Member Info for mattlilly

CJ didn't want to leave the Board when NCM removed him...

Newcrest are one of the best block cavers in the world...

Whats wrong with wanting him as CEO...?

Ready for his next step up...?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/craig-jones-879103129/?originalSubdomain=au

Great post addickt....spot on...

Read my post again and reconsider what Twigger said in the investor call

Here is a different scenario...get rid of the old Board, install Craig Jones as CEO and achieve what you and I both really want

Meanwhile Brooke Mc Donald says a bid is coming. How would he know that and would CGP REALLY get into bid with BHP...?

I am categorically NOT in favour of BHP taking over...unless they pay me £1/2...

But rcgl...can you state here specifically the process by which BHP could 'stuff the board...?'

Agreed

I can't disagree with any of that Lunch

Sound as always

Thats a really clever hypothesis Jerry...I buy that one...

Its all the 'carp' I'm posting Monte...hang on in there mate...

And you are an unpleasant person...are YOU Nick...? Or one of his best mates or placemen?

"What is this then about NM being behind things, as in your earlier post ?"

Please substantiate that with something I specifically posted.

Here is what I actually said:

"But in our one to one it was clear that Nick is a continuing issue..."

and

"And ask yourself why NM wouldn't be behind it since he has 'struggled to adjust to his new role'...

(So ask yourself that...)

and

"I ask again, who benefits most from the destabilisation of the Board...BHP?

No read below...

But maybe the previous CEO, especially if there is no CEO appointment..."

and

"Who's blocking those appointments on the Nominations Committee?

BHP? No influence whatsoever...

The two independent Directors? That makes absolutely no sense.

Which leaves the 'old guard's.... Mather, Moller and Twigger."

So how do they substantiate your accusation.

If you met me in a pub would you call me a p***k to my face, or do you hide behind your pathetic cowardly anonymity like many other trolls...

I say again to you and anyone...post reasoned articulate arguments and facts rather than aggressive personal attacks.

After `I receive your factual reply I will filter you and grimbergen...you frankly add nothing and you are seriously unpleasant when you don't like the reasoned arguments and facts that some people post.

Sorry for the overload guys...

I hope none of you are in any doubt of the following:

I care PASSIONATELY for the ultimate success of Solgold, but...

I fear that the last two years have left them wide open to a bidding war.

Depending on the circumstances and my forward outlook I may as stated before sell half at 50/55p but...

Would not accept less than £1/2 in a bidding war.

That has been my consistent position and I feel no reason to change.

I will admit honestly that after the second letter I seriously considered dumping half,,,

NOT because of the BHP inference, but because I am very concerned that the current instability which this letter has created risks the share price falling significantly further, especially if institutional investors got totally fed up with how this company has been steered recently and how it has utterly failed to appoint a CEO, thereby almost certainly holding back a raft of news that we all know can only be good...

I repeat...4.1/2 years ago the SP was 46.5p...

With proper management and governance, where would it have been by now...

Its been a shambles and I continue to pin my hopes on the NEW Directors, not the OLD guard...they still have too much sway.

I'm buying Gino...I'm exhausted...

Still trying my best to restore reason and objectivity though, rather than unsubstantiated hype.

Have a good weekend mate. You won't have much from me to catch up on...

I have no idea sharhetmare but I fail to be convinced that it was BHP...

They are one of the world's biggest miners and quoted companies

They have a professional reputation to protect and...

They would be far LESS likely to get shareholders' support if it WAS them behind it all.

Please also read my latest posts...

Cheers

So lets consider if all the remaining Directors were put up:

KM TICK 99.91% at the last AGM
MAA TICK 99.86%
EG TICK 99.86%
KOK TICK 99.85%

But...JC? 64.57%
NM? 55.3%...

And out of all those, who represents the 'old' Board; who supports NM; and who wants to see a new CEO as quickly as possible?

For the avoidance of doubt....here is the core of the Berry Street letter:

"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."

BOTH of those, not only echo my comments on here, but also exactly reflect two of the three the main questions that investors were asking the Chairman in the CG roadshow (as SPECIFICALLY confirmed to me at the time.

The third was "why haven't you appointed a CEO?'

Now there is no evidence whatsoever that BHP was behind that letter; the questions were totally reasonable and why di the Chairman make the astonishingly inept decision to respond publicly?

Unless there is another game being played...?

There was absolutely no suggestion or inference that BHP were behind the letter in the Chairman's response.

And having written that unnecessary letter, why did he feel the need to publish another letter, clearly designed to stir things up and risk destabilise the company, once again alienating BHP (and probably NCM, BOTH of whose support we need to finance Alpala)

In his second letter he says this:

"However, it has come to my attention in recent weeks that one of SolGold's significant shareholders, BHP Group Ltd., has been actively canvassing certain shareholders and members of the Board seeking to persuade the Board that each Director should stand for re-election at the upcoming AGM. For the reasons set out above, the majority of my fellow Directors believe that putting the entire Board up for re-election next month would further destabilise your Company, undermine the advanced process to secure a new CEO and otherwise is not in the interests of all Shareholders."

But in our one to one it was clear that Nick is a continuing issue and I said "why not put him up for re-election?"

His response was "what happens if he gets re-elected? The only alternative to putting him up is to put the whole Board up"

Now in the light of what he said in the second letter, why would he say that?

In fact he was NOT saying BHP want four, three or even two Directors on the Board...he actually said:

"BHP Group Ltd., has been actively canvassing certain shareholders and members of the Board seeking to persuade the Board that each Director should stand for re-election at the upcoming AGM."

Whats wrong with that?

Only 12 days (and 8 working days) to wait...

Thank you for your constructive post smickster...

I'm relived you are not Nick...

We clearly have the same interest at heart, so I'm glad we can be friends....

Cheers

Show me the evidence that BHP were behind Crux or Berry Street, because I haven't seen it?

I am prepared to apologise if I'm wrong.

And ask yourself why NM wouldn't be behind it since he has 'struggled to adjust to his new role'...

Grimbergen...

I have no respect for people who simply trash anything reasoned that people on here, with massive skin in the game and genuinely with the best interests of ALL shareholders at heart, invest time, research and experience in before putting forward...

I would respect you FAR MORE if yo posted a reasoned and articulate response that required me to reflect and consider that I may possibly be wrong.

On matters of corporate governance on here I'm afraid I am absolutely correct, having written and lectured on it, been there seen it done it and worn the tee shirt...

So I eagerly await your constructive response...cos frankly I aint seen much value on here from you in the past...

And BTW how many shares do YOU hold...?

amickster...I share your personal aspirations and respect them

OK so you're not Nick, but...

BHP CANNOT gain control of the Board and

If they made what some have called a 'low ball' bid, do you honestly think that in a world where copper is forecast to go to $15 dollars because of EVs and climate change...

Where the gold mining industry only has NINE years of reserves in the ground...

That any or all of them would let BHP walk off with the current biggest prize in the world for a pittance...?

It simply won't happen.

I confidently a bidding war in due course, but...

WE NEED TO GET THE SP UP SHARPLY BEFORE THEN, otherwise we could be taken out for under £1

We need a smooth AGM, CEO and all the other announcements gong forward WITHIYT the current sideshow which has been triggered by the Chairman, not BHP...

Why di he have to say anything at all...

Unless he wants to START a bidding war...maybe he's just as fed up as we all are...?

OMG smickster...you're either stupid or you simply haven't read exactly why it is IMPOSSIBLE for BHP to gain control without a bid...

One or two Directors stirring it...?

You are besmirching at least one who is a lawyerand whose integrity is beyond question