Member Info for NotMuchMoney

ProfitSniffer - I may be able to help with your SR query...

Guess how many times 'Strategic Review' is mentioned in the 129 pages of the 2025 Annual Report?

Answer: zero

Hi Bozi

I see the Strategic Review and ineptness of Sangha/Caldwell as being largely the same thing!

SRs are fine, but they don't (shouldn't) take 2 years.

The only positive scenario I can think of is they got very close to an agreement/sale, only for someone to pivot at the last moment.

So the Board are holding out for fair(er) value, even if it is taking a while to get there.

Fort - agree on portal (commencement of construction) also being a key event.

But as you say, suspect reliance on CIPA for that.

I don't really want Solgold to get distracted with additional open pits at TAM. At least not before they get cracking with the two pits currently identified.

Keep a drill or two turning if you want, sure. But not at the expense of delaying TAM MRE / Cascabel DFS and construction decision.

KEFI? Ethiopia? $700m NPV at 5% (!!) interest and $2,400 gold?

What a joke of a comparison.

And Solgold already has an agreed $750m financing package.

Sh4reInvest - I had similar views on today's RNS. Another good set of drill results, TAM open-pits appears substantiated.

But, more drilling, and even more satellite potential, suggests more time going by.

An updated MRE is a positive step, if 'coming weeks' means end-November (and not 2026).

Really hoped the update would hint at when an updated study (likely PFS, hoping for DFS) would be ready.

I suspect the next exciting events would need to be:

o CIPA

o ExploreCo structure

o additional funding (3rd FNV or even a new Copper offtake).

Based on Dan's comments I'd have hoped the above would be announced this year, before the AGM? That is certainly what I'm evaluating Dan's performance against this year.

Yes Orthern. I'm afraid your 15:18 is why there is a disconnect between SOLG and Solaris/Others.

Too slow to deliver. Even on the main priority project, let alone the incredible regional portfolio.

I'm wary that another SOLG CEO may have over-promised and will under-deliver. However, still c6 weeks for items to be announced.

With a hopefully positive referendum result giving a boost to things.

OR, just max the study to include revised cut-off and TAM, produce a mega PFS (higher capex but huge NPV), and hold an auction to sell to highest bidding major!

Yes, overall capex will go up. Both revised expenses for block cave, and additional TAM pit.

BUT, what we don't know, is the phasing of the plans and how soon TAM will start producing revenues.

'Slow' the block cave development whilst TAM gets into early production, and the funded Capex before block cave comes on line may well reduce?

Market just needs this all spelled out by management and backed-up by TAM MRE and updated Cascabel study.

Hi Fort

Personally I don't mind Dan skipping a few conferences.

He has done the initial burst of events to show a new man in charge and Solgold moving in a new (and positive) direction.

Insti investment will come via demonstrating progress and enhancing the financials. If IIs are still reluctant, I'm sure FNV or similar will be keen to throw in cash, given the $ms they are likely to make at current metals prices.

Dan needs to focus on deliverables. There are many due over Q4. Some of these already delayed.

Get things done Dan instead of more 'jam tomorrow'.

IRR 34% Pre / 26% Post

Hardly any better than current for Cascabel (33%/24%).

Would expect Cascabel to far exceed these on updated metals prices.

Let alone TAM open pit starter.

Not sure prices in first 3 years really matters, most will still be in the ground.

So at $4.5/$2,500 adds $1.5bn to Cascabel post-tax NPV.

Becomes $4.7bn. Call it c$5bn with Silver increase.

Thanks Fort. Also reading through this.

NPV looks higher than I expected, but equally US$3.7bn initial capex! For open pit!

Manta or Salinas much more likely in my view Pbow. Galapagos would be a PR (and environmental?) disaster in my view.

Both would cover Guayaquil. But given Esmeraldas proximity to Colombia, and previous issues at Esmeraldas, would also hope additional port checks and maritime surveillance there. Can only be a good thing for Cascabel output in my view.

Fort - I know from a contact who spoke to a SOLG Director, Solgold have been using Lundin as a 'model' for operating in Ecuador. In particular permitting, protection agreements (inc. royalties) and construction.

Look at the similaries in how Lundin secured licences. G Mining constructed Fruta del Norte etc.

Lundin have obviously been very successful and I'm sure Solgold keen to copy this success.

That's true addicknt. Still wary of the (potential) conflict of interest with Jiangxi though - are they going to want to identify $100Ms of savings to enable Solgold to 'go it alone' or increase the price of any offer?

With focus on Tandayama I can't see a revised Cascabel study arriving in 2025. Hopefully an updated MRE for Tandayama in Q4, then a monster PFS - even DFS - in Q1 2026.

Ferro-Alloy Resources announced a Feasibility Study in mid-October, highlighting a Capex of c$500m.

Three weeks later they annouce a Project Finance Expression of Interest from a Chinese engineering firm. This cut the Capex to c$320m.

A 35% reduction in Capex.

Appreciate Cascabel is probably a more 'mature' PFS given the multiple attempts 'experts' have had to design this. However, I can't help wonder what the Capex reduction would be if Chinese engineers were involved.

Imagine the IRR/NPV on Cascabel with the Chinese doing construction and allowance for more realistic metals prices. All of a sudden $5bn+ seems attainable.

Thought Robert Friedland's post today was positive:

https://x.com/robert_ivanhoe/status/1985080223097115077

A nice upwards-sloping copper futures curve.

Orthern - agreed.

I would like Dan to host a retail presentation and take Qs from SHs well before the AGM.

He has been given grace on the 'delays' to CIPA and ExploreCo because of, frankly, how bad the preceeding Scott / Strategic Review period was.

Corporate communications continue to be poor (not mentioning CIPA in Annual Report for example). Why is there not a clear roadmap of deliverables through Q4 into 2026? Something with specific dates, not just names of items that can get kicked down the road.

Hi Fort - it wasn't a criticism of the comparison. Solaris are clearly a useful benchmark.

Franco $750m is still a contingent commitment. Milestones to be ticked off.

Agree on Porvenir potential - really scratching my head why management haven't progressed PFS or found a partner for that.

I disagree with TSX/no shares point (but I don't focus on market mechanics much). Wouldn't have thought much difference in selling 1 share at 500p or 1000 shares at 0.5p. Yes, potentially Toronto values explorers more than London (but we didn't see that when Solgold were dual-listed).

Agree we should be much higher. But Dan needs to up the pace, hit his own timescales, provide clarity on progress.

Rather than market guessing on CIPA, exploration fees delaying ExploreCo, when will we get a PEA or PFS to include Tandy etc.