Member Info for SharketMare

Fair enough, it was only 18 months ago they publicly backed the strategy, I thought it was longer. I would suggest that a fair bit has happened in the last 18 months for NCM, and public statements made by Sandeep Biswas and company imply that South America and therefore SOLG are not going to be top of their priority list.

Agree Bozi. And Darryl said himself that these would be options AFTER publication of DFS/BFS.

Quady, as Jerry points out Newcrest said that years ago. If you bothered to listen to what the company (Newcrest) is saying this year, you'd know that SOLG isn't a priority for them. I'd have thought the the market-beating investor of the last 40 years you claim to be would see this clearly.

Quady, can you point me to a producing asset that Newcrest own less than 20% of? They are not going to stand aside and be bit-part players in the building of Alpala. They will either sell their stake and continue their pullback from South America (likely), attempt to takeover the company in tandem with BHP (possible, but unlikely for my money given their current financial position and priorities), or they will attempt to buy us out themselves (very unlikely).

Hmm. The 5% news has clearly caught them off guard. I think SD would have expected the following outcomes in this order of probability:

Most likely: NCM take the 5%
Possible: NCM take the $85m GGP offer and make $25m for nothing
Unlikely: NCM simply walk away

I just hope that SD has covered all his basis, and that any financing packing discussed with lenders was NOT contingent on NCM going down paths 1 or 2 above. Today's news will make lenders pause for thought I think, but Shaun is very articulate, persuasive and confident in the asset.

Secure finance and our short-mid term stability and we are laughing here

Always happy to discuss anything about the stock. I found the 34p pricing to be disappointing and would like to know how it was calculated. That said, I expect the stock to push back up to its highs - our resource is expanding and we are derisking it, step by step. The outlook for lithium is still positive and the green energy transfomation isn't going anywhere soon. It will be an industry supported by governments the world over.

As for the van Oosterwijks and the Mascolo Estate selling down, one thing we often overlook as investors is the fact that there are real people behind these decisions with real lives.

I have no idea as to the financial situation of Len and his wife, no idea whether this is the first time in his life he's earned substantial sums of money, whether he has 3 children he wants to put through a top private school, whether he wants to buy a holiday home in the Carribean.

The same can be said of the Mascolo family, who I'm sure will have someone (e.g. a financial advisor) helping the family manage its affairs after their tragic loss. Financial advisors are risk averse, and their exposure here as a % of Vince's Estate will not be inconsiderable. I believe his daughters still have considerable shareholdings and would not be considered part of his Estate. They seem to be holding.

Ultimately it comes down to trust and whether you trust management and the BoD are acting in good faith in the interests of all shareholders. Having been invested here for some time and reaped the rewards of the company delivering against its promises, I'm going to stick with them and give them the benefit of the doubt.

as far to say*

Hi swest, whilst I wouldn't go as far to as I'm a 'no brainer', I still struggle to see much of a downside to this stock, bar a black swan event.

I think the ASX listing has been priced relatively cheaply (possibly tied to a weighted average here) so that the first few days/weeks of trading are positive and see the stock re-rate to where it was a few months ago. Better to price it modestly and watch it soar - you'll attract more interest. I think the PFS will be published after September 8th to create a good buzz with investors in APAC. I don't think that releasing potentially transformational news in August is a particularly savvy move.

Yes Jezzoo, he is back doing his very best to disrupt the board. If you look back through MassiveRay's posts on this BB going back 2-3 days (and further tells the same story), this poster has contributed absolutely nothing of value, and simply posts to wind people up and discuss anything but SOLG.

I have never reported anyone on this forum bar him, as he is by a long way the most pathetic troll this board has ever had to put up with. I encourage everyone else to do the same on a daily basis so we can be rid of him. A proper sad act.

rcgl2, it was an assumption I made the other day, but might not be right.

I don't understand this obsession with Piedmont's share price. We are not Piedmont. We are a mining exploration company that does not generate any cash (yet). They own 50% of our core asset. That does not mean our share price ought to rise in line with theirs, at all.

Thanks Quinty. Cornwall really is a great part of this country, excellent food, great beer, clear blue water, and good honest people who remain unfazed by the crap peddled by the media.

Great post BnC. It's all about control here - the drilling and the long term strategy are moot at this point in my opinion.

What % of shareholders must be against a proposed fundraise in order to be able to block it? Sorry I might be being dim. I am tired after 6.5 hours in the car on the way back from Cornwall today, and wading through the posts on this BB.

I just find it both strange and concerning that BHP and NCM can say we're not going to cough up any more money, but also say to SOLG you can't go and raise capital (via equity at least) elsewhere, when they own less than a third of the company between them.

Is that accurate, Quinty? Are we in a situation whereby two majors that control 26% of our company are able to 1) refuse to participate in a fundraise and 2) prevent any fundraise that doesn't include them from taking place?

From here: https://www.afr.com/rear-window/s-all-not-well-at-solgold-20220814-p5b9p0

"BHP and Newcrest were apparently unwilling to invest again, and a second raising that would circumvent pre-emption rights was ultimately seen by shareholders as not appropriate. And fair enough, it’s a £600 million company, not a Perth-based penny stock explorer, though it’s only got about $25 million left in the bank."

So we now know that SOLG wanted to raise $50m but BHP and NCM said they didn't want to participate in the raise. We don't know why that might be. Whether the price we tried to raise at was too high, or whether BHP and NCM simply don't want to invest anymore capital into this project under this management.

Where I'm struggling is the second part of the above, why a raise that would circumvent pre-emption rights was seen as "not appropriate". Surely this presents existing shareholders an opportunity to dilute the holdings of the two majors who are clearly only interested in getting their hands on our assets as cheap as possible? Or would the optics of BHP and NCM not taking part be detrimental to the share price?

When this is all over - and I struggle to see how SOLG will exist in 2023 - it will be fascinating to hear the stories of those who have lived and worked through this on the inside, Mather, Marshall, Ward, Twigger, and most recently Ayten Saridas. I bet there are some great tales to be told.

A question to those of you more clued up than myself on corporate governance.

If we assume Nick Mather is going to be ousted as a director at the next AGM, is there anything within the rulebook to stop him from either selling ~2% of his personal holding to DGR, or instructing DGR to purchase more stock to move them above the 10% threshold. At which point (I think) DGR would be entitled to a seat on the board, and could put forward Mather to be their representative. Aside from the obvious governance concerns and p*ssing off BHP and NCM, is there anything wrong with this?

DGR has been selling its position down in ALL recently. There was an excellent post on the ALL board summarising their situation by DGRInvestor1 the other day, speculating that they are moving into oil & gas and away from EV metals. But I'm more interested in DGR's intentions here, as if their stated strategy is executed correctly, the payout from SOLG could be enormous (I.e. sale to a major at a significant premium).

Maybe I am reading between lines that don't exist, but I get the impression that Nick puts SOLG on a pedestal above some of his/DGR's other investments. He isn't going to go down without a fight.

Morning Damers, I can't say I share the same view, and unfortunately think you're giving the company too much credit.

Cuzzubbo stated in a piece posted on here yesterday that offtake deals were possible post DFS and BFS.

If what you've written below is true, we can expect to see BHP and NCM vote to oust DC at the AGM.

I suspect he's trying to do the impossible and balance the interests of BHP/NCM and Mather.

Something has to give at some point to allow SOLG to move forward with a clearly defined corporate strategy, including how the business raises funds.

The current situation is untenable and renders DC relatively powerless. His must be one of the toughest jobs in mining at the moment.

Fair enough. I guess what you see as trashing the company I see a healthy discussion of the situation the company finds itself in. I don't believe that Bozi and Sean post based on their positions, I think that they (like me) simply don't share your unbridled optimism.

Enjoy your Sunday.

"So that's it. Talk of 'failure' to raise cash etc sounds like SOLG is unattractive and there's a problem with the assets or something is not right. When in reality it just comes down to the fact that two major shareholders don't like a royalty tap and majority of shareholders don't like hefty equity dilution. Nothing to do at all with SOLG assets or attractiveness - in fact you could say BHP and NCM's actions actually prove that they are very very interested in the asset."

But that is the very thing that isn't right, CD, the fact that our major shareholders have serious disagreements about the way forward. Yes, there is an upside to this conundrum, whereby SOLG shareholders receive a healthy payday as the company is taken over. Whether that's 60p, 90p or £1.32 who knows. I would welcome all three at this point.

But there is also downside to the above that involves considerable volatility if things don't go our way. Objectively, the news from the company of late has not been positive.

Under your previous moniker you were infamous for changing your narratives based upon your positions. I called you out myself for doing so as you're extremely good at writing a compelling story.

I still have a core holding here because I'm stubborn and have invested too much time and energy. But as stated several weeks back I'm trading this where possible and have no issue with people who choose to do the same.

I'm of the view that the fundraise was equity based and that Mather stopped it at the last minute. This led to Ayten's credibility and relationships with the market taking a hit, which she was not willing to stand for.