Just an observation:
Neither SA ETF added any oz last week. And PD prices (coincidently?) were flat for the week. I know correlation does not mean causality but....
"Cold fusion" or LENR or whatever you call it won't affect PD at all. Very little PD needed,
Only about 2,304,745 PD atoms needed to power a city the size of Columbus Ohio.
True details at:
My estimate -.03 to -.04. Was -.05 but more shares will make it look "better".
Yes, watch TPD very closely. If they are to reach their guidance of 5000TPD by EOY I would expect to see Q2 rise somewhat from Q1 3050TPD,maybe to 3500TPD.
I don't look at cash cost because it omits too much - like over $100/oz interest, G/A, etc.
Hope they start to publish all-in costs and all-in sustaining costs.
"and got my cost basis down below $5 and then in a .."
That implies your cost basis is well over five. What sort of investor, trader or speculator will allow themselves to take (at least) a 50% loss? Looking back from $10 in a few months? That would be a 300% increase. You are in deep denial. Just admit you bought the wrong stock at the wrong time and held too long. That's what stops are for, to take the emotion out of it, On a stock like MCP , my loss limit is 15%, let Uncle Sam pay for part of the loss and move on.
Shorts do the same thing longs do. Buy low,sell high - just they do it in the reverse order.
They have as much right to try and profit on a downdraft as do longs on an updraft.
I have a complete copy of the loan agreement in .PDF form. It is 124 pgs. Due to the complexity I cannot answer any questions you might have but I can e-mail you a copy if you supply e-mail address.
Couple of things that are clear:
Prepayment fee is all the interest that would have been earned by BAM until maturity (2017). So at 15% paying now (3 years early) would add 45% to the principle amount being repaid.
Total outstanding balance ( + prepayment fee) is due upon any change of control of PAL.
"Their recent insider buying, though not huge, was a refreshing change to me."
They have (a new?) policy that execs (and BOD members?) have skin in the game to the tune of $150,000. That may account for some of the buying.
As far as SWC BOD attitude to a buyout, guess it depends on who and at what price. PAL buyout would have to be some sort of structured buyout with BAM a central player and IMO stockholders getting little. Take a look at what is happening to MCP.
As for ore formation, PAL narrow/deep is a real problem. Going down costs much time and money. The 5 year life of mine is also worrisome. That implies substantial capex every year to keep mine going beyond 5 years. By comparison SWC LOM is more than 25 years. That means they are not under the capex gun, they can concentrate on cost cutting and mining efficiency. Next Q2 reports and cc from both will be interesting and revealing.
The last time PD ran to 850 (6/11) buyers had to wait 3 years to get back. And and that it took an alignment of the planets (SA,Russia,ETFs) to do it. Two of those planets (SA,Russia) seem to be drifting a little so I'm just urging a bit of caution here.
SWC still an accumulate but I wouldn't touch PAL even for trading. IMO the Q2 report will be the straw that breaks the impatient camel's back. Continued losses , no real sign of long promised shaft production ramp up and possible talk of needed a financing to get PAL to the "next level". Even the faithful may finally decide this emperor has no clothes.
What do you think of SWC being a takeover by some gold or other miners wishing to diversify int PGMs? Not many choices for the buyer - I wouldn't touch SA mines, next largest is Zimabawe, then SWC. Forget Russia and PAL. Would SWC be too small for a big (BHP, Glencore) miner to bother with? BTW board member of SWC also on Glencore/Xstrata board.
I agree - SWC will do very well at these prices. Just one thing about upcoming Q2 report, they did mention a one time charge of about 4M think due to layoffs and maybe more if some additional employees take a severance package. Should be noted as a non-recurring item though on report.
First it i snot manipulation. Phys backed ETF buy and sell Pd only upon instruction from investors whou want to buy new shares or liquidate old share. And yes , I am claiming exactly that.
PD on Jan 21 2011 $858
PD on Sep 30 2011 $614.
Do you think the global macros supply demand oicture chabnged that much in 9 months. No, it was 400Koz of above ground Pd sold into the market.
Think of it, 900Koz held by SA ETF is about 12% of annual mined output bought since March. That is a huge market distortion and can be reversed at any time by investors who feel the run is over.
"Any such paper event would not change the actual demand for palladium."
That is not a paper transaction. These are physical backed ETf's is real physical platinum being sold into the market or delivered to endusers - that is the same as increasing supply just as their buying decreased supply.
"You consider an $8 pullback in palladium a serious decline "
Never called it a serious decline. A serious decline can be when the 900Koz of SA ETF investors decide to exit. That happened when PALL liquidated 600K, drove the price from 850 to 650.
"The overall context here is the skyrocketing increase of palladium demand "
Disagree. The overall context here is the SA ETFs taking 900Koz out of the market. That 900Koz above ground Pd (no mining needed) can be returned in a blink to the market if investor sentiment changes.
"with Palladium prices skyrocketing. "
???? Down $8 at the moment.
FYI: Pan, you are replying to a mindless computer generated post.
SA ETF's have slowed purchases and PD price stalls also.
I am convinced that this run-up wa almost entirely due to ETFs and not due to any fundamental changes.
You can't take 900K+ oz out of a 6Moz market and not cause severe distortions. Same thing happened when PALL swept up 1.2Moz and ran the rpice up to 850 which then collapsed when PALL liquidated down to 600Koz.
A word of caution - this 900Koz above ground (no mining needed!!!) can quickly be returned to the market with any change in investment sentiment.
Better than +.15 of Q1 2008? Be bullish but do some dd.
In the last 40 quarters PAL has been positive for only 6.
They have not had a profitiable full year for at least 8 years/ The say they are transitioning to become a mid-tier miner. The record shows they are still a junior miner - making money not by producing but by issuing stock and getting loans. My est for Q2 -.03 to -.04 Would have been -.05 but increased shares make it look lower.