Member Info for Pbow

So using the correct number of shares its 1.07 a share.... so 30 pence to 43 pence a share.

Jack wont like you anymore haha

Stas there are 3 billion shares.......

I think your data is wrong Rodney and im loathe to correct you. But in the FS for Mirador the NPV was $265 million this was from 2008 they were bought in 2010.

But country risk was lower and the mine was more developed - they had the FS as an example. They also had the licenses.

Https://www.primicias.ec/economia/noboa-visita-china-agenda-prestamos-inversion-98713/

I think your analysis of a potential Jiangxi takeover is missing a lot of aspects Rodney specifically around tax. Im admittedly not familiar with Ecuadorian tax law but I imagine it is similar to Costa Rica. I would be amazed if Jiangxi didnt attach a lot more weight to taxation issues rather than regulatory issues (which I think are basically non existent.

They will be looking at the most tax efficient structure taking into account withholding taxes, capital gains tax, offsetting interest on shareholder loans etc (obviously working within reasonable anti-BEPS rules). If you read up on how Tongling Nonferrous Metals Group and China Railway Construction Corporation (CRCC) bought Mirador it will likely give you a guide - though for the love of God please dont start again with NPV and valuation of that mine (and the other one whose name escapes me that they bought with Mirador).

Https://www.expreso.ec/actualidad/economia/catastro-minero-ecuador-importante-reapertura-246644.html

I think the chamber of mining is doing a decent effort in pushing back on this fee/ tax.

I found the above article funny specifically this which i will translate from a mining lawyer.

"Furthermore, experts on the subject, such as Ycaza, point out that this new fee must be rationalized because some companies may not have the resources to pay it. "The government could be unpleasantly surprised if, of the approximately $200 million it aims to collect, only $10 million is ultimately collected.""

Incidentally Rodney im pretty sure Solgold could challenge the imposition of this fee under the IPA we have signed for Cascabel (obviously doesnt help anywhere else). The government is clearly calling it a fee rather than a tax due to concerns regarding the IPA's it has in place and the tax treatment. The tricky thing for Solgold will be do they want to annoy the government given were we are in the permitting process. If it were me I would probably reserve rights to go to arbitration but hold off on it and hope someone else with an IPA does it for us :-)

My only concern with Cascabel and Porvenir is a short term cash flow one. The deadline to pay is ridiculously close (very unreasonable in my mind) so I just hope the company has the money in place to pay whatever the fee is, and keep going until we receive tranche 2 of the money from Franco - which I am convinced is going to be October/ November.

From what I am reading the mining chamber is putting up a good fight with the government and I am sure our management will be pressing hard for lower rates.

I'm interested to see what they do with Blanca Nieves and Chical given slide 9 of the latest investor presentation. I suppose we will learn more as they will have to RNS this in the coming days.

Jack has said he was told there will be a investor meeting next week. I was told something similar albeit it differed slightly - I was told "meet the company call in the next couple of weeks." maybe we will hear something in that whether it is next week or the week after.

I dont believe Canada Inc makes any difference to ICA as it was just a holding company

This is copied and pasted from the ICA itself - I dont see how a holding company (particularly one that no longer has any assets) would meet this definition.

"business includes any undertaking or enterprise capable of generating revenue and carried on in anticipation of profit; (entreprise)

Canadian business means a business carried on in Canada that has

(a) a place of business in Canada,

(b) an individual or individuals in Canada who are employed or self-employed in connection with the business, and

(c) assets in Canada used in carrying on the business; (entreprise canadienne)"

I just thought of an actual significant benefit of the delisting..... we wont have to submit the FS in French anymore!!!! That will save them a year in the PFS was anything to go by.

I think most people on here agree you are an idiot Jack.

Jack im not saying anything of the sort. I actually think the Chinese are the most likely buyers.

Notwithstanding that;

1) I really dont think the President of China is going to be that interested in the process of purchasing Solgold..... one would suggest he has far more important things on his plate.

2) that removing from the TSX is anything other than an attempt to save money. Because the ICA did not apply to Solgold.

3) In terms of the trip to China it will be interesting as to which ministers he takes with him. If he takes the mining ones that will be a positive sign.

Quady they are of the opinion (wrongly) that the Investment Canada Act (ICA) prevents Chinese investment in Solgold. This is despite the obvious fact that if it did there would have been issues with Jiangxi Copper purchasing any of Solgold.

The Investment Canada Act (ICA) applies to foreign investments in a “Canadian business”, which must have:

A place of business in Canada

Canadian employees

Canadian operations generating revenue

SolGold plc:

Is a UK-incorporated company

Operates its assets in Ecuador, not Canada

Maintained only a listing on the TSX—not a substantive operational footprint in Canada

They are using the example of Solaris Resources who were blocked from taking an investment from Zijin Mining. it is however notable that Solaris were a Canadian headquartered company. Their response to the blocking of this investment was to move its headquarters to Switzerland to prevent it happening again. They remain listed on the Toronto exchange, because its not relevant to the ICA. https://www.miningweekly.com/article/solaris-appoints-new-ceo-as-it-prepares-to-exit-canada-2024-11-22

Prob true Cash. Pass them to the atate owned company (who presumably dont pay the fees) let them JV with companies who will actually do something with them.

If the rates are right and the hectares provided by Google are right. We have to walk away from the vast majority of our concessions before the end of the month...

. Unless the government sees sense which im still hoping for

Cash you are referring to the wrong rates. They are for the concession itself these are the rates for the inspection fee so for most of our concessions its 235 usd per hectare or 117 i found the chart confusing to be honest.

https://avl.com.ec/tasa-de-supervision-y-control-de-la-arcom/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

According to chat gpt they are all at initial exploration stage. But I dont trust chatgpt other than as a pretty good search engine.

Cash I have absolutely no idea about Aurania I had never heard of them until they showed up in a news article I read.

I imagine they are all in the early stages like all of solgolds (except cascabel and Porvenir) but I really dont know. None of their prospects sound familiar to me as ones that are going into construction in the next 5 years though.

I just did a Google search which came up with this

Solgold 320,000 hectares

Aurania Resources has a land package of 208,000 hectares in southeastern Ecuador

No idea if this is correct

I dont think thats correct Rodney. I think they have double but Solgold had two plots at a higher stage so bigger fees. I will wait to see what solgold say but I expect them to walk away from some. Im not too worried about that because clearly none of them have value against them. I hope we keep the ones near Cascabel though or the may presentation needs updating.