Mon, Dec 22, 2014, 3:42 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 5 hrs 48 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

MineFinders Corp. Ltd. Ordinary Message Board

  • voltar1 voltar1 Aug 19, 2008 2:05 PM Flag

    More Bad News?

    Looks as though another round of bad news may have been leaked.

    No fund is going to short a company so hard for so long without knowing something very damaging to the company, they just wouldn't do it. They do not take that much risk on one company.

    This guy in the IR departments story is wearing old and personally I think the whole band of them are just keeping themselves employed until another sucker is dumb enough to hire them.

    News timing, Delays after confirming time frames and failure to act in the shareholders best interest by ducking their heads in the sand when the company is under attack from Shorts or naked shorts is just neglect and the lot of them should be replaced.
    Nobody working in the companies best interest would allow this to go on so long so what does that tell you? When is the last time you seen the insiders purchase shares? Wouldn't it be funny to see them buy at the very near bottom and of course immediately disperse them? What do you want to bet we see this happen?

    By the way, before any of you start calling me a paid basher or any other ignorant name I will remind you I have been and still am long in the company and intend to stay that way if for nothing else for the class action that may just surprise you all who is indicted.

    And to the management, Up Yours! Were it left to me you would all be unemployed. I am an owner of this company and I can say anything I want about it.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • one of the best posts I've read in a while...

      This company, along with Gammon Lake, used to be the darlings of the mining world. Everyone was touting them, their fantastic deposit, and how they would get re-rated higher as they went to production.

      Little did the sheeple investors know that mining isn't as easy as that. Things do go wrong, there are delays, and there ARE major risks with a mining company going into production.

      This was an exploration company that found a fantastic deposit, and now the are trying to put it into production. As an exploration company, this was a great company, but as a mining company this company is absolutely terrible. They have missed on every single one of their timelines. I have no doubt that this will continue in the future. I don't think they will make the deadline for the first pour. If they do, fine, but what's most important is the timeline for full production. When will they be cash flow positive? When will they bring in more money than they leak out? This is critical, and I believe they will continue to disappoint as they enter full production. Investors, by that time, will simply give up and the shorts will be justified. Why risk it? There are better opportunities in the gold/silver space.

      Agnico Eagle, Silver Wheaton, Royal Gold, Franco Nevada, even Hecla, these are all good, safe plays that you know will go up with the rise of gold and silver prices.

      This one might go up with the rebound in the sector too, but you run the big risk of having the company disappoint yet again. Why risk it?

      • 3 Replies to silver_guru
      • As you likely understand I don't have much desire to defend this company, specifically, (mis)management. However, I still find your analysis biased.
        People buy exploration-to-production stocks to get the premium: difference between valuation assigned to exploration stock (~$100/oz M&I) and to production stock (~$250/oz P&P). Obviously, this potential reward comes together with the risk, that we unfortunately feeling right now, that mining startup will be mismanaged. However, your safer plays will get neither this risk nor this reward; it is basically different plays; talk about apples and oranges.
        I would not also count this stock out. Certainly, harm is done; and I also assume that this management will be able to screw up shareholders on multiple occasions in future. At the same time, I see asset value here, and big valuation gap between NAV and market cap. After all, bad management can be replaced (see Gammon example that you used) and mineral resource will stay.

      • "Why risk it?

        Because they have an experienced ops mgr.
        Because construction is almost complete.
        Because it is a potential double from here even if gold prices stay flat.

    • I agree 100% with you.....Something stinks here.

    • For the last week or so, the whole sector has been moving together in a tight cluster. I see no evidence that MFN is doing any worse than others. In fact it is actually one of the better ones:
      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=5d&s=PAAS&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=cde%2Cssri%2Cmfn%2Cgrs%2Ciag%2Cauy%2Cgld

 

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.