We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Add, sorry didn't express that very clearly. The SP is still lower now than it was 6 months or a year ago, when we didn't have various of these risk reducing items ticked off. I just meant hopefully the market will price this higher as it perceives the risk getting lower...
Add, yes I do. And I very much agree with your view on SC's progress over the last year and the success in ticking off all the milestones to make this saleable.
However I still think a high level of risk remains. But perhaps the market hasn't changed its pricing of that risk, and we hope it soon will.
"And my foundation for such thinking is proven by the last placing which saw Maxit and a few others help themsselves to the cheapest placing in SOLG shares for yonks."
An alternative view would be that Maxit and chums were willing to invest millions of dollars into a company that had already raised many millions from other investors who are now sitting on large losses as a result and were probably unwilling to throw yet more money at this. If management had been able to raise $20m at 25p a share then I'm sure they would have leapt at the chance but I expect a lot of investors didn't want to touch this with a bargepole. When your company is looking like a falling knife and you need investors to catch it, you are going to have to take their investment at a price they dictate.
For all the grumbling on here, which of us has several million dollars we'd be willing to invest to keep the Solg show on the road? I could throw another 2 or 3 times my investment at this today at these bargain bucket prices, but I choose not to because that original investment is now about 70% underwater. If this goes belly up the Sangha will have lots many many times more money than I have.
And it could go belly up. The reason we will get paid on this is for taking on the risk. If there are multi-bag returns on offer at this price, that's because the risk is equally very high.
Having a reasonable level of confidence that a mine will be constructed at Cascabel and that mine will be a major customer of the hydroelectric plant is not the same thing as having confidence that Solgold will build and operate that mine.
"I will be happy with 120p. I won't and don't need to sell for anything less."
Disagree. Either a court approved scheme of arrangement or the squeeze out rights under the Companies Act would force you to sell at the price agreed by the rest of the shareholders.
Tesla how are you saving £6k from having heat pumps? How big was your gas bill before you got them?! My house isn't that much smaller than yours although it's a lot newer... My estimate gas bill is £1200 a year.
By the way, I have a PV system with a battery. It has reduced my electricity consumption by about 1/4 over the year, but I'm still exporting about half what I generate. Unfortunately due to the height of my neighbours house I barely generate anything over the winter. Can generate more in a single day in June or July than in the entire month of Dec or Jan. Shows the limitations of solar in the UK.
Hi Quady, this is by no means intended as an attack on you and I realise I'm relying on a fair bit of hindsight here, but are you sure this will have been worth it even if what you hope for does play out?
You have been holding over 10 years now. I believe your average is around 4.5p, and you hold over a million shares. In that time the price has been to 40p a couple of times and into the 30p range a fair bit. You could have sold multiple times for a 7-10x return which would have been a very healthy return and large wedge of cash.
Are you really expecting that if you stick this for the long haul, say another 10 years, you will really see better total returns than if you'd sold at 40p five years ago and reinvested? I know you're a dividend investor and there have been some insane opportunities over the last few years in UK dividend payers. Even putting it in an index tracker between 2018 and 2030 would probably perform better than holding Solg until then.
Are you actually looking for the best investment returns now, or are you just trying to be proved right and trying to test your own patience in holding for so long? I do realise that patience is something many investors lack, that you have a lot of and has effectively been the bedrock of your successful investing strategy for the last 40 years.
A couple of months ago I filtered needalife and novicehunter, and the board is much better for it. Now could everyone else do the same and just ignore them and stop responding every time they post.
Every green box on here is followed by more messages from people baiting, responding and engaging with obvious trolls.
I don't like filtering anyone because even people I generally disagree with tend to post points that are worth considering, and I am very keen to avoid creating an echo chamber of views that only align with my own. However the two above post literally nothing of relevance whatsoever and seem to just be posting their rubbish here to amuse themselves. What's more embarrassing is that I believe both are grandfathers and should know much much better.
Hi NMM, I think if they want PIs to vote in favour of the special resolutions disapplying pre-emption rights, they should do a better job of explaining exactly what these resolutions mean, what they are for and why they are proposing them. I didn't bother to read this year's circular but from memory the board's explanation isn't particularly illuminating unless you already essentially grasp them in the first place.
The general feeling on here seems to be that the company is "up to something" and we should be fearful of these resolutions. And after all, we are being asked to vote away our own protection against dilution, so how about a much clearer explanation of how this is in our best interests.
They could also try explaining that these resolutions are fairly standard across all corporates, not Solg specific. Last time I looked they were also proposed by Aviva, BT and I expect every other UK listed company if you went through the alphabet.
Orthern, regarding the finances and viability, I do keep wondering if this is why a Chinese group like Jiangxi are the most likely buyers, because their focus is on securing future copper supply rather than delivering maximum shareholder returns.
"It is going to dawn on them There’s a metal shortage shortly after it dawns on them they need to slash interest rates and you will see a feeding frenzy for assets
I think Jiangxi are smart enough to move before this"
Given the luxury of time (which we don't have) I guess it would be better to sell Cascabel into the feeding frenzy for assets, rather than to the canny early bird who wants to secure the asset before the frenzy kicks off.
Isn't this the constant problem for Solg management in that they have always wanted to sell, and we have always known that selling it was the number one aim. But it's a lot easier to get a high price for it in a hot frenzied market than it is trying to get a decent price from any party in a depressed commodity M&A market where there is not much competition.
And since they properly defined Alpala/Cascabel, this resource M&A frenzy keeps failing to materialize, which means they keep needing to try to hold out a bit longer and a bit longer for it. But holding out longer means they have to keep developing the asset (for quite a while under the pretense/delusion that they were going to construct it), which means more and more fundraises, which means more dilution, which leads to alternatives like royalty deals, which makes the asset less attractive to acquirors and irritates the current major shareholders, who then cause trouble etc etc...
I guess spinning it out waiting for the hot market is a double edged sword in that you hope to sell into a much better market, but you slowly paint yourself into a corner and risk delivering yourself on a plate to the majors at a bargain price and wiping out most of the other shareholders. I think the CGP team, Sangha and co realised Solg had been playing this game long enough and were in danger of hashing the whole thing up, and managed to convince Mather that enough was enough. To paraphrase Warren Irwin, let's try to get our decent chunk of dough out now so we can go and put it to work in lots of other attractive looking assets (before the next resource frenzy really kicks off).
BTW this is just a bit of a thinking out loud ramble. I'm still hoping they can pull off a blinder and extract a decent price from Jiangxi or whoever and the early bird discount won't be to steep.
The CGP shares have already been issued. They are outstanding and just being held by the Canadian subsidiary. So they aren't covered by the resolutions I don't think. Can be sold at any time. They also aren't technically treasury shares according to the Companies Act definition as they weren't bought back out of profits.
Patel family own the bidder for Shanta and are significant shareholders in Shanta. Ketan Patel is board director of both. You can see why the bid is where it is...
Hi Italian. So are you saying Solg could have sold itself for 40-50p a share back in 2017, according to what Mather told you? Sorry haven't had a chance to read all the messages today.
In hindsight that would have been good compared to where we find ourselves today... And there are now probably double the number of shares in issue at least.
I feel that the SP really does need to start moving north and soon... Back when it was 20-30p I think most of us would have felt disappointed with a takeover at 50-60p. Now that would represent a 7x return on the current SP it feels somewhat unrealistic to expect even if there were competing bids.
Sangha was not a board director of Solg so the article is inaccurate in that respect.
Agree Add, it's interesting that Mather was/is one of the leading proponents of selling Cascabel when he spent the preceding 5 years claiming Solg were going to develop it themselves and defend against takeovers. And it seems like DC was hired on the basis he was planning to build it and Mather would have been involved in that hiring process.
The article also pins DC's sacking entirely on the process around the Osisko NSR. It doesn't mention that the Osisko deal was preceded by a debacle over the failed cash box fund raise, which according to bits and pieces I've heard was something DC was pushing for and led to Ingo and Ayten's departures.
Also just for the record although I know people like to ignore this fact due to their bogeyman narrative, but BlackRock did not align themselves with BHP and NCM when Mather was forced out. Their voting history is available on the SEC website, in 2020 and 2021 they voted in favour of all resolutions apart from re-electing Brian Moller. They even voted in favour of Mather's reelection when he barely survived. Yet more lazy journalism just assuming they are lumped in with the majors and against the board at all times.