Member Info for Pbow

Im actually in bed feeling sick and sorry for myself. I have covid I think. I have to say I somewhat enjoy reading the shi*te you post.

You clearly havent done much research. You didnt know the Franco deal came after PFS. You didnt know the sensitivity analysis was in the company presentations... I mean these are pretty basic things.

I have no bias. I think we will be sold prior to production. I think it will be in the period of the license application, once we have the DFS and the other IPA we are waiting for. Once the process has gone far enough to show there wont be any legal challenges. Are you aware of the environmental nutters in Australia who are trying their best to stop the mine being built? Who in their right mine will buy a mine like cascabel for a billion(s) plus without knowing for sure that it will get the permits to build it? If they buy it now it will be an opportunist move to capitalise on the low share price and PIs will be screwed. I dont think the shareholders of BHP and the like would appreciate their company betting 4.5 billion (giving Jacks figures) on black on a roulette wheel which is what it would be doing. Do you know by the way that Lumina was held up in the courts for years?

No ive said from the start that your high valuations are stupid for a project at this stage of development.

Cascabel is at the same stage as it is in the same stage in the permitting process, has a PFS only and is working to a DFS. This is the exact same as Lumina. A Tier 1 mine is a Tier 1 mine. If its a copper one its a copper one, if its a silver one its a silver one. Given the price of gold has risen to crazy levels I would suggest if anything buying the largest gold mine in Ecuador would be attractive. You just twist everything to try and trick people into your pump and dump. Ill bet you will be gone in 6 months if this company isnt sold. Ill be here for a long time yet unless its sold - just as ive been invested for years.

At the end of the day the market agrees with me which is why the share price is at 7p and not 40p.

Im sorry but ChatGPT is clearly useless for the purposes you are using it for. Its ignoring the fact its primarily a gold mine, It doesnt know where its located I mean seriously?

Yet you talk about me selectively quoting. You are just a ramper who clearly hasnt done any significant research into the company and are using AI to fuel a pump and dump. I on the other hand have read the PFS cover to cover multiple times, Ive read the full public engagement study on Porvenir (I can speak/ read Spanish). Ive invested a 6 figure amount into this share and I want a good return. im not however a fantasist. Ive got a reasonable expectation on where an exit will come and its not in the coming weeks. It also certainly wont be over a pound unfortunately.

Cangrejos, by contrast, falls short on several Tier 1 criteria:

Low copper grade (~0.10%)

Significantly lower average production

No strategic scale in copper

What relevance is the above to it being a Tier 1 gold mine?!?! Clearly its not a Tier 1 copper mine and im not for a second suggesting it is.

Lets go through it.

1. Metal Grades and Focus

1) Cangrejos is primarily a gold-heavy deposit with modest copper content (~0.10% Cu average) and no molybdenum credits. In contrast, Tier 1 assets typically feature high copper grades (around 0.5%+ Cu) or significant multi-metal content, which drives stronger margins and strategic interest.

* I agree its not a Tier 1 copper mine, it is a Tier 1 Gold mine.

2) Tier 1 projects are usually multi‑billion-dollar NPV assets with very low cost per pound and annual revenues often exceeding US $200–600 million. Cangrejos’s PFS shows strong gold production (371 koz/yr) and copper (41 Mlbs/yr) over 26 years, yet its PFS-grade economics and IRR (16–17%) align more closely with Tier 2 benchmarks

* somewhat right using the metal prices they do - but remember you use spot. Its IRR and NPV will be massively higher than the above. its also relatively low cost producer

3) Tier 2 deposits are typically “significant but not exceptional.” They face moderate development risks, shorter mine lives (10–20 years), and fewer expansion options. Cangrejos is certainly substantial, but it lacks the combination of scale, infrastructure readiness, partial by-product optionality, and strategic leverage found in Tier 1 assets.

* Its life is over 20 years, its got less development risk than Cascabel. Its bigger than Fruta del Norte and everyone says thats Tier 1!!!

4) Tier 1 assets consistently attract multiple major miners and are viewed as industry-changing plays. Cascabel is firmly in that category, boasting multiple majors around the table and independent confirmation of its “World Class” status. Cangrejos has drawn interest, but not at the level or intensity typical of Tier 1 assets.

* 1 has been bought by a major mining company..... one hasnt.

Im not comparing apples to oranges...

Im following your argument.... You say buy outs of mines are based on NPV and a %. Ive given you a mine thats in the same jurisdiction, same level of development as Cascabel, and with a PFS using similar metal prices to Cascabel and it was sold this years for a fraction of what you are claiming.

You subsequently are saying its because Cascabel is Tier 1 and Cangrejos is Tier 2. But the reasons given for why it arent Tier 2 are either wrong or Cascabel is the same - ie jurisdiction. The size of the mine is covered by the NPV..... thats why people use %'ages to get past different sizes to do a comparison. Also just to note they have just been bought by a rather large miner whilst we have had the for sale sign up for donkeys years and no one has bought us.....

As I keep saying the management need to get the DFS done, get the application in for the license and then whilst we wait a year to get the license we can try and raise the money hopefully in the best way possible for us to build the mine. This will all lead to a re-rating. Not wasting time updating the NPV on the PFS which anyone with half a brain already understands because of the sensitivity charts in the PFS. The only other game changer will be TAm if its viable - if its not I dread to think.

I think its the best search engine Ive come across to be honest. I use it all the time for searching for documents and case law.

But just to add Stas the AI you are using loses all credibility when it says Cascabel is nearer to the coast and paved roads. Ive driven on the Pan American Highway in Mexico, El Salvador, Panama, Costa Rica and Nicaragua - it was paved in all of them so im pretty sure it will be paved in Ecuador (where I confess ive not driven on it. Im also pretty sure 30km from a port is closer than 180km which is how far Cascabel is from the nearest deep port.

Its not a Tier 1 mine as it isnt built. Cascabel is also not a Tier 1 mine as it isnt built yet!

If you use the same metrics as you want to use for Cascabel ie todays Spot Prices it is a Tier 1 mine by anyone's definition.

i dont know which AI you are using but ive just used the paid Chatgpt and the google one and both say it is a Tier 1 mine.

Here is chatgpt

Is Cangrejos a tier 1 mine

ChatGPT said:

Here’s the most clear and balanced answer to “Is Cangrejos a Tier 1 mine?” — based on its data and the industry’s accepted definition of Tier 1.

📋 What defines a Tier 1 mine?

A Tier 1 mine is typically:

✅ Very large — long life (>20 yrs) and high annual production (>500 koz AuEq or >500 Mlbs Cu)

✅ Low cost — bottom half of the cost curve, robust even at low metal prices

✅ Low risk — politically stable, low jurisdictional risk, strong social licence

✅ Proven — consistent production & financial performance over time

🔷 Cangrejos Project (Lumina Gold, PFS 2023)

Metric Value

Mine life ~26 years

Reserves 11.6 Moz Au + 1.4 Blbs Cu

Annual production (avg) ~371 koz Au + ~44 Mlbs Cu

AISC ~$1,000–1,100/oz

Jurisdiction Ecuador (moderate risk)

Status PFS stage — not yet built

🧭 So — does it meet Tier 1 criteria?

✅ Scale & longevity: Yes — its reserves and 26‑year life clearly meet Tier 1 expectations.

✅ Costs & margins: Competitive ($1,000/oz AISC) and profitable even at conservative gold prices — good, though not exceptional.

⚠️ Jurisdiction & risk: Ecuador is better than it was but still riskier than top Tier 1 regions (like Canada, Australia).

❌ Proven performance: Not yet — still unbuilt, no operational track record.

⚖️ Conclusion:

Cangrejos is a Tier 1‑scale project — its size and mine life put it firmly in that league.

However, it is not yet a Tier 1 mine, because:

it is not producing yet,

and its jurisdictional risk & unproven operations make it less certain than classic Tier 1 mines.

It’s more accurate to say:

📝 Cangrejos is a potential Tier 1 asset — but whether it becomes a true Tier 1 mine depends on successful construction, stable operations, and how Ecuador’s political & social environment evolves.

Https://www.otcmarkets.com/research-report/N2eB0A74CSL/contents?utm

RBC Capital disagrees with AI. Ill go with them cheers.

Apparently they are going to start coverage on Solgold soon lets see what they say about Cascabel.

Casabel is block cave and is a lower development cost than an open pit mine near haha you really shouldn't use AI for anything other than a search engine - which incidentally it is brilliant at.

Just laughing as I read it properly stas

AI says "Cascabel has coastal access, hydro grid power, sealed roads, and water – all critical for ESG and capex. Cangrejos is inland and faces higher upfront development costs."

The reality "The Cangrejos project is located in SW Ecuador, 30 km SE of the Pan American Highway and 40 km from the deep water commercial port of Puerto Bolivar."

So its actually closer to the coast and port than Cascabel and its near the Pan American Highway which is the main motorway in Latin America

Bonkers thats a reasonable point the 5% does inflate the NPV so the purchase % price should be higher if changed to an 8 but its still nothing like the figures stas comes out with.

Cangrejos isnt Tier 1?!?!?!? Are you mental?

A 26-year mine life

An after-tax NPV₅% of approximately US $2.2 billion

Among the top 26 undeveloped gold assets globally by contained gold

They must have changed the definition of Tier 1!!!

Good job it isnt over 5,500m above sea level then isnt it Jack? its 3,800 to 5,400m above sea level.

Also there is a permanent settlement called La Rinconada in Peru at 5,100m above sea level with a permanent population of almost 30 thousand people and guess what the main source of employment is..... gold mining.

If they managed to mine Veladero at 5,000m above sea level in 2005 they will manage with this deposit

Jack now explain the selling price of Lumina Gold - which is a mine in Ecuador (as is Cascabel) at the same stage of development as Cascabel with an NPV at PFS (using rates very similar to Cascabel) of 2.2 billion USD sold for 421m USD.

I agree with most of what you have said there RK couple of notes.

The DFS imminent..... more like the end of the year, which may well fall into the definition of imminent to Solgold management though :-)

I dont think TAM will lead to construction starting earlier.... it will have the same dependents. Mainly the license. What it will do however is bring forward production as we wont have to spend a couple of years tunneling to hit the ore body. This is a game changer for cash flow and investment.

I can also explain why the drilling at TAM became part of the CPs if you really need...... as a clue, based on the original plan it wasn't necessary.

Jack im referring to the drilling that was started in May which was the one required for the CP. So as per usual you are talking out your rear. You relly need to try and understand what the company is doing if you really have the amount of money you say you have invested.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SOLG/solgold-early-production-open-pit-strategy-wdt0pxuz1yk0beu.html

The program is expected to commence in early May 2025, utilising three drilling rigs to establish resources in the measured and indicated categories, define limits to near surface mineralisation, and test for open pittable at or near surface resources on which expedited open pit mining activities may be commenced. The program is expected to take approximately three months with assay results available a month later.

Stas I just say it as I see it - which is why Ive often been called a ramper on this board. In the last few months unfortunately everything that I have seen has been negative with the following 4 exceptions.

* we started drilling TAM (albeit far later than should have happened)

* we have now received tranche 2 (10 days later than the self imposed deadline

* we received a license at Porvenir - pretty much in line with expectations given the public consultation was mostly positive (I read the whole document).

* we received the AIPA - my biggest disappointment is this didn't have a positive impact on the share price which I was really expecting to happen.

Separately we have the negatives.

* The FS is clearly delayed

* The Application for the license at Cascabel is clearly delayed

* The CIPA still not executed.

* Tranche 3 is likely delayed unless Franco gives an exemption again.

* The government has implemented a new tax which has presumably impacted on the exploreco hence it not being announced as plans.

The potential game changer thats coming up is TAM - this could have a big impact on the share price if the results are positive. PS was confident that the results would be when I spoke to him in April (ie prior to drilling commencing) so i hope and pray he is right. That being said im looking for results from the board not wasting time messing around with NPV and playing with numbers. Everyone in the market knows what the asset is like thats not the problem.