Member Info for rcgl2

If everyone is convinced that this will definitely end up in a major's hands, then why would any holders accept a low ball bid? As Quady said, we aren't financially backed into a corner and we have lots of other potential assets. Solg can reject an offer and carry on its way.

I know people here are saying they've been here years, they'd be happy with 60p just to get out etc etc... But let's say BHP or NCM (or both of them together) bid 60p a share next month after PFS. Why say yes to that? Clearly they want it. Clearly if they don't get it, another major such as Barrick may want it. Clearly 60p is nowhere near the maximum they could afford to pay. So why say yes to 60p, when you virtually know a higher offer will be forthcoming if 60p is rejected?

You are basically being given a choice, a) say yes and sell for 60p, or b) say no and you will be offered more than 60p shortly afterwards. Why would anyone chose a)?

If you think there's no way Solg will take this to production, then why not hold out for at least £1? Realistically, does anyone think if BHP bid 60p and it's rejected, they and all the other majors will be sitting there thinking no way are paying a bit more for this? Of course not, Alpala is worth a decent chunk of that alone and Solg has 12 other prospects. If just one of those is another Alpala then that's double the value and it's likely several of the others will prove very valuable assets.

You can summarise his attitude as "we think the industry would be better served if the established global majors take control of all the best assets and squeeze out all competitors and prevent newcomers from disrupting our global oligopoly".

Basically what's been happening in every other industry over the last decade or so too. Having said that, if that means a major forking out big bucks to take Alpala and the rest out from Solgold, I will be happy to take their money.

Q, interesting that you mention the possibility of BT being subject to a bid and taken private, possibly by private equity groups. This is exactly my point about why Solgold could be taken over by a major and yet Solg itself, all of its subsidiaries, governance, licences etc would remain in place, including most importantly its holding in ENSA. The fact the top co is acquired and taken private does not have to mean the group structure below it changes.

Think of the absolutely critical role BT plays in UK infrastructure and national security, it is the backbone of our communications network, it owns the entirety of the openreach broadband infrastructure, it is subject to massive regulatory oversight and obligations. If any takeover did occur it would no doubt be subject to government sign off and no end of guarantees and commitments from the new owners. However, if it did happen, the BT group and its current businesses would remain as they are now immediately after the takeover.

That makes ENSA's water licences look like nothing in comparison. However, a BT takeover is a realistic possibility as they have instructed advisers to defend against it. By the same virtue, a takeover of Solg is not unrealistic, irrespective of the licences and commitments of its subsidiaries.

"as people posted stuff off the internet"... to be fair it was an extract from the UK Takeover Code which I happened to obtain from the Takeover Panel's website. You make it sound like I got it from Mail Online or something! ;-)

FWIW, just topped up my holding now by about 50% now the price is down around the 24 area... wasn't sure it would come back down below 25p again given the recent slightly higher range and the prospect of more news being dropped any time now.

That's me done now, fully loaded, pretty pleased with my average and now just wait and see what the next 6 months has in store.

Bozi are you joking? Punter just copied and pasted WI's tweet and the replies to it, including the oddball comment.

I don't have a view one way or the other as to who would build it the fastest, but purely for the sake of discussion, in what way are Newcrest block caving experts then if the ability to build such a mine can just be bought in by a company that has no experience of mining at all? NCM's block caving expertise has been much discussed. Surely this must convey some advantage when it comes to actually delivering a fully functional block caved mine?

What is the source for that? Where is it stated that ENSA will dissolve? My point is, a buyer can leave Solgold as is, with all of its existing governance and corporate structure etc in place. Solgold will still own ENSA. It's just one party will own a majority of Solgold, whereas currently no single entity owns/controls more than approx 20%.

*permits, not patents

Hi Quady - regarding licences, patents, government relations etc etc, what is to stop a third party just acquiring Solgold, taking it private, and continuing to run it as a wholly owned subsidiary? All the licences and permits seem to sit in ENSA, of which Solg is the majority shareholder and operator. Why couldn't someone buy Solg out, leave the existing corporate structures, governance practices, management team in place, but with a new C suite and board.

NM states that he wants Solgold to become the BHP of Ecuador. What if they actually just became BHP Ecuador?

The fact this is in Ecuador is the very reason this is such an exciting prospect. How often do you get the chance to invest early doors in a smaller company that is in pole position to exploit an essentially untouched market, i.e. mining in Ecuador. There's so much more potential upside than investing in established global players who are dominating already well tapped markets and countries.

An annoying change in markets over the last few years has been private money increasingly getting in early on exciting companies which only come to the public markets later and later in their lifecycles, largely as a payday for those early private investors. The opportunities to get in on the ground floor of companies with big potential in new markets become more limited for ordinary PIs like us. This to me is a decent opportunity with big upside potential for fairly limited downside risk.

Listen to what Paul Brink the CEO of Franco Nevada said in that recent interview:

"It will be a block cave, but you've got BHP and Newcrest invested in the story"

He just casually mentioned that as if it's no drama, their involvement is a plus point... I realise that it doesn't really matter to FNV who builds the mine so long as it gets built, but to me that implies that it doesn't have to be a zero sum game between Solg and a major. It's not takeover or go-alone as binary outcomes. Highly likely a collaborative approach could occur, either earn in, formal JV or whatever.

Quady - "Companies don't lay awake at night thinking, oh dear if nobody buys us, then we are not viable."

I think that might be exactly what's keeping the Cornerstone board up at night ;-)

Hi Steve - why do you think it's a given that Kier will lose money on all its contracts? Are you saying that there is a structural flaw in Kier's models that cannot be changed which means it will never be profitable? It essentially has a new management team, whose focus now is on cutting costs, managing debt and being more selective in bidding for contracts. Surely it must be possible to operate a company of Kier's size in this sector profitably, why do you think Kier's current management will not be able to achieve that.

I agree that it is quite possible they won't succeed, and that Kier will still go under. Hence the level of risk in the stock. But there must be a possibility of succeeding no?

Regarding your question about the big banks, Citi have been hired by Solgold as corporate advisers in order to protect Solgold against a hostile takeover. Nick Mather's stated aim is to take Alpala to production, or otherwise for Solg to get acquired at a price that represents close to full value. The current share price of 26p is nowhere near full value and leaves Solgold open to takeover bids at a price of say 50p - £1, which in NM's view is still well below full value. Therefore Citi will be advising Solgold on corporate strategy and tactics in order to protect themselves against such a bid. Solg is paying Citi for this service and it does not represent a view by Citi on the investment potential or otherwise of Solgold.

Stockbrokers and the research divisions of banks will produce analyst's reports, including share price targets and buy/hold/sell recommendations on the shares that they cover. Larger and better known companies will be covered by many if not all major brokers and banks. Smaller and lesser known companies will often not be covered by the bigger equities outfits. The other day, BofA initiated coverage of Solgold with an 83p price target. In my opinion this is a good sign when one of the largest banks in the world is covering a smaller Mcap stock like Solgold. The more analyst coverage a stock has, the more likely it will be for fund managers and institutional investors to have it on their radar and potentially invest in it. Lack of analyst coverage can hold back some stocks as it limits the audience of prospective investors.

The research and analyst coverage is a product in itself that the banks and brokers are putting out and or selling to their clients. It is meant to be independent from their own sales and trading divisions and they are not just pumping stocks that they own themselves (large US banks are prevented from prop trading for their own account anyway nowadays). However they will have their own wealth and investment management divisions who will feed their research to their clients, so again in my opinion it is a positive development for banks such as BofA to initiate coverage.

Personally I think for a novice investor putting all of your money into one investment is insanity. Doesn't matter what share it is or how good you think its prospects are, it's asking for trouble. Would suggest a new investor put most of their money into a core portfolio of cheap funds and then only invest a portion they can afford to lose into individual equities, especially high risk ones.

Some of you guys have been investing longer than I've been alive, if you really want to put all your investible funds into one asset like Solg then that's fair enough, I'm sure you're fully aware of what you're doing and the risks you're taking. For a new investor I think it's just crazy. You might have been lucky and picked a winner in Solg, you might not. If you're investing with no research based on what a mate said then it will be just blind luck imo.

Very interesting fact Gino, thanks.

Thanks and good luck.

I doubled down during the march panic, got my average down to 20p. Mentioned to a friend that I'd bought more, she went and invested off the back of that and got in at 12p. Feel like I've done my bit for the community already.

Not invested in GGP and barely know anything about it other than the basic facts of the Haveiron project, but since it keeps getting so much airtime here, I thought I'd have a quick look on the GGP board for the first time... Did not fill me with comfort reading some of those posts... very frothy, people piling in left right and centre with their thoughts on how it would definitely go to 50p, 80p, £1 etc. Expectations of a near constant flow of better than expected results pretty much forever. Personally I think the GDXJ addition has got people overly lathered up, if it's telegraphed that far in advance then of course everyone will load up in expectation and then there will be disappointment afterwards. Also the general tone is pretty much only positive, today's hefty drop is being mostly touted as a buying opportunity, MMs playing games and deliberately manipulating the price or just a healthy shake out.

Of course they may all be correct, what do I know, but I expect the ones who have done their homework and know their stuff got in at single pennies or less and anyone reading the board now and piling in may be in for a surprise. Just my feeling but when something becomes so frothy everyone gets a bit blinkered and it only goes up... until suddenly it doesn't.

Solg board actually gives me much more confidence that this is still undervalued and lots of potential. We shouldn't shout down negative opinions on here, it's very healthy to hear them and factor them into our thinking so we keep assessing our position here. I'd much rather hear reasoned positive and negative views with the positives winning on balance than just rabid frothing at the mouth about how high the price will go.