Insider buys tend to be the only thing going for a miner like PGLC. For other miners, it doesn't seem to matter much. Belo Sun has had tons of insider buys when it hits new bottoms. What generally follows after the insider buys become known are new bottoms. The ANV insider buys of recent have all been either peculiar (ie Buchan paying more than fair value) or polite (the new board member buying shares upon his appt). I like insider buys too, but the only ones that seemed to genuinely matter a lot as late were the Revett insider buys which correctly implied good news re: the Troy mine, but then horrific news to hit that miner just a month later.
Anyway, ANV is great if it makes good money this quarter. If it doesn't, then it might be smart to look at miners like ALAMOS (as that one may have held up better in this market for a reason).
from calandra report titled "An Afghan named Malik...":
The only other companies I follow, and own, that are NOT turning me into a nervous Nelson are NuLegacy Gold (one of our TCR 8 and on cusp of something near-surface BIG in Nevada, I believe; Natcore on the solar cells; BioCryst Pharma (still, many years of shingles watching that one -- hey, how would you like to be the only on at the dinner table praying for an avian flu nightmare?)....
If it jumps 25 percent in one day on great news, it will be interesting what it does the following day. So many miners to me have recently had well-deserved jumps from ridiculous lows, but then got kicked back down within the next few trading days. It's definitely a hard sector to figure out.
He recommends these companies at very early stages. When BCYP was initially recommended, it was trading at 9 cent per share. It was barely if ever traded at that time. I bit on the day it jumped from 9 cents to 16 cents, assuming something was up. (Apparently, at that time, it jumped on a press release.)
CEOs of all the gold miners seem to be planning that the market will likely be bad for another two years. As such, there are write-downs of assets by mining gold at higher cut-off grades, and there is a lot of scaling back of projects, etc.
Should the market suddenly take off, not sure if many of these miners will be able to reverse their plans, or make the most of the moment.
And as long as institutional investors can exploit gold ETFs, it seems hard to be super bullish. The latest collapse in gold prices makes no sense, but it happened, and it always seems to happen. It's getting impossible to be a "smart" long in this sector when every miner gives up its gains (if ever accrued) on almost every subsequent trading day. To respect one's profits seems paramount when trading in this sector, as they can disappear in a snap.
I didn't understand their answer to your question either. However, since they are expecting a burn rate of 3 million per quarter next year and 3 million per 4th quarter, I assume they have what they consider to be about 12 million cash right now (which I assume would include the last payment for Los Cordones, yet not include the monies still owed to Sprott). That 12 million would finance them through Q3 of 2014, which is what they claimed they were currently financed through.
If they could sell Guadalupe for 10 million, I think they'd do it, as it would finance them into 2015, so am curious how low their offers for it have been.
Also have the impression that AWAK MAS could easily fund it through the rest of 2014 and part of 2015 too if they choose to become a smaller partner in it. If so, it seems it would be easy for them to come right out and say they could easily stay funded through 2015 (if they choose to make a sale or 2 for non-core properties at prices they do not currently wish to accept), and that would make their situation seem far better than they ever seem to like to suggest.
The current ISO trader seemed to have started his games when VISTA suggested they had a liquidity issue in their press release, and it would be prudent if VISTA made clear that they have options which they can execute, if need be, but that they are trying to figure out whether they'll need to execute those options. They need to do something to get that ISO trader to cease.
I ended up capturing the recorded webcast. Guadalupe has had 2 offers; neither have been accepted, but it's still being discussed. The mine equipment remains for sale, and likely will not be bought by end of year. As for the Los Cordones sale, it was done to prevent having to dilute shareholders in 2014. An issue not fully explained, though.
Also, AWAK MAS is advancing, and VISTA has to determine if it wants to remain a 20 percent holder, or a 15 percent holder, or else simply a company collecting 2-3 percent royalties on it.
Overall, I did not mind the conference call, but was hopeful that the questions at the end would be a little about the stock's current trading activity. That was only briefly discussed at the beginning (when they mentioned about being removed from GDX and GDXJ for market cap reasons). The Van Eck dump of shares was in relation to that event.
Hopefully MT Todd will get environmental permits by end of year, as anticipated, and hopefully gold prices don't tank much further either.
Acquired in 2006 from AngloGold. Info on the transaction can be found from searching both plus year 2006. One headline found on the ITH Mine site is "International Tower Hill Closes Financings and Completes Acquisition of AngloGold Ashanti's Alaskan Property Portfolio".
As for the time it takes for a mine to go from exploration to production, it all depends. Some are fast-tracked, and some can take about a decade. There are occasions where it can sometimes take 4 to 5 years for permitting, etc. The case of THM is somewhat unique; 2009 PEA proposed a heap leach, 2010 PEA proposed a heap leach/mill scenario; 2011 PEA and the 2013 feasability study both went a different direction, with no heap leach scenario. Now, quoting from a Brent Cook article, "the eventual July 2013 feasibility study is a total disaster, and shows that the previous NI 43-101 compliant studies prepared by Qualified Persons to Industry Standards were way off base. At a $1,100 gold price, the project went from a positive $1.2 billion NPV5% in 2011 to a negative $1.8 billion. Worse, at a long term gold price of $1,500, the project still loses money." To that effect, it's more of a gambling stock right now than an investment IMO. If you invest and make some profit, be sure to respect the profits.
Though there are a lot of shorts here, it's the hedge funds, investment banks, and market makers who are keeping this stock down. And it's they who'll lift it too.
Aside from a few gold mining stocks (ABX, NEM, etc), I really don't think there are enough retail investors in the sector anymore for them to even have much of a say whether a stock goes up or down. This is one of the things that have made me really tired of this sector. Studying the miners is fun; actually watching the investments perform on a daily basis is all games and BS.
Lake Shore Gold doubled quickly after its June/July release stating it was being severely undervalued by the markets. Another miner did this, and the market reacted the same way -- which means, if VGZ thought it was undervalued, there's no reason it should not make this known.
The MIDAS market cap now exceeds 130 million, so well over 30 million of value from there is now in the VISTA shares. They now have more cash than debt, with another 6 million in cash coming in January...
And while I wouldn't recommend this stock at this time to my most hated enemy, it is obviously worth more than current PPS...
For a good worst-case scenario, the article listed below is about a stock (now valued over $70) which dropped from $41 to a penny in a few hrs based on ISO orders:
Accenture’s Flash Crash: What’s an “Intermarket Sweep Order”
Furthermore, they lose about 500 million at $1400 gold, and it might take $2500 gold for someone to actually build the mine -- but it definitely seems like a good day trader stock. A ticker that can move up or down very quickly.
VISTA's 24.9-27 percent ownership in MIDAS , coupled with cash minus debt, means a negative value is now ascribed by the market to Mt Todd and the other VISTA properties.
It will be interesting to see if the stock price action persists even after permits are received for the MT Todd project.
This story/controversy is interesting. The other side's allegations aren't fully understood in your excerpts, and are included here (and found off ceo.ca):
The famed whistleblower who allegedly told U.S. regulators that gold and silver prices are manipulated by the likes of JPMorgan Chase has no background as a metals trader, according to precious metals research firm CPM Group.
Andrew Maguire, presented in the media and on his current employer’s website as a trader with more than 30 years of experience, actually has no real trading experience, alleged CPM’s managing director Jeff Christian during his presentation Thursday at the Silver Summit in Spokane. Rather, Christian said, Maguire’s background is in vehicle car leasing.
BTW, this is an excerpt from an overview of the project from Brent Cook. It contained an answer to your question:
As the project evolved, total contained ounces increased dramatically, yet the grade never really improved-- despite the discovery of higher grade zones. Ultimately, it appears the mineable resource was cut back to about 10 million ounces in order to increase mined grade to 0.69 grams per tonne. Gold production costs, as per the economic studies, increased over the four year period from $533/oz to $987 (~45%) and the final, all-in, costs ended up at $1,474/oz.
This part of the article was cut off, but is perhaps the important part:
Whatever the exact trigger-fish prices become, it is in Barkerville's interest to see shares go well above $1, when one factors in the volume-weighted effect. A forced exercise of $5 million of bonus warrants then goes to Mr. Sprott's desk for check-writing signature.
A good post from the Calandra Report on the Sprott/Barkerville deal:
The terms sheet of Mr. Sprott's loan is a template for financing success, in our TCR view, if 1. the price of gold stays above $1,200 -- the lowest amount the Sprottian lender can receive for 12,500 or so ounces of gold during a span of 30 months; and 2. the stock price rises to 90 cents or so, almost where it is now -- making for what we read as an accelerated warrant payment to Barkerville, bonus or otherwise. It's a little complicated, like some French filmmaker's plot.
On the bonus factor, for instance, read: After reinstatement for trading of the Company, and in the event that the volume weighted average trading price of the Company's common shares on the TSX-V for a period of 10 consecutive trading days is at a 50% premium to the Exercise Price (the "Exercise Trigger"), the Company may require the Lender to exercise $5,000,000 worth of the Bonus Warrants (the "Forced Exercise") within 10 calendar days of the date the Company provides written notice (the "Exercise Notice") to the Lender.
The exercise price is this: a 20 percent premium to the volume weighted average trading price of the Company's common shares on the TSX-V for the five-trading-day period commencing five trading days after the Company's common shares are reinstated for trading (the "Exercise Price").
Our TCR stab at this is that the exercise price is going to be somewhere in the range of 85 cents to 90 cents a share; I did not take advanced statistics like the kids did here at home, so that is a guess. Today Tuesday is day 4 of the 5-day trading period after the first five days of trading began Oct. 9.
All of this is a work in progress. So another 50 percent premium to that gives us a premium rush of about $1.25? Help me here, please. Don't scream if our calculations seem fishy.
Whatever the exact trigger-fish prices become, it is in Barkerville's interest to see shares go well above $1...
Again, totally agree -- but I don't think this simply a case of someone shorting it. I think it's a seller trying to force VGZ's hand to either overthrow its mgmt (or dump other assets too hastily). I have 40 percent of my portfolio invested here. I need to trim it to 10 percent, tops, and let it simply be a long-term hold.