Member Info for Quady

OK everyone, this is a little wordy, but stay with me.
As we came into Sunday I posted my thoughts at 16.15, looking at the facts, if we assumed NM was indeed going.
I will start by pasting this in first. ( this post is factual and everything I say can be seen in the RNS )

I am trying to imagine, that this is true, what has happened and what is happening.
Let's forget the conspiracy theories, by the let's sell it cheap brigade.

No matter what anyone says, the AGM was a success, this is because any other result would basically show that Solgold could not defend. They can.

So let's have a quick recap.

We are in the process of a redesign of Alpala to bring some of the underground infrastructure above ground to share resources with other mines. Why would you do this, unless they were pretty certain some of the nearby tenements are viable, as this adds costs at this stage, but saves costs later on down the line. So Solgold are thinking long term, about not only the construction of Alpala, but other nearby tenements.

Also we have been changing the BOD to increase our governance, and to increase the expertise of taking this to production.
So maybe this is the next evolution, and Nick Mather is handing over to a CEO that has constructed mines, and brought them to production.

As the BOD has to act in the best interests of shareholders, ( doesn't mean selling it cheap because some PI's want a quick profit ) this may be being done with Nicks consent.

Just a thought.

Now the relevant text from the RNS:

The Company will commence immediately a global executive search program to identify and engage with candidates that have experience in base and precious metals exploration and the construction of large copper-gold porphyry mines in South America, development financing and executive corporate management.

It clearly says that the new CEO will have experience of construction of large copper-gold porphyry mines, as in my post, I suggested that NM was standing aside for the evolution to becoming a producer, this is clearly stated in the above statement. Also Nick Mather is not out of favour, or he wouldn't be staying on.
All the rubbish printed over the weekend that NM had to go, was exactly that RUBBISH !

Also remember that we changed the mine design, so that a long term view could be taken, as to sharing infrastructure for further construction projects. ( let's all remember how huge this company is going to become )

Next funding, again I will paste in the relevant part of the RNS:

SolGold is currently assessing financing options available to the Company for the development of the Alpala mine following completion of the Definitive Feasibility Study.

It is clear that we have been putting together a CFP, and from this statement, it looks like we are nearly there, so no requirement for a JV.

All in the RNS .

Enjoy the fact checking.

OK Redknight, I am going to prepare a mail and pull out the relevant parts of the RNS, as I don't believe you have read all the way down to the bottom.

Give me 15 minutes as going to have a cup of coffee first.

Andy have you read the whole RNS.

killjoy read the RNS, it makes clear Solgold is going to fund Alpala to production, no JV or any other type of deal.
It clearly says that they are assessing the funding options in front of them at this moment in time.
This has progressed much faster than most of us thought.

ssmith_trader, you haven't read it all have you.
In a few minutes after people read the RNS again, they will get it.
If they need help, then read my post on the 17th, just two days ago at 16.15
It couldn't be clearer.

Read the RNS again Redknight, it makes it very clear Alpala is going to production, and that we are going to raise the money.

Good morning all.

Please read my post on 17/1/2021 at 16.15

It was a guess based on the facts and if the story was true.

It has turned out to be 100% correct.

After you have read the post, then read the RNS again, without the conspiracy theories.

It clearly shows we are going to production.
Reading the chat this morning has made me smile, you have all piled in reading each others arguments, without properly reading the RNS.

Good luck everyone, I agree this is good news, and I personally would like to say thank you to Nick, as we enter the final stage of evolution, where Solgold as an explorer becomes a producer.

All the best.

Hello Jerry I have already said why it was a success.
It was a success because NCM, BHP and CGP would have voted against anyone who stopped them getting this on the cheap.
Also to get so many PI's engaged in the vote was a huge victory. Not to mention other investors like Blackrock.
It showed that Solgold can be defended.
It was a success because we took a 1% NSR which can be reduced to 0.5% as opposed to a 20% further equity release.
Of course they want to weaken Solgold, so a low bid can be put in.
I suggest we wait and see what transpires.

All the best.

Spot on Bozi, a reminder of all the facts.
This is what peoples opinions should be based on, not twisting the facts so much, that all meaning is lost.

All the best.

ToS1963, if the investors that brought in at the time, when we were an explorer, then the share price was lower before 2015, which is when we switched to becoming a producer.
They have already had over 200% maybe more in 5 years.
They understand what the value is, so they are not selling, because they realize what this is worth when we are producing, and that's Alpala.
So they want the value now, of the company that is not yet in production.

I agree ToS1963, but we don't fully know the situation.
I dare say when the PFS is issued, we will all look it over, and different parts of it, will mean different things to different people on here. So we gain from everyone's input.
I still remember the shock and awe statement. so as usual, they are late, but maybe something to look forward to, in the near future.

Thank you smickster, I try to keep it factual, and I was dubious of the post on Friday, as it was an unnamed source and it came from Canada.
I am still dubious.
I o believe that NM will stand down at some time, and to be honest if this turns out to be true, it has surprised me.
But let's get an official response from Solgold, with a full explanation, and we can all take stock, whatever side of the argument we are on.

Good evening ToS1963, yes you are correct, when I invested, Andrew Martin was CEO and we were an explorer.
If Alpala had not been so large we would have sold this off, and no debate would be happening today, and I supported that position.
However over time the position changed and this kept becoming bigger.
Andrew Martin stepped down, enter Nick Mather.
Very quickly we realized something was happening, and we announced we were going to production.
I remember everyone was excited and thought the share price would run away.
It didn't.
Today we are many years down the road, with delays, and people on here are impatient, I get that.
But we need to look at what has happened, and what we think will happen.
The PFS will arrive.
But the question mark is over, do we get a CFP to go it alone.
I think we do, others think we don't.
Time will tell.

My point is we change our opinions when new facts are presented.
I thought this was going to be proved up and sold on at one point, I don't today, because to my mind, the company has a credible strategy and a way to production.
Why on earth would you sell something, that can fund every other tenement once built and in production.

So have I Montecristo, been investing for 40 years now, and I retired at 57 on dividends in my portfolio.
Suffered a bit last year, as 2/3rds of my Portfolio stopped paying dividends, so just increased my drawdown on my pension a bit.
So I get the bit on dividends, however this is in my growth part of my Portfolio.
I have one share in my growth Portfolio and it's Solgold.
So while this is a significant amount of money for me, I brought all my Solgold shares with excess dividends at an average of 4.6 pence.
Hence my relaxed attitude to the share price, as I am not depending on Solgold to change my life.
This means I can take a more objective view of this company.

All the best.

Can I go further Woody, and suggest all those that don't like my posts filter me.

Sorry Zoros, how could I forget you.

All the best.

Hello Redknight, add Tigers name to the sell them cheap brigade list.

As I said Redknight everything posted on here is opinion, I am often pulled up for not saying imo or imho, I am just someone who doesn't use text talk.
I just think with a PEA of 3.3 million pounds and just over 2 billion shares in issue, that 1 pound is cheap.
When we get the PFS I believe the figure will be higher, and that 1 pound will look very cheap.

All the best.

Redknight, that's a silly post.
You want me to name the sell them cheap brigade.
It's a term I use for anyone, who would sell in the short term for under a pound a share.
So don't have anyone in mind.
But two names come to mind.

Schlemiel and Earthling.
Not because I say so, but because they have said so many times.
No doubt, I will get lot's of green lines on my screen now, but to put everyone's mind at rest, it will be a one way conversation, as I won't be responding.

Good afternoon Redknight, let's remember none of us sit on the BOD and so we don't know the ins and outs.
I will try to put my outlook on your questions.

The AGM was a success, if anyone hadn't given NCM, BHP and CGP what they wanted, they would have voted against them.
It was a huge vote of confidence, not only from the PI's and also Blackrock and other institutions that NM got a majority.
So are you arguing that because NM didn't give more shares to BHP and NCM, and we went with FNV. then that was the wrong thing to do.
Remember 1% offtake, that can be reduced to 0.5% was better than handing over another 20% of the company.

Their is no doubt that civil engineering companies can build this. That's how BHP and NCM build mines.

Your last point is a good one, why would NM have to step down and have someone replace him who has experience in mine construction.
In all honesty I don't know.
And maybe your expertise can answer that.
Could it have something to do with Governance and also would it be easier to put together a CFP, if someone of that experience was in situ.

All the best.