Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Solgold Plc LSE:SOLG London Ordinary Share GB00B0WD0R35 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.45 -1.33% 33.35 1,263,227 11:13:58
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
33.30 33.60 34.50 33.20 34.50
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Mining -18.08 -1.00 684
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
11:24:08 O 14,099 33.4081 GBX

Solgold (SOLG) Latest News

More Solgold News
Solgold Investors    Solgold Takeover Rumours

Solgold (SOLG) Discussions and Chat

Solgold (SOLG) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Solgold trades in real-time

Solgold (SOLG) Top Chat Posts

Solgold Daily Update: Solgold Plc is listed in the Mining sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker SOLG. The last closing price for Solgold was 33.80p.
Solgold Plc has a 4 week average price of 31.70p and a 12 week average price of 30.55p.
The 1 year high share price is 43.90p while the 1 year low share price is currently 10p.
There are currently 2,049,657,030 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 2,687,241 shares. The market capitalisation of Solgold Plc is £690,734,419.11.
lowtrawler: DD, are you confusing realisation with value? Anyone who owns a house, has an understanding of the value of the house, even if they have no plans to realise that value. It is perfectly possible to own assets with a substantial value and have no plans to realise that value. Perhaps you are saying that there are obvious ways for a homeowner to sell their house but no obvious way for SOLG to sell their assets? Personally, I think if SOLG wanted to monetise Alpala, they would find a queue of willing bidders. However, if you own a dilapidated house, you can add value by renovating before the sale. SOLG are adding value to Alpala through production of the PFS / BFS and drilling the satellite mines such as Tandayama. These are relatively low cost activities which can add substantial value. In my view, maximum value can be achieved at Alpala once the BFS is produced. However, there is a case for monetising after the PFS because exploration of our other locations will otherwise dilute shareholder value. If my view is accurate, SOLG have an asset in Alpala which is of value and which could be monetised relatively easily. We then have a discussion about what value can be assigned to Alpala. I have often stated my view that Alpala has a current value of around 40p per share. I know that some posters hold much higher valuations. I believe Porvenir is becoming a valuable asset. Once results for holes 3,4 and 5 are released, it may even be worth over 10p per share. The other assets definitely need explored before values can be assigned, but it looks like we will have several assets capable of becoming valuable. For these reasons, I am very comfortable holding a view that the current share price does not fully reflect the value of assets that SOLG hold.
tibszol1: LT,DD Where do you get your totally spurious statement that Solgold does not have shareholder support, and the implicit assumption that BHP, Newcrest and Cornerstone collectively form the entirety of shareholders. Correct me if I am wrong, but was it not the case three weeks ago that at the AGM the entirety of the BOD was re-elected to serve, that usually constitutes a vote of confidence, if perhaps not entirely by BHP et al, bur who cares about them, their motivation is pure and simple, daylight robbery, steal Solgold for as little as is humanly possible,my objective is to prevent that if at all possible.Some of the so called "old boys" terrified of falling off their perch before they get to enjoy the fruits of their investments, my advice is sell up now and make the most of the time you have left, I am 75 but am quite happy to take my chances with the Grim Reaper for a few more years DD are you an accountant, someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing! The point is that Fortescue achieved great success from very modest beginnings,perhaps even more modest than Solgols`s, and yet against a plethora of naysayers won through, I wonder where all the doubters are now. I neither have the capacity or time to go into the nitpicking that you suggest to establish the relevance of Solgold`s situation to Fortescue`s, suffice it to say that Solgold will deal with the circumstances and all other considerations as it sees fit. As an aside, have you ever considered changing you tag to Eyore, stricks me as being far more appropriate considering your lack of vision and enthusiasm in Solgold`s future.
bogotatrader: MF - no announcement. volume was 47497....speculation on LSE BB of bid/JV last of posters stated he heard from mate at Cantor Fitzgerald that bid for SOLG was on its way...this post was subsequently deleted....something brewing with the sharp Cornerstone Share Price rise. SOLG price action today will be interesting...
rougepierre: MK you've completely misunderstood... Valuestone is a $300 million investment fund...while it has a major mining company and a major construction finance bank as its sponsors, it invests on its own behalf... It was established 3 years ago and I'm guessing its biggest holdings are c$20/30 million...its investment objectives are quite clear... So my thinking is that they may have a target maximum investment size for individual holdings...the fund is almost certainly run for HNW individuals... If the Chinese mining company wanted to bid that would be an entirely separate transaction but of course they could start by acquiring Valuestone's stake...though it wouldn't get them very far... I'm simply saying that it is very likely Valuestone wanted more shares when Nick issued them, because $5 million only represents 1.7% of the entire fund's investments...and indeed only 0.5% of SOLG stock, so not much use to fund or 'parent' In summary to repeat...Valuestone could choose to buy up to 50 million shares in the market or from other holders before they would have to let the world know...but they would slowly move the price in the meantime... I DON'T buy into the theory that their stake is a precursor to a bid, but I do accept that it is most likely that their decision may well have been influenced by either or both of their 'parent' sponsors, as the other one would be a candidate to provide project finance for Alpala... In conclusion, I didn't mention anything about 50p or 60p but I do think the next significant move for the SOLG share price will take us through 50p, whatever the stake...or simply demand exceeding supply... Savvy?
rougepierre: I came across this wise quote in relation to another company... "Something always fills a vacuum. The long vacuum caused by no participation by the filled with speculation and wishful thinking." And so it is here... I would like to think that Nick has finally got the message...STOP overpromising and underdelivering...'Shock and Ore' is a quote we may remember for a very long time, mainly for the massive anticlimax that followed... Apart from the conciliatory tone in the AFR article, what caught my eye was Nick's suggestion that the DFS may be delayed into 2022...THAT sounds like underpromising to me... In my entreaty to Nick through Eliza, I implored him not to keep overhyping in so many corporate presentations, but rather to let the drilling news pleasantly surprise us and do the work of elevating the share price... It seems notable to me that there have been SEVEN exploration updates and countless conference presentations since 9 October when the share price hit 43p, but it is now 15% BELOW that... So...unless there's another reason for the radio silence, there will be pent up desperation by the time the next juicy RNS hits and FOMO just might ignite the share price .. Remember, in August, a Mining Weekly article posted by SOLG on its own Twitter feed, said Solgold was the hottest takeover story in the City... And what, you may ask, might the alternate explanation for radio silence be...? A takeover approach or even JV discussions for Alpala would preclude any other RNSs being issued... I am of the view that the next sharp move in the share price will take us through 50p,,,whatever the reason... GLA!
lowtrawler: FSAW, the Hannam valuation model is flawed. They have created an NPV based on the 8% Discount Rate used in the PEA. Nobody is going to invest long-term in Ecuador for an 8% return. They state that the IRR is 21%, which is above the threshold needed for investment, but it suggests that if you use a more realistic 12% Discount Rate, the NPV would fall to around $3bn. That is roughly where they have pitched their Alpala valuation. However, it assumes that 100% of Alpala will accrue to current shareholders. We know that 15% will go to CGP, 2% to FNV and can reasonably expect other capital providers will also take a cut. On the other side, they are flawed on valuation of our other properties, we know that Porvenir probably already represents 7p in our price and it has been more. They also haven't taken into account the satellite mines around Alpala. In short, they have performed a simple valuation of Alpala based on the PEA with some minor adjustments. While this might give a more accurate NPV than was contained in the PEA, it falls way short of providing an accurate value for Alpala in the share price. Equally, by failing to properly assess the potential value of the other locations, they are undervaluing those. In my view, they have only served to highlight that time delays to Alpala have a major impact on the finances and that they have lazily failed to properly value our other sites. They have assessed the impacts that they have modelled on Alpala as being a reduction in value of 17%. I doubt this is close to being accurate but using it at face value, I believe Alpala previously represented around 24p in our share price and so a 17% reduction would take around 4p from the share price. It would leave us with a lower limit share price being 20p Alpala, 7p Porvenir, 3p other sites = 30p. Add in John Cornford's comments that no bid is imminent, we may actually see 30p. Over the next few weeks, Porvenir will become better understood and more certain of success. Rio, I hope, will become another Porvenir. Tandayama will become a valuable satellite for Alpala. These events should add 15p or more to the lower limit price. If they go the way I expect, during Q1 we should move into a 45p plus trading range.
mirabeau: SolGold’s Nick Mather faces shareholder anger at AGM By: Trish Saywell December 18, 2020 Two years ago The Northern Miner named Nick Mather, president and CEO of Australian junior SolGold (TSX: SOLG; LSE: SOLG), as its Mining Man of the Year for his role as the driving force behind the world-class Alpala gold-copper deposit at its Cascabel project in Imbabura province in northern Ecuador. The company has attracted major companies as shareholders, including BHP (NYSE: BHP; LSE: BHP) with a 13.57% stake and Newcrest Mining (TSX: NCM; AS: NCM) with 13.49%. But delays at the project this year and Mather’s decision in May to raise money through a US$150 million royalty and streaming agreement with Franco-Nevada (TSX: FNV; NYSE: FNV) elicited criticism from some of the company’s shareholders. That displeasure was voiced at SolGold’s annual general meeting on Dec. 17, when 44.75% of the company’s shareholders voted against Mather’s reappointment to the board of directors. Mather, who according to the company’s most recent corporate presentation owns about 4.37% of SolGold, could not be reached for comment. In mid-July, Cornerstone Capital Resources (TSXV: CGP), said it wanted to replace SolGold’s entire board of directors. Cornerstone owns 7.54% of SolGold and has a 15% interest in ENSA, the Ecuadorian company that holds 100% of the Cascabel concession. SolGold owns the remaining 85%. “As one of the largest shareholders of SolGold, it is obvious to Cornerstone that the current SolGold board is incapable of managing the affairs of SolGold for the benefit of all shareholders in a prudent and transparent manner,” Cornerstone’s chairman, Greg Chamandy, outlined in a press release. “Additionally, it is our view that the proposed Franco-Nevada royalty financing will significantly destroy shareholder value for all SolGold shareholders.” Calls for the board’s replacement came shortly after Cornerstone rejected SolGold’s second hostile takeover bid. (SolGold launched its first disclosed all-share bid for Cornerstone in March 2019 and a second on June 30 2020. The second bid valued Cornerstone at about $140 million (US$102 million).) Under SolGold’s financing package with Franco-Nevada revealed on May 11, the first US$100 million in funding gives Franco-Nevada a perpetual 1% net smelter return royalty (NSR). The agreement can be upsized by US$50 million to a 1.5% NSR within eight months of the agreement. In addition, SolGold and Franco-Nevada signed a US$15 million secured bridge loan at a 12% interest rate for a four-month period with an option to extend the maturity for another four months. Ingo Hofmaier, SolGold’s executive general manager of corporate finance, noted in a press release announcing the royalty deal that the company had “received and considered a broad range of funding options and the decision to proceed with Franco-Nevada is based on various factors, including the size of investment, the permanent nature of this financing, Franco-Nevada’s experience and understanding of Latin America and the competitive cost of capital.” Hofmaier also noted that in SolGold’s opinion, a 1-1.5% NSR “will not constrain the debt capacity of the project; on the contrary, we believe this financing increases the confidence in SolGold’s ability to fund the development, further affirming the overall quality of the Alpala deposit.” SolGold said the funds would be used to complete a feasibility study and any surplus would be used for SolGold’s share of the development of Alpala, pursuant to agreements with Cornerstone Capital. “The big companies don’t like royalties because they take value away at a project level,” said one mining analyst who covers the company who requested anonymity. “But SolGold’s argument is they’re trying to maximize SolGold’s shareholder value and it’s very dilutive to give equity. The royalty deal preserves the equity component for equity holders and they haven’t realized the full value yet for the project … and Franco-Nevada are going to be partners and that’s not necessarily a bad outcome.” “I’m never a huge fan of royalties but sometimes you don’t have a choice,” he continued. “Cascabel is a huge project and if their equity price had been higher or someone would offer them a higher price they would have taken it.” What’s more, SolGold has made big strides on the exploration front in Ecuador in the last twelve months, the analyst said. In addition to the Alpala deposit at the Cascabel project, SolGold is exploring and assessing 75 regional concessions across 14 provinces in the South American country. Recently the company has released solid assays for its Cacharposa copper-gold porphyry discovery at its Porvenir project in southern Ecuador and at the Tandayaa-America porphyry copper-gold target on the Cascabel concessions. “They’re doing great, they’re finding new porphyries and that’s part of Nick’s vision and the team he’s assembled and that value hasn’t been realized yet and you can see where he’s going with it and that’s not part of any royalty agreement. An equity raise would have diluted that stuff as well.” For its part, Franco-Nevada said it was delighted to participate in the Cascabel project, and president and CEO Paul Brink described Alpala as “an exceptional orebody and one of the most attractive block cave development projects globally.” SolGold updated the resource estimate for Alpala in April, outlining measured and indicated resources of 2.66 billion tonnes at a copper-equivalent grade of 0.53% and another 544 million inferred tonnes grading 0.31% copper-equivalent. The deposit remains open at depth to the north and northwest. It certainly hasn’t been clear sailing, however. On Dec. 1, SolGold announced it would not be able to complete a prefeasibility study as planned in 2020. Apart from delays caused by the global pandemic, the company explained that new geotechnical information has necessitated a redesign of certain underground infrastructure to a location outside of the cave footprint and also said it was introducing changes to the mine design and development and mining production schedules. As part of its optimization work, the team is also investigating improvements to metallurgy; seismicity studies to refine design of the tailings dam and processing plant sites; and sustainability improvements, including the option for hydroelectric power supply. The deposit, 180 km north of Ecuador’s capital of Quito, lies in the northern section of the Andean copper belt, known for producing nearly half of the world’s copper. According to the company, Alpala has produced some of the greatest drill hole intercepts in porphyry copper-gold exploration history, such as hole 12, which returned 1,560 metres grading 0.59% copper and 0.54 gram gold per tonne, including 1,044 metres grading 0.74% copper and 0.54 gram gold per tonne. Once developed, Alpala will produce an average of 150,000 tonnes of copper, 245,000 oz. gold and 913,000 oz. silver in concentrate per year over 55 years. During the first 25 years of mining, average annual production is forecast to be 207,000 tonnes of copper, 438,000 ounces of gold and 1.4 million oz. of silver. As for the AGM, “it was really just Nick the vote was against,” the analyst said, “and there weren’t enough votes to get him out. Nick’s a successful and self-assured guy and has some great successes and some people don’t like him for that.” Over the last year in Toronto, SolGold’s shares have traded in a range of 19¢ and 72¢ per share and at presstime in Toronto were changing hands for 66¢. The junior has about 2.1 billion common shares outstanding for a market cap of about $1.4 billion.
lowtrawler: We need to stop thinking along the lines that BHP or Newcrest want to take advantage of the poor PI's and get SOLG on the cheap. The reality is, they simply want to control the resources being found by SOLG. If they can do so cheaply, great, if not, they'll still be in the game. For BHP and Newcrest, £1bn here or there is nothing. Having assets to meet their customers needs, now and in the future, is key to their business. Newcrest in particular, but also BHP, took a chance on SOLG with some seed capital. They see themselves as having supported SOLG to be in their current position and want to benefit from the resources SOLG have found. They had been hoping that their friendly relationship with SOLG would allow them to carve up the assets into bite sized ventures where they would be the major parties and SOLG would be along for the ride. They have not been happy to find that Nick wants to be the major party and they are not being offered the opportunity to control the assets. I have cobbled together the following fantasy scenario. Only one of many ways this can go down but I feel it is plausible: Yesterday's results will force Nick to monetise Alpala. BHP and Newcrest will be hoping for a Farm-in or JV arrangement which gives them majority control over the asset. Nick may placate them by going down that route or he may find a way to monetise without them. Given the close run results from yesterday, I suspect Nick will placate them. For outsiders looking in, they have not had to make any move to date. BHP and Newcrest have not gained control over the assets and so there is still time for them to act. That will all change if SOLG monetise Alpala to the advantage of BHP and Newcrest. Third parties will see this as a model for Porvenir, Rio and all other assets. If they wish to gain control themselves, they will need to act. In my view, SOLG will need funds towards the end of Q1 and so a deal with BHP and Newcrest is likely to be proposed during Q1. Any lurking third party will need to put in a counter-proposal at that time. Either BHP / Newcrest will miss-out or the third party will. Also around the end of Q1, sufficient drilling should have been completed at Porvenir for an MRE to be imminent. Rio will also have a lot of available drill results. If they are both looking to be Tier 1's, whoever misses out on Alpala will be desperate not to miss out on these 2. In my view, a bid becomes inevitable. With majors competing against each other, the price will be less important than how much they want the resources. If we look to have 3 x Tier 1's, they could want the resources very badly indeed.
lowtrawler: Surprisingly, with the AGM only 2 days away, we still have no inkling what opposition is to be faced by the Board. This lack of knowledge is breeding concern and manifesting in the lower share price. When faced with uncertainty, it is important to analyse the fundamentals. In this case, if the Board are defeated, why would that be and what would be the intentions of the opposition? The Board can only be defeated if BHP have joined with Newcrest and CGP. They may vote down the appointment of Director's or they may vote down the special resolutions which could otherwise dilute their interest. Voting down the special resolutions is not the end of the world, it simply means that the Board will need to seek permission for equity raising. They will need to plan in advance and likely raise more equity, earlier, than would otherwise be the case. Probably, over time it will lead to BHP and Newcrest having a bigger interest in the company. Voting down appointment of Director's would indicate a new strategy is wanted. Most likely, BHP and Newcrest want to take-on Alpala as a JV and aim to force a sale by SOLG. However, we know other parties are also interested in Alpala and so even taking this route, they could be gazumped by a third party. It would be a dangerous path for BHP and Newcrest which means I consider it unlikely. Losing the special resolutions will likely lead to more expensive capital raising and BHP / Newcrest increasing their grip on SOLG. It is an adverse outcome for PI's and may knock c.10% from our enterprise value (something which has already been reflected in our price over the last few days). Losing the Board appointments will likely lead to early monetisation of Alpala and our immediate share price would probably increase. If the Board successfully pass all resolutions, it will be because BHP either abstain or support the Board. The uncertainty will be removed and we can return to business as usual. Except, the warning will have been given and so BHP, at least, will need to be kept onside with future fund-raising. In summary, our current share price appears to reflect the Board losing a vote on the special resolutions. Any other outcome from the AGM should be price positive.
mirabeau: JC, againToday 14:24 SolGold update By John Cornford 11 December 2020 Pursuant to his comments earlier this week, John Cornford provides an update on his view of SolGold. Just to add to my thoughts 9th December on Solgold’s 17th December AGM, and the dangers of an increase in its authorised share capital. If Nick Mather is charged with risking diluting shareholder value by funding further exploration through expanding Solgold’s share numbers too much, he has an answer. It is that exploration success at Alpala has already delivered a $4.2bn NPV by spending a total there of only some $200m so far, and maybe $300m by the time it can be financed in a year’s time. The counter to that, of course, is that Solgold’s market cap (now about $950m) has nowhere near kept pace with that NPV. On the other hand, it is now some three times the total Solgold has spent on exploration at all its properties. Up to last September that was $245m, and by mid 2021 will be around $320m. So, the argument remains. If the value investors will place on Solgold’s exploration results can be guaranteed to increase more rapidly than its shares in issue, then Mather will be right. But even if that happens, the share price increase might be slower than it would be if (e.g.) Alpala is ‘monetised’ in some form (to limit dilution) earlier than the eight years or so before it will deliver cash if Solgold retains it. The issue might not come up at the AGM. But it is bound to loom in some investors’ minds. - What's' the betting that SOLG's had a word in Cornford's shell-like after his write up earlier in the week? After all, we know companies read these bulletin boards to assess sentiment of retail investors (muppets)
Solgold share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20210118 11:42:19