Member Info for SharketMare

Whilst Truss was and is wholly incompetent, the mortgage myth that was peddled and swallowed is ludicrous.

Our share price dropped on speculation that someone might buy us? You really have no idea how this all works, do you?

Thanks Fort.

Having re-read the RNS, why do you think a maximum of 10 trading days before we hear news? What am I missing?

1984, whilst the EV market has cooled temporarily, the (frankly insane) AI boom is fuelling demand for high powered chips which use copper. Despite your protestations, the EV market will inevitably recover when prices come down and more second hand vehicles come on the market. This in turn will make them affordable for a new set of buyers while those who are better off will buy newer models. And they won't be buying petrol engines.

No intention of getting into an EV debate, but on the issue of whether this is a copper or gold play, I think both is the answer. I don't see copper demand waning any time soon, though imagine it will pull back (along with Nvidia's valuation) when demand for chips tapers off, which history shows it it definitely will.

Bought a few more.. 14,184 at 9.2p

NMM @ 16.43 - thank you for taking the time to post this. I'd written out similar but decided the juice wasn't worth the squeeze. Hope you're well - your analysis and attention to detail is missed on this BB.

No, Quady, I haven't said any of those things. Put your straw man away.

This argument based upon semantics is utter garbage. When our CEO states we are not mine builders, he's not saying so with the intention of hiring a civil engineering firm to build a mine on our behalf. What a ludicrous way to communicate with shareholders that would be. He's saying so because he has zero intention or desire for SOLG to take on a capital intensive and highly complex engineering project. This will be sold or farmed out with us retaining a minority stake.

From last Friday - just under 5m shares @ 9.59p - £476k. Interesting.

Quady, by your twisted logic, the major miners you refer to are not actually miners, because they've hired civil engineering teams to do the mining for them.

Solgold ain't hiring no one. We're selling the asset or we're partnering with a major(s) and becoming a junior partner. We won't be calling the shots when construction starts either way.

Don't disagree. Think it is as good as done, but the original post was misleading. I think we'll see the CIPA signed before the financing announcement. I'd be grateful if the company could give us some more detail on the timeline and process for the environmental permits.

The CIPA has not been signed. What we signed was a statement of intent to sign a new IPA. The latest RNS mentions this is outstanding.

Welsh/Culpepper - that point (on processing Hav ore at Telfer) is currently unclear and certainly not 'hard-wired' from everything I have read. A statement (i.e. in an interview) from Shaun stating that whoever ends up owning Telfer is legally obliged to process Hav ore would assuage concerns.

Welsh, if someone decides to buy Telfer and process the remaining, low grade ore at a loss, our right of last refusal isn't worth the paper it's written on. If the new Telfer owner says that they're not going to process any Hav ore at the facility, then no one is going to want to buy the 70% as they'd be forced to build a brand new processing plant and the mine economics look far less attractive.

The only entity interested in purchasing the 70% would be the entity that has bought Telfer. Yes it's a high risk play but it's one that potentially pays off handsomely as they'd end up buying the 70% from Newmont for cheap (no other interested buyers) and by that point we'd have no choice but to accept what we're given for the remaining 30%. It's high risk and relatively unlikely but it's not impluasible.

Welsh, suggest you take your critical thinking a step further and think what the implications would be for GGP should an unfriendly organisation end up as the owner of Telfer. Our share price would crater. The Telfer owner could then make a play for the Hav 70% or the whole thing. We'd be in no position to negotiate and would have to take what we were offered.

Why is the BB constantly dogged by people chucking insults every time I bother to read it?

There are 6 or 7 companies interested in Telfer apparently. Last time I stopped by one of the respected posters was claiming that it's unlikely there was even a sole third party involved in purchasing Telfer and the 70%. Another respected poster claimed the rise last week was "different" and a return to fair value. We have to consider all possible scenarios here - mining is an ugly game and established players do not like giving out seats at the table.

Interesting and thanks for sharing. I wonder if there are some mid-sized gold miners throwing their hats in the ring to stop GGP emerging as a major competitor down the line. If we are successful in securing Telfer and the 70%, even in partnership with a friendlier (we hope) organisation like Wyloo, then we have a brilliant platform to go on and achieve Shaun's personal ambition of building a serious mid-tier gold miner. Established players won't want to see this happen for obvious reasons - would they go as far as overpaying for a dud asset (Telfer) to starve us of our processing plant?

Agree, also noteworthy that Chinese-owned Shein has chosen to IPO in London and that - so far - politicians red and blue appear to be happy for this to go ahead. A much needed win for the London market, that probably edged out the US due to Republican pushback.

Stackhigh, that's some cherry-picking you're doing there. The point you raise also doesn't change the fact that the supply of quality, online mines is dwindling, which means, inevitably, majors are going to have to invest in developing mines themselves. Thankfully we are sitting on the world's largest undeveloped copper/gold mine not in the hands of a major miner, so are positioned extremely well to profit when this change happens.

"As things stand the commentator here is saying companies won't try to bring on stream new resources as it will be too late to enjoy the predicted prices caused by supply issues."

This is a rather shallow analysis as what it doesn't take into account, is through not attempting to bring new resources online in time to benefit from the price boom, the price will creep higher still, due to an even greater supply/demand deficit.

Which leads us, again, back to companies being forced to develop new mines themselves, or risk explorers/developers becoming miners themselves (i.e. greater competition) who will benefit in a bigger way from the higher prices.

If SOLG's PR lot (Tavistock) were worth whatever retainer we are paying them they would have nudged contacts in trade media to suggest that BHP might look elsewhere to secure their future copper supply. Cascabel is massive and worth a fortune. If you're reading this, PR team, pull your fingers out.