Member Info for schlemiel

It wasn't a reasonable concern. The CEO owns 15% of the company, in various incarnations. Anyone who purports to have an interest in SOLG would know this. It's SOLG's greatest strength.

ello - do some research and then make an informed comment (good or bad) -

PDF's not uploaded to BHP site as of yet but should be an interesting read when they are. I hope there's a little more info. on Ecuador-SOLG and the how they see the future panning out

https://www.investegate.co.uk/bhp-billiton-plc--blt-/rns/bhp-billiton-plc-2018-agm-presentation/201810171015413333E/

https://www.investegate.co.uk/bhp-billiton-plc--blt-/rns/bhp-billiton-plc-2018-agm-speeches/201810171017333331E/

Speechless

At the end of the day it's the fundamental value of the company in the real world that matters. The value of the company as determined by the stock-market (digital world) is open to all sorts of manipulations, games and nonsense. The disconnect between the real world value and the digital value can sometimes be world's apart

typo - 'sell orders'

is on the bid again with 20k. Not seen that before

2 v 1 (25k v 694) - light on the offer so looking ok

pity about the 5 x 250k sell order at 44p and above but far away to do any damage

Look for mining companies with deep pockets

Exploring and finding rewarding underground deposits is a job that can be successfully completed by juniors, but designing and bringing such challenging mineral deposits into production is a task that requires larger companies that have access to capital and technical expertise. There are many questions that an investor might need answered before deciding to invest in a medium-sized company that is trying to develop a smaller bulk-mining operation.

Large mining groups that have multiple producing mines are also better positioned to weather production stoppages than companies that only have one or two operational mines. As time goes by, most of the world’s ore production is going to be sourced from underground mines that are definitely riskier than surface-mining operations. Under these circumstances, a stoppage at one important block-caving mining operation that produces significant amounts of ore could put a dent in supply and could result in a metal price increase. Compare that to the current situation, where it is easy to respond to higher demand by increasing production at existing open-pit mining operations; it is far more difficult to increase production at block-cave mines.

Final word: beware of political risk

The large capital expenditures and long lead times associated with block-cave mines highlight the importance of a correct geopolitical risk assessment of a prospective block-cave mining operation. The Oyu Tolgoi case speaks for itself. Friendly mining jurisdictions where open-pit operations have gone undisturbed for decades and where mining companies are transitioning to underground bulk mining are good places to invest.

end

https://investingnews.com/daily/resource-investing/underground-block-caving-guide-investors-open-pit-mining-rio-tinto-codelco-freeport-grasberg-chuquicamata/

Location, location, location

Geography and topography play important roles in establishing a block-caving operation’s risk profile.

Block-caving operations located close to inhabited centers are not desirable as they create significant risks for water resources, infrastructure, buildings and human lives due to ground subsidence.

Further, underground block-cave mines located in wet climates have a higher risk of flooding than those located in temperate or desert conditions. Managing water inflows and dewatering the mine and surrounding area for 30 to 50 years in a row will definitely have adverse impacts on groundwater and possibly on the local flora and fauna.

These types of environmental impacts are not overlooked by regulators, NGOs and local communities and can result in longer approval times.

On a related note, an often-overlooked aspect of deciding if an area is a good site for a block-caving operation is the region’s seismicity. Some regions, like Bingham Canyon, are quite stable and present little seismic risk, while other sites are characterized by high seismicity — for example, the Chilean El Teniente or Chuquicamata. An earthquake that might not adversely affect an open-pit mining operation is capable of substantially damaging a block-caving operation through a massive cave-roof collapse.

One of the most common locations for a block-caving operation is below an existing open pit. In this case, the underground block-caving mining operation could pose serious danger to the open-pit mine, especially if the underground operation starts before open-pit mining is completed.

cont..

Cheaper per unit cost

The block-caving method produces cheap per-unit ore at a cost that is comparable to that of open-pit mining. A tonne of ore from a block-caving operation costs $5 to $7 to produce, while open-pit mining produces a tonne of ore for about $1; however, an open-pit operation also needs to mine and move another four tonnes of waste to get to the ore.

Block caving’s per-unit cost is also low because it can produce almost as much ore as an open-pit mining operation over an extended mine life — up to 50 years.

Dangers of collapse

Block caving is not without risks. For instance, if large blocks collapse from the roof of a cave, production drifts/galleries can also collapse and mining activity can be halted. Such a massive collapse happened in 1999 at Northparkes in Australia, causing fatalities and an airblast that shot through the mine.

Deep underground mines are also plagued by other negative events, including rock bursts and man-made earthquakes. These are caused by the sudden release of the high energy stored in compressed rocks as well as fault-plane movements caused by mining operations. Deep underground gold mines in South Africa are often affected by this type of seismic event.

Inflexible design, labor shortages pose additional risks

Investors must bear in mind that unlike other mining operations, block caving is inflexible; once started, it cannot be changed. In other words, if the initial design of a block-caving operation is faulty, at least some of the money invested in the mine will likely be at risk. Further, a block-cave mining operation cannot be put on care and maintenance as the company is then at risk of losing all of its capital investment.

Another thing that investors should consider is that there are not many qualified underground miners, so block-caving personnel must be trained from scratch, sometimes over a short period of time. As the open-pit mining operation at Chuquicamata in Chile reaches its end, some 3,000 to 3,500 miners will be retrained over three years for the upcoming underground block-caving operation. At the New Afton block-caving operation in Canada, 80 percent of the workforce was comprised of inexperienced people that had to be trained on the job. Investors, therefore, should know that the transition from open-pit to underground mining involves potential delays and additional labor costs as personnel are trained.

cont

block caving -

Underground Block Caving: A Guide for Investors :Investing News Network - April 16th, 2013

With the discovery of near-surface mineral deposits declining, exploring for deep-seated deposits and finding innovative ways to mine them is the solution to the ever-growing need for metals.

For example, Rio Tinto (ASX:RIO,LSE:RIO,NYSE:RIO) is transitioning from open-pit to underground mining and estimates that within 10 years, about 40 percent of its copper production will come from underground mining operations. It is estimated that by 2018, about 50 percent of the world’s ore production will come from underground mines.

Two of the world’s largest copper mines will soon move underground. The Grasberg mine in Indonesia, operated by Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold (NYSE:FCX), will reach its open-pit limit by 2016, while Codelco’s Chuquicamata mine in Chile is expected to do the same in 2018.

Underground mining of massive, low-grade mineralized ore bodies has been carried out for decades, but in total there have been fewer than 20 block-caving mines. In most cases, this type of underground bulk mining has occurred in order to follow mineralization at depth after the exhaustion of open-pit ore.

Bulk-mining methods are a necessary component of economically mining massive, low-grade porphyry copper, gold, molybdenum and diamond deposits, and block caving is the method of choice. The process is suitable for the mining of near-vertical, compact and highly fissured ore bodies.

By analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of the block-cave mining method, investors can understand the risk profile of this type of operation and can select the companies that are most likely to succeed in mining these huge deposits.

Capital-intensive operation

The block-cave mining method is capital intensive and can cost anywhere between $2 and $10 billion. While that is comparable to the cost of starting an open-pit mining operation, block caving takes significantly longer, usually in the 15- to 20-year range. For example, Freeport’s Deep Mill Level Zone underground mine is expected to be fully developed over 12 years.

Another factor that differentiates block caving from open-pit mining operations is that for a block-caving operation, on average, 70 percent of capex is spent before any revenue is generated.

Long lead times and high capital expenditures mean that block caving carries certain risks for investors, including: geopolitical risk, long-term commodity prices and cost inflation.

cont..

released today - Page 7 : Corporate strategy is :

A CONTINUAL PIPELINE FROM IDEAS TO CASH

INFANCY
1.Choose commodity, region and country
2.Seed raising, proof of concept, IPO
3.Exploration programs
4.Resource definition, secondary raisings
5. Development/Corporate takeover
MATURITY

*PAY DIVIDENDS*

really motoring - now up 28%. Are they in the cross hairs of a major?

Columbo - yes, Temple sounds like he's almost about to pop his cork!

Nick Mather Mining 121 Hong Kong 23-24 Oct.....China...mmmm

from a top poster on ADV-FN :-
-

'whites123 - 16 Oct '18 - 19:06 - 13517 of 13517

Last time I posted was when a few here were shouting about a fundraising decimating the sp.

Heck it looked like something walked it down and now as it has become abundantly clear it was absolutely nothing more than PI trades..

We knew BHP were here and we KNOW they have not finished.
It was right and proper that SOLG provided BHP with the incentive they have done..

And incentive it is.. Because (And this seems to have escaped peoples attention) BHP will see there 6% stake acquired at 45p per share as a BARGAIN..

They will see the purchase as essentially a discount to the fairer value.

Remember those who shout 30% discount to prevailing share price for fundraising etc, well BHP paying 45p is not seen by them as paying a premium, oh no, it is a discount..

They would never in a million years have been able to acquire the amount they did today on the open market.

They want a member on the board of SOLG..

They have plans..

I said many months ago I was here for the £2.00 Solgold share price...

The fact BHP have been keen to strike so quickly after obtaining their first 5% is making me reconsider that now and maybe re-evaluating it upwards..

£100 Million, £500 Millions, are peanuts to BHP.. Its a bit like people saying "I wouldn't get out of bed for that".

This really really should be A £1.00 all day long with what we currently know and people should be complaining and saying BHP have been gifted shares at 50% of current share price, because one thing is absolute certain, that is what the Board of BHP will be feeling like they have done..'..end

From today -

http://www.kereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018-10-16-Chris-Temple.mp3

Q - Yes, that's the most noteworthy part of the agreement. The former surely relates to a possible bid for CGP while the latter is self-explanatory

The agreement is constructed in a way that allows SOLG to profit from any increase in interest from other parties. This is the trigger which should flush out a full on BHP bid for SOLG

I'm still intrigued to know if BHP want ENSA without SOLG (can they buy ENSA without buying SOLG?) or the entire SOLG company. I haven't the insight-patience-experience-intelligence to work it out..

Valuation:
Valuation neither reflects likely resource growth nor competitive tension on a take-out. SolGold trades at US$0.050/lb (pre-resource update) versus peers at US$0.037/lb CuEq (Figure 3). In our view, the upcoming resource growth and the strategic interest in the project should warrant a share price re-rating given that the company is largely funded for 2019 exploration efforts. Upcoming catalysts: 1) Ongoing exploration and 2) Resource update (Q4/18).

END

http://www.redcloudks.com/companies/solgold-plc

SolGold Plc

Great White Shark Takes Another Bite

Impact: Very Positive

BHP makes a statement by increasing its stake in SolGold at a premium. BHP Billiton (ASX:BHP; LON:BLT) has increased its stake to 11% and has provided a good portion of the funds required for SolGold’s 2019 exploration program. This should lift any perceived financing overhang and opens the door to a valuation rerating. With copper fundamentals improving and few large-scale undeveloped projects available (Figure 1), we expect Alpala to be coveted by major miners looking to bolster future production.
Highlights:

BHP’s second investment should act like blood in the water with other majors circling this world class asset. BHP Billiton (ASX:BHP; LON:BLT), the world’s biggest miner, purchased 100M shares at £0.45/sh (C$0.77/sh), a 30% premium to the 20 day VWAP. BHP is now at 11.2% or 203M shares (was 6% or 103M shares), putting it just behind Newcrest Mining (ASX:NCM) currently holding 14.5% (247M shares) (Figure 2). We believe Alpala is one of the few large-scale copper assets available (Figure 1); thus, it is likely other large mining companies noticed the feeding frenzy.
Multiple strategic investors create competitive tension. With two strategic shareholders over 10%, we expect that a takeout is most likely to occur at a premium to historic transactions. We note that copper projects historically sell for, ~US$0.07/lb CuEq and BHP’s investment implies a value of ~US$0.065/lb CuEq (pre-material resource update).
Exploration upside on an already world-class deposit is attracting attention. The current resource of 16.18Blb CuEq, is based on 53,616m of drilling. The updated resource estimate expected in Q4/18 is expected to include an additional 70,400m of drilling; which we believe should grow the resource materially.

continued above...

'if you can get them cheaper'