ET - yes there are change of control clauses in the FNV agreement. Any future transferee, assignee, owner etc would have to agree to be bound by the terms of the NSR. So FNV will get their royalty when Alpala is built and producing regardless of who owns or controls it.
For my understanding, if Marex is acting on behalf of a client why would they become a registered market maker for Solg? Doesn't that oblige them to make a two way market at all times? Why wouldn't they just act behind the scenes to work whatever order or build whatever position the client wants?
I think the selling of PMs is way overdone. Fundamentals haven't changed that much in the last few days. I know yields have ticked up a bit in expectation of inflation but the fed and other central banks have pretty much said they're going to keep rates pinned as low as possible, so real yields are going to be negative, which is still good for PMs. Also silver has industrial uses so the reflation trade should not be killing it. PMs will go higher... IMO of course.
Gold, silver and miners have been taken to the woodshed today. Selling here is not to do with investors having some in depth view of Nick Mather or Solg's progress or the delay in news... IMO it's just arbitrary selling of all things gold related.
People probably selling miners to buy bitcoin or something. Worry not, this too shall pass.
Hi Addicknt, NM has suggested that selling Alpala would not be optimal due to the tax liability, but I have often wondered if that is too narrow a view and not looking at the bigger picture. It may not be optimal in itself but could be better for the wider portfolio. If they sold Alpala but only kept 70% of the proceeds or whatever the net amount would be, that could still be the best route if that 70% was enough money to prove up all of the other wholly owned targets without any more material dilution or external funding.
So are we inferring that if there was a master plan, it was that? BHP and NCM wanted to fund Alpala through more equity, to themselves, which would have begun the steady dilution of the company into their hands. But NM threw a provocative curve ball with the FNV deal and Valuestone placing, which although it irritated BHP and NCM massively did push them away from a dilutive equity raise. NM now makes a public display of contrition and offers an olive branch, but in the form of a JV for Alpala on more favourable terms, rather than the placing which would have diluted us in respect of all the assets. If a JV unlocks substantial value, everyone is happy, and Solg and the majors can look to repeat the same with the other prospects as they get proven up.
Reflecting on the funding stoush, Mr Mather said it was clear that taking on the Franco debt had annoyed BHP and Newcrest and he wanted to avoid such tensions in future. ''Obviously it upset BHP and Newcrest and we regret that and we will be taking steps to ensure that upset does not happen again,'' he said. ''It is not good and we recognise we have two major shareholders as disenfranchised as BHP and Newcrest felt they were, and we don't want them to feel that way and we will be taking steps to try and make sure that situation does not perpetuate''.
It implies that NM was surprised that BHP and NCM took the FNV funding so badly and he didn't realise that it would upset them or lead to protests. I simply cannot believe he would be that naive? He must have known that by taking the FNV funding to avoid further dilution into the hands of BHP and NCM, he was going against their wishes and would likely incur their displeasure? DId he expect them to say "well done Nick, you've done a great job of protecting everyone else's interests ahead of ours"? Of course not. As soon as the deal was announced the general feeling was that he had got one over on the majors and was clearly playing hard ball to avoid a gradual dilution of all the smaller shareholders.
And the Valuestone announcement was surely nothing less than provocative to BHP and NCM, it was clearly a signal of intent or at least of what possibilities were available.
It doesn't seem right that NM is suddenly shocked that BHP and NCM are unhappy and is now going to go grovelling to smooth things over with them.
"BHP and Newcrest were not the only SolGold shareholders with concerns about Mr Mather, with 44.7 per cent of the company's register voting against his re-election to the SolGold board shortly before Christmas."
This is factually incorrect. 44.7% of the 80% of the company's register who voted at the AGM voted against his re-election. It was essentially only BHP, NCM and NCM's lapdog CGP that voted against. It was not 44.7% of the whole register.
If there was no risk there should be no reward. That's what you get a return for, taking on risk.
Just to add to that fairly eclectic list of megastructures, what about the humble Scottish parliament building? 3 years late and 10 times over budget. Or on a larger scale, look at Crossrail... Also didn't the LHC break down rather spectacularly after it was fired up and took about 2 years to fix?
Yes or just holders managing position size and risk. If you bought 1m shares at an average of 20.5p maybe you'd want to lock in a 100% gain on half of that at 41p and take some risk off the table, who knows.
Why do you care? I think there's too much unnecessary about worrying about shorting. And I really don't think there's much short interest in Solg. Why short an explorer that's pumping out news every month and is widely viewed as a takeover target?
I tried drawing a trend line on the daily chart from the Porvenir gap up and annoyingly we seem to be be breaking down below the trend.
So I zoomed out a bit more and drew a trend from the March panic sell off low, and it actually looks like today's low is bouncing off that lovely rising trend line which we've already bounced off twice. Tells me this is going higher from here :-)