Member Info for RodneyT

Hi NMM,

I took another look at the register alongside the new DGR and NM Form 8.3, and you were right to question it. I had essentially counted part of the holding twice. The register shows several different custody lines under NM's name which made the total look larger than it really is. But the new RNS is the important one here because it tells us the true beneficial position under the Takeover Code. WIthin the RNS, NM personally owns about 84.25 million shares which is 2.8 %, not 3 %.DGR owns about 204.15 million shares which is 6.8 %.Together, that is 9.6 %, exactly as stated in the RNS. The Samuel entities in the RNS are listed as controllers of this same 9.6 % position. They are not shown as holding a separate block on top of it. So the old idea that Samuel had an extra 2.8 % on the register does not appear anywhere in the actual disclosures. Once you start from that corrected baseline, the overall picture is still very strong for the NM side. You then add Sangha and Maxit with about 5.1 % and Tenstar with about 3.6 %, both of which naturally sit in the NM aligned group.

That takes the NM leaning side to roughly 18 % even before you consider insiders, long term Australian holders, foundations or aligned retail. So yes, the hard formal core is 9.6 %, not 12.6%, but the wider influence is still more than enough to shape or block any deal. Thank you for querying and making your point NMM.

Darren,

Given the guesstimate to be in the vicinity of what it actually is, those shares are worth having for a suitor so we can expect all sorts of effort to fragment the group. That effort could come in many guises as we know. Again, perhaps we should emulate what NM and Co have done today and show unity. Only folk who want to buy these assets will benefit from fragmenting our small shareholder group. True price discovery is vital for us.

Hi Darren,

I've used the Wilkie on this - just a series of 'what if' scenarios.

Best guesstimate given current register is the most reasonable reading is that private shareholders account for about 25% of the company.

Even when you adjust the main areas of uncertainty, especially the proportion of nominee platform holdings that truly belong to retail investors, the outcomes generally fall within a broad range of roughly 23% to 35%.

The estimates cluster close to 26%, and almost all scenarios end up between 25.5% and 27.5%.

In summary, no matter how you vary the assumptions, the calculations continue point to something very close to one quarter of the register being held by genuine private investors. Hope this guesstimate helps.

Great day for true price discovery and small shareholders, bad day for cheap takeovers?

Today's disclosure confirms that the NM bloc almost certainly already holds a blocking stake under the Takeover Code. Even using only verified and conservative numbers, the NM core consisting of DGR Global at 6.80%, NM personally at 3.02%, and the Samuel entities at 2.80% reaches 12.62%, which is already slightly larger than the JCC position at 12.18% and is now formally recognised as an aligned group. Were the Sangha and Maxit holding of 5.11% to be added, the bloc rises to 17.73%. Including the Tenstar position of 3.59%, another long term non PRC aligned holder, brings the total to 21.32%. With insiders, historical Australian supporters, and smaller aligned retail positions, reaching the 25% threshold needed to block a Scheme requires only a few additional percent, and all available evidence suggests those holders exist. The funding stability created by the Samuel facility strengthens cohesion even further. On this basis, the NM bloc is very likely already at or above the effective blocking threshold, making any undervalued or hostile bid unworkable without their support. I realise my assessment of Maxit is moot but welcome views given the RNS today and how frank it was.

Agree. LH.

This news is a major positive development for SolGold. DGR, NM, and the Samuel entities have now formally declared themselves as a coordinated interest group under the Takeover Code, openly confirming control of 9.6 percent and signalling unified intent. Combined with DGR’s strengthened funding position, this removes any possibility of forced selling and makes clear that a tightly aligned core will be driving the takeover process. JCC can no longer rely on fragmented holders or opportunistic pricing, and any bidder will now need to engage with a confident, well-funded, long-term block. The effect is simple and very bullish: true price discovery has become far more likely, and the path to a properly valued, competitive outcome is now stronger than ever. True price discovery is what we would all like I am sure given how valuable the company's assets are. Once again, bravo management team at Solgold. This time it is NM giving clarity. A clear statement of unity. Perhaps we should all do the same here? Fragmentation will only help those who wish to own our assets for as little as possible!

Thank you RBM, I totally agree. The current share price action is virtually identical to back in October when the SP tried to get through 20p. Fell back to 16p then soared through the 20's and into the 30's. I agree with you that news from the company about operational issues would be ideal. This company can go to production on its own if it wants to. Repeatedly demonstrating that to the market, suitors and potential suitors has worked beautifully over the last 8 months. Let's keep it going DV.

:-) that made me chuckle, Add, but you're too valuable here to write jokes for Peter Kay. Please stay here and don't apply for that role. I think there are other candidates.. :-)

With the Jiangxi deadline fast approaching, pressure is building and not just around the bid. Just weeks ago, we saw the preaching of a “5p raise incoming,” sowing panic in an attempt to drag sentiment through the floor. That call has aged like milk.

Now the price is surging, institutions are quietly loading up, and reality is doing what it always does i.e. catching up. A 300% + rise since DV took office, Takeover Panel involvement, accelerated project momentum, and heavyweight interest in Cascabel. That is not spin. Just look at the share register and see how many new institutions now feature.

Whatever comes next, whether Jiangxi ups its bid or a rival steps in, the re-rating is real and in motion. Company operational updates will add fuel to the fire and boost the share price themselves. Once again, tremendous work DV and team. So pleased that you are in charge of this company and I believe you work for the benefit of shareholders.

MS You're right in my view. :-) Really happy to own shares in this company. Wish I could buy more but don't have the cash to do so.

Stack, I don't think you did but I genuinely admire your consistency. Not in accuracy, of course, but in the way every firm prediction you make quietly vanishes the moment reality refuses to cooperate.

We’ve had a 300 + % rise and the Takeover Panel formally involved, yet you’re still pretending your famous “5p raise incoming” call was somehow reasonable. It wasn’t. It was spectacularly wrong.

And here’s the bit you keep dancing around: if you were so certain back then, and if people actually did act on what you said, why have you never once acknowledged it or apologised? You can’t talk with absolute authority one minute, then shrug and say “everyone has an agenda” the moment it suits you. That’s not insight. That’s evasion.

Since when were you concerned about the welfare of investors here, Stack? You advised that a 5p raise would be forthcoming then left that in the lay-by as the share price soared. Did you ever comment to those who sold in the 6's and 7's having been influenced and frightened by what you said? Having recently referred to others as 'cowards' here, please be bold and candid and address those who may have lost so much as a result of your previous remarks.

That's right, Stack, that's right. And you were right all along, Solgold is heading for a 5p raise. Would that be before Christmas? JCC, Dan Vujicic? They really must learn from you as must we of course. :-)

As shareholders, we want any interested bidders to re price and act. If they choose not to, then the company moves ahead with taking TAM into production, and the valuation will naturally follow. My view is that the Board understands this dynamic very well and is positioning for exactly that outcome.

The next steps are quite straightforward. A TAM resource upgrade, building on recent RNSs, would confirm the expanded shallow economic tonnage and lift the share price from around 31p toward 40p. A starter pit PEA would then formalise the economics already shown in the current corporate presentations, taking us into the high 40s or around 50p. Finally, a streaming term sheet with Franco Nevada or Osisko would provide the market with clear external validation and a credible funding pathway, removing uncertainty and pushing the price into the mid-50s or even the low 60s.

Given that SolGold is already in a UK Takeover Panel offer period, each of these developments would make it harder for any suitor to sit on their hands. They would be expected to re price and take action as the company strengthens its hand.

These moves could happen at any stage from now as the company works on our behalf to achieve maximum value from our investment in Solgold. Well done DV and team. You have taken us from 6p to where we are now and subject to Takeover Panel rules in 8 short months!

The derisked estimated NAV of this asset is 164p at least. Our CEO concurs.

IP, for months you have referred to 150p + for a takeover price. Based on where we are now and the newsflow we expect, you're much closer with your prediction than others are with their '5p raise' divination! Who'd have thought it, eh? ;-)

Stack, '26p as the ceiling'? Perhaps you should offer your services as a joke writer to Peter Kay. On what basis do you justify that comment given all we know about Solgold and recent events?

Stack, What would you like to say, if anything, to the people out there who were influenced by your 5p raise prediction and, as a result, did not invest here. Have you got anything to say to those people?

Stack, I accepted your commiserations a few weeks ago when I went behind the sofa and bought a few more at about 17p. The price fell a little subsequently which made you chuckle. Glad I wasn't influenced by your opinon and kept them - as I said at the time, wish I could have bought more. What do you have to say to the folk out there who may have been influenced by your (infamous) '5p raise' prediction? Is it time for you to 'clean the slate' and reset yourself?

Agree, Fort. I tried to be conservative and even then I had NM and those close to him as the biggest holders here. Larger than JCC. Pretty easy to double the % without being unrealistic based on a good look at the share register. I really like the way things have come to this. NM and friends have played their cards well. Would like to see some technical updates from the company this week. Some news to show progress at TAM or maybe even news on CIPA.

DGR’s renewed use of the Samuel facility has removed any pressure for it to sell SolGold shares and has reinforced a stable, long term aligned position alongside NM and the Samuel family, together holding a minimum of 12.62%. This cohesive core is now fully funded and under no obligation to accept early or modest proposals, meaning no bidder can rely on opportunism or liquidity pressure to secure control. Solgold is free to get on with de-risking the assets and moving forward to production in line with its stated plans. With JCC unable to dictate terms on its own, the market is now far more likely to see a genuine and competitive price discovery process at SolGold, reflecting the asset’s underlying strategic value. Looking forward to the next 3 weeks or so at Solgold. Hopefully, we'll get updates issued this week. It all looks strong to me.

I've had a look at the DGM update and have tried to be reasonable in relation to the % of shares NM can 'speak for'. I have checked the share register and the Samuel family shares will more than likely be held via various nominee accounts which is consistent with how family offices work.

DGR’s renewed use of the Samuel facility strengthens its ability to hold its full 6.8 % SolGold stake and reinforces a long term, value focused stance. When combined with NM’s 3.02 % holding and the Samuel family’s 2.80%, this creates a minimum aligned group of 12.62 percent, the most cohesive strategic bloc on the register.

JCC’s 12.18 % remains the largest single line item, but it is not aligned in the same way and therefore carries less strategic weight. In any takeover scenario, bidders will need the support of this Mather core group, which is unlikely to back early or modest proposals.

In short, the DGR Mather Samuel alignment quietly holds more influence than JCC, and any successful approach to SolGold will need to engage with this core group. I am sure that NM can drum up more support if need be. The highest plausible total % is about 23% total so about 18% if we split the difference. I suspect NM speaks the the Board and the other parties regularly and that they know much more than this. I am just saying that I think the DGR move is excellent in relation to our journey from here to be about genuine price discovery i.e. a proper market on a quest to find fair value for the Company's assets.