Member Info for rcgl2

Schlemiel.... just saying...

A lot of the web articles seem to be written by jobbing staffers who are recycling information that we all know already. This Mining Journal article on the other hand seems to have a few more interesting nuggets in it...

"Valuestone's move followed another flurry of speculation in London that Barrick Gold was also putting a slide rule over SolGold" - I don't recall seeing much of a "flurry of speculation" about Barrick besides the usual constant thinking that an outside major could be interested. This line suggests something more substantive?

"He annoyed both Newcrest and BHP earlier this year" - has it ever actually been confirmed that BHP were annoyed? Or has CGP's constant insistence that they were annoyed just become accepted as fact? BHP said nothing publicly on the matter and NM himself said things were nowhere near as bas as was being made out.

"Last week SolGold's Australian finance director left by mutual consent after a longish tenure and the City understands he is to be replaced by a Brit." - is there some significance of having a Brit as CFO? I think Ingo is Austrian so he's obviously not keeping the role full time. Is it a specific Brit they already had lined up, or is their aim to get a Brit onboard and if so, why?

"given the closeness of the PFS early next year" - early next year? So not 2-3 weeks!

When the Pfizer vaccine news hit last week iirc Solg sold off as well as gold, after a promising morning. Today with Moderna's news gold and silver have sold off but not as hard and Solg seems to have held its price much better. Which is good.

Vaccine or not, more CB stimulus is going to be needed to get through the next year or two and you can't just unwind the trillions that have been printed already overnight.

Like the sound of that Red. Can't help but think the Cornerstone all-share offer looks more and more generous by the week as the potential of the regionals begins to be revealed.

Am I right in thinking there is no requirement to name the subscriber for the newly placed shares? At such a small percentage they wouldn't have to disclose their holding and the company could have just said it had placed them with an institutional investor?

In which case it was purely tactical to release their name in the RNS? Both Solg and Valuestone wanted it to be known that they had made this investment.

The Neverending Story

It's on their website Red.

OUR TARGETS
Geographical Focus:
-Management teams and holding companies located in the US, Canada, UK, and Australia
-Target assets primarily located in politically and economically stable areas.

Types of Natural Resource:
-Precious metals (gold, silver)
-Base metals (copper, molybdenum, zinc, lead, tungsten)
-Other (iron ore, lithium, graphite, potash, phosphate)

Types of Investment:
-Equity
-Convertible debentures
-Royalty/streaming
-M & A, restructurings
-Capex financing

Stage:
-Bankable Feasibility Study Stage
-Construction Stage
-Operational stage

Targets
- Deal size US$10-40 million
- Companies with high potential, short time-line to cash flow generation
- Listed or Private companies
- Well-defined reserve potential
- High intrinsic value with appreciation potential

When you say "they don't want to pay the price, that NM wants. ( whatever price that is ) Otherwise a deal would have been done by now." I don't think this is necessarily the case.

Under normal conditions, they don't want to pay the price that NM wants without much more certainty over what they are paying for and much less unquantified risk. NM knows what they have in the ground, it's clear that experienced geologists can tell with some degree of certainty what their initial results are telling them. However, BHP cannot just spend $1-3bn based on initial results and gut feelings. So NM's price (let's say £1.50 - £2 for argument's sake) is what he knows Solg is worth once Alpala and Porvenir have been proven up further.

BHP will not pay that pre Alpala PFS and pre some form of MRE or PEA for Porvenir, because it would be irresponsible for them to do so. Once certain formal milestones have been achieved in order to further define and de-risk what they are paying for, then BHP may well be willing to pay what NM thinks is fair value.

That is under normal conditions. The alternative scenario is that other parties make a move for Solg before these milestones are achieved. Then BHP has to decide whether to stick to its own rules or whether it wants to roll the dice and make a counter-bid, to avoid the whole lot slipping through their grasp.

Could just be that Valuestone has dollars and Solg pays its drilling contractors in dollars, so they would rather just take the funds in USD without the cost of FXing everything in and out?

Sandeep Biswas must be delighted... equity being his preferred source of funding for Solg : )

Lafitte are you wapping67 on ADVFN? Also posted a nice explanation of this yesterday I noticed.

Meanwhile, it's taken me about 4 weeks to get a flu jab at my local Boots.

As a PI, I find Newcrest's attitude to funding annoying. They seem to be saying that instead of trying to avoid dilution for all shareholders, Solg should have just handed larger and larger chunks of the company to its two major shareholders NCM and BHP, and diluted everyone else into oblivion.

They say that by agreeing the FNV deal Solg was giving away value outside the company. True to an extent, but only a small piece of value of one project, Alpala. If they had done another equity raise for $100m with NCM and BHP substantially increasing their stakes, the rest of us PIs would be getting what, diluted by 20% not just on Alpala but on everything else?We'd be losing value on Porvenir, Rio, La Hueca and all the rest too.

In NCM's view we should get diluted further and further as they increased their stake, and then Solg would get taken over by them before it ever got to production, so we would never really see the full upside of holding a smaller stake in a much more valuable pie.

So basically, you are both right. IF a bid comes in from a single party or an outside party, and none of the biggish shareholders want to sell to anyone else, then it becomes very hard for a bid to succeed. IF a bid comes from several of those biggish shareholders cooperating with each other, it becomes very hard for the remaining shareholders to defend it.

I didn't understand what that meant. Can people trade through LSE itself? I'm just here for the BB so not interested in premium features. Also not really sure why they would have suffered any more data or traffic than during any other period of market volatility, which always come along a couple of times a year at least.

Maybe he felt undermined by Ingo, thought he should be running the funding discussions for Alpala. Wasn't included on the new committee. Threw a wobbler?

Agree with that zoros.

LSE was in pretty esteemed company today, a lot of the big US brokerages were down (Fidelity, Schwab, Merrill, Vanguard), as well as Morningstar and Fidelity in UK for a time. But joking aside, that is poor. There have been numerous vaccine trials going on for some time, we have been told to expect a vaccine sometime around the end of this year on several occasions, it was highly predictable that at some point now or in the next couple of months there would be a vaccine related news event which would cause markets to react strongly... you would have thought given Robinhood's much publicised outages during the March sell off that the big brokerages and financial data websites would have sufficient capacity to respond.

And on that point, I'm a bit surprised the markets have reacted this positively, especially given that they are meant to have priced in most news already and it was highly predictable that at some point soon some sort of vaccine breakthrough might occur. Feel like they are getting a bit ahead of themselves... the vaccine will take months to roll out fully across major countries like US or in Europe, it's a two stage vaccine that's only effective a week after the second shot (a month after initial injection), and what about the rest of the world that doesn't have first dibs on what's available? Covid and some level of restrictions are surely going to be around well into next year.

Also the US market has been led by the stay at home big tech plays, with poor depth across much of the SPX, and fuelled by massive amounts of money printing. With this news is money just going to rotate out of big tech into other sectors? Will the money printing continue? Surely there must be some long term "scarring" as the economists call it, so can markets really justify heading to new all time highs at a point when the pandemic is still far from solved and we will at best return to an economy that is 90% of what it was before Covid happened?

And if money printing and stimulus is going to continue, the savage sell off in precious metals today seems quite overdone to me. I can't see central banks just coming turning off the money printers before they go home this evening on the basis of this news alone.

Also I've noticed that Solgold hasn't been super highly correlated to gold over the last few months, probably as it isn't producing any yet... until today that is! Seems to have gone up with PMs this morning and straight back down with them this afternoon. What about the vast quantities of "future facing" copper which Solg has in abundance, that is mean to be needed for the economic recovery from covid?

Good to be included but it's only a $15m fund of which Solg is 0.05% (just over $7k worth). So not gonna be explosive unfortunately.

Indeed, her performance in Under Siege was top drawer ;)