Member Info for TheItalian

If I may interject, Scott not being a corporate finance guy, most likely he was not fine tuned to work on selling Cascabel to investors and rather focussed on the project derisking, which was also needed given how under NM that aspect was severely underestimated.

Quite possibly, since the operational plan in in flight, it was time to switch gears and really focus on selling the bloody thing, hence the change at the top.

Would make perfect sense to me that way.

There is no liquidity, you cannot trade large tickets in the first place so the only ones you see are the small ones, not even that many of them. Given the illiquidity, even small tickets move the price. Not rocket science.

...

The appointment of a CEO with a robust background in resource industry financing and project development, such as Dan Vujcic, is generally perceived positively by investors. His expertise in securing substantial funding and managing large-scale mining projects may bolster confidence in SolGold's future prospects, potentially leading to an increase in the company's share price.

However, the actual impact on the share price will depend on various factors, including market conditions, investor sentiment, and the successful execution of the company's strategic initiatives under the new leadership.

On a personal note, while I could almost tell that Scott was filling the role but not naturally keen on it, he was gracious, available, technically competent and obviously invested (more than you and me together). I hope Dan makes a difference to long term investors.

Just for balance, at the London event Nick mentioned that years ago BHP were preparing a bid for Cascabel at 50p but then did not progress with that, AND that he would sell Cascabel, not the entire company, at 50p.

I mentioned that with dilution and current market sentiment a bid would come at a lower price than 50p if at all, he didn't comment on that.

Here’s a probability-weighted breakdown of the price forecasts based on the likelihood of key events materializing:

Near-Term (6-12 months) – £0.20-£0.30

🔹 Probability: ~60-70%

🔹 Key Justification:

Strong likelihood of a rerating if the Feasibility Study (FS) confirms robust economics.

Early-stage financing progress (further stream deals, strategic partnerships) would boost confidence.

Copper market sentiment remains a key variable—if prices hold steady or rise, investor interest could improve.

SolGold’s low valuation relative to its asset value makes a modest uplift feasible.

Mid-Term (12-24 months) – £0.50-£0.70

🔹 Probability: ~40-50%

🔹 Key Justification:

Heavily dependent on securing full project financing, which remains uncertain.

Market conditions for copper juniors will need to improve—if risk appetite returns, capital inflows could drive the stock higher.

A potential M&A offer within this timeframe would significantly increase chances of a rerating.

If execution delays, the probability drops below 40%.

Long-Term (Production, Copper Bull Market, or M&A) – £1.00+

🔹 Probability: ~20-30%

🔹 Key Justification:

Reaching production is a multi-year process with execution risks (permitting, funding, political stability).

If a large miner acquires SolGold, this scenario could play out much sooner.

A copper supercycle (demand surge) would significantly improve valuation prospects.

This price target depends on both execution and macroeconomic tailwinds.

Conclusion

The most probable scenario in the next 12 months is a rerating towards £0.20-£0.30.

A move towards £0.50-£0.70 within two years is plausible but contingent on financing success.

£1.00+ requires either a bull market in copper or an M&A event, making it the least likely in the near term.

Taking the human emotion out of the equation...

Estimating the timing and magnitude of a potential share price rerating for SolGold involves analyzing several factors, including project milestones, market conditions, and investor sentiment. Here’s a structured outlook:

a) Timeframe for a Price Rerate

A share price rerating could occur in 12-24 months, depending on key developments. The most probable catalysts would be:

Final Feasibility Study (FS) completion (expected late 2024/early 2025)

Securing full project financing (beyond the gold stream deal)

Government approvals & permitting progress

Market sentiment towards copper prices and mining equities

If SolGold delivers strong feasibility results and finalizes funding in 2025, a rerating could happen sooner, possibly within 6-12 months.

b) Triggers for the Rerate

Definitive Financing Deal – A full financing package (e.g., strategic partner, equity/debt funding) would de-risk the project and attract institutional interest.

M&A Activity – Given its world-class asset, SolGold remains a potential acquisition target. A takeover bid from a major miner (BHP, Newmont, or another) could rapidly drive valuation higher.

Higher Copper Prices – If copper demand (driven by electrification, EVs, and infrastructure spending) pushes prices above $4.50-$5.00/lb, investor sentiment towards copper juniors could improve.

Government Support & Permitting Progress – Clear regulatory backing in Ecuador would enhance project certainty.

Construction Decision & First Production Timeline – Confirmation that SolGold can execute its phased development plan would boost confidence.

c) Realistic Share Price Expectation

SolGold is currently undervalued compared to its asset potential. A fair valuation based on Net Asset Value (NAV) and peer comparisons would suggest:

Near-Term (6-12 months): £0.20-£0.30 (if FS results and financing progress materialize)

Mid-Term (12-24 months, post-financing & project de-risking): £0.50-£0.70

Long-Term (Production, Copper Bull Market, or M&A Event): £1.00+

If a major miner bids for SolGold, a takeover premium of 50-100% over the then-current market price could apply, leading to a sharp rerating.

Emailed you Rodney

Forte, I think the "merger" suggestion was made to Nick and if I remember correctly his answer was literally "Why the f*** would we do that?". Of course he would not confirm that if it was in fact the case, but he seemed quite puzzled at the suggestion.

RodneyT, why do we need to do that, can you not just tell?

RodneyT, what is this about?

I could tell that something is cooking since they would only come to London to either discussing the chairman appointment or some serious funding,a nd also Nick was asking everyone about how many shares they own, which I assumed it's linked to some voting where PIs are somewhat relevant.

Nick was quite adamant that he didn't care too much about Cascabel at this point, on the basis that it has already been discovered and it's not going anywhere (in the positive sense of the word). He is still excited as he was in the past about the number of other prospects (I think he used the number 18) that are waiting to be brought to light.

So there is likely an angle about the regionals that offers vast potential but has not been exploited, and to be honest that is more baffling to me than how Cascabel has been progressing.

Scott being the more practical guy focussed on the current to-do list, is just targeting TAM since it's linked to the Cascabel story which needs to be brought to fruition, and possibly Porvenir.

Long story short, the narrative has not really changed IMHO but as we discover every day, the amount of frictions to manage between the bureaucracy and the funding adds a lot of delays, but as long as they can keep the company alive and make progress we will eventually be in the money.

Yes Magoo, I was born with it!

Eish,

I was the good looking one!

Jokes aside, I was wearing a grey jumper on my shoulders, light blue shirt, rather bold head.

Very glad to finally meet Scott and Nick in person, one gets a far more accurate vibe about them and what is going on.

The time variable was always my biggest grudge and remains so, but as DBW indicated, I got the sense that the process is moving along and it is far more complex and full of frictions than we tend to make it. All in all I feel a bit better about the investment even though for all practical purposes my dial has not moved since I will be stuck with my position for a while. On the plus side I got the Solgold hat!

Scott is actually an honourable and knowledgeable bloke, not a strong communicator and certainly more an operational figure than a leadership one. But he came across informative and genuine. Nick is a funny bloke, very direct, very blunt, bordering on the occasionally rude, but you can see the old soldier who has fought many battles there and I found him as entertaining as he was spooky.

Nick mentioned that BHP was preparing a bid (didn't specify when but I inferred it was back in his day as CEO) but somehow the process stopped and he could never find out why. I did not want to imply that it might have been because of him! He kept going back to a 50p price for Cascabel.

I know more of you were there but I only had the pleasure to talk to Jerryspaniel and Dreamboarwarrior and Ed McGovern from the Telegram group.

Peace and love everyone!

Pbow thanks for sharing.

For those who have been struggling with concept of the derisking of Cascabel and its impact on the strategic review, this article is quite good for the context in which Solgold operates.

I am planning to go, probably not before 6pm.

Sean suggests that Scott, Chris and Christina should be there.

International mining companies are at the mercy of “terrifying” tactics from military regimes in Africa’s Sahel, whose leaders are using legal disputes, nationalisations and arrests to assert greater control over crucial minerals such as gold and uranium. Barrick Gold on Tuesday temporarily suspended operations in Mali after the government started seizing gold from its mine, weeks after the country issued an arrest warrant for chief executive Mark Bristow. Authorities separately detained Australian gold miner Resolute’s chief executive Terence Holohan for nearly two weeks. Niger has also stripped mining rights to one of the world’s largest uranium reserves from French state-owned nuclear producer Orano, while Australia-based gold miner Sarama Resources has launched arbitration proceedings against Burkina Faso after the junta withdrew its exploration licence for a project.

The three countries are part of what is known as Africa’s “coup belt”, after being taken over by military juntas between 2020 and 2023. Their more interventionist stance, according to people familiar with the regimes’ thinking, stems from a desire to assert national sovereignty after decades under the thumb of western miners and subject to contracts the new rulers view as tilted in favour of the companies. They have been rewriting mining laws, demanding higher tax payments and larger ownership stakes in the industry, but have also resorted to restricting operations, issuing arrest warrants and detaining employees.

Https://www.ft.com/content/8ae50718-31ce-4e18-8491-33a600bbd3a5

In short the article described the end of the iron-centric, construction-centric commodities supercycle of the last 20-25 years, and the beginning of the next supercycle based on copper, lithium and the other metals and minerals required for the electrification of world's infrastructure, green transition and AI development.