Member Info for Pbow

Cash the lowest rate is not 11.50

I assume based on this article we will have to pay 53 million a year as we are supposedly the biggest consession holder

https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/economia/tasa-minera-empresas-gobierno-ecuador-camara-mineria-inversiones-nota/

i think we are talking 2 million ish for cascabel and 1.75 million ish based on back of *** packet figures. half payable next month. walking away from most other concessions i assume.

Https://www.primicias.ec/economia/tasa-minera-vigencia-publicacion-registro-oficial-daniel-noboa-98958/

Very poor from the government

Cash again there is a difference between opening offer and selling offer. I dont think for a minute 10p would be successful. You need to read the whole post, think then reply. Not spit your dummy out at the first second.

Jack good to see you are still an idiot

I honestly don't know what TINTO stands for.

Cash I can see a slim possibility of a sale price in the realms of 60 to 70 pence. But absolutely no chance of an opening bid at that level. I would expect if we get a bid in the next month it will be circa 10 pence and will hopefully fail or cause a counter offer and a bidding war starts. This is the point I keep saying no company on the planet is going to do an opening bid of 1 pound for a company whose share price is 7 pence.

If we sell soon I think best case is 30 to 40 ish. Most likely 20 to 30 pence and it will annoy the hell out of me.

Cash

Im not saying this share wont go for a good price. My expectation is 100% that it will, or it will go into production. Im merely saying that there is zero chance of an opening bid of a pound a share. If we get a bid soon at this depressed share price we will have a problem unless we get a counter bid (which I think is possible).

Quady I find the whole thing annoying and immoral, there is no chance we are getting an open bid at 1 pound. If it goes into a fight between majors we might get to a quid a share but I think the chances of that are next to zero. If we have the FS and the permits a pound a share becomes more likely (but I still dont see it happening). If we get to production then more likely depending on dilution (if any) and financing to fund the mine build.

For me the big question is what will the results of the TAM drilling be in Sept/ Oct

Rodney you are not answering the question. Yes companies may have paid close to NAV or more for companies. But their share price was closer to NAV.

You cant answer the question(s) directly because you know it has never, ever happened. You know that if an opening bid came in from BHP at 1 pound a share, for a company whose shares are at 7 pence their board would be sacked - and rightly so.

Every announcement of a takeover of a company I can think of references the share price, or 30 day average or the likes. Ive never seen 100% premium EVER. Yet you are suggesting multiples of that.

What you are saying is just fantasy stuff. Its also dangerous. People like Jack have invested based on these kind of promises. He has seemingly had a mental breakdown because people like you promise the impossible and he believed it and bought more shares than he can afford. Its immoral.

I think this share will come good. I think most of us will get a good exit price or a reasonable one at least. A pound a share is for the birds.

Sorry a 100% premium of the existing share price.

Its a tenuous link at best Rodney.

Again can you provide any example of a opening offer of 100% of the existing share price? Any in history or anywhere in the world? Ill ask a second question.... if BHP issued an opening offer of 1 pound a share (either in cash or shares or a mix) how long do you think their board would last before they were forced by shareholders to withdraw it?

"No I am talking about you having a go at someone for incorrect information when you just posted, - A) Volume yesterday was 2,803,119 one week earlier it was 3,128,339...... increased volume? - when in fact it was Thursday 12th June volume was 6.11 million, - thus the issue with using AI for correctness, which you called out."

Ive openly said I used ai to look that and it had links to sources. If its wrong its wrong. But thats not quite the same as writing a long post based on obvious information. I mean the FILO takeover has been discussed multiple times on this board.

So you are saying that Rodney uses AI because the majority of what I wrote (copied and pasted) was what he wrote....

Literally the only involvement of AI was the question of volume. AI is rubbish for anything other than as a search engine as it gives answers like the one Rodney posted re Filo mining. I dont see it being useful for other things for years.

I use Ai as a search engine. Im very open about that - in my opinion it is the best search engine ever invented. I asked it what the volume of solgold was yesterday and what was it the week before. Everything else I wrote myself. Unsurprisingly I dont know the volume of solgold on a particular without looking it up.

Las Bambas (MMG): paid $5.85bn for a project not yet producing — the premium to market was irrelevant; they paid for the resource. Our Chairman, Paul Smith, was heavily involved with the sale of this asset at a fair price to MMG by Glencore. A) they were owned by Glencore. They didnt have a share price per say. So again show me a scenario in history, anywhere in the world where a opening offer has been over 100% of the current share price. You cant because its never happened. Never mind the fanciful figures you are talking. If BHP did that their board would be crucified. I am not saying in a bidding war that the price couldnt reach that (though I doubt it given we dont have the FS and dont have the licenses). But the chances of an opening offer of 1 pound is so ridiculous its mad.

I dont believe that solgold will get an offer of a pound because history has shown that it has never happened (or even close).

A few clarifications in return, if I may, PBOW,

You say you don’t see it. That’s fine — but perhaps you’re measuring traction through Telegram sentiment rather than by watching volume patterns, growing shareholder engagement, or the re-emergence of NAV-based arguments across multiple investor channels. Price suppression doesn’t require universal belief in fair value — it simply requires a critical mass to start asking the right questions. And that is happening, whether publicly acknowledged or not. A) Volume yesterday was 2,803,119 one week earlier it was 3,128,339...... increased volume?

On Jiangxi and fundraising urgency

You say “the board ran out of time.” Possibly. But urgency does not justify strategy. Rights issues and bookbuilds can be executed fast — especially with Tier 1 assets, an undervalued NAV, and a copper-gold macro tailwind. Instead, we got an off-market placement to a PRC SOE with no open process and no retail access. It solved a cashflow issue, yes — but it also conferred strategic control without strategic pricing. The dilution to retail wasn’t financial only — it was structural. A) They should have sold it long ago. Scott said he didnt want too as the price was low - he messed up - we are where we are.

You suggest ICA might not apply. Respectfully, it did — until the TSX delisting, which neatly eliminated that risk for PRC parties. Solaris hasn’t delisted because it hasn’t needed to — it’s not yet under the same kind of creeping accumulation pressure. The fact that delisting happened just as SolGold became geopolitically interesting, and just before a possible transaction window, is unlikely to be a coincidence. There’s a pattern here — and it’s becoming harder to ignore. A) If it did apply why did Solaris go to the expense of moving its headquarters to Switzerland because of the ICA but maintain its listing on the Toronto Exchange. What do you know that they dont?

Rodney im going to say one thing in this because you keep ignoring it.

THE INCREASED COMMODITY PRICES ARE STILL REFERENCED IN THE PRESENTATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will reply to the other points in a separate post.

Stas if you ever visit Riyadh and have to travel around for meetings I think you will find you will spend a significant amount of time in taxis.... it has some of the worst traffic in the world. Im now sat in my hotel - there isnt a great deal to do to be honest. Its almost 40 degrees C (Its 18:30) and I dont fancy going for a walk.

Surprisingly I dont drive a taxi, the taxi driver does that.

Rodney if an offer came in now I think it would a disaster and nothing like the value you are saying. Ill ask again have you ever seen an opening offer of over 100% of the share price. Find me one never mind one comparable to the one you are suggesting.

That’s fine — but you’ve gone to quite some effort (sitting in your numerous taxis) to argue every point made about valuation suppression, PRC accumulation, and insider alignment. It’s hard to square that with a supposedly casual interest. Im also sat in hotels as im travelling for business and there isnt much to do in Saudi at night.

For your final point im not having a go at you. I just disagree with what you are saying. I would be delighted in the company was sold in the next few months for a pound a share. I just think there is more chance of me being the next Pope (and I would note I meet all the requirements under Cannon Law so its not impossible but given im married and not a cardinal I would say unlikely).

Ill answer again

Fair enough, we’re not running a hedge fund but this isn't about popularity contests. It’s about arithmetic. A market price of 7p versus an NAV of ~164p based on conservative assumptions isn't an opinion — it's a mathematical mismatch. Dismissing that on the basis that only a few people are pointing it out doesn’t actually change the facts. Truth doesn’t need a majority. A) Im not dismissing per say I am disagreeing and saying why. You have every right to believe what you want. Im also replying to the point that literally said "growing traction and momentum" - I dont see that being the case.

That’s technically true — it’s buried in the PFS. But that’s precisely the point: it was removed from the most accessible investor presentations at the exact moment the company was awarding low-priced options and facilitating a discounted placement. Transparency isn’t just about burying data in a footnote and calling it good. If NAV wasn’t important, why was it ever shown? A) Again its still in the presentation but shown in a different way. I think they showed it in another document but I cant recall which. I will have a look later. The prices of commodities have been higher since the PFS was issued. It was shown in 2, maybe 3 presentations. The presentation changed completely when the new management came in. In my opinion its more professional. I dont see how its buried in the PFS.... its in a section titled sensitivity analysis.

Yes, but why Jiangxi? Why off-market? Why at 8.56p? Why not a properly structured rights issue or a bookbuild allowing wider participation? If 157 million shares had been bought in the open market, the price would’ve soared. Instead, a strategic buyer acquired a large position at a steep discount while retail shareholders were locked out. That’s not capital raising — that’s price avoidance. A) I mean they literally paid a premium on the market rate.... Yes it would have been hard to acquire those shares on the market. I think the board ran out of time.

Perhaps operationally, yes. But it also conveniently removed Investment Canada Act scrutiny — just as the strategic register was consolidating. The timing is curious. It’s not wrong to ask whether this was coincidental or coordinated. As I said I dont think ICA applied if it did Solaris would have left the exchange as well as move headquarters after the chinese investment was blocked.