Once again your ignorance knows no bounds.
You say that Bolivar has operating costs of $161 per ounce when its web site say that 2005 costs would be $178 per ounce and then in the third quarter report it says operating costs are projected to be (based on an expansion) to be $195 per ounce.
Then you say GRZ operating cost is $263 which if you could read is the capital cost plus the life of mine cost, royalties, and the operating costs.
On an apples for apples basis using $1.00 copper GRZ operating cost is $154 which is less than Bolivar. Now at today's copper price operating cost is a negative number.
No permit but last fall Bolivar lacked a key approval by the government and then they got it and the stock moved up and of course GoldFields made a bid to take it over.
Low grade ore - yes and what is your point when you look at the operating costs, really what does grade have to do with it?
Do you think that Bolivar did no "Social programs" in its area? Did you even look into it?
Need to run a fleet of trucks - define fleet 5 to 10 truck transports which can also be used to backhaul needed supplies for the mine, but of course there is no reason to go ahead with the mine because it would need a fleet of trucks. It is mining after all, which is something you know nothing about.
Two dump trucks and a bulldozer - once again from the Bolivar site and I quote "The mining plan was developed utilizing seven 55-tonne haul trucks and two 7 cubic metre excavators
What imbecile feeds you this information since you obviously do not get it from reliable source such as company filings or websites.
When you cannot get even basic facts right then one can dimiss the rest of your useless advice.
So you concede a $300/oz profit ("$263/oz operating cost.") And I say to you: If the political risk is $300/oz, why did GFI pay a premium for Bolivar instead of avoiding Venezuela like the plague? (and since you are such an expert, why don't they process the copper on site?)
Incomplete DD as usual won_dumb
You didn't read enough of the posts over on SI.
I never said I bought an entire position in 1999 and then did nothing.. Sure at times Aber would have been 20% of my portfolio by value but not all the time. I had other stocks and they all went up and down at various times.
Your attempt to belittle Aber by calling it a no-name stock just shows your ignorance just because you had never heard of it... It's the highest market cap, publicly traded, diamond producer in the world with a 40% share in a mine that produces 5% of the world's gem grade diamonds.
There are more trades like that available if you seek them out and don't demand an overnight double. Companies with proven assets but which could take a few years for the market to realise just because building mines takes time. GRZ is one. Another is MDM which I also have a reasonable stake in.
What you believe is irrelevant. Vet responded to your query: " Is the stock market THAT inefficient? "
ABER is just one example of how inefficient the market can be.
I owned that stock when it languished in the $5 range and regrettably sold at $9.....won't make the same mistake with GRZ.
It will eventually rise to it's true value: $40+.
What a sad little person you are won_dumb.
I have never posted here on the Aber board. I used to post on the Silicon Investor Aber board under The Vet and if you go there all my posts are there to see. That board eventually died but by all means you can rad it all.
My first post there was dated 3/19/1999 and I had been buying Aber well before that.
At least it's pretty clear how I arrived at my numbers. I used data compiled by a competent gold analyst at a major firm, I used data from a BANKABLE feasibility study, I adjusted reasonably and conservatively and I used prevailing spot prices. Make your adjustments accordingly. If you think assuming $1.50 Cu is too high, plug in something else. Think the costs per ounce are too low? Use a higher number and tell us what you get.
Why don't you enlighted us as to how you arrived at a $5 value for GRZ? All you said was you crunched the numbers and that's what they say. What numbers? You are a liar and you will not respond to this post intelligently because you cannot.
Well at this point the negative political noise has had only a slight drag on this stock.
GRZ up 1.7%
NXG up 5.3%
I am going to wait and see if more unsettling news comes up from Venezuela this week. Such as ties with Iran and potential consequences etc ad infinitum.
Anyway if the negative does not shake up and out soon then this hummer may run on up. Should it do so,I promise to cover my shorts in a polite and dignified manner, heh heh
Yes won_dumb, the market IS that inefficient, but only rarely. Sometimes, like in the present case it is caused by an overblown perception of political risk; sometimes by overblown enginnering or financial risks and sometimes because short sellers force the stock into a down cycle that is difficult to break...
Several years ago I was buying Aber Diamonds at $5 and $6 a share at a time when it was well known that that owned 40% of what was proven to be the richest diamond mine in the world in Canada. It now trades at over $40 a share and is still undervalued. All because the mine had to be built in artic conditions under a lake... Seemed expensive and difficult to finance, and it was, but they did it. Until the market actually saw diamonds coming out of the ground despite the excellent plans and engineering the price languished. It still doesn't get much respect on the US market but then the majority of US investors are a bit slow when it comes to mining stocks.
By the way I sold most of my Aber between $30 and $40 and made a nice 7 figure profit in just a few years; just buying the dips and holding..