Member Info for Quady

Rcgl2 pay no attention to Grimbergen he's strange. He has been here years and spends his time accusing others. He constantly accused me of not being invested and being a deramper many years ago. He only pops up now and again nowadays. He strikes me as someone who likes to take offence.

Agreed addicknt, the person who posted it, used it as proof of manipulation, complete Tosh. I also have seen it over the years. Not only on chatrooms, but also published as an article on a site that is free but many people pay for.

I think Rk means that post that's been going around for nearly ten years saying I apologise for being a paid deramper and naming all the user logins of himself and others.

Colonel I just recommended your post, most of what you post is level headed, please don't feed the conspiracy theorists like BBG, it gives credence to his views.
And then he's off on one.

NO NO WOODY don't you realise it's Blackrock manipulating the share price to make it rise at BHP's bequest.
It must be, because so many on here say it's manipulated.

All the best.

Colonel you make me laugh, trading CFD's in Solgold with this volume.
Sounds risky in the extreme.

Correct rcgl2 just normal trading on low volumes.

Hi BNC the more you listen to Steve Garwin the easier it is.
The first one Pinot put up, I have listened to many times before I understood it, this was a repeat with a bit more depth on surrounding minerals.

Redknights post put more simply says we expect the PFS in October and expect price to be higher than now.
Now off to watch Steve Garwin, thank you Pinot and BNC.

Addicknt I am pretty sure BHP know more than me.
I haven't even covered nanocoils. I first read a paper on these about ten years ago from MIT. If this technology becomes available, we will be able to power cars at a fraction of the energy required today. Still some time off being commercialised, but you could see solar panels producing five times the power output for the same space covered. Lots of Silver and Graphene also required.

Agreed BNC.
Addicknt as you know I was a technical analyst and engineer most of my life, so still keep up on the tech.
I believe the following scenario is entirely possible.
We start greening the world, we need Copper, Nickel and Lithium. Cobalt will drop off, as largely nickel will replace Cobalt, and the Graphene revolution, and revival of the Gallium Arsenide industry, will mean less copper required for same KW of storage.
When copper becomes too expensive for industry, then product will become too expensive for consumers, and cheaper alternatives will be used. Micro generation, that requires very little copper as it's local, will provide power and charge electric cars, and take the load off current infrastructure. And Hydrogen will power Heavy goods vehicles and aircraft. Remember the hydrogen industry has yet to take off. Natural gas will go by the wayside, faster than we think. I already have plans to convert my house to a Photovoltaic system with storage and go off grid to avoid daily standing charges. But the technology is 2-3 years away, to be commercially viable. It's here now but to expensive. Metal prices will not rise and rise, as technology will improve, and new materials and Polymores will be available.

Morning addict I would say John Henry is correct, we have the evidence. China is scaling back demand, mixture of Covid cases rising again and debt ratios.
Also copper and gold falling back, as we now see dollar buying start to recover, as maybe currently regarded as cheap. On the other side of the equation, Bidens 1.9 trillion green agenda, and going green around the world.
However those on here who predicted 5,000 and 10,000 dollars an ounce for gold by 2025 have been shown to be wrong. It was me and I think BNC that said we would struggle at 2,000 dollars an ounce, as gold is a safe haven while stocks are out of favour and people exit gold on a bull run. So Henry is taking a cautious approach. He has 14% of a world class discovery, which he now needs to make sure is monetised. Sure he would like more, but since we defend, he's not getting it cheap, so he won't want it. He will go after other copper projects that can't raise finance as easily as Solgold, and acquire those at a discount.

Good grief read it, it's not a bid for Solgold.

The Brisbane-based U.K.-listed miner with assets in Ecuador, the Solomon Islands and Australia, said its board has unanimously rejected BHP Billiton's offer to purchase a 10% stake in SolGold for $30 million in cash and then spend $275 million on the Cascabel project in return for 70% of SolGold's 85% stake in the project.

It was for a ten percent stake in Solgold and 70% of the 85% of ENSA which equates to 59.5% of ENSA.

Someone doesn't even know what a bid for Solgold means. Says a lot for your reputation.

I agree addicknt but they don't ignore them, they must be aware of them and make the best decision they can.

SharketMare
There are many more over the years, this is just the latest.
It goes against everything that is said on this board.
Any fact or evidence or statement is ignored and twisted by certain individuals on here.
People just want to ramp this share regardless of what the true situation is.

For once addicknt we are in agreement just normal trading.

They never made a bid for Solgold.

Redknight their latest statement said they would not overpay and that they were looking for JV's.
Please read it. they are not going to bid for any company unless it's discounted.
BHP has said this and it's been posted on this chatroom in the last 2 days.
What are you on about.
The evidence has been posted.

Sorry DBW the VAT does work like that.
If you fiddle your VAT and you don't claim what they know about, they will ask you to report everything until they are satisfied.

Don't fiddle your VAT and keep accurate records.
It's all about evidence.

Colonel as an ex technical analyst I can assure you it's the person that makes the claim that must supply the evidence.
It is impossible to supply evidence for something that is not happening.
To make such a statement can only show me, that you don't understand the word evidence or fact.

That is like asking someone to supply evidence that God doesn't exist.
It is the person that says God exists that must supply the evidence.

Now hopefully we have cleared that up, please could you supply the evidence or are you just posting with zero evidence, which would show everyone you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.