Recent

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

Rubicon Minerals Corporation Or Message Board

  • pioneerrubi pioneerrubi Jun 26, 2013 10:27 PM Flag

    Longs re:AGM

    This was drafted based on the meeting itself as well as private discussions before and after. I could not copy it from draft to phone so had to wait until my return home.
    A rockous meeting. Too bad most comments on the board come from those not there.
    Takeaways:
    1) There will be no dilution.
    2) The original mining plan would not work, hence, the new mining plan.
    3) Their contingency plan is to hunker down, conserve capital, drill and add to resource. This has not been articulated in a formal document but as anyone who has ever run a business knows, this SOP.
    4) The total grade dilution is likely to be at least 10% less than in the PEA. To be clear, instead of 41%, it will, likely be 30.
    5) They used the 3 mo. avg gold price of $1385 rather than 3yr avg of $1550 to be conservative.
    6)There were a number of very high grade intercepts which were included by AMC which SRK's method excluded. A few closer spaced holes will remedy.
    7) Ore will run through the mill by April/13.
    8)The SRK method showed lower grades in the bulk sample area than the lab did. Very bullish for actuals.
    9) At $1250 gold only 1 of the major producers break-even and make money.
    10) 4 miners have already closed down and at $1250, 1 will close every week going forward.
    11) At $1250, Barrick will go bankrupt.
    12) Physical gold is unavailable at these prices so paper market is unsustainable
    13) From an analyst present, Rubicon is the best project in the world.
    14) BMO's analysis work is a joke in the industry. For example, they rate an Exeter project in Argentina their best pick of all miners.

    This is all I can remember off the top as I sit in downtown Toronto waiting for traffic to clear. Sorry for inadvertent errors as I am pecking this out on my handheld.
    pioneer

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Hope you're wrong about Barrick going bankrupt at $1,250 ? Some mines shut in perhaps?

    • Thanks for sharing pio!

      DId you get the sense that Lalonde and co were disappointed by the latest PEA?

    • Pio;
      Thank you for sharing.
      Did you get the feeling that management felt they could get reasonable financing?
      Did anyone ask or say why the IR department is/ was not functioning to shareholders phone calls for the last month.
      Still long
      ce

      • 1 Reply to rby57
      • There are only 2 companies financing mining projects at the moment and the company is talking to both. They are guardedly optimistic but they have a contingency plan to conserve cash if necessary and expand the resource until conditions improve. I repeat, they will neither dilute nor do an uneconomic deal.

        Based on the opinion of the analysts in the room, it appears they will be one of the few companies to get financing at this time.

        Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • Pio, I still have some doubt that we are in good hands. Take one point from your summary. They seem to have told you that the older mining plan wasn't feasible. I think it's clear they knew that when they announced that they were going to look at a new geological interpretation. I'd be willing to bet it's why they looked at a new geological interpretation. But, did they tell shareholders that at the time? They did not.

      As long as they are withholding important information like that, then I have a hard time saying that my money is in good hands. They could have explained why they were doing a new geological interpretation but chose not to do so. That was a choice they made and the choice was to withhold information from the shareholders. That behavior needs to change for me to think of them as straight shooters.

      • 1 Reply to sewells831
      • They did not have the data to support a change in the mining plan until this PEA was received.

        My sense is that Mr. Lalonde suspected this was the case during his due diligence, but had to go through the entire process to prove it up.

        BTW, the old plan required 60 mining faces to keep the mill full. In hindsight, this was not realistic from a labour or logistical point of view, but took an experienced miner to recognise.

        Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • Thank You for taking the time to do this,. very informative.

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • "There were a number of very high grade intercepts which were included by AMC which SRK's method excluded."

      So the AMC report was less conservative and had a higher calculated grade that the SRK report!? As soon as the AMC report was not released, the assumption by most everyone here was that the report must have been negative and therefore was not released. So that was not the case, they just wanted to release one set of numbers only. So they have two reports with different grades, but which report is likely to be the most accurate?, probably would be the AMC report since the high grade intersections were representative.

      Next it is considered they do not want a small number of samples to have an effect on the economic calculation, so better be conservative and exclude them. That is standard, and widely done, but that still does not mean that it is correct, it can be argued as overly conservative for the sake for being safe, even though there was not a reasonable basis for it. AMC likely had it right, it reflects well on them to set aside an established method and instead go with what is more accurate. It would be nice if the company could release both reports, but i suppose they never will.

      "A few closer spaced holes will remedy". No, I don't think so. It can help understand that isolated area, but may not remedy much. The deposit includes some coarse irregular random gold, most drill holes miss that, and only a small fraction of them intersect it. It is more likely that a fewer close spaced holes will just confirm the randomness, and even if there is a geological feature associated, it could still be an irregular randomly distributed feature.

      • 2 Replies to think5x
      • Think, it seems to me from rereading Pio's note that SRK excluded areas instead of just applying a more conservative top cut to them. I'll have to see the full 43-101 that gets filed on Sedar to know for sure though. I doubt this company is going to clarify anything like that.

      • An additional note, the very high grades are not actually excluded, but they are "cut", that is they are reduced to a number that is high but not very high, to get them to the high end of the range, but still fitting in with the pattern. So it's done with reasoning, but it still leaves questions about what is actually the most accurate way to have done that.

    • Thank Pio for the report from AGM. Very encouraging. I am glad to know the mgmt got the big picture, getting practical, and run to the finish line to get gold produced ASAP.

      JMT.

      Sentiment: Hold

    • Thank you for that summary. Did you talk about the long term plan with the deep shaft going down to 1400? Is that meant to eventually become a separately mined shaft?

    • Thanks Pio, I am still long and very bullish on rby...patience..I think we will look back at this price in a few years and it will seem like an unreal bargain. Thanks again!

      JAH

    • 7) Ore will run through the mill by April/13.

      I think you meant April/14

      No. 14 Is that Exeter property in Argentina or Chile? I thought they have a big gold mine in Chile which shows very little promise.

    • View More Messages
 
RBY
0.0310.000(0.00%)Jan 11 4:07 PMEST