Member Info for mattlilly

For the record, Blackrock's 5.52% holding is as at 30 June 2022...

For the avoidance of doubt, this is an exact transcript of what Nick said at his DGR Noosa presentation...

"the model we've been following successfully for some years is to create companies around very very large resource projects and then ultimately majors seem to take them over and thats certainly the plan in respect of Solgold..."

So the literal implication is:

"to create companies...and then majors seem to take them over and thats certainly the plan with Solgold..."

Surely...if he's gone in December (and surely thats a racing certainty), he needs to make his and DGR's pile before then because the norm is for a leaving Director to be required to sell all his personal shares and after he leaves the Board he cannot exert anywhere near the same influence because he would no longer be privy to 'inside information'...

There's a lot more in that than in the D&D presentation...

However it still assumes a $3.60 base case copper price (currently $3.51) and an 'uplifted' price of $4.20...somebody must have had a very wet finger to come up with that number.

What we really need is a risk evaluation of all the scenarios including copper and gold price variances' effect on NPV...

The revised GANTT chart now shows construction starting between Q4 2024 and Q4 2025, with first production in Q3 2029!!!!

This keeps getting pushed back!

The Chart is headed 'Clear path to production' but every time it gets published the deadlines seem to slip...

Finally there is next to nothing on the regional projects but this statement is still there:

"Focusedonanumberofhighprioritytargetswith extensive and systematic exploration field programmes underway ranking priority drill targets"

Really...? $30k spent in the three months to Dec31 and $399k to 31 March 2022...

Thats a very good point Lunch.

Hi Lunch...so why not ring fence it for Cascabel?

Then the $26m is available for Admin and regionals including Porvenir.

And then the quarterly cash balance would look very much better irrespective...

Haha nice one mog...but there isn't any mining for at least 4/5 years, so this is a 'sunk cost'

Right now, Solgold is probably one of the biggest charities in Ecuador...

If that were true Orthern, it would have to have been notified to the prospective investors in the failed raise and declared in the 'cleansing statement'....

In April with the release of the PFS, Darryl had been in post for 4 months...

There was a chance to raise funds in the mid 30s at least, then and again in mid June...

Instead they are making themselves a hostage to fortune with the failed raise; the market expectation that this predicates a raise sooner or later; a continuing weak copper price BELOW that assumed in the PFS; a global stock market that still looks vulnerable; etc.

From the March MD&A...

"Finance costs for the nine months ended 31 March 2022 were US$9,895,561 compared to US$6,965,853 for the nine months ended 31 March 2021. The increase in finance costs predominantly relates to the effective interest charge calculated on the NSR Financing Agreement, which for the previous period was only for the period 11 September to 31 March."

That is a contingent liability running at almost $13m a year, although admittedly only becomes live if SOLG want to redeem the deal...

Anyhow....if the company is complacent about a fund raise and a cash balance of $26m, consider the following facts:

The cash balance at 31 December was $58.4m, so if it was $26m at June 30 they have burned through $32.4m in six months. That equates to $65m a year.

Of course there will have been special factors and $30m was spent on Cascabel alone, but the continuing costs include PFS2 and proving up additional resources, etc....The cash burn in the 6 months to 31 December was $51m...

Admin costs for the 6 months were $8.7m.

Meanwhile, here are the comparative exploration costs for the three quarters to 31 March 2022:

30 Sept - $3.3m
£1 Dec - $30k yes $30k
£1 March - $399k

These figures show clearly how much Darryl has curtailed exploration since his arrival...which means apart from the Porvenir PEA by 31 December, no sexy RNS's for any of the other regional projects to support the price. That is certainly putting a lot of eggs in one basket (because there are no known unknowns on Cascabel resources...)

Oh dear smickster...really...?

Just looked in detail at Barrick's Reports...

This year they will mine 470m lb of copper for which they have KPIs. Last year copper produced almost $1bn revenue...

They state up front "We are a sector-leading gold and copper producer" and "We are building the world’s most valued gold and copper company by owning the best assets"

"We have put a particularly strong focus on exploration in Latin America"

"Barrick’s strong balance sheet and the abundant free cash flowi generated by our operations will enable us to continue building our future by investing in the development of the many growth prospects within the group as well as the acquisition of the rare external opportunities that may meet our criteria."

"the outlook for copper demand in the coming years remains very strong"

I've watched Darryl's presentation to Diggers and Dealers. Unfortunately I couldn't get the sound but there's nothing new in the presentation other than an animated feature film on how they will block cave Cascabel...

There won't be a royalty deal...

Solgold has rebuilt relationships with BHP and NCM. Why would it trash those again?

The current FN deal is costing us 12%pa if we want to redeem it.

So what other avenues do they have other than an equity raise?

Why not do another cashbox. Ingo pulled off a winner with that one...?

stitch up...

Thanks Lunch...

Meanwhile surely SOLG wouldn't have tried to hawk the whole deal to BHP because that could have increased their percentage holding to almost 29%...inviting a bid...

Please don't say you're also part of the 'this is all a stitch pop by Darryl the BHP stooge' conspiracy group...

Fortissimo....if I'm 'talking my book' why do I keep referring to the inevitability of a bid...?

Also, well before you joined, we've already more than doubled our money twice by taking a view at a point in time.

I have never set out with the intention of trading Solgold, but I take a view on our holdings of everything in our portfolio all the time, based on content research and a narrow strategic focus centred around copper, gold and silver (accounting for 80% of my portfolio).

And remember, I didn't SELL Solgold, I SWITCHED into ATYM as appearing to be a better prospect at the time, with an operating mine and a yield of 10% plus at the current price. Since July 8 SOLG has fallen 22%; ATYM 4.6%...

I recognise some people don't like me saying what we've done, but since being challenged as to the veracity of my stated dealings and having to produce screenshots of actual trades, I have tried to be transparent at all appropriate times.

I have not said people should sell SOLG since I di last week. People like MAX have made their own decisions.

And yes we may miss out if there is a bid before we can reinvest, but we won't have LOST any money, we will have GAINED on our existing holding if there is a bid, but obviously not as much as if we still had 800k or even 1.1 million shares.

With very best wishes

With the dust having settled, I've taken the opportunity to speak to my contact in the City and, while she has no direct relationship she is very well connected with market participants, including those who advise prospective subscribers. Also anyone who works in the City knows it is a village and you can't keep a secret, viz the two 'informed' articles in the last couple of years saying there will be a takeover bid, e.g. "the hottest takeover story in town..."

I have some understanding of FCA regulations, having been both a broker and a principal in capital markets, but its moved on a great deal since my time and it was refreshing to catch up on stuff relevant to last week's debacle...so...

We need to put the TWO RNSs together (the 'inept' one and the 'voting rights' one).

They are BOTH clarifying statements required under FCA regulations as a result of the failed equity issue.

So...because certain parties would have been approached and some might even have indicated or made a commitment, they would have been precluded from dealing in Solgold shares while the issue was 'live'. Furthermore, they will have been given an up to date story of where SOLG is at because in the absence of a Prospectus they would have needed a rationale to buy.

Once the issue failed, they remained in that privileged information position and would continue to be precluded until these clarifying statements were released. So the first RNS simply summarised everything the prospective investors would have been told and nothing more that wasn't already in the public domain. The second confirms no shares were issued. Together they release those prospective investors to deal again in the market.

I referred to the first RNS being inept, but the ineptitude was in being persuaded by a bank to embark on the issue and then having it fail. We may never know whether it failed completely, I think it is more likely that it was pulled because the terms weren't sufficiently attractive for enough investors to commit and fill the subscription.

That is the ineptitude: an ill judged and failed fundraise; and then the requirement to as good as admit that to the world (later confirmed by Berry Street).

So where does it leave Solgold and us?

Any prospective investors that were approached are left in no doubt that Solgold needs a raise, which makes the company a 'hostage to fortune'. The SP has already fallen as a result. There may well be sufficient interest from existing investors such as Norge, Blackrock, Valuestone and of course BHP and Newcrest (and DGR and CGP if they can raise the cash) to be the bedrock of a successful issue which I believe would have to be pitched at c20p.

For some there is a sound logic in holding on for a bid(s) that surely cannot be later than end December.

Others, like Max, may already have sold with the intention of buying back; others may have spare firepower, waiting for their target entry point. Good luck to all of you whatever you

Bozi....with the continuing You Tolgui delays, there is no significant copper c coming on stream before the inevitable demand/supply crunch in a minimum of two years.

And there is only 9 years of gold in the ground of existing mines (meanwhile big prospects like EQX are valued at a song).

Bristow has publicly stated Barrick are looking at copper/gold porphyrys...

Ecuador is the next Peru/Chile...buying Solgold would give any one of these majors an armlock on some of the best prospects in the world...

Tick tock...

Haha Fort....

Remember when I laid out my rationale for reducing my stake that I reiterated my firm conviction that Solgold will be taken over....its only a matter of time.

I have also said that there is a risk I might miss out and I genuinely wish the very best to all of my fellow travellers on here if they finally get their due rewards for patience...

But no...we still have only 300,000 shares, which has at the current price saved me losses of c£16,000...

I continue to research and watch and will post something immediately after this that clarifies my current thinking.

Keep up your objective posting mate.

Good luck Max