We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
They didn't say when the loan was done just that it must have happened probably in the first 6 months of this year based on the quarterly reporting.
It is more likely they are selling their other Solgold shares that the lender doesn;t hold to come up with the dosh to pay AJQ if they need it and they likely will. The loan just goes to show that they need sources of cash.
Nick Mather is hugely responsible for the mess that Solgold is in and deserves to get booted along with Scott and others.
It doesn't matter depending on what is in the loan covanent if the loan to value ratio goes below a set figure the lender can sell them if they wish to keep the loan within their required margin. They didn't declare any more with regards to this loan so it is all just speculation.
Here is the bit where they pledged 17 mill to AJQ if they need it. If they have sold their Atalantic stake in full then it could be them selling Solgold. I wouldn't be prasing Nick Mather on this board because he could very well be responsible for the recent declines in the share price.
Letter of support - Armour Energy Limited
DGR Global Limited (ASX: DGR or the Company) has provided a formal letter of financial support to Armour Energy Limited (ASX: AJQ) to provide
financial support for a period of up to 12 months of up to $17,000,000 to enable AJQ to repay their debts as and when they fall due and payable, as
well as settle certain loan repayments that are currently due by AJQ and for repayment of the related principal which is due on 30 November 2023.
Addicknt
Check the DGR annual report. I cut and pasted the relevant bits.
Loan
DGR Global Limited (ASX: DGR or the Company) has entered into a loan agreement with Equities First Holdings LLC (EFH). EFH has agreed to advance
£600,000 (GBP) to DGR. The loan is secured by 15,000,000 ordinary shares held by DGR in SolGold plc. Although the title in the shares has been
transferred to the lender, DGR has retained substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of the shares and will continue to recognise the
investment in the shares. The loan bears interest at 3.75% per annum and is repayable after 2 years.
Could even be DGR selling. I got it from a source that they were down to only a few million Atlantic Lithium shares a few months ago and in their annual report they took out a 600K quid loan out of London secured against 15 million Solgold shares that the lender now has the title to. Since then the value of the collateral would have plunged and the lender may be selling Solgold shares if the loan agreement had been breached. DGR is down at 2.5c and may need to come up with cash to fund their oil and gas play next month AJQ that they have agreed to support. AJQ has been approached about a takeover by a chinese mob and so maybe they Chinese group will provide AJQ funding but I wouldn't rule out DGR being a seller at these low depressed prices to defend their stake in AJQ. We may find out when they issue their quarterly report in the next few weeks.
The Panama canal is currently restricted due to low rainfall and as a result fewer transits are allowed, vessels can't be as big as before, cargo sizes are down and there are a big log jam of ships waiting to get through extending shipping times via the canal. I think you will find that this is more of the reason for bigger demand for larger vessels to take the cape route rather than strength in the Chinese economy.
Apparently Newcrest has been approached by a North American player. My bet is on Barrick.
https://www.afr.com/street-talk/newcrest-mining-digs-in-for-m-and-a-talks-calls-in-advisers-20230205-p5chyr
I am not voting against all of the directors just against Mather, Twigger, Clare I just checked my voting record on my broker platform and I actually voted for Maria but lodged my votes last week.
You said yourself that you are voting against Twigger and Clare what real difference does it make me voting against 3 directors vs you voting against 2?
What does it matter if there is a vacuum at the BOD level, there already is with many of the existing directors doing the right thing and standing aside, because of the Solgold BOD incompetence they have effectively handed over the keys to Cornerstone to drive the thing going forward. One of the things they highlighted in this announcement was to prevent BHP / NCM gaining control without making a bid now what we effectively have done have given control to Cornerstone with only 6 odd % of Solgold and 15% of ENSA now in control without them making a bid but in fact being paid a premium in Solgold shares for the privilege via the merger. All this because the incumbent Solgold BOD screwed things up, how can any one vote for and reward that? Best to get rid of the lot of them and bring in new talent to drive the sale process forward.
The important resolutions are the funding ones, if they pass then that means that Solgold can be funded without BHP / NCM creeping up the register and these are the resolutions that may trigger BHP to bid if passed. I voted for those, but refuse to vote for directors that in my opinion haven't performed their jobs properly.
Well I have already voted my 4.9 mill SOLG shares. I voted against the remuneration report and against all incumbent directors but for everything else. The reality is that Solgold has been badly mismanaged by the BOD and as a result we have a share price in the doldrums and now a sale process from a position of weakness rather than strength. Reasons for voting against the current BOD.
Delayed / shelved feasibility studies / PEA's, Solgold can never seem to hit any targets that they set.
Fraud of around 5 mill lost somewhere in the Ecuadorian jungle.
Huge turn over of staff in key positions.
Many unfavorable articles in various media about staff departures and instability in the boardroom.
Bad relations with the major shareholders resulting failed funding efforts which depressed the shareprice.
Not going out for a fundraise earlier in the year when the share price was in the 30p range.
Putting a stop to regional exploration. This is the only thing that Solgold appear to be competent at.
Nick ****ing up the first PFS by making the block cave too ambitious that required an expensive and lengthy re design.
Wasting loads of royalty cash on studies and development concepts that a major would just tear up and start again on the false basis that Solgold could go it alone and become a BHP of Ecuador.....
Employing too many staff and having an excessive overhead.
Taking over a year for a French translation... not treating the shareholders seriously with announcements.
I could go on.
The current BOD do not deserve your votes as because of their actions it is likely that the assets get sold for less than what they are really worth. This sorry saga deserves to be put out of it's misery so we can all move on with other investments run by more competent managers. The cornerstone guys can get the thing sold and Nick can still be influential via his shareholding rather than being on the BOD. I have convinced other mates of mine that also have multi million shareholdings to vote the same way.
My 2c.
https://twitter.com/bhp/status/1593378500634763264?s=46&t=C_MS-wnKB_YKfgxlcGVGqg
I am voting them all off the board with my shares as the decline in the share price is more self inflicted rather than can be blamed on general market sentiment. There is a fair chance some of the directors don’t get re elected if BHP and Newcrest vote against them as well.
Putting on a sexy red dress and showing a bit of leg...
https://www.miningnews.net/barry-fitzgerald/opinion/1441254/solgold-gets-dressed-up-for-bhp-or-newcrest-bid
evaluating financing alternatives for the Combined Group;
a spin-out of assets, other than the Cascabel Project, to all shareholders of the Combined Group;
the direct or indirect acquisition of an interest in ENSA and/or the Cascabel Project howsoever effected; or
any other transaction or series of related transactions as may be agreed to between the Parties.
The completion of the Transaction is not contingent on the completion of the Strategic Review Process and there can be no assurance that the Strategic Review Process will lead to any transaction.
Board of Directors’ Recommendation
The Transaction has been unanimously approved by the boards of directors of SolGold and Cornerstone including, in the case of Cornerstone, following the unanimous recommendation of a special committee of independent directors. The Cornerstone board of directors unanimously recommends that Cornerstone shareholders vote in favour of the Transaction.
Paradigm Capital Inc. (“Paradigm Capital”), financial advisor to Cornerstone, has provided a verbal opinion to the Cornerstone board of directors stating that, and based upon and subject to the assumptions, limitations, and qualifications set forth therein, the consideration to be received pursuant to the Transaction is fair, from a financial point of view, to the Cornerstone shareholders (other than SolGold).
Advisors
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. is acting as financial advisor to SolGold with Bennett Jones LLP acting as its legal advisor in connection with the Transaction.
Paradigm Capital and Maxit Capital are acting as financial advisors to Cornerstone with Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP acting as its legal advisor in connection with the Transaction.