Member Info for Stackhigh

Indeed...

Though from memory, on this board, it was all going to be done and dusted by the last AGM. Then by Q2. Then after the summer.... You get the point. Just hope no novice investor uses this board as a source of research: they'd be very confused by the total absence of any hint of a sale!

Behind a paywall, but wholly predictable

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/newcrest-mining-slams-solgold-financing-deal/news-story/10efb3585fab757ff9591cb1b8991b64

Who is 'they', 'walking this down'? Biggest sells have been coded 'O' today, so it can't be these mysterious 'Autobots' that usually get accused whenever profit taking or low volume causes the price to fluctuate... Unless.. maybe... This could be a completely unfounded conspiracy with zero evidence?!

Thanks for this. Please keep us updated...

I assume this is satire?

I think he might have meant to label me 'pedantic'. A few years ago, people who couldn't use that word accurately started to proliferate the word 'pernickety' instead. That would fit...

And I've only posted a few times, but I'm pretty sure Quady's view of this will be correct every day until it sells, if it does. Everyone else seems to be hoping so hard for a sale that they've imagined it to be imminent or even inevitable, which hasn't come true yet...

Anyway, apologies to all for any disruption. I only wished to call out a baseless claim of nefarious interference which might have put off genuine investors from taking a position. Any evidence of 'walking down' still openly received.

Thanks all!

You didn't predict that a rise on tiny volume would not be sustained. Instead, you questioned whether it would be 'walked back down', but you didn't substantiate that hypothesis with evidence.

If you find a basic requirement to evidence your claims 'tedious', this message board is definitely for you!

All the best.

Ok, so we're agreed that it's not being 'walked down' by any mysterious plotters?! Ha. Always enjoy debunking a poorly constructed conspiracy theory.

How do you fold your tin hat, Sean? Perhaps that's advice you are qualified to dispense! LoL.

I did my own research, and it turns out this is a conspiracy theory, and isn't what's actually going on with the share. So I'm glad I did. Others reading this forum, perhaps new investors, might mistake your inference for something that could be proven correct.

As of June '23, solgold made up just 0.3% of BR's World Mining Trust. About £3.8m at the time, in a fund where some holdings are well over £100m. They will buy and sell shares to a maintain their broad exposure (that's what investors want from WMT) but even a 200% 'manipilation' of solgol wouldn't move the needle their end.

Hefty rounding- it didn't cost buyers £1m

Think Slug is drunk or high. Shame people looking for Solgold info have had to read that. Be gone soon, no doubt to return. I'm put in mind of those bots designed to use AI to pass for humans, but after a few hours of 'learning' from the internet, they start spouting nonsense.

21% of the mineral deposit, closer to 40% of the value.

Today's shihshow will have an annoying knock on. Volumes may not have been massive, but it will serve to once again reinforce the idea that one should sell Solgold at prices over early-30s. So whatever future news drip-feeds, this becomes a psychological resistance for the SP. Optimists on here believe the mar

Agreed. Long road, no one excited by pfs, not many PIs expecting bid with enough confidence to stay in. Back to sleep, back to the bottom of the portfolio drawer. Check again in a couple of years, hope against dilution.

1. So they were tested? And you were therefore incorrect go call them 'untested'? Just as I thought.

2. The vaccines do protect against the disease. See death rates post-rollout Vs pre. No vaccine in the history of vaccination has been 100% effective against catching a disease, which is why no definition has ever stipulated that it must.

That was easy- thanks for admitting to your errors. Post carefully in future.

The legal framework under which they are administered is not an indicator of whether or not they have been tested. You refered to them as straight untested, and that's not true. Got it?

And which definition of vaccine are you using to preclude those administered against the original strain of Covid?

Amongst many, many off-topic ramblings, you have repeatedly mention untested vaccines. Where in the world do you think they are injecting people with untested vaccines? Mercifully not in the UK. Even willing participants in early stage clinical trials aren't receiving completely untested vaccines, as they've been through I.V. and primate testing. Such an odd claim that they are untested...

Ocean genuinely doesn't seem to understand. Ocean, have you heard of DYOR? If the answers provided on this message board don't satisfy you, don't invest just yet, do a bit more reading about historic debt covenant adjustment in times of unforeseeable market conditions, and then decide. Don't keep asking the same question if you're not yet able to understand the answers, as you risk embarrassing yourself. Come back after you've educated yourself. That's what an actual invested would do. Okay? Lovely. Thanks.

Ha, wtf?! Why would a covenant be altered when there's not a review due? Was tempted to say this was a troll account, but given the blatent lack of understanding on display, it can't be. Just someone who is genuinely a bit simple!