Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
See if you can spot what's been omitted from the section relating to the SR.
Elsewhere it's good to see costs are being cut and an admission that the head office has been dysfunctional for a long time. Some honesty at last!
Our new leaders are tackling the situation with enthusiasm and direction.
Add, dont keep us guessing, what's been omitted?
Vujcic: "Cascabel has been adequately studied".
I wonder what this means? No more exploration work? No more work on the DFS? A very cryptic comment from the company.
Overall, the emphasis is quite clearly on cost saving and organizational restructuring whilst going flat-out to complete the SR. The comment about reducing the number of time zones is also interesting. Which office(s) are going to be cut?
The Italian, no direct reference to value enhancing at Cascabel, which, when combined with Vujcic's comment, may suggest something.
I'd get rid of the TSX listing. It's pointless and delivers nothing.
The problem for Scott is that he would have known that the financial results ending Dec 31st would need to be in the prospectus. Being realistic, getting accounts sorted can take up to 4 weeks especially when involving two companies. So the overrun would have taken us to end of Jan which is what was RNS'd. So FCA may have had issues with some of the numbers and as such they have had to resubmit which then goes to FCA again to approve. Basically... FCA putting SOLG through the mill and holding up SOLG's prospectus. Looks like it should be resolved in 2 weeks time. Apart from that... reducing cash burn is a no brainer... but why are they aiming to explore Australian assets if looking to focus staff in Ecuador?? Also... does this mean they are getting rid of Solomon Islands assets?? This all feels like a slimming down exercise to suit certain buyer?? Chinese already dictating what they would like?? Apart from that, looks like we are getting there but lack of CFO clearly being seen.
I like what I am hearing. Now walk the walk.
Good morning all.
It really couldn't be more simply laid out.
No more drilling at Cascabel our resource is mapped.
We have our PFS.
Maybe this means they are going straight to the BFS and side stepping the DFS or DFS is the next step.
Also we continue with the strategic review ( which the likes of Redknight and DBW Said would never happen ).
We are getting a new CFO, which again makes ridiculous the claims that we were not getting one because we were going to be sold.
So no sale and we are advancing Cascabel.
The only question that remains is how we are advancing Cascabel.
addicknt... in the MD&A, ENSA had $11m to be spent on it through to July 31st. All studies and work was outlined there. So I think you're reading too much into that. $11m is low for ENSA spend so was telegraphed on 14th.
Fort, I'm simply looking at what Vujcic said. "Cascabel has been adequately studied". I'm sure that wasn't just a throwaway comment. It means something.
Sure, money's going to be spent, but presumably that's about keeping a functional workforce? But I'm certainly open to any other interpretations of his observation.
Agreed Quady, not the direction I want so I’ll have to take a bath on my holding today. Very disappointed with this, atb to those who choose to stay invested
Looks like I was right about the board despite Bozi defending them.
Scott saying in corporate talk that they are basically taking the p#ss
Quady it clearly mentions that a sale of cascabel or a part of it is in the review
I've got to say, if I was pro a takeover I wouldn't be enthralled reading that update.
The company's workforce is being streamlined but a full time CFO is being sought. That suggests longer term planning than just the next 6-12 months.
If I had to nail Mt colours to the mast I think they're going to spin out the regionals and try and find a buyer for Cascabel. Failing that it will be the dreaded JV and on SolGold goes as a joint or minority partner.
I know it doesn't fit with the MO of the Cornerstone leadership but I'm sensing a change of direction fr them now. Interesting.
Monte - Scott is entitled to his opinion, as are you and I.
I showed you how investors could have secured a better return from the decisions the board took rather than a strategic review 5 years ago and you offered no suitable counter-point.
Scott knows he can't mince his words at this stage. Investors want heads on spikes and he knows he has to row with them, or a tleast chuck them a bone.
Bozi, your post appears to be contradictory. On the one hand you suggest it doesn't look good for us Exiteers, but on the other you say you think they'll look for a buyer for Cascabel.
Btw, I think you're third paragraph is a pretty good guess and would explain why a full time CFO is needed.
Not contradictory in the slightest Addicknt.
You know that a partial sale of Cascabel doesn't give the Exiteers their exit. It gives them a small special dividend at best.
The only true exit here is a sale lock stock and barrel for somewhere between 40-60p. Reading that update, I don't believe that to be happening, right now at least. If it is, we're being sneakily put away.
Why would they not replace the CEO? I don't see how that changes the likelihood of a sale.
Suitable counter point.
How about this one.
We could have got 40p a share 5 years ago. We would be happy to take 40p a share now.
Would you like your 40 p now or 5 years ago ?
Yes Bozi it's simple but the best things in life are.
Exactly as I thought!
They took so long that they had to file new accounts.
Utter incompetence.
This is what happens when you slim down the staff so much.
Frankly I lay this blame right at the feet of Cuzzubbo...slowed things down, screwed up the financing, caused Ingo (Acting CFO) and Ayten to go, leaving this ultimate mess.
No wonder some think he was a BHP plant!
And as for Sangha...his expletive outburst against BHP and NCM and his 'fast and smart not slow and stupid'made him look utterly unprofessional.
Finally, the buck stops with Twigger...again...
Bozi,
I think you are assuming a lot but for instance... what do you think will happen if they announced a partial sale/ jv deal on ENSA? Do you think BHP would counter offer? Do you think that could set off a full scale bid war??
Just need the first domino to fall. It's not really about what pi's think... it's about the big boys and what they want. Spinning off the rest of the business into a new company would only be required if SOLG is bought out lock stock and barrel. Or you'd just spin off ENSA and keep SOLG. There are tax benefits and accounting games which help when splitting things off as I'm sure you know. There's a man or women in Switzerland drinking nice coffee while waiting for instructions I believe!lol!
Q ..perhaps you have been right all along and that is why the sp is where it is ..we are going to production and the only way is down !! I am sure a sale would reward more shareholders than trying to go to production
Fort - from the fella who assumes more than any other, I'll take that as a compliment.
I don't think there would be a counter offer to a partial ENSA sale. It's something management would likely agree with an interested party and it would become binding pretty quickly. Always a chance a superior proposal might be received but I think it's unlikely. Why would you buy half of ENSA but not SOLG if you were BHP?
Of course it's not what I think, but do you really read tha tupdate Fort and get the impression that a takeover is the leading strategy? I'm not sure it is.
I suppose in one sense I'm happier they are at least taking some action to be able to continue on an even footing should the optimal outcome not arise.
Just a frank admission of what many of us on here have long suspected. For far too long they’ve dragged their heels whilst being handsomely compensated at the expense of us, the shareholders. Let’s get it sold.
No one should be enthralled reading that update Bozi
I have been withering in my assessment of our management and board over the last couple of years…. utterly woeful.. just abysmal, under performance again and again. It seems there is no end to it.
There have been multiple occasions, over the years, where we have been made to amend and resubmit official documents. It’s become embarrassing. Heads should be on sticks.
Whatever the outcome of the strategic review, we do need an experienced CFO.. you can’t deliver a Spin out, a JV or a Sale without someone with some brains, understanding and experience in that area…
but this strategic review process will be dragged out far longer than many hope…
Monte it does not mention the sale of Cascabel in the strategic review because it hasn't been done yet.
Also in the announcement of the strategic review it mentions the best way to advance Cascabel, nothing about a sale.
However possible I have missed something, so please feel free to post were it says the strategic review is to sell Cascabel.
Certainly Quady
Look at the bit after the 2 comments where it say strategic review
About 3 down it say
The direct or indirect sale of a stake in the cascabel project