The other question I will try and ask Solgold today is regarding statements such as:
“The Company is confident that this revised approach being studied from that which was previously considered is much more beneficial for SolGold and will deliver significant shareholder value.” “ This could result in potentially significant cost savings. “
What we do not know is the benchmark they are working against. The last “numbers” we have had from the company are: Those mooted on the PEA (which is now superseded by the MRE3 based on Sedar comments) The payback and development costs listed in presentations. We do not have sight of the figures which were on the first planned PFS in December. So were they bad (and is this the benchmark)?
I am also pleased with this update. I think that they will set up for a TA drill update post elections which should give a further clue. In the "new Solgold" approach of steady, professional, under promising and over delivering this is really positive. One interesting point is the word "potential" precedes production three times in the RNS. Not sure whether this means potential in that Solgold may not take it to production and leaves open for JV – or they want to take a cautios approach in a forward looking nature. “· much earlier access to the resource with shortest time to potential first production;” “mining of higher head grades in the earlier years of potential production.” “Anticipated benefits of the revised approach being studied include lower expected execution risks, lower expected pre-production capital and significantly reduced time to first potential production.”
Why the silence on drills for Tandayama/Blanca?10 Mar 2021 10:05
Appreciate the RNS / Presentation yesterday gave snippets of info with regards to the grassroots exploration projects. What Solgold has failed to do, to date is deliver on assay results for Blanca - announced due end Feb/1st week of March
Drill Assays outstanding from 5-8 of Porvenir, and drill results from Tandayama. The question from me is why is the company silent on this? Previously they said that they were batching the news flow - a month from last drill updates and nothing.
It is not what the company is saying - more what the company is not saying - and why?
Quady - suggest you read this RNS https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SOLG/clarification-to-technical-disclosure-ct6l53sm246tqgr.html Note: "SolGold acknowledges the defaults raised by staff of the OSC as a result of its review. At the request of staff of the OSC, SolGold will address these through the removal of references to the superseded PEA and filing an amended MRE#3 on SEDAR. It is expected the amended report will be filed by the end of September 2020. As the 2019 PEA results have not been carried forward in the new technical report, SolGold will not refer to the 2019 PEA results in ongoing public disclosure "
Quady - not disputing the comments stated by Co about Cascabel - I am stating that the obvious stpry of partners (JVs) is unfolding. The question is how will it unfold with Cascabel, BHP, NC etc. This is what many have been saying on here is obvious - the question is when. (And no the company have not stated it - yet)