Member Info for mattlilly

kat I've spent the last 14 months being treated for cancer...I've visited hospital over 40 times and every time I've felt safe and immensely reassured by those wearing masks and being asked to wear a fresh one every day myself...

I hope you're not bitter kat...you've had a terrible experience; I lost my brother, my ex wife and my wife's sister to cancer in their 50s...

You will come through mate...

I have been immensely helped since my brother's passing with "I'm only in the next room..." and thinking the very best of him...

Hi mathersfinger...either you're mather or one of his Oz mates...

Do you spend all day thinking up this tosh...?

"I also quite strongly believe Redknight1 is a CGP share holder or even higher up in the company, read all his posts, confirming many points and arguments raised by CGP.
Hates Solgold board and really hates NM"

If you read my relevant 'City' experience from the other day, what on earth would I be doing holding CGP shares...they've never turned a profit and their SP has languished with pathetic volumes...

I HAVE held DGR Global and made a boon or two but decided SOLG was the better play...I do still have 100,000 free Options...

Is it possible CGP, BHP and NCM were making the same comments to the Chairman that I was...

I don't HATE the Solgold Board...if you really read my posts you'll see I strongly support KOK, EGG, MAA and KM and have voted in favour of JW and KM...so that's at least 5 out of 9...

I DID however become seriously disenchanted with Nick overpromising and underdelivering for two years however and have simply asked the question how two people (BM and NM) fit the UK CG Code when neither is an Exec or an Independent...

I would rather have DC of course, a CFO and two new INDEPENDENT Directors to look after my interests...

Enjoy your day...

Looks like we had a bullish Hammer on Friday followed by a bullish engulfing pattern today...

People determined not to miss out approaching Dec 1st and the AGM...?

British Bulls agree with me, signalling a Buy yesterday at 22.7....

"Our system’s recommendation today is to BUY. The BULLISH HAMMER pattern finally received a confirmation"

The biggest mistake is thinking wearing a mask is to protect yourself...it is primarily to protect other people...

There is an astonishing number of people who simply don't give a toss...

I agree also rcgl

The other thing is that issuing much more equity but with no pre-emption rights could be a cornerstone of the Board's Bid defence strategy.

BHP makes a bid...the Board issues another 50% equity to friendly investors...bid defeated but..

I'm just asking the question Lunch.

As I've said before. I was told that Alpala could be funded largely by debt and streaming, but given SOLG's relative anonymity in North America, I believe much if not all of the debt would have to be convertible. Look at the original proposed funding for SXX...

But we're also going to need a large amount of money to drill/assay/MRE/PEA/PFS Porvenir, Rio, etc etc.

No Board would want to be hamstrung and have to keep going back to the AGM to raise more money before they could proceed with a major initiative.

I'm sorry if you think I've lost the plot. I am simply answering other posters' unsubstantiated challenges with reasoned rational thinking supported by facts wherever I can.

Hope this helps...

I'm fed up anyway...off to continue reading "The Big Score"...learning so much about mining from this...astonishing...

The Chairman's response included

"The Board and Management are currently actively engaging with shareholders and other stakeholders as part of a corporate governance road show. Upon completion of these consultations the Company expects to provide an update on governance developments.

In relation to the PFS, work is ongoing. The SolGold Board will receive a briefing from the Project Committee on the PFS later this month and will update the market accordingly."

The PFS update was 23 November and we all know what has happened since.

So Berry Street were asking a legitimate question about the PFS and as we now know there is a further delay.

As to their challenge on NM's position, the Chairman himself implied to me that many investors were asking the same question. Surely BHP were one of those and he volunteered to me "Terry what do I do, put NM up and risk him being re-elected, or do I put the whole Board for re-election?'"

Its a legitimate question, but I've said that already.

In the end he did neither...

You make some very fair points rcgl and, in truth I am far more concerned about BM.

You are right that my mind changed when he issued the two astonishing Chairman's Letters. Large credible companies don't do that sort of thing, especially when there has already been more than enough criticism over the last year or two.

I don't think for a moment it would put off BHP if they have an agenda, I think instead it was designed to rally investors such as ourselves around the flag and to feel beleaguered.

But the other factor was the appointment of the CEO.

On August 16 I was told that it would only take 2/6 weeks to 'tie up the loose ends' on the top candidate.

That means interviews were over. So my reasonable conclusion is that the Nominations Committee could not agree. Its members are:

KOK (Chair), MAA, BM, NM and LT...

And the Chairman made a Freudian slip when I asked him in mid October why a CEO hadn't been appointed. His reply:

"I was talking to one of the candidates...the top candidate, only yesterday..."

Finally, you raise a very significant point when you say:

"why on earth would he launch an attack on BHP if he didn't know he could rely on the other major holders to support him at the AGM?"

Exactly that. If he has the other major holders support he doesn't NEED to launch an attack...

And the Berry Street letter was just stupid. Why give very public credence to a tinpot fund that doesn't even register 3%

Here is the core of their statement:

"In recent months, we have highlighted a number of concerns to the Management and Board, some of which have also been historically expressed publicly by investors.

Our main assertions are as follows:
• The PFS (“pre-feasibility study”) on Alpala should be published as soon as possible and without further delay. We believe this will enable the Company to raise new capital, at more favourable levels, to finance its operations going forward.

• Despite his retirement as CEO (effective April 2021), Mr N. Mather remains on the Board as a non- executive director alongside the same executive and non-executive members from his tenure. In our opinion, steps should be taken to ensure the Board has improved independence and augmented technical expertise so that it can deliver on its intentions to create better value outcomes for all stakeholders."

Part 2 to follow

Hi Lunch
You may be right and if so I apologise, but what is the existing headroom?
Would it accommodate for example a $1 billion Convertible?

From Oct 19 RNS

"The maiden MRE is based on assays from the first 18 holes. Drilling has continued at the TAM deposit during the estimation process and visual mineralisation from Holes 19-30 suggest potential for future resource growth in the southeast quarter of the open pit optimised shape and particularly in the east and southeast depth extensions of the underground optimised shape where the highest grade mineralisation encountered thus far remains open”.

Yes Lunch...exactly...but the Chairman and people on here are convinced BHP can manipulate ordinary sane fund managers to do their bidding...

smickster..please tell me HOW anyone can clear the way for BHP.

Please detail the AGM, SGM, legal and/or other mechanisms by which BHP could first, get control and then make a low ball takeover.

You see the trouble is that I understand people being irationally fearful of such a possibility but there are several people on here who understand exactly the legal, market and governance regime of a quoted plc.

Mathers won't like it but remember I've directed the ENTIRE due diligence for a £860 million IPO and a property company that I floated on the Stock Market, including working in partnership with JPM, Goldmans, Cazenoves, Slaughter & May, Freshfields, the UK Treasury and two well known Nomads...

And if you doubt me, ask me any question from your own knowledge of the stock market and UK Corporate Governance...

Mathers...why don't you ask Fawzi if I had a 30 minute 1 to 1 with Elodie and Liam...?

wait and see smickster...

remember, we're too small to have any influence...

At 50% its pretty much game over:

"With a majority of over 50% shareholding, they are able to pass ordinary resolutions such as (i) authorising the directors to allot shares (other than if there is one class of share, as this is authorised under company law), and (ii) appointing and/or removing directors."

At 75% we're toast:

"The 75% shareholding and the majority shareholding are the famous thresholds in company law, and not without reason. Once a shareholder’s percentage is below the quarter mark, his or her power diminishes significantly. The law provides for certain protections for minority shareholders, and there are important sub-25% thresholds to note as well."

And at 90% you can be compelled to sell, as I was at Manutd...

SM...how can BHP 'manipulate from a distance'?

They have no Director.

The Chairman hasn't specified what their interference was. Based on my own conversation with the Chairman I have concluded that they wanted either NM off or the whole Board put up for re-election. There is no way voters could be garnered to sack the whole Board...

People fear BHP putting in a low ball bid...but at Noront they bid 45c after a 24c pre-bid price and were driven up to 75c by Wyloo.

Noront is small compared to what we have here. It started at £70m MCap and if the bid succeeds it is £230m...

But its still not over as Fortescue won't roll over...

https://www.mining.com/bhp-extends-noront-bid-deadline-amid-talks-with-wyloo/

Does anybody seriously think BHP could walk away with SOLG for peanuts?

The rest of the major miners wouldn't just sit on their hands.

Lunch...do you believe everything you read...?

Of course BHP, NCM and CGP will align to defeat the pre-emption resolution.

NM is not up for re-election. I just ask what his role is when he fits neither of the categories of the UK Corporate Governance Code, i.e. Independent Director or Executive Director.

How can BHP and NCM exert any influence when neither has a Board Member, nor a 'placeman'?

But DGR Global/Mather have two. And both sit on the N nominations Committee...

Loads of people think NM will look after them but he will only look after himself now...

If the special resolutions get defeated there is no chance Alpala can be funded except by a JV with...BHP for example...?

Thats why the only Not I registered were for LT, BM and the Directors remuneration.

We need a new Chair and I frankly can't see what BM adds...he's certainly had plenty of fees out of the company in the past...

DGR Global only has 8.9% of Solgold.

Why should they have two Directors on the Board?

Moller and Mather are active Directors of DGR, attending every monthly meeting in the last year.

Mather earns a total of $532,000 a year from DGR where he has 143 million shares and 15 million options.

DGR had only $1.359m AuD left at 30 September (c£730,000)

It generates negative cashflows year after year and has to raise equity in large sums every year.

You could say NM will look after us because he and DGR have a vested interest in maximising share price value, but...

You might also suggest that, as 2/10 of the Board of SOLG their decisions (NM and BM) are influenced by the interests of DGR...

Life's too short for me to unfiltered Quady...at least zoros is polite...

1709095 at 22.95...

Onwards and upwards...