workers and management.
I've been through a number of exits including one that looks very similar - potential buyer wants one asset for which they will acquire the company, but doesn't want to have to handle everything else, so the existing company is given the option of either ditching it all or spinning it out to a newco that is not in competition. In my opinion, this is what is happening here, SOLG is being prepped for sale including known asset (Cascabel), and the exploration side which is just a cost at the moment will be split into newco owned by existing shareholders if they want it. If this is the case, it will be announced shortly after 27th.

Here's the rub though - if splitting off newco, will existing shareholders see full benefit of current asset value? That's why I'm neutral at the moment - could be a massive buy opportunity, or it could be the death nell of asset value. I won't sell up, but I won't buy more either until things are set in stone.

You should get out more then :)
I left when I was early twenties, but folks are still there, so back a lot, and will always miss it :(
Perhaps I can retire back there once SOLG has done it's stuff!
T

nonsense - grew up there but now live in a big city and realise just how amazing it is year round, just put a thick coat and decent set of boots on yer feet and then get a nice warm pint of Cumberland on the way home (none of that Yorkshire rubbish thank you very much!).

I try not to wade in here too often, but I agree with you on this one, and we have to start looking a lot closer at reality.
At the moment we have a valuable asset, that is not in dispute.
However, what we do not have is a plan or a board willing to deliver a plan to realise the asset.
Founder (NM) is quite clearly of the opinion that we can go it alone and develop the asset, but there is very little reason for anyone to support us in doing so - they would be stumping up the cash and the mining expertise whilst leaving a lot of the profit in the hands of SOLG that will not be contributing anything going forward.
So the obvious solution would be either a full sale of the asset (maybe just Cascabel in the first instance) so that the buyer can exploit it, or possibly a JV where SOLG are a very junior partner. The alternative is to carry on business as usual until we can find no more 'easy' money to keep us going and then trigger a fire sale.
Obviously I don't want the latter, and for me the former would be best for holders - we'd see a decent chunk of cash returned to shareholders and no longer have to support a board that seems to have lost it's way in the last three years.

Looking at the official news flow, I feel that this is what is being prepared for at the moment (I know that contradicts me saying that the board has lost it's way, but I think that they are to some degree making plans again now); getting full ownership of the resource is one step; the royalty deal is a small stepping stone to allow us to continue operating long enough to create a sale agreement, it is not long term funding and does not actually enable us to exploit anything, anyone that thinks otherwise is following a red herring in my view. The next step came this morning, with a very clear statement that we have enough money to run for another few months, but are not planning to do anything other than keep it ticking over.
I don't know what the final value of this will be - copper is currently in high demand, and that is likely to continue throughout the coming recession; gold will piggy back that copper demand as a circuitry component, so the value of the asset is not going to diminish anytime soon, but whoever takes it will need deep pockets to exploit it within the constraints that the local govt are imposing, so the value in the ground is not a good indicator as to what may be realised.
Just my opinions, got too much time on my hands this morning!
T

Man after my own heart. I've a large holding here and re-building WG (I got chicken and sold out after the sale announcement, so hit lucky there really!). This sector is very undervalued given current global situation - it's not about the oil price or any recession fears, it's about opening new channels for political reasons so that we are covered for the next few years until 'green' energy becomes more commercial. Even then, we will still need oil as a raw material for the foreseeable future, which will probably come from more localised resources (OPEC+ already acknowledge this, hence their recent diversification drive), and that means that service companies like this and WG still have value.

Unlikely that we'll be looking at a $2Bn raise if the lifetime pre-tax for Cascabel is 1-1.8. Question, is though, what raise would we need to get to production - something that has been missing from any studies that I've read. If we're looking at a raise to keep the holding pattern for another 6-12 months, then what happens other than the usual over-excited spike to 40/45p that will drop back to 20p, then creep up again, rinse and repeat.
Time for someone to make a decision here, today's RNS is a clear statement of that intent, but it won't be anywhere near the speculative prices that this board has been banding around for the last few years.

Any explanation of why you think 20-25 would be a raise price? To me it feels like there is a balance to the risk here - existing investor will almost certainly take a chunk, but will they really want to own 70% or more? Looking back across the previous restructuring ideas, is it possible that they may split into the three divisions and dump the existing shareholders into the one that most closely resembles current business?
Having slept on it, there are a lot of positives in the results - after the delays in publishing, I suspected that it may have been a notice of a fire sale, but to achieve that we'd need a buyer I suppose - losses are not as great as they could have been, and we have the potential of a very healthy pipeline. That has to be tempered by the continuing knowledge that we don't seem to be capable of making any margin on contracts for the last few years - we're just running a very busy yard and paying wages - will the next tranch of turbine jackets turn that around?
Any thoughts appreciated, thanks. (btw, if it's not obvious, I am a long term investor - been in and occasionally out for ten years)

Don't get too worried - big drop on .2% of the shares traded just smacks of market maker games!

Thanks folk.

I've read the restructuring docs, but I'm struggling. Has anyone figured out what
- the total debt position is now
- what the repayment agreements are (how much anually)?
I'm confused over what the new debt looks like when wrapped up with the various swap stages and interest.

Thanks!

Found one that size Jan 2019, is that what you saw?

Hope you're right - my average is still 168p, so a long way to go!

May be wrong, but first tranche should be around three month average, which is not far from where we are now. No particular reason for any immediate re-create unless 26% of note holders say no, in which case we are struggling once more.

Funny how that happens - I bought some just before Chrustmas, but when I checked my holdings I was net down and had three times as many as I thought I bought - forgot that I bottom drawered this two years ago! Very happy to see this rise now!

Stands to reason that operational costs are well down - everything closed for a month in Q2 and presumably the workers were not paid full salary.
Big stones are the majority of the cash inflow, and it looks like the mythical June small stone tender was at prevailing price which will not be diminished in September.
EV is too low, sentiment holds it down and that will reverse.

Norfolk Vanguard approved, Hornsea Three 'likely'. Both are shallow water large scale farms, no contractors announced yet.