Member Info for RodneyT

At the pub, SC and NM didn't agree on much and one got the feeling that they were like heavyweight boxers in their respective corners keen to knock the c--p out of eachother...NM in particular. That said, they agreed with one another on one thing: the NAV of Solgold at that time was 105p. With that in mind, Stas' sketch looks pretty sound to me.

Add, the introduction of convertible bond financing would be of huge concern and I hope this does not happen. Under no circumstances should the board of this company go down this route. The LSE is littered with companies where LTSGs have been wiped out due to the use of convertibles. In most cases, advisers and insiders do very well indeed.

Whatever you say, Stack. What a funny fellow you are!

All the work I have done was based on public information and what I have said was written under the title 'possible scenario'. That is all I wish to say.

No, Add, it was not.

Why don't you go through each thing I have said and research it yourself? Nothing I have said is deceitful, specious or aimed to mislead.

Add, I never try to spin and always try to be objective. If I find relevant facts, I will refer to them. Based on what I have said, PS was involved with an excellent sale for Glencore and it seems the PRC were happy too.

The PRC demand for a secure copper supply is in the spotlight due to demand for EV, grids and infrastructure projects and the need for China to diversify as Chile's Codelco state copper is in decline. The PRC may regard Solgold as a 20-40 year national resource investment. Were JCC to move and launch a bid for the company prior to ASX listing and thus avoid FIRB, to win outright, it would need to bid an amount 1. that the Board would recommend immediately 2. High enough that BHP, for example, could't rationally justify a higher counter-bid 3. High enough that retail investors and others would roll over happily. My research suggests that anything around 25p or less triggers a counter-bid immediately, 30p still vulnerable to intervention from BHP, for example, 35p, the board is divided and others still tempted to counter. 40p Hard for BHP or others to counter due to capital discipline and long pay back models. 45p effectively kills competition triggering Board-wide acceptance. 50p+ likely to wipe out counter-bid probability. BUT If we look at MMG and Las Bambas, we can see that the PRC will pay what it takes provided access is certain. For Las Bambas a company was forced to sell it to MMG (owned by China Minmetals and backed by the Chinese government) in 2014.The asset was widely seen as Tier 1 (very large copper resource, long mine life, high capital requirement). A deal was done at what many called a “full strategic premium” — i.e. not the public market value, but the value required to secure strategic supply. Analysts at the time estimated the deal at ~1.0x to 1.1x NAV — high for a greenfield asset but acceptable for Chinese state buyers seeking long-term secure supply. Essentially, MMG paid full intrinsic value — not bargain value, not discounted for execution risk. Based on full ‘Las Bambas style full premium’, an equivalent Solgold sale would be at £1 to £1.20. The company that sold to MMG was Glencore. The sale price was $5.85 billion and the name ‘Paul Smith’ Investor Relations Manager featured regularly on documentation during the sale in 2014. Can we have a re-run here please, Mr Smith?

Well said, Stas

Just read your own words over and over Eloro. You don't speak for me. There's a group representing about 60 million shares and we shall see it the group needs to me mobilised. Nobody bullied anyone to join anything. As for being Nick's 'lackey', I don't know Nick Mather and have no personal or business connection with him. I met him at the pub and have had email contact with him. I do respect his business record and what he has achieved for small shareholders in the past.

My objective here, Red, is to assist in any way I can to get a fair outcome for all small shareholders. In the event that I end up making a fortune out of my holding here whilst other small shareholders miss out, I will continue to work as hard as I can to assist them and, where necessary, hold the company and its advisers to account, no matter how long this takes. As a related point, it is immaterial given the above whether I am up, down or sideways on profit/loss. My objective is as stated above. Of course, we all have our own objectives. This is mine.

Stas you Maestro! love the way you replaced 'sh*t' with 'selective messaging'! Bravo! Mushroom Treatment is something so many LTSHs here and elsewhere relate to. Thanks for keeping it real Stas and welcome once again.

I am sure DV and the other insiders are well-versed justifying their actions Panda. The same folk who say nothing whilst those options were granted with HP predicting a 57p SP in June 2025 and immediate vesting hidden away whilst the RNS droning on about vesting dates. One can only hope for more than one bidder as and when.

Sound comments in my view, Add. There was a choice to grant options at a more palatable price,!20p, for example. They didn't do that. We shall see. The grantees and other insiders have optionality and are largely indemnified.. Many LTSHs do not. Their actions speak so loudly, I can't hear their words.

Red, I've done to death already my opinions about millions of free options held by management along with shares held by management at low average prices so that they can make large sums on a low price takeover whereas many LTSHs would be rinsed. I have also explained the difficulty assessing nominee accounts and who actually owns shares and how those parties may vote.

From this price you look great, Stas. There are many LTSHs with averages in the high 20's and 30's and have not been able to average down or be granted millions of options at zero cost with no capital at risk, no opportunity cost and immediate vesting rights based on a broad set of conditions outlined in the MD&A (the vesting dates referred to in the RNS are effectively window dressing. Alastair Campbell would be proud).

Hi Stas20,

I agree. Let's hope that any in-coming bid at a large premium (a 25p offer, say) to the current share price will be countered. The company's own broker has a June 2025 SP target of 57p whilst options were recently granted to our CEO and CFO at 7p. SC and NM didn't agree on much as far as I could gather but they both agreed on a 106p NAV for the company back in January. For LTSHs, the main risk here is being sold out too cheaply. It is difficult to see how a bid for 25p could succeed but it is not impossible due to the setting we have at board level and the difficulty of assessing nominee accounts and true ownership. I think you've come in at an ideal time, Stas, welcome to the pleasure dome!

Thank you for conveying your opinion so eloquently IP. What effect do you expect that to have on your readers?

It's 1 million shares showing as a £70,000 sale. Could just as well be a buy (to help close the short) but who knows ? :-)

TSX Solgold shares are fungible for LSE ones via Computashare. There's a small fee and it takes 5-10 days.