Member Info for mistermeister

rcgl2 - take your point fully. There are a couple of other things that do not add up....
Why stay on until 31st March - is there another plan?

Key things within Q1 are:
Porvenir will have 8 holes drilled and Assayed by then
Blanca Assays hole 1&2
Tandyama Americas - Assays

Still unsure how this will play out although am expecting something during Q1 (hopefully positive)

Woody/Add
When I spoke to the company I directly asked this about why go to the effort of canvassing votes? The response was to the effect of if he lost - he would have had to go immediately. In this way he retains a NED status and will remain on the board, which was important to him.. apparently

https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/stockbeat-bhp-glencore-payouts-bolster-commodity-supercycle-talk-2419474

Good that MD&A was not released today on a Friday. Hope that all the decks have been cleared for a more positive update next week.

100% agree red - had a similar call

Add - of course. But NM still went ahead and got a streaming deal (in spite of them). If they had others lined up of greater value it may have forced the hand of BHP/NC to accept a similar deal in place of NM stepping down and have more inputs into the direction of the project.
(Effectively getting more say) - just speculation.

What we do not know if there was agreement for NM to step down on the basis that BHP/NC would arrange for a streaming deal themselves....it gives Solgold the funding (without dilution) and allows for a "workable" solution in that SOLG get "fair value" and BHP and NC will benefit for future.... If they thought it was not a good deal for Solgold then a deal of the same structure taken up by BHP or NC would - presumably - be a good deal to them... There is talk of more collaboration.

Add - When I asked Fawsi on this - he stated that "an option" was to renegotiate an extension to the FN deal. Of course this is words which may or may not be true but it was not dismissed out of hand. The word collaboration with the major shareholders was also used alot. If the FN is still on the table then of course it could be used as leverage for funding.
Fawsi was also categoric in stating that they are well funded - we will find out more in the MD&A

Medar, the days of over-hyping are gone. It was repeated to me a "more measured approach". Fawsi also stated that the asset is still there but it is about risk to get it out and he was categoric to me that it was not a U turn (when asked about why not drill Aguinaga further before), merely a best practice scenario review. "if" fits in with this.
However there are other targets that I hope will result in more of a "when " - ie surface...

RK- exactly. These guys don’t have to engage. They are not responsible for other deadlines. This is ground zero now and expect a “more measured” approach.

Zoros - send an email and ask for a video call. Eliza coordinated - they are keen to engage PIs (he said if they don't reply then they are busy with deadlines etc).

Spoke to Fawsi :
In essence is a “reset” time for Solg. Will be a much more professional outfit.
NM:
NM wanted our votes so he remained on the board as a NED. If he didn’t then he may have gone completely.
NM role will be focused on exploration and still be part of committee.
Acknowledged that things were “overhyped” – and suggested this does fit more for a 100m style market cap company – when drilling one prospect.

Exploration:
As per DBW post recently – Fawsi stated that exploration will now encompass complete holes and assays. Not on hyped basis
News feed should now focus on exploration in coming months. As we know MD and A next week. More details as to cash burn on regionals etc

Structure
Alpala committee is focused on a less risk approach as any BC comes with risks. Grassberg and Oyu Tolgoi cited as examples.
Mining experience brought in over last 6 months has highlighted this more.
BHP/NC
Spoke of working more collaboratively with these. Would not be drawn any more.
New CEO will focus on strategy moving forwards [my take on this – include JVs etc]

CRUX
SOLG only refuted facts on the RNS dated 28th Jan that they were allowed to. They are not allowed to comment on the PEA as per RNS dated 15 Sept 2020 – this is required by Ontario Securities as MRE3 is the latest filed document. Any other comments by Solgold would have been purely opinion.
Webinar to let PIs understand changes:
Discussed internally but bit early at the moment.
Fawsi wanted to encourage comms to PIs.

Overall I feel most encouraged by NM desire to stay as NED and will have a hand going forwards - which makes me more comfortable with share holding.

Lafitte - agree the alpala committee is doing what it set up to but why was it set up in the first place? My suspicion is that it was a reactive move. The timescale points this way:

30 Sept 20 - RNS (PFS update) - lots of nearing completion statements and final line is "SolGold is focussed on delivery of all draft input from the studies referred to above as soon as possible. Following a review and revision period, financial modelling will be undertaken in order to complete the PFS as soon as possible."

October - throughout - a flurry of RNS for regionals - some of them nothing style stating about to drill etc

10 November - 6 weeks after the PFS update (presumably when they knew the economics) they announced a committee.

Therefore I don't disagree that they are doing what they are supposed to be doing but they were set up as a reaction to the economics. Why the heck was the team not set up earlier, so they would not have focused on the core, but derisking in the first place - ie open pit in the Cascabel concession. Shows the lack of expertise in development. for the record I still hold but await some positive news about Tandy asap.

I predict RNS next week with strong surface Tandayama America grades - and BHP/NC placement of c 45p. Not sure which order... There was no other reason to release this RNS on a Friday of all days without any mention of the assays/drilling from Tandy...

FTF - understand the view although they have been selling the relatively "low capex" for the approach including block caving and the virtues being nearer sea level (as opposed to the Chilean High and Dry), plus near hydro electric etc. Now they suddenly consider this higher risk...
I hope they have a decent RNS for Tandy to hit on Monday. Bury this news on a Friday and see investors happy come next week and buy into the delay...

P18 on the presentation is at odds with the RNS today:

P18 = "High grades at Alpala to deliver fast payback "

NM states in RNS regarding revised study " is to reduce the risk of a very large initial capex on a large underground development"

So which is it Solgold - fast payback or not? So many contradictions of what has been sold to us over the last few years

Smallworld - they had wind of this back on 1st Dec RNS - likely before - which is why they formed the Apala committee.
http://ir.q4europe.com/Tools/newsArticleHTML.aspx?solutionID=3676&customerKey=Solgold&storyID=14890142
This was not a surprise back then.

Regarding Aguinaga - with all Solg talk of "blueprint" exploration program etc etc still confused as to why they didn't drill further when they started exploring Aguinaga - then for whatever reason gave up. Shows that their strategy has been wrong in terms of development of a mine. The PFS was from a 3rd party (wood?) - I expect this came back with uneconomical results and forced a rethink. My question is timing - why delay from 1st December until now? AGM? Hoping for better regional grsdes?

Shocking and Aweful :)

Surely CGP knew about this. So why raise the funds? There is still something being done IMO

Seems like Newcrest was correct in their press release a number of months back.