Member Info for SharketMare

The company has a clear strategy for the first time in as long as I can remember. We are conserving cash and desrisking Cascabel. Not developing, derisking. This means securing permits, protections and land for tailings sites. Scott's latest interview gave us 2 years of runway to do this. It bought him and us time. We'll keep the lights on for as long as possible through placing the shares held in treasury (hopefully at better prices) and then by royalty/offtake agreements if necessary. If at any point someone makes a bid that Mather and the BoD find acceptable, that'll be the end of it all (and the end of the strategic review, which is a load of tosh IMO).

If you don't like this strategy (Eloro, Fort, I'm looking at you) then I'd seriously consider selling up and parking your money elsewhere.

Quite right add.. they're only getting paid if they deliver, and if they deliver we all win. Just let them get on with it.

Fort, can you help me with the timelines for the exploitation agreement? I thought the tweet on Friday was related to that, due to the fact that it references the 33 year timeframe that the exploitation agreement covers.

From the July 2023 RNS: https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SOLG/exploitation-agreement-with-government-of-ecuador-lpviw3v6bmqdwj5.html

"In the following months, the Company must apply to change the SolGold Project's official status from exploration phase to exploitation phase (the "Phase Change Application"). The Company has up to six months after the approval of the Phase Change Application to execute the Exploitation Agreement with the Government of Ecuador. Once executed, the Exploitation Agreement is required to be registered with the Mines Registry and will be made publicly available on the Company's profile on the SEDAR website maintained by the Canadian Securities Administrators at www.sedar.com."

This agreement was non-binding.

Then from the quarterly MD&A, published Feb '24:

"The Company has applied to change the Cascabel Project’s official status from the exploration phase to the exploitation

phase, which was registered before the Energy and Non-Renewable Natural Resources Regulation and Control Agency of

Ibarra on 6 December 2023 ".

And then:

"The Company has up to six months after the approval of the Phase Change to execute the Exploitation Contract. Once executed before a public notary, the Exploitation Contract is required to be registered with the Mines Registry. The Exploitation Contract will govern the legal, economic, technical, social and environmental commitments of the Company and the Government of Ecuador. Management expects the Exploitation Contract to be finalized and announced prior to end of the current financial year"

Perhaps this news is the finalisation of the exploitation contract?

I don't think it's related to the CIPA agreement which was signed (but doesn't yet mean much) at PDAC.

Symptomatic of just how lazy journalists have become, too. Trawling X for news. Did they bother contacting the company for comment? Doesn't appear that way. Perhaps we'll see something later on today.

Very odd addicknt. If the exploitation agreement has been ratified, it'd be nice to know formally, not on X.

What you fail to understand is the $3.2bn is nothing at this point but a statement of intent to invest that capital developing Cascabel under the CIPA (revised IPA). Under the initial terms of the first IPA we agreed to invest $430m between 2011 and 2023. We didn't meet that level of investment. Because of this, and the fact that the project status has changed from exploration to exploitation, we've had to negotiate a second IPA, which is being billed at the CIPA. The signing at PDAC you link to is essentially meaningless until the actual document (which will contain details such as timeframe etc) is signed, and it certainly doesn't mean we're going to raise $3.2bn.

Why do you keep asking what I'm on about? The idea that we are going to raise $3.2bn is insane. How do you suggest a company with a market cap of £300m does that?

"Plans to invest" does not equal "plans to raise". Just as when we signed the first IPA with a spending commitment of $430m at Cascabel by end '23 (which we have not met), it didn't mean we planned to raise $430m.

Very different things.

Can you just point me to where Solgold announced that it's going to raise $3.2bn?

"Recently Solgold has announced that it is raising 3.2 billion to advance Cascabel."

Can you provide a link to this transformational news? I must have missed it.

This is important news. If you recall, we had to reapply for our IPA, in part to reflect the change in project status from exploration to exploitation. Now that this term sheet has been signed, we move closer to the revised IPA (which CMG links to below) being formally signed too. What was inked at PDAC was a statement of intent. Good PR for Solg and Ecuador on a big stage. Next up the real thing. All will be being closely watched by the Chinese who have had their fingers burned elsewhere in Ecuador and will be keen to pick up a tier one asset with all the necessary protections in place.

Not the same thing.

Https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SOLG/exploitation-agreement-with-government-of-ecuador-lpviw3v6bmqdwj5.html

The former. This is the exploitation agreement being signed/executed. Note the 33 year timeframe in both the linked RNS and the tweet/article.

Is this the actual signing of the exploitation agreement? Or the IPA?

Https://www.mining.com/solgold-reaches-deal-with-ecuador-on-cascabel-development-financing/

The article links to the tweet. Totally unclear. Hopefully cleared up via RNS on Monday?

Stackhigh @ 20.02 - bless you for thinking the UN still has any relevance in today's world. That organisation has fewer teeth than needalife.

The usual idiots making a mountain out of a molehill. I guess Israel is univestable too after they bombed the Iranian embassy in Damascus? I see Naboa going after the grifters as a positive for doing business in the country. Majors don't like corruption.

That article is from 5 years ago.

If your friends are questioning your integrity based upon the posts of some bogan moron on here, I'd suggest finding new friends.

1984, don't be silly, Diane Abbott can't run