Member Info for RodneyT

# virtue..sorry

2024 was an excellent year for investors in Solgold by vertue of the various developments we know about supported by the upward movement in gold and silver over the same period. It was a much less attractive year for traders of solgold shares although money could still be made over various periods; particularly by those who also short where possible or use CFDs to do so. If one believes that the share price and value of a business mean essentially the same thing then there's probably not much point buying shares. An index tracker might be more attractive to a person with that view. In any case, the market in Solgold shares last year was about 4 million shares traded day to day and small deal sizes. With just over 3,000 millions issued, small deals and volume have a disproportionate affect on share price. Those buyers and sellers have an opportunity cost trade and are looking for immediate gains in many instances. Trading and investing each have their place but are different in many ways.

'Taking over' Solgold is not so easy given the % of the market cap needed to do do and the make up of the share register. Quady has made this point for years. I believe it is worth considering and thinking through. That is not to say that a takeover is impossible of course, rather, that it is potentially awkward. The whole nature of NDAs is that people like us are not meant to know what is doing on at the goldface. 2024 was an excellent year for Solgold. Let's hope that the share price reacts positively in due course.

Perhaps it was because it became clear that the NGL was expensive and was causing clog-ups and production issues? In any event, the Board should have been candid about what was happening and why. Folk will have an opinion as to whether it was or not.

What if it was both the wrong injectant and that a different type was abundant, way less expensive and far more effective? What caused the parafining?

Unless there is a fair outcome for all, small shareholders, CAG will not be 'getting out of the way'. Actually, we're right at the start of our campaign proper.

Passionate about the truth BBG. Always good to know the truth. I'm interested in what you have to say. Are you sure it is the company's broker?

OK BBG but how do you know it is the company's broker?

Thank you for explaining BBG. Have you asked Solgold to comment on this? Also, when you refer to the 'company' s broker', who are well talking about? H &P?

I have just reviewed Level 2 and can see no evidence of the 1m blockers you refer to BBG. Would you like to comment please? This is an important point which I think you agree because you have already referred to to the FCA. What about others with Level 2 access - can you confirm or deny the presence of these 'blockers'? Thank you all

Let's see what Prax say, if anything, about the FPSO news. Don't forget that DCU holders have the TotalEnergies assets due to complete in Q1 2025.

A, as the share price has dropped, the share options granted to executives feature lower and lower strike prices rather than a price connected with the NAV of the business. Personally, I don't like that at all.

BBG raised the subject of '1m blockers' by the Company's brokers. Whilst I am not an expert, this seems an important point potentially. Would anyone here like to elaborate and comment? As a layman, why are they even doing that, if true?

I suspect things may have moved on from those remarks. Production at Lancaster is holding up and an extra well there was being discussed. I guess we need to wait for news from Prax given the news about Mizu.

Prax will be keen to continue production given their infrastructure acquisitions and business plan so i would imagine they are seeking a replacement for Mizu.

Possibly. How many do you want and how much will you pay per DCU?

I don't value my opinion because it could well be wrong. I do value tangible advancements at the Company and the breakdown of the share register and details of the 2024 PFS. Overall, Solgold has had an excellent year. It is a shame that small shareholders don't seem to perceive that. But that's all it is, a shame. The due diligence carried out by FN, for example, is more important than the views of people like me.

Agreed Bob. Plus it was stated on here a while back that TW wrote to the FCA alerting them of activities and transgressions at COPL on multiple occasions prior to suspension. Apparently, he never received a reply. Why?

That's kind, Steve, thank you on behalf of all CAG. The quest has always been a fair outcome for all small shareholders. That won't be changing. We will press on regardless.

Well the 180 day average shares traded is just under 6 million per day with total shares issued just over 3000 millions. This means that tiny trades influence the share price which means that private shareholders getting frustrated for whatever reason, influence the very share price they worry about. The share price doesn't reflect the NAV of the business but this happens all the time. Despite what textbooks say, markets are not efficient. That's not my view, have a look at what W Buffett says.