Member Info for NotMuchMoney

Would expect AGM details and resolutions to be published around middle of next week.

I wonder if there will be another attempt at the 'disapplication of preemption rights' Specials.

67% 'For' last year, getting closer...

Orthern - I understand the point you are making, but I disagree on 'We don’t have other potential Alpalas'.

This is an under-explored part of the andean copper belt. It is not junior exploreCos scratching around in the Australian outback. Ecuador is an incredible opportunity, and if you believe SOLG's "first mover advantage", well, a very good chance of one or more Tier 1s in their 80+ regional portfolio.

Who knows, one of those may well be viable by open-pit too?

www.miningfeeds.com/these-companies-are-making-billions-in-the-andean-copper-belt

Bozi - precisely.

(Unfortunately) the current position shows CGP's hope of flipping the asset quickly, at a decent price, is not possible. That was presumably the reason for the 'capex light' PFS - to market a project at PFS stage but with huge upside (further work for a major).

Now further studies (and potential redesign) required, to incorporate Tandayama. I'm unsure if this will increase initial capex for a higher long-term NPV, or a lower-cost starter pit can actually provide early cashflows and therefore REDUCE the initial capex.

Either way, I am disappointed (bordering angry) that so much shareholder cash has been spent on PFSs so far. But I guess that is what happens with a block cave Tier 1.

Right Scott. You have a clear plan. No more flip-flopping. Get on with it.

... and that's the rub isn't it addicknt. If Scott does muck it up over the next 12 months, Solgold could be in real trouble.

The $750m is contingent on meeting specified milestones.

When Solgold do need to be raising finance - whether for regionals or a share of the funding gap for Cascabel - it shouldn't be at anywhere near these SP levels.

Sections are probably a rehash of an older article.

After all, election time is in four months; Cascabel unlikely to be producing before then!!

Pbow - re: your earlier comment to BBG of "but surely even you can't be that thick?".

He genuinely can.

He's not worth the effort.

One of RainForest Action Group's challenges is around electricity. They state Solgold won't have access to enough (and not costed within the PFS), given Ecuador's current electricity challenges.

However, it appears to ignore the announcement of 4th March around sustainable hydro-electric at Cascabel.

A new 200MW power source. Financed by others (Instis and ESG invetment), not Solgold.

Providing power for the community, discounted power for Solgold, $billions in future tax revenue for the local community and national Govt.

Common sense, huh?

And please stop referring to "at least TEN serious players in the data room".

Pure speculation. We have no idea who is still interested in Solgold and "in the data room", and on what basis (full sale, funding, particular assets or JVs).

I do agree, however, it is pointless to sell a single share at these levels.

More selective information redknight1...

Darryl was CEO from Nov-21 to Nov-22. SP fell from 26p to 18p under his watch (-30%).

On same basis, since Scott has been CEO the SP has fallen from 17p to 9p (-47%).

Ironically SOLG are going back to similar approach for Cascabel to Darryl's plan. Albeit without the 'other cabs on the rank'.

Equally Fort, Franco is contingent financing.

It is not a cash up front, current valuation. It depends on future milestones.

Of course, when Franco are paying their future tranches, the asset is more and more derisked. Hence would expect the SP to be higher as we progress.

It may well get to a long-term $1+ SP ($3bn valuation of Cascabel). But not yet.

Fort - actually, not sure we have a credible valuation of Porvenir. Where is your 10p-15p from?

We need the PEA completed (on hold since late 2022, i.e. when CGP took over!).

If it is worth $300m-$500m, why haven't SOLG raised some cash ($10-$20m?) to complete the PEA? Even if they need to flog it relatively cheap to fund Cascabel or JV with Chinese?

Hi RICH3R.

Can't say 2 years for permits and ESIA is too surprising. I'm sure it was the same duration in those Gantt charts in the corporate presentations from years ago!

Suspect the frustration is more the treading-water of the last 2 years, and no regional progress to release every month.

Don't need 'shock and awe' - just some sign of a regional plan, prioritisation and route to monetisation - to fill the void as Cascabel is financed and permitted.

I know Scott previously said Porvenir wasn't as good as had been hoped. But how bad is it to simply ignore after spending nearly $100m on it. Why aren't Valuestone/Chinese looking to progress this into the next copper super-cycle?

A bit surprised at all the in-person presentations.

Solgold has a skeleton staff, limited budget, short-term priority on the studies/geo-tec for next milestone payment, discussions with Govt on permitting and CIPA...

... so why is Scott flying around wasting time and dollars at presentations?

Bozi - Solgold could also try to unlock some of the 'value' in the regionals.

e.g. a JV or financing package on Porvenir. Unlikely, given the focus on Cascabel, but possible.

Or further bump the Cascabel NPV (and lower Capex?) by incorporating Tandayama resources and an open-pit starter.

Hi addicknt. Was just going on the SEDAR filings - 2023 said 'virtual' whereas 2024 says 'Brisbane'.

In reality I suspect no real difference. Hosted in place X (why not Ecuador or Canada?) and directors dial-in.

Agree that there should be the option for shareholders to join virtually and ask questions. Perhap's they're concerned about BBG going off on one!

Morning addicknt. Re: your "an Australian mining explorer" comment...

As you say, Solgold have now ended (the incredibly limited) Australian exploration, and those related Australian subsidiaries will be closed.

All Ecuador and Canada focused (obv with UK listing and UK registered office).

All this is why I think it is so odd the 2024 AGM location is listed as Brisbane, rather than virtual in recent years.

Amusingly, the Annual Report states that Solgold is headquartered in two different places - Perth and Brisbane.

The **** is another word for over-confident!

agreed bozi, always looks easier from the outside. especially to ****y canucks.

no benefit in voting against scott at agm though. need to stick to the derisking plan, as frustrating as the last 2 years have been.

Addicknt - nothing unusual this year. Notice timescales are due to TSX regs and filed on SEDAR:

Notice of record date and meeting date requires:

- Filing at least 25 days before record date (Oct 28th)

- Record date must be set 30 to 60 days before the meeting (Dec 5th)

See page 3:

www.tsx.com/en/resource/69

'Interesting' it is being held in Brisbane though, rather than virtually last year. If going to be a physical meeting, why not in Canada, given make-up of board? I also thought SOLG had got rid of Australian offices.

Either way, I trust shareholders can dial-in this year to be able to 'read the room'.