We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Add, the only thing I can think that he might be doing is goading a lowball. This was a SOLG sponsored interview so they will have had full editorial control on what was published.
I'm actually shocked he said that add. A damp end to an otherwise promising interview.
Asked if he would accept USD 0.30c (23p) a share for a full takeover, SC claims he would take that. Some realism.
"We believe we'll obtain all the permits to BEGIN CONSTRUCTION in 2 years from now"
Bottom line is this - we are conserving cash, de-risking the project through permitting, land purchases, and waiting for someone to come to us with an offer than works for management with skin in the game. The strategic review is just a way of buying time. Personally I don't think we will ever seen a formal output from this workstream.
SC: "The big capital number, we believe you could finance this through various pieces.... - we need 1.5bn - that's a lot of money for a company of our size. So I think you're going to get a strategic to take this through to production. Whether we're involved on a royalty basis, or we own a part of it, that's what the future is going to tell us."
Interesting on the royalty piece. What a dream that would be.
SC: "In the short term we're working on some non-dilutive financing. When I say non-diluting that is not an equity offering. At Cascabel, we're looking to derisk the project to make it more attractive via low cost initiatives, such as getting permits. We do not need to do anymore drilling at Alpala. We don't need anymore ore, we know we have more tonnage, but we have a generational mine now. It's really derisking and strengthening the balance sheet that's number one. We need to get some cash into the treasury, we have some ideas. Non equity. Over the next few weeks or months we'll have some proposals we'll have worked through. "
Interviewer: "Why are you planning to take it into production versus selling the assets?"
SC: "Well we'll continue to de-risk it, that's a very good question, and by de-risk it I mean getting environmental permits, right of ways etc. We'll continue to de-risk it. And if a strategic initiative comes along as we continue to de-risk the project, a fully permitted and ready to construct project is of much higher value than one that doesn't have the permits. As we continue to de-risk it, I think people will be interested in this project as an opportunity, whether as a joint venture or some other transaction to get involved in this project."
That is not the answer of a man who intends on taking this asset to production!
What is extremely heartening is that despite us needing cash fairly soon, there doesn't seem to be any downward pressure on the SP. Quite the opposite in fact.
Add - the recent de-risking events, gold reaching ATHs, less political uncertainty, Naboa's pro-mining stance, the crackdown on criminals, SOLG languishing at multi-year lows. There will likely have been many prudent retail investors who after 'fast and smart' died a death sat on the side-lines waiting for a re-entry.
Thanks BBG. Interesting Newmont speculation. Question in a JV scenario is what % would SOLG retain? Or is the idea we flog Cascabel to the NMM and Jiangxi?
Would appreciate the full text, if anyone has a subscription.
https://www.mining-journal.com/london-to-a-brick/opinion/4189775/newmont-kingmaker-future-solgold
The former Soviet Union! Kat will be pleased.
1984, agree with you on smart meters, but my god I watched that climate 'doc' you shared over the weekend (with an open mind) and even as someone with limited knowledge of the subject (compared to, you know, actual scientists) I could tell that some of the graphs they put forward as 'evidence' were total baloney. There's good thread on X that debunks most of it that I'd recommend reading:
https://twitter.com/mkeulemans/status/1771642599989711005?t=s9blMFQcvh6f0bfAN_gHyw&s=19
Let's have some funding news soonish please SOLG or we might start to see some downward pressure on the price. Keep the momentum going.
Redirons, the Lassonde curve is not plotted against share price, it's against value. MCAP is a better measure to look at. Far more share in issue than previous ATHs which, IMO, are a pipe dream for some time.
It's not immigration folks, it's drugs! Quady, you must be a wind up merchant. Cannabis has gone from class C to class B, by the way.
Kat, what you refer to in the 80s happens all the time in the present day. Many businesses are valued less than the sum of their parts. That's where the likes of Nelson Peltz and the private equity guys get involved and buy and breakup. Sometimes fairly, sometimes through grim financial engineering.
I think you could argue that SOLG could potentially spin off its regional portfolio (which is of course worth something) to make the investment case at Cascabel clearer (though isnt this what ENSA is for?). But it certainly wouldn't be a means by which we could return cash to shareholders, and it would certainly be dilutive as per addicknt's post below.
Nowhere near*
BBG, the problem with that scenario is that no one, including many invested on here, believe SOLG has the capability to successfully develop the mine. BHP would carry on doing what they've done for the last few years - sit back and watch SOLG create a mess of its own making.
The situation is nowhere not as binary as you make out.
"Think about the question you just asked me over in your head and figure out why this might be an extraordinarily positive event for us. This was step 2.9 in the 3 step process. What do you think the next step is?"
- Warren Irwin, November 2022, just after Jiangxi bought 180,000,000 shares.
How his tone has changed.