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

Gold Resource Corp Message Board

  • keepshorting keepshorting Jun 30, 2011 1:19 PM Flag

    beware of amadeus & rapier

    spreading deception and hype to get you folks to buy. amadeus saying that a 5 cent dividend was likely and then rapier accusing me of being a concerned long. their sole function is to try to get rid of anyone who post negative comments about GORO. they even participate in a censored private GORO board where only hype and promotion is allowed.

    disclosure: short GORO

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • you folks are using deception again. i said that since gold and silver have exploded in price relative to the base metals, there is no way GORO can meet those $0 cash cost credits without using silver byproduct or without cooking the books. so either they say cash costs were $300+ an ounce or they use silver byproduct. you will see in the next earnings release. the numbers dont lie. i am convinced GORO has the most clueless shareholders in the world.

    • Shorty really tries to make it sound like he knows what he is talking about. That just might work on some of the other boards. However, he doesn't have a clue and will not get away with his tricks here.

      As soon as GORO moves back up high enough, Shorty and Revere will slither away and disappear into the woodwork.


    • You beat me to it Amadeus, I pointed that out to shorty too. Funny that he left out the copper and lead numbers. He must have just forgot to put it in, right :-)? Didn't mention that from the original gold and silver estimates that the POG is now 2X greater and silver is 2 1/2 X greater.

    • Keepshorting,

      You're saying the Reid's calculations are on old, stale numbers. So why is a a bad thing for the bottom line that the price of gold has more than doubled from when GORO gave their metal estimates and silver has gone up 2 1/2 X ??? As for base metals, I find it convenient that you only mentioned one of the three base metals, the one who's price went down. About 40% of the remaining base metals, lead and copper both have gone up significantly in price since 2007. So why do they have to find 2 to 3X the percentage of base metals to make up?
      Even if they did want to utilize some silver to get to their zero cost goals, which is unlikely based on current base metal prices, having the price of silver now at 2 1/2 times the price in their original estimates makes things very easy for GRC to reach that goal.
      Keepshorting, even second grade math can be difficult for someone like you if you leave out lots of important variables in the equation.

    • Again, Shorty, you continue to obfuscate and avoid the truth. I just looked up the historical prices for zinc, lead and copper (interesting that you left copper out).

      Your quote:

      "If you use the current numbers, they won't come anywhere close to $0 cash costs using base metals alone."

      Jan 2007 - Zinc - 1.8
      Jun 2011 - Zinc - 1.0
      40% decrease

      Jan 2007 - Lead - 0.8
      Jun 2011 - Lead - 1.2
      50% increase

      Jan 2007 - Copper - 2,500
      Jun 2011 - Copper - 4,000
      60% increase

      Now, I am not going to waste my time further educating you by checking on exactly what percentage mix of base metals they are estimating. You can look that up for yourself, if you actually care. But the broad picture here is that although zinc prices have dropped since beginning of 2007, lead and copper have more than made up for that drop.

      Not only has the picture with respect to by-product metal likely improved since 2007, gold and silver have risen astronomically. And do you know what that means? Yes, lots more cash flow and profits for GORO.

      Keep it up Shorty. You're batting 0 so far. You need some remedial basher training.

      Gotta laugh!

    • i dont have a clue? i know how the byproduct credit game works. Agnico-Eagle used to rely heavily on Nickel to keep their cash costs negative in 2006 and 2007. When Nickel crashed, their cash costs skyrocketed.

      GORO made the $0 cash cost claim in 2007 when the prices of gold/silver were a lot lower and the prices of zinc and lead were a lot higher. So now 2nd grade math is going to bite them in the rear end. Gold and silver have outperformed the base metals bigtime since 2007. The Reid's never factored that into the equation. So their original equation about $0 cash costs is based on old/stale numbers. If you use the current numbers, they won't come anywhere close to $0 cash costs using base metals alone. They either need 1 of 3 things to happen:
      1) gold and silver prices collapse while base metal prices remain the same
      2) gold and silver prices remain the same while base metal prices
      3) they need to find twice or three times as much base metals than they originally anticipated

      All 3 scenarios are very unlikely. So I have a 4th and 5th option for the Reid's

      4) they use silver byproduct towards cash cost credit
      5) artificially report lower gold equivalent ounces produced to meet the $0 cash cost target

      I am betting that they use #4 and worst case scenario, they use #5

    • "Is that the same website that said they are going to do 90,000 ounces in 2011?"

      They have already said that they are going to re-evaluate that target after Q2 earnings (but you knew that). And I personally believe they will lower it to around 70k.

      No biggie. As long as cash flow and profits increase, as well as the per quarter ounces produced, I am good. And the market will be just fine with it as well.


    • "There is no way that GORO can have cash costs of $0 without using silver as a byproduct credit. It is impossible."

      The more you post like this, the more you show how ignorant you are and how little you know of the company. I am not going to educate you on just how it is QUITE possible to have cash costs of $0 or even negative.

      You are clueless.

      Oh, and your argument about how could they possibly know in 2007 how they could achieve cash costs of $0 without knowing the price of costs such as oil in 2012 is bogus. What planet do you live on?

      Regardless of whether their calculations were based on 2007 estimated costs, or 2012 estimated costs, the increase in the price of oil has been completely overshadowed by the monumental increase in the price of all precious metals since 2007. They are actually in a far better position now to achieve $0 cash costs than they were in 2007.

      You really need to get another job. You are in this way over your head. Get out now before you lose big time (that is, if you even have a position).


    • if there is enough lead, zinc & copper in the arista ore they could have costs of less than zero --- you bashers haven't got a clue

    • Go to GORO's website and you will see quite clearly that they state that cash costs for 2011 will be $100. Cash costs for 2012 and beyond are $0. They have been saying this for several years
      Is that the same website that said they are going to do 90,000 ounces in 2011?

      There is no way that GORO can have cash costs of $0 without using silver as a byproduct credit. It is impossible.

      Funny how the Reid's were projecting $0 cash costs as early as 2007. How is this possible without knowing what the price of input costs, such as oil, would be in 2012? It is all marketing and hype.

      I will break down the numbers again for you in the next release. You couldnt figure it out the first time.

    • View More Messages
1.57+0.09(+6.08%)Feb 5 4:01 PMEST