don't be sucked in by ultra's fraud analysis of the streaming agreement. It is disingenous to be concerned about the semantics about the title of the obligation, ie debt vs liability. In fact the streaming agreement , if properly understood , is MUCH WORSE THAN DEBT.
debt not only can be paid back , TC has several options to do so. They can pay it earlier than maturity , ( if they have sufficient liquidity) by a combination of open market purchases and designated call provisions. They can ( and are obligated) to pay the debt (notes) back at maturity ( 2017-2019). But the streaming agreement has NO CLAUSE whereby TC can force its termination. The agreement is for THE LIFE OF THE MINE (currently estimated to be 29 years) and if Royal does not want to terminate it, they can keep in force the agreement indefinitely. So, TC , and any potential acquirer is faced with that grim reality, It makes TC very much unattractive and unpalatable to a potential acquirer. This is fact. Ultra and his gang will try to mislead you and tell you otherwise.
The real nasty part of the streaming agreement is that TC has to sell 52.5 % of all gold produced at Mt Milligan for the below cost price of $435 an ounce to Royal Gold FOR THE NEXT 29 years, NO MATTER how high Gold price may go to, and no matter how high the costs to mine it go. Thus TC could be locked into an ever increasing money losing situation because of the streaming agreement. TC was desperate for funds to complete the mine and they literally sold their soul to get the money. As such they have impacted their future in an apparently irreversible manner.
no, I did not miss the press release, which obviously is the trigger for the technical rally. The difference between you and I is that I am a professional, and you are an amateur. Of course, the jackals on this board have done their level best to reverse reality, so that the frauds like ultra and his gang are the ones recognized as "experts" , and to denigrate anyone who actually is not a fraud, So the frauds are held up and supported, and a true professional is denigrated. No problem, I still make money , it is like taking candy from a baby.
The technical rally is already fading as it runs its course. I could explain it to you, but somehow I don't think you are really interested in the truth.
today is the expected sharp technical rally that Iforetold you about. The one that professionals will use to lighten up on their TC long positions. TC was extremely oversold and this type of rally has to occur. But we should note that TC is still very much in a bear market. Bear market rallies can be very strong and fool the amateur into thinking all is well. But this rally will run its course and TC will once again resume its downtrend at some point.
One of the most amazing things is that some very dull people here are still looking to Ultra for advice and fact checking!
Ultra is a fraud, and incorrect about many facts concerning TC.
What he told you about the 2017 notes and many other things SIMPLY IS NOT TRUE .
there is a better chance for an ice cube to stay solid in the sun's core than for TC to pay a premium to pay off the 2017 notes this december. at the call price of 104 plus.
Management is not too bright, but they are not that dull.
Only on this board is there consideration of that as a possibility. It is not going to happen.
you started a thread today asking for reasons for the thrashing TC shares have been taking.
Of those that answered, the best post was xtim's.
As an option market maker, I have access to many sources of information. I would suggest to you , that the least of the factors involved was because of funds with regulations that they not hold stocks under a $1. Most of those funds that have that regulation , have clauses that give time leeway , ie under $1 for a very significant amount of time, so as not to force them out on a potentially momentary low. This high volume sell off is from large long holders CONSCIOUSLY and DELIBERATELY wanting out of TC shares., known as long liquidation, or "distribution". The sword of damocles of the large 4.2 million share put position on the jan $5 puts still hangs over the shares , in addition to the recent selling.
Bottom line, there has been no conspiracy, TC is being sold down because they are in trouble. I posted today , that anytime you see a selloff of the magnitude and velocity that TC is seeing, that an oversold condition can easily give way to a dead cat strong rally that can be confused by amateurs as a substantive sustainable rally. As such TC could have a strong short term rally ( as we have seen many times) , which should not be bought, but should be used to lighten up. If one fancies themselves the great trader, one can nibble on the extremities of each daily selloff and then try to sell into any strength, But bottom line for most people is that longer term, TC shares are in for rough sledding.
I doubt jack really is buying. Maybe true, but I doubt it. I think it is his way of cheerleading.
The stock is getting very oversold and a sharp technical rally is getting more likely.
the truth is that TC cannot afford and does not need to have a seperate IR contact. The CFO / and assistant should be able to handle that dept. They pay Pam Solly big money to be the IR contact. A frivilous drain on the shareholder. Of course Pam would not be happy to admit this, and it is not meant as an attack on her personally.
Writing to Pam is a useless endeavor, nothing will change for the positive by doing it. The only thing that could help would be significant shareholder activism. A big opportunity was missed with the recent annual shareholder meeting. They voted in the same old blood sucking compensation package with "performance " grants. The current management is not interested in you the common shareholder. Rather they are only interested in sucking out as much money from you as they can possibly accomplish.
you are using figures that are old and inaccurate. The present value is much less than the historical values,
The current shareprice is telling you that but you have the blinders on , unfortunately.
I acknowledge that you have not joined the "bernie" false accusation movement. That was wise on your part as it obviously is not true and the people doing it are viewed as ridiculous by any honest intelligent fairminded person.
I am not a cpa, I am a semi retired option market maker. I can speak the language. I post to the common man here. Unlike you, I am not attempting to fool anyone here. Hope you do better at golf than you do at at investing. What is your handicap?
talking about yourself "skippy"?
the game is over , your multiple id , pumper fraud game is old and tired.
that means you are busted.
any intelligent fair minded person reading your posts easily discerns that you are the problem
what happens if TC is at 85 cents at sept option expiration. What is your return then?
what if TC is less than 80 cents? what then?
you attempt to belittle my position on TC analysis by painting a picture that you are the professional and that I am taking an uninformed amateurish view. Exactly the opposite is the case.
Not only am I a professional in the financial world, but I have contacted a number of professionals in the mining industry . Every one that I have contacted agrees with the assessment of the Royal Gold streaming agreement I have outlined. Each one has stated that if they were to consider acquiring TC or Mount Milligan , they would not do so while that agreement was in place as it now stands. They would only consider ti as a possibility if they were to first buyout Royal and end the agreement or restructure it hugely. That would cost a very very large sum, more than a billion. This is fact, this is reality. You are on the fringe, not I.
cracklesnapper, I know but that is not the real picture. Assets are stated on the balance sheet at higher values than actual. This is common. It includes such things as goodwill. Why do you think they have had to write off some of the values. The values on the balance sheet you are referring to are inflated dramatically vs real values. Sad you don't understand this simple investing fact.
don't get caught up on the semantics of how you classify the encumbrance of the Royal streaming agreement. The point is it is an encumbrance, much like debt is an encumbrance.
I STRONGLY disagree with your statement of $3.30 tangible book value for TC. Please detail it out. The actual tangible book value of TC is a negative one, when you writedown what is needed to be written down and you take all factors , including the streaming agreement into account
Re the streaming agreement, you are not realizing how much of a potential encumbrance it can be. If gold rises in price significantly , and costs to mine it rise as one would expect , TC can lose every increasing amounts with the agreement by having to deliver gold to Royal at the $435 an ounce. So if costs rise to $1500 or $2000 or more an ounce to produce, TC will lose the difference on every ounce. It has the potential to be a very large amount of money lost by TC, not just lost potential proits , but actual losses. Do the math, If it costs TC $ $2000-3000 or more an ounce someday to produce and the margin on their 47.5 percent is not too big, the 52.5 % that they have to sell to Royal Gold at $435 an oz would be a huge cash drain on TC.
you miss the point. My post was not intended to evaluate how good or bad a deal Royal Gold received in the agreement. The point is simple that the agreement as it exists decreases the value of MM by a very very large amount of money, to TC shareholders or to any potential acquirer.
the answer is simple, I post to counter the fraud perpetrated by the pumpers , ie ultra and his gang. I am sorry for your loss in being sucked in by his lies and the resultant loss it has given to you. I hope you have the smarts to realize the truth and not let all of your money be lost.
some have opined that TC is undervalued. They point to MM and give a figure. The problem is that MM is not EFFECTIVELY worth what they think. First of all there are the production problems. Secondly whatever value to place on it, you have to subtract a figure of the better part of a BILLION dollars OR MORE due to the onerous terms of the Royal Gold streaming agreement. Royal Gold gave or effectively "lent" TC close to 800 million dollars to build MM. The agreement is for the life of the mine, estimated at 29 years. The total payout figure to Royal Gold will be in the Billions if kept for the full term. So what would Royal Gold demand to be bought out of the agreement, who knows, but more than a BIllion dollars. Endako has a negative worth, ie more liabilities than assets, TC isnt worth much, Add to that 900 million dollars in note debt and you come up with probably a NEGATIVE number for net worth. TC is not undervalued. The common shares represent a speculative two to two and half year option . Like most options they may expire worthless. That is the most likely scenario for TC common shares. Worth zero in three years from now. Small chance they will have some worth. Extremely remote chance they will be worth more than a $1 a share in that time span ( less than 2 percent chance)
thank you for the kind words, I must admit that while I felt quite certain of my prediction, I did not realize that it would be fulfilled so quickly.
Don't be too hard on yourself for being fooled by the ultra& gang deception.
I don't worry about it .
Anyone who has not figured out by now that they are the problem, well I feel pretty sorry for them