Member Info for rcgl2

They said 80% turnout, which is high. I think the average is about 70% at best at AGMs? If the usual 70% had voted then BHP, NCM and CGP's combined c.35% holdings would have been almost 50% of the vote and enough to unseat NM. So I think the outreach campaign and high turnout saved NM.

Addicknt, re our conversations on this a few weeks back, I think my hopes that it was just a nice attempt at shareholder engagement were wrong, and you were correct when you said they were worried about passing the key resos.

But... the special resolutions that would have disapplied pre-emption rights were not passed, and the authority to disapply pre-emption up to 15% from last year's resolutions has now expired as of today's AGM. So does that not mean that the company has to issue any new shares that are offered for cash on a pre-emptive basis? BHP and NCM would have the chance to maintain their c13% holdings at that level? Before we get carried away with thoughts of diluting them into oblivion.

They said approx 80% of eligible votes were cast. So BHP, NCM and CGP's approx 35% in total translates to roughly 43% of the votes cast? That is to say, BHP, NCM and CGP all voted against NM re-election, and virtually all other votes were in favour?

Interesting numbers!

Always amazes me that shareholders vote against even the mundane formalities like approving the audited accounts. 10.6% voted against that. Why even hold shares in a company if you're going to vote against the completely uncontroversial business of the company.

Basically the AGM is a formality and they release drilling news as and when they have it? There is no hidden agenda, no second order tactics. What you see is what you get?

Nice news though!

It says in their RNS that more than $11bn has been invested in OT to date. And a lot more still to go. Big numbers.

That says as much about the French and their protectionist attitude to their big companies as it does about Bloomberg!

Smith trader, if the SP goes up under either scenario, why hasn't it gone up already? Everyone should be trying to buy it now in anticipation of it going up either way.

But the decline from previous highs was stopped and reversed, and it has been rising all year (taking out the March dip which was beyond control). I would say it was stagnating if the price was still kicking around the low 20s now, or even still trending down.

We could argue this til the cows come home!

I think it's a bit harsh to say it's stagnating though Z. Share price is up about 75% since a year ago. The CFP is due very soon on Alpala, albeit delayed but with good reason considering the world is in the grip of a global pandemic that shut down whole economies and massively restricted travel. CFP is progressing and as was pointed out earlier lots of expressions of interest received. $150 FNV deal was inked which has funded Alpala through to DFS, which I doubt many us were expecting before it was announced. So progress without significant further dilution to us so far. It's called the Lassonde Curve and not the Lassonde Line for a reason...

Also drilling is happening apace at various targets right now, and a moderately high level of confidence that Porv may be another Tier 1 asset. There is plenty going on.

Hi Quady, I was kind of just thinking out loud. Like you I am not invested in GGP and have done very little research on it except occasionally looking at the LSE board and asking questions to Zoros and others. The point I was trying to make is that the general theme whenever it gets mentioned is "NM is mad for trying to take transition Solg to a producer, he should do what GGP have done to release value and stick to exploring". But this morning, GGP have appointed a new CEO who has mining experience and people on that board now seem to be all excited about GGP transitioning to a producer. Just occurred to me that the two may not be so different after all.

OK so one of the reasons people seem to keep mentioning GGP is that they think their model is what Solg should be doing, stick to what you're good at as an explorer. Make a discovery, prove it up, JV or farm-in with a major who will actually mine it, and use the proceeds to keep exploring and proving up the next prospect. Wash, rinse, repeat.

But looking at what GH is saying about leaving it seems he's standing aside for someone who has much greater mining experience. I can see talk on the GGP board about mining Scallyway themselves. So in fact, after JV'ing on Havieron, maybe GGP are now also trying to transition to becoming a producer? And people over there see this as a good thing, $8bn mcap here we come etc.

So maybe, if NM just pulled that ace out of his sleeve and JV'ed or otherwise monetized Alpala so that Solg could move on to mining its other prospects, the models of the two companies are not that far apart after all? A big difference being location and timing, with everything taking a lot longer in Ecuador than Australia for obvious reasons. But otherwise two versions of the same thing??

That's interesting... I keep seeing people comparing NM to GH and saying what a great job GH has done producing value for GGP etc. Is that bad news he's leaving? Or is it something Solg should pay attention to, knowing when even your star performer has reached their limit and you need someone else to take you to the next level?

Zoros, I realise everyone who holds GGP is currently strutting around thinking they are the God of Investing incarnate on Earth, but comments like these posted below would be setting off alarm bells bigtime for me. But apparently you aren't allowed to question whether it's overvalued on that board or the high priests of Greatland will have you thrown out of the temple and cast into the wilderness along with Miagi.

>GGP will look after you, only if you look after yourself, your next set of decisions will permeate every aspect of your life.
>Very few people get one opportunity in life to make a life changing decision, this is your time.
>Be grateful, grasp this opportunity with all your might, you'll never see it again.
>Don't live a life of regret, this is as a sure thing that you will ever encounter on this wholly rigged system.
>When you're offered the chance to beat the system, grab it and run with it.

Speaking of CGP, I see that Zoros got a reply directly from Warren Irwin on the CGP CEO board. If that poster is WI, which seems like he is. Warren definitely not a fan of NM judging by his posts.

I meant before mate. He could have always stayed just under 10.

OWAN, according to the filing insiders took 380,000 shares out of a total of 1,540,000 so not half. Rosseau didn't seem to have participated.

But I don't think Irwin's little decrease means that much, if he was that fussed about avoiding the insider reporting Irwin would have kept his holdings just below 10% rather than just over 10%.

It says his stake has gone down not up.

Since the last report filed by Rosseau under Part 4 of NI 62-103 for the issuer, there has
been a decrease of 10,000 in the number of common shares. Based on the number of
currently issued and outstanding common shares as at December 9, 2020 (as reported by
the issuer), there has been a net decrease of 0.56% in Rosseau’s securityholding
percentage.

The uncrossing trade isn't necessarily a single buyer or seller though is it? I thought it was the price at which the largest volume of orders can be matched out of all the bids and offers submitted into the auction? So if there are various bids or asks at the same price they can be aggregated into one UT if that can match the largest volume?