I wont bother going on, as it is obvious that every year there have been a lot of fantastic targets generated by the geophysicals, which are then followed up by drilling. During the drilling there are announcements with headlines like the following ....
"NICKEL‐COPPER SULPHIDE DISCOVERY CONFIRMED AT STRICKLANDS PROSPECT"
"MORE MASSIVE NICKEL‐COPPER SULPHIDES INTERSECTED AT MT ALEXANDER"
The pattern goes from there to a cap raise, to more targets, to some fantastic new drill intercepts to another cap raise, to targets, to drill discovery/intercepts etc repeatedly.
There is no standard industry accepted follow up in drilling out a resource, just more of the same.
I suspect that the market is getting bored with all this, a bit of the boy who called wolf, especially when compared to the Mcap that other companies are being propelled to after an announcement of a massive Ni/Cu/PGE find. We have a lot more great intercepts, but the market is just not reacting to them, because St George has already made 'the discovery', back in 2016.
Don't get me wrong, if it wasn't for the appalling approach then I wouldn't have had the opportunity to enter cheaply, so I'm greatful. However I've been doing all this past research to work out why the Mcap is so relatively low. My hope is that bringing this to the attention of shareholders people can start to question or influence management into getting this great find into an orderly (read normal) resource drill out, followed by a normal path to resource estimate, feasibility study and mining (or sale or T/O along the way).
IMHO the market does not like companies that approach 'things' in a non normal way, and the shareholders suffer low valuation because of it.
A couple of posters seem worried about keeping larger fish at bay as the reason for not following a normal path, but IMHO this leads to lower price cap raises when the 'motherload' is not found in any particular drill program.
I'm trying to think of how to ask the correct questions for the AGM, along the lines of ...
Why are there so many 'discoveries' over the last 4.5 years without a follow up drill program to work out a resource estimate before moving on to other targets??
Why has it taken 4 years to do a resource estimate for Stricklands?? Why is the resource estimate just limited to Stricklands and doesn't include shallow Investigators?? (likewise for the Scoping Study)
How many EM targets are there that have not been drilled?? Why?
Why are there no announcements with full documentation of all drill intersections for the current program like most other companies do? (applies to all the different drill programs over the last few years)
Why are there no multiple cross sections after drill programs highlighting the 3D potential of any of the resources along our 4.5km strike length despite the 'plan view' being shown often?? (OK this needs work, hopefully someone can word this better)
Why are we always chasing 'the motherload' instead of working through what we have (some fantastic drill intercepts), which hopefully would allow a re-rate that then allows for capital to be raised at higher prices, which pays for a lot more exploration??
That's just a starter for questions, perhaps people could add questions which might trigger further thought between all of us.
SGQ Price at posting:
13.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)