Really funny comments today. Does anyone really think they want to trade today or tomorrow if the first part of the cap raise, tranche 1, is meant to be settled on Monday (12th August), as per pg 21 of presentation?
If the trading halt was 'to correct misinformation', why do they need a trading halt? Why not just correct the misinformation??
The 'misinformation' excuse, just happens to allow the SP to not dip below the ask price before the settlement date!!
I'm looking forward to find out what the misinformation is. The Itafos PEA still exists on their web page and is very, very relevant to this project. It has tonnes of information in it..
This is all information in the public arena, so should only 'some' people know about it? Why shouldn't it be highlighted on these threads, where it is relevant to all investors, those holding SGQ or just interested in it.
It is also the latest information that Itafos have on their web pages about the project.
If you bother to look up the corporate presentations of Itafos there are lots stating the ARAXA project is pending feasibility, which was the next step after the PEA.
Why didn't Itafos do a feasibility study on the project if the economics are as good as the rampers here would have everyone believe? Year after year they didn't bother doing a feasibility study on the project?
All the excuses about Itafos not having the cash to start a mine are irrelevant, as they would have needed to do a feasibility study, to get better information about the economics of the project. A feasibility does not cost much relative to the spend of building a mine and according to the PEA would add value to the project (Pg 95).
Why didn't Itafos do a value adding feasibility, even the relatively cheap PFS?
The Samarco tailings dam failure did happen in Brazil, and laws relating to tailings dams in Brazil have been tightened up substantially, this is also on public record. Part of the existing resource is under the base of a tailings dam wall, as is stated in the Itafos PEA and no-one has moved either in the last 11 years!!
The real question still remains of why St George failed to mention anything about this tailings dam in any part of the presentation, plus failed to show it in the cross section of the existing drilling on pg 10 of the presentation?
Why not highlight what's public information and how you intend to deal with whatever problems may arise from it's existence, so there can be no criticism of non disclosure?
SGQ Price at posting:
2.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
(20min delay)