Member Info for Quady

It is possible that NCM and BHP did not buy any, although I think this is unlikely, but would explain lack of RNS's.
However more likely, is they got scaled back like everyone else has reported on here, and they have been diluted to bring on other investors, who don't pass the threshold to make the reporting of their holding Mandatory.

Someone beat me to it, looks like added one word incorrectly.

Here you go DBW

SolGold Plc (SOLG-TSX, LSE), which in Ecuador has identified 13 projects considered a priority, said wednesday, April 28, that it has raised US$ 73.8 million that will be earmarked to finance a minimum of 40,000 meters of diamond drilling, mainly, and the final feasibility study and other work related to the development of the Alpala copper, silver and gold deposit in its Cascabel project , located in the province of Imbabura, in the north of the country.To date, exploration activity h SolGold Plc (SOLG-TSX, LSE), which in Ecuador has identified 13 projects considered a priority, said on Wednesday, April 28, that it has raised US$ 73.8 million that will be intended to finance a minimum of 40,000 meters of diamond drilling, mainly, and the definitive feasibility study and other work related to the development of the Alpala copper, silver and gold deposit in its Cascabel project, located in Imbabura province in the north of the country.
To date, exploration activity has identified 15 potential porphyry centers in Cascabel: Alpala Central, Alpala Northwest, Alpala Southeast, Hematite Hill, Alpala East, Alpala West, Alpala South, Moran, Trivinio, Carmen, Cristal, Aguinaga, Tandayama-América, and Parambas.
This has identified 15 potential porphyry centers in Cascabel: Alpala Central, Alpala Northwest, Alpala Southeast, Hematite Hill, Alpala East, Alpala West, Alpala South, Moran, Trivinio, Carmen, Cristal, Aguinaga, Tandayama-America, and Parambas."

Very pleased BNC as you say it looks like we have another player or two onboard, and this will not increase BHP or NCM's percentage share. In fact it may reduce it a little.
So onwards we go.

One last point Bozi.

I do agree with you the latest fund raise is a good thing, and as you say sets us up for the year.

I am drawn to further points which I suspect you and others are aware of.
We can issue new shares every year, the two resolutions that were withdrawn have had no effect on the company whatsoever. ( it has some unimportant restriction )

But mostly I am interested in who the new shareholders are, as Ingo has said we are putting together the funding to build Alpala. I wonder if this latest fund raise is part of a deal further on down the road. And our newer shareholders want to take part in the Alpala build.

One thing for sure is the BOD are talking to interested parties.

Hi Bozi, I do try to avoid conflict and the board is a more peaceful place, after filtering two people.
We don't agree with each other on some things, but you always explain your points of view and like rcgl2 and others, I take interest in what you post.
Many on here have always used the childish argument that if we were to JV with Alpala they wouldn't announce it.
Also as you know the company has said no JV for Alpala so many times, I have lost count.

For the people who say we would not announce if we were going to do a JV, they have been proved wrong again, as we have announced that we are looking for JV's on 20 tenements, which seems to equate to 10 sites. We don't even know who the company is talking too, but they had to announce it I guess, as it would be seen as market sensitive information.

All the best.

Tiger the clueless fools you refer to, have called this correct every time.
You seem to take notice of the people who have continuously called it wrong.
Everyone of them said that as soon as the BHP standstill was ended last October that this was over and we would be taken out.
It's the likes of me and Bozi and others that have provided clear cut information, and the likes of the people I have filtered that pretend they are experts and still don't get it, that they try to misinterpret the company announcements to suit their own agenda.

Just look at the facts, and how we continue to defend this company.

PS: I only stick up for myself against people that insult me.
The main ones being RICH3R, Redknight and Addicknt.
Everyone else I show consideration and respect .
I don't hold grudges as life is too short.
Post what you want, as long as you don't insult me, I won't defend myself.

Good luck.

Hi rcgl2 I accept what you say, and of course you are correct when you say nothing is 100% correct on either side of the argument.
Our two resident experts shouted me down, when I said we could get around the 5% max figure.
I knew I was right as I was aware this could be done, after all I have been investing since the age of 19, so 40 years now. Experience does count.
I had forgotten it was called a cash box placing. ( I seem to remember it being called something else many years ago, but cannot remember )
The reason we can do this is the BOD must act in the interests of shareholders.
Some people on here think that means selling it at a profit.
It doesn't mean that, it means running a company that they have a strategy for continuous advancement, as you know.
CEO's don't think continuously about how much they can sell the company for. ( well maybe the bad ones do )
They think about how they can position the company in the market they are in and win more market share amongst other things.

I consider you and some other posters on here to be more knowledgeable than me on cooperate law, and that includes people who have filtered me. ( pity that one, but my own fault ) Please keep posting, it gives me more insight and I am sure others. ( an old dog can learn new tricks )

But our armchair CEO and junior accountant really talk some rubbish, and they should have known about this mechanism if they are who they say they are.
Instead they just spout regulations that say we are defenseless and we will be acquired against our will.

Yes that can happen to companies, and those companies that are taken over are usually distressed and their share price falls and someone makes a takeover bid.

I don't see Solgold in that vein.

If we find out that BHP and NCM we not invited to take part, or that they were scaled back as much as some on here, then they cannot complain, because as long as Solgold can acquire finance to continue their is nothing they can do to influence Solgold, Apart from a hostile bid, and we both know what that means.

All the best.

Morning rcgl2, I believe they have been diluted, the company has said more long term share holders on the book, whose details will be released in the near future according to DBW.
I haven't checked this, but he is usually right about such things.
Also everyone on here who took part has been scaled back.
This type of mechanism is rarely used by companies, but when it is, they are pretty sure it will be successful, otherwise it can crash and burn. I believe not only are we funded to PFS, but we may be funded to DFS as well, not forgetting about the extra drilling that's about to ramp up. Then we have the JV's of 20 tenements. Which they hopefully will majority fund.

Schlemiel nobody cares who's in government. No party is going to kill off mining. The countries people are already having a tough time of it. I doubt anyone who is seriously considering government could win by promising the people less prosperity than they currently have.

Understand what you say Ssmith_trader, I just think we can continue to reduce BHP, NCM and CGP's holdings as a percentage, and that Solgold are in charge, not BHP or anyone else. I think yesterday's move was a good thing, and yet again we continue to be able to raise money without serious dilution. We start construction on Alpala in less than a years time. This is key.

Hi Covgaz, I do not believe we will be taken out cheap as long as we can raise funds to continue with exploration and advancing Alpala to production.
Let's say we get a bid at 55 pence by BHP. ( that seems to be the popular choice )
In order for that bid to be successful, then NM, Tenstar, DGR, CGP, NCM and many others would have to accept it.
Cannot see that happening.
By logic is that the diverse book protects us, as everybody wants a bigger slice of the cake.
They don't want to sell out on the cheap.
They want the decades of profits to support their companies.
Hence why I believe no bid big enough will be tabled, and it is in all parties interest to Support Alpala getting to production as cheap and as fast as possible.

Well done Ssmith_trader, you are finally starting to understand what I have been saying for years.
All you need to do, is see this from the company's viewpoint.
Solgold has managed to raise cash and defend from a takeover, and issue more than 5%, which our resident clowns ( experts ) say could not be done under any circumstances.

The only thing I disagree with you on is bid price.
This is because we can increasingly defend against all bids, apart from a fair value bid, and the further we get to proving up other tenements and Alpala production, the more expensive it gets.

Hence at this stage, unless something changes, their is no bid coming.

Excellent news DBW, so we have new investors, and BHP, NCM and CGP are further diluted, giving us an even more diverse book, and adding extra protection against a bid.
I think Solgold's word is good, and we are taking Alpala to production.
This is just more evidence.

Thank you.

Just a thought as have not seen shares placed like this in a long time.
As we only issued 10% maybe there was a cap on what any party could get, so maybe BHP and Newcrest and CGP got further diluted.
We will have to wait to see what has happened.

May I say that the distribution of the shares to various people is interesting however for the price you paid and the market price, is about 1.5 pence.
If you really want the extra shares you applied for, just buy them in the open market, as the difference is so little.

All the best everyone.

Good morning, I have been going to my usual resources, and cannot find out if BHP, NCM or CGP got any of the new shares. I suspect they did, if not the book became even more diverse. Would be nice to know if we have a new player in town.

Jezzoo if you misrepresent me, I will correct you. You still haven't read what I said. You are assuming what Zoros said was correct, he lied and he knows it. It would be so simple to prove otherwise, as I have posted a fair amount on the subject. All you have to do is find one post of mine, which supports your argument. You won't find one as I have never said such a thing.
Thank you for filtering me, as it makes this chatroom a more pleasant place for everyone.

Morning Shipright that's a good question. I suspect a better question will be who took part, and how much they acquired.
This looks to me a way to override the two resolutions that the so called experts said we couldn't override, to fund ongoing exploration at Solgold.
Also interesting is the fact we didn't take up the last 50 million with Franco Nevada.
So to me it says we still required 50 million, but not to get Alpala to BFS. Only a portion of the money is required. So I believe they have done this so money can be spent across the tenements, as with the FN money it could have only been spent on Alpala. Also this move gives us the right to reduce the FN deal to 0.5 % of NSR in the future.

Jezzoo, please learn to read, you like Zoros are accusing me of something I never said. I said we would have the issue of new shares for further exploration and minimal dilution for the Alpala build. I purchased my shares at 4.6 pence when 600 million in circulation. Today 2.3 billion and a much higher price. So my response to Zoros was accurate. Try reading what I say, not what Zoros pretends I say.