Solgold Share Discussion Threads

[dmitribollokov] 12/6/2019 08:17

Zoros has been a bear masquerading as a concerned party forever. Filtered him ages ago...

INV is a £20m mkt cap company without significant finds. SOLG is a £550m company with potentially nation changing finds and prospects.

Comparing apples and oranges.

[mknight] 12/6/2019 07:25

Important post from Zoros on the LSE board.

INV METALS

Its a must read for all of those who think it could never happen to us .

It can .

Lets hope it does not but do not be in Solg with more than you can afford to lose .

After the news you can always get back in as long term with political support it is a no brainer.

[1garythomas] 12/6/2019 06:07

The value Solgold are claiming is 4.1 billion, thats on the price of copper being 3.30, at the price today of 2.64, gives a correct price of 2.8 billion, minus cornerstone who own 15% brings the correct price to 2.4 billion.

[dmitribollokov] 11/6/2019 20:26

Yup worry is it just takes 800 ppl who didn’t get jobs to get promised something if they vote for the plaintiff in a referendum.

[njg41] 11/6/2019 20:18

Worth a review of the sustainability section on the Solgold website and the positive impact on the community - and environmental friendly approach:
hxxp://www.solgold.com.au/sustainability/#comm

[lefrene] 11/6/2019 20:02

From that judges track record I rather suspect that this will be seen as an opportunity to put a further building block in his career, and thus he will want to put this challenge on the ballot.

[arcadian] 11/6/2019 19:22

2p rise this PM with some buying interest.

Will we hear in the morning?

[dmitribollokov] 11/6/2019 18:38

Fair enough. Interesting commentary anyway, thanks.

[relliott10] 11/6/2019 18:06

A previous holder of Solgold I sold out several months ago but have still followed the share from a distance. The recent volatility has piqued my interest again and it's an intriguing story. Bored so I spent this afternoon having a closer look and it's a very difficult situation to read. It would appear to be a question of interpretation of the Constitution by the judge, that's why I was interested in his background. I'll watch for now and may take a position if there is some clarity.

[dmitribollokov] 11/6/2019 17:02

Why the sudden interest just out of interest Relliott ?

[relliott10] 11/6/2019 16:48

Judge Agustin Grijalva Jimenez:

'Twenty-three years ago, he worked as a teacher at the Universidad Andina, in the subjects of Economic and Social Rights, the Legal System of Production, Legal Methodology and Constitutional Interpretation.'

'He was one of the five founders of the Law area of ​​the Simon Bolivar Andean University, Ecuador headquarters, helping to devise a new model of doing academia, committing students, professors and authorities in the guarantee of human rights. He is one of the most important thinkers of the constitutional school that has been called Andean constitutionalism and, has contributed substantially to understand the plurinationality and interculturality from the law with his studies on indigenous justice. This development of legal thinking has allowed him to participate as an advisor in the last two Constituyentes of Ecuador.'

Two points to consider from the above. He advised on the Constitution so is well placed to determine legality of the question. He helped devise a new model of committing authorities in the guarantee of human rights and has contributed substantially on understanding the law with his studies on indigenous justice.

[relliott10] 11/6/2019 16:17

Yes agreed Arcadian. I have also seen 'by 24 June' given as the date for a verdict. Very confusing.

[arcadian] 11/6/2019 16:14

And yet SOKG think

The Court heard arguments from many interested parties with the great majority opposing the proposed referendum. The Court subsequently adjourned and is expected to deliver its verdict by 24 June 2019.

[dmitribollokov] 11/6/2019 15:55

so they just need to bribe 800 ppl

[relliott10] 11/6/2019 15:52

Pro mining groups believe that the constitution does not prohibit mining in this area and that such a decision cannot be made at a local level.


The defendants case centres on allowing a consultation otherwise it is violating rights to water and life.

[lefrene] 11/6/2019 15:48

Thank you Relliot10

Arcadian, to me it feels less like shadows on the cave wall, and more like having been dropped into a deep hole, and now the miscreants are pi$$ing in!

[relliott10] 11/6/2019 15:44

If the Constitutional Court agrees that the question is legal and constitutional then the defendants must get signatures from 10% of the local population for a referendum to take place. The 4 parishes contain 8,000 inhabitants. Only one local mayor of the 4 parishes attended and he spoke in favour of a referendum.

[relliott10] 11/6/2019 15:40

The La Hora article states that:

On May 27, the constitutional judge Agustín Grijalva Jiménez issued an order for this hearing to be held. And until next Friday, June 7, at 4:30 p.m., the deadline for people or organizations that did not intervene will be able to present their papers on the subject in writing.
After that, the Constitutional Court will have 5 days to present its opinion on the legality and constitutionality of the question.

Not sure whether that would be 5 working days or just 5 days. In the case of the latter 5 days from 7 June is tomorrow, 12 June.

[arcadian] 11/6/2019 15:27

You and I are both in the cave looking at the shadows on the wall . We both need someone on the outside to tell us what is real. Pob69 is much better placed than us when it come to information on such matters although I shall obviously try to help myself as well as it is the critical/timing factor.

[lefrene] 11/6/2019 15:19

Arcadian, as this is a local matter then I would expect it to be some sort of county court, and for the decision to be given in open court for the those in the public gallery and any media people to hear first. But then what the heck do I know about Ecuador and it's legal niceties? Most likely the first thing we will notice is the share price popping up.

[dmitribollokov] 11/6/2019 14:41

Ecuadorian govvies going well today. Hopefully they won't let the economy get derailed...

[arcadian] 11/6/2019 14:18

Perhaps we should concentrate, not on the things we can`t control or foresee and focus on finding out the best and most immediate means of knowing the decision when it is made. How will the decision be announced : in open court, by public proclamation or a news bulletin? Has anyone telephoned SOLG IR to learn how they will find out: presumably from their country manager but they may hear direct from the government.

Having said that I`m sure that Pob69 will have it sorted and will share his thoughts with us mortals.

[lefrene] 11/6/2019 13:22

Alas we can take no high ground here,
three years after a decision taken so clear,
the slithery cowards whimper and haver still,
because it's only their seats they truly hold dear!

[mam fach] 11/6/2019 13:05

Agree entirely. But it is much better to get parameters in place now.
Then everyone will know where they stand.