Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
Just browsing on this - if only they stuck to the original plan, not fallen out with CGP, then we may well have had Blanca drilled, a low cap-ex first PFS and maybe NM in his job CEO job still (post March). They say hidsight is wonderful, still question why they didn't go ahead with this strategy - as it was obvious to them then also...
https://www.miningweekly.com/article/solgold-ceo-high-grades-deliver-independence-2018-09-28
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 At the request of staff of the OSC, SolGold will address these through the removal of references to the superseded PEA and filing an amended MRE#3 on SEDAR.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 - read the official RNS - not allowed to refer to PEA. You therefore cannot base your arguments on this... :) Touche
Addinckt - so much better put than I could have done, The obvious has been staring at so many for so long. It is a matter of time...
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)
Like I said earlier, Quady, what is obvious to so many....
DBW. What has been obvious to many has now been admitted by the company.
Presentation “seeking partners to develop grass roots projects”
Would he have stayed at the helm and taken it to production?. No. He would have been voted out. Not sure why you don’t understand a simple fact.
Quady, explain to me what would have happened if NM lost the re-election vote please?
Quady - I didn’t mean immediately as in that second.... but expeditiously
So Quady, if he lost the vote he would have stayed on? How on earth does that work? Surely that is obvious. Speak to PR if you dont believe me.
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
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.