Member Info for SharketMare

Morning add, I think we discussed this at the time with a couple of others and general consensus was as you point out, that it would be difficult for the company to update on finance without having decided what it actually plans on doing.

I doubt we'll get an update on finance beyond what we've already been told this year I.e. we are good for money until mid next year as long as we continue to do the bare minimum.

A big thanks to DG1 for sharing his notes from Scott. Positives for me were the confidence on getting the two agreements over the line and a repetition of us not being the ones to build a mine at Alpala. Will be sitting and watching the politics unfold and settle down before buying back in.

Dip666, I'm in another share (ALL) that cross listed on the ASX back in Sept '22, and many of us invested there at the time thought it would catalyse a re-rate (as did the company, as lithium stocks were/are more liquid over there). Fast forward 8-9 months and the London listing still dwarfs what is traded over the ponds. With GGP the story might be different as Shaun has repeatedly touted the Aussie instis as waiting for the ASX listing before getting involved, but it's not something I'm hanging my hopes on, unlike the FS and DTM, which will start kicking off our journey back up the Lassonde curve :)

@acechaser 19.07 yesterday - good post! For me the more important of yesterday's two RNS was the one related to the debt funding agreement. This is a big show of faith from the banks that GGP will ultimately be bringing Hav into production. We've just asked them for a little more time before we draw down on the funds and start paying fees that would eat in to our cash balance (which reading between the lines is going to be topped up soon via a placing). That RNS has helped put a floor under the SP somewhat and will hopefully stop us from having to raise equity as cheaply as we might have done. Good work SD.

The Rio farm in is fine and has the potential to be exciting, but I think some posters on here have misread it as a farm out (whereby Rio would be shouldering the costs of drilling up OUR licenses, and typically does come with a much more substantial re-rate). As bamps points out, Rio are rebalancing their exploration portfolio and given our proximity to Telfer and relationship with Newcrest, we were the obvious partner to work with on proving up those tenements - but that work will be done at our cost.

I do think we might be gearing up for something bigger involving Telfer, which makes the farm in potentially a highly lucrative move over the long term, providing the drill bit finds another viable resource.

Bailey is a terrible communicator and not up to the job. The problem with that body is far too much groupthink, resulting in no one wanting to actually lead and make tough calls when necessary. Much easier to go with consensus and take no personal responsibility. Why we are in the situation we are now. Feckless, the lot of them.

Hi Quady, I guess it's a possibility, but not something I'm willing to risk and be a part of. If I had an average sub 5p as you do I'd be more willing to ride it out and see. Best of luck.

Sensible posts, rhodi and Tildo, to add to Lazarus' too.

It's staggering that people are up voting the tripe that Toffers continues to post when he/she clearly has little to no understanding of other participants in the market or how Blackrock operates as a business. Just yesterday they posted that Blackrock buying was a positive.

"The good news is that if BR are accummulating, as far as I can see, then they will be expecting a rise in sp before too long!"

The share price is going down because people are selling their stock. They are doing so because the company has confirmed it's discussed a significant fundraise with multiple investment banks. It is that simple.

Hi Quady - it was at pre-PDAC during this presentation I believe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knXIt1Vqxhw

I don't have time to watch now myself and give you the exact time I'm afraid, but I believe the quote was "we are not mine builders".

Fort, no my remaining holding here was modest, best of luck with your ~£100k+ investment here.

Quady, simply not true. The company stated recently that it was not planning to build a mine at Alpala. It stated a few months before that that gone were the days of aspiring to build a block cave mine in Ecuador. You choose to ignore these facts (you have never addressed them or acknowledged them) because they don't suit your blinkered narrative.

The tone has changed substantially with Caldwell now talking about development. And given the inevitable delays in reneging the IPA and the other agreement, and nothing being released for about 3 months, I'm going to invest elsewhere for the time being.

I have no intention of investing an a company that is looking to build a mine at Alpala. Too much risk involved for my liking.

Christ. Nothing of any substance for another 3 months or so. More talk of developing Cascabel ourselves. Two big agreements with the Ecuadorian govt to finalise by year end.

Taking my money elsewhere for a bit. Best of luck to you all.

"Just after the leak and RNS i posted that this is just traders spreading a rumour and trading on the short side for a bit of profit. Nail on head springs to mind. 20mill shares added to the short list and we fall 2p."

What on earth are you on about? If it was just traders spreading rumours the company would have come out and refuted the claims made in the article. Instead they confirmed that they'd been in discussions with investment banks about a possible fundraise. Granted we have no idea at what price, but it's par for the course when the market hears that a fundraise might be on the horizon that there's a sell off. Happens all the time.

Zoros, not that it matters as there is currently nothing to discuss bar the doom and gloom of Ecuadorian politics.

I think we might get some assays from Tandy this quarter, though that might be overly optimistic.

Bubble, if it isn't too late I implore you to consider holding a few of these to see how it plays out, you might be kicking yourself in a few months' time otherwise!

Q I was engaging in good faith, what you originally posted wasn't right.

As our CEO has publicly stated "we are not mine builders" I hope that the granting of the exploitation license isn't dependent on us demonstrating to the Ministry of Energy that we can build a mine. Because we will look bloody foolish if so!

Q, you said in order to get the exploitation license we need to "construct Alpala". We cannot construct Alpala without the license. End of.

"But somehow we require the exploitation license and to get that we need to construct Alpala."

Quady, we can't construct Alpala without an exploitation license. You have it the wrong way around.

I find it hard to believe that Lasso - wallowing in the polls and unlikely to win the election - is going to double down on one of the main things the opposition party is vehemently against (mining).

I agree that we can't blame Caldwell for the political unrest. I am slightly resentful of former management slowing the development of the company down and not marketing the asset earlier, whilst Ecuador was comparatively stable and had a mining friendly leader who wasn't facing impeachment charges. The political risk here now is substantial and even the analysts who do this for a living have no idea how this is going to play out.

It's going to be tough for SOLG to obtain the exploitation license and reneg the IPA with all this going on, and as Bozi points out no company in their right mind is going to stump up billions with elections on the horizon which could result in a much less favourable environment for foreign investment.

On the plus side - and this is a very generalist comment - the hard left in South America do tend to gravitate towards Chinese investment over 'the West'. The chips might fall quite nicely for Jiangxi taking over or JV-ing Cascabel.

From the FT Live News desk 2 hours ago:

Ecuador’s rightwing president, who is facing impeachment charges, has dissolved the opposition-controlled National Assembly and triggered elections.

Guillermo Lasso can rule the country by decree for up to six months, by which time presidential and legislative elections must be convened.

“This is the best decision to give a constitutional solution to the political crisis,” Lasso said in a televised address on Wednesday.

The constitutional clause, known as “mutual death”, has never been used before, and comes at a time of turmoil in the Andean nation.

Lasso, a former banker, on Tuesday appeared before congress where he is facing an impeachment trial for alleged embezzlement. He denied the charges.

Ace, in the short term yes I understand that isn't his primary concern, but it certainly is mine and most other PIs I'd imagine. They might have differences of opinion on timeframes, but all PIs will generally want a higher share price as a priority. This is where, as I mentioned yesterday, the interests of PIs are not always aligned with the interests of a CEO building his business, or institutional investors who are thinking over a much longer time period for their returns, have deep pockets to avoid being diluted, and are important for management to both onboard and keep onside to ensure stability.

This is what I think we will see play out here with a further raise- a reweighting of the register in favour of institutions who are going to be here for the next X years, vs PIs (like myself) who originally bought in looking to slice with the release of the updated MRE/FS/DTM and hold the rest for production next year.

I don't really hold this against SD. Yes I find it frustrating, but it's part and parcel of the risk you take when investing in explorers/developers. I maintain that a CEO with skin in the game is preferable to one without any, but it's not going to materially impact whether or not I invest any more of my own cash.