Member Info for mistermeister

CD - is it likely it could be a form of bidding war - ie those who want the shares will get at the highest price? Will play NC and BHP off against each other...

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Those mooted on the PEA (which is now superseded by the MRE3 based on Sedar comments)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.”

Zoros, they are aiming for a MRE on Porvenir in 2021. Ask IR and they will confirm.

Rich3r- yes they did. Company are quite open about this and time will tell what it looks like.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/

Been in contact with Eliza - she is leaving end of month. Heads up to those who want to send her a note and wish her well....

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.