Member Info for SharketMare

Everyone should have known about the fundraise, because Shaun Day told us we would be needing to raise funds. This is part and parcel of investing in mining explorer/developers. The fact that our CEO has put his hand in his pocket is a good sign. I can't believe people are slating him for this. Talk about damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I would not be surprised to see this finish at 9p+. I have added more this morning at 8.65.

The bloke that sold all his shares is aligned with the LTH? Righto

The company and the market were fully expecting NCM to take up the 5% at $60m. As SD stated, mid-long term this is the best thing GGP holders could have hoped for. However, short term, it creates the need to secure funds. Raising capital in the current climate is not easy - there is a huge amount of uncertainty out there and investors aren't ploughing money into equities like they used to.

I actually thought that the detail provided on the long term debt funding was pretty useful. As another poster has just pointed out on the SOLG board, that short paragraph was more informative than anything we've ever heard about how SOLG intends to fund Alpala. I'm taking SD at his word as I think he's played everything with a pretty straight bat so far. The idea he has illegally colluded with the shorts is risible.

Any retail investors feeling aggrieved will have an opportunity to buy at low prices on the open market (dependent on what happens tomorrow, and if the short sellers start to close their positions), and bringing a few more IIs on board is good for the stability of the company over the long term.

The fundraise was not a surprise. Let's just hope it's the bottom.

Jigglepuff @ 20:25

What a load of nonsense.

Mike has slowly been pushed out of KAV ever since BT took over. I think it's odd that a substantial shareholder and founder of a business would want to resign from its board and lose insider privileges. He's probably fed up of having to answer to BT, I know I would be.

Whether we refer to it as "having 20% more resource than we would have if NCM took the offer" or "we have retained our share of the project" is indeed semantics.

Christ alive, you lot would argue with a brick wall on here given the opportunity.

I am happy with the outcome and agree with SD that mid to long term this is the best GGP shareholders could have hoped for.

lebugue-addick, am well aware of the numbers and the implications, it's just a question of semantics in terms of whether saying we "have 20% more" or we simply have kept hold of what we already had. Doesn't bother me either way, the upshot is exactly the same and that's all that matters.

Atb

We own 30%. Newcrest refused to take the 5%, much to our surprise. This means that rather than owning 25% (as we would have done if they took up the offer), we own 20% more (30%).

I agree that spinning it as 20% more reserves is a little disingenuous.

I think Berry St are aligned with Nick Mather. See their recent note on SOLG after the failed fundraise:

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/0991U_1-2022-7-28.pdf

They want the business sold. And they talk about a 'select group' who might be exercising control. Some speculated that was Mather, I think it's much more likely to be the majors, who certainly don't have ours and other shareholders' interests at heart.

Jezzoo, I wouldn't go as far to say Darryl is engineering a lowball takeover, but that is where I think we are headed unless Nick can pull something out of his hat.

If the SP falls back to 15p a takeover at a 300% premium (Noront's was 358%) is 45p. If we can achieve 60p-80p here I think we will have don extremely well.

It feels like it's almost written that BHP will somehow get the whole lot for the same price they paid all those years ago (45p).

CD, you raise 3 interesting points on potential catalysts of our SP. Personally, as it did with the PFS, I think the market will shrug its shoulders at 1 & 2 if we publish both of these pieces of news before raising funds. 3 is a different kettle of fish, particularly if we announce a JV with someone like a Barrick.

I'd also note that BHP will be in no rush to bid for SOLG before those two updates are published. If they do so beforehand with a lowball offer they will be playing into SOLG's hands, who would hopefully say the offer doesn't represent fair value, and then publish the Porvenir and PFS news to support their case. I.e. if you were willing to pay 50p a week ago, you should be paying at least 80p now we've derisked Provenir and improved Cascabel (numbers just examples).

We need cash in the coffers ASAP as Bozi suggested in his (great) last post.

Life's too short to spend Saturday morning arguing with someone convinced that down means up. See you all Monday.

Quady, part of any fundraise is getting your major shareholders to sign up to it. SOLG failed to do this, which is why their proposed fundraise failed.

Basic stuff.

CD @ 20.52 last night - great post, wholeheartedly agree. Reads like it could have been written by your mate Sean!

Mather not wanting or not being able to stump up the cash?

Lunch I disagree, it is poor comms because the SOLG narrative is currently being written by others. Maybe the company is fine with that because the truth is even worse than what is currently being written.

As stated earlier, we're at an impasse and there is no way we can move forward meaningfully with BHP, NCM and Mather all holding the stakes they do, pulling our CEO in opposing directions.

Mather will now be doing everything he can to engineer a bid and a handsome payday for himself and DGR. Let's hope he succeeds.

Lunch, fully agree.

Those who are saying we have approached Boliden or Franco for a deal that got rejected aren't listening to the company. Darryl stated the other day that those deals are back on the table post DFS/BFS.

The AFR article last week or week before said that SOLG had tried to raise cash via equity and BHP/NCM said no.

Agree with the sentiments above, this is just p*ss poor communication from SOLG.

Orthern, I think they've had an impossible task because of disagreements amongst major shareholders about the best way forward. We're clearly at an impasse and given the fact that BHP/NCM are no longer willing to stump up cash, something has got to give, likely before this year's AGM.

In order for this company to make meaningful progress, with a clearly defined strategy that all shareholders can get behind, either Mather or BHP need to go. They are never going to agree.

Quady, you are so blinkered in your viewpoints. Of course there is nothing publicly available that suggests NCM are considering selling their holding, else our share price would be even further in the doldrums. Half of this game is piecing together what is NOT being said by companies. This year, NCM have withdrawn from a project in Chile and in Ecuador. They have also suggested publicly that their focus will be on domestic assets. Their financial position is far weaker than it was 18 months ago, when they last publicly expressed support for SOLG.

Given the above, I think it's more likely that they are eventual sellers here than buyers. I also don't see them sitting quietly with 13.6% of the company and watching your fantasy of SOLG taking this to production playing out, because that simply isn't what they do. Are there any examples of Newcrest holding less than 20% of a producing asset anywhere in the world?