Fri, Aug 22, 2014, 11:10 AM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 4 hrs 50 mins

Recent

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

Yamana Gold, Inc. Message Board

bogfit 22 posts  |  Last Activity: 16 hours ago Member since: May 31, 2002
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    For boggasmiasma

    by sewells831 Aug 20, 2014 6:07 PM

    Try plain language for a change. I'm not invoking any experience. I am reporting the history of Apollo Gold's attempt to develop the Black Fox mine. Because of the irregular disposition of metal in that ore body it was identified as a "coarse gold" deposit, meaning uneven grade with barren areas between. F2 also shows an irregular disposition of metal in its ore body and it seems reasonable to me that Apollo's difficulties in establishing sufficient P&P to attract development money could likely be experienced by Rubicon in a similar fashion. No pretending, I actually believe that deposits such as these have difficulty in attracting capital in a highly competitive market. I would point to Rubicon's tedious record of non-development as indicative of such deposits.

    Feel free to point out anything you wish, but allow me to consider the facts for myself and to draw my own conclusions. If other readers find my perspective reasonable and based upon factual experience then perhaps they will realize that your fancy language, half-truths, and "kill the messenger" character assassination are no more than cheap tricks employed by those who really are trying to sell them an empty box, filled only with hot air.

    "IGNORE THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN" - at your own peril.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    O/T update for Bogfit

    by jazenevd Aug 21, 2014 7:44 AM

    If your memory is so good, why do you get so much wrong?
    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    For boggasmiasma

    by sewells831 Aug 20, 2014 6:07 PM

    You keep telling the board that I believe this and I believe that, but really it's one dam lie after another. Please allow me to state what I think or believe, you have enough trouble just keeping your own story straight.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Let's be clear about something

    by sewells831 22 hours ago

    " I think it, along with the competence or lack thereof on the part of management and the likely price of gold are the three most important issues to be considered when looking at RBY's F2."

    Stop it! You're killing me! LOL My concerns about the mgmt. was the very first argument you took up with me a few years ago! NOW it is most important consideration! ROFLMAO Well, it does show you have the ability to learn.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    O/T update for Bogfit

    by jazenevd Aug 21, 2014 7:44 AM

    LOL Amazing how your memory of my every word seems burned into your memory. Oh wait a minute ... that's not a memory, that's just some more total BS from a very confused man. In fact that alias was actually created to play a joke on Johnny Canuck on the Wheaton River Board back in '03 or '04. Contra might remember that, although I must admit he hasn't the total fascination about me that you display.

    I pulled that alias up when you and your cohorts decided that the board shouldn't have the opportunity to judge all posts on the basis of their logic and reason; but rather should be denied alternative opinion that could have prevented some of their subsequent losses. You know - like in one-star CENSORSHIP! No, no you never caused Rubicon shareholder to lose money, you just didn't every thing in your power to prevent any and all criticism, even if based in fact and not intended to bash the stock.

    Heck, you were censoring my posts when I still held Rubicon stock, like I'd bash my own investment. Isn't it interesting how the Wiz goes from his irresponsible speculation on the total P&P to concern about an alias I've freely identified using sometime past. Anything to change the subject.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    O/T update for Bogfit

    by jazenevd Aug 21, 2014 7:44 AM

    Notice how everyone knows my alias!

    Wasn't that sneaky of me to openly advise the board of an alias I was using to overcome the one star ratings (and restrictions) that my posts were receiving from the Wizard's cheerleading section.

    "Deceit should be made of sterner stuff."

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    For boggasmiasma

    by sewells831 Aug 20, 2014 6:07 PM

    Let's see now, if it is seems important to the Wizard of Ahs then by definition it MUST BE the "pertinent issue"! Which is a lot like saying that his set of evaluation tools are the only valid means of evaluating a mining project. Oh Whiz, could you try that again, but with a little more arrogance? LOL Here once more we see the little man behind the curtain thundering his special and exclusive pronouncements.

    I am not a mathematician, that much should be obvious, but I have been investing in mining projects for over 12 years. Most people would probably assume that I had met with some degree of success to have stayed around so long. The fact is that coase gold deposits trend to be hard to measure and/or "prove up" with a bankable feasibility study. I warned the board not to expect a quick development of F2 over three years ago, and in return you led an attack similar to much of what we see written today by you and your cohorts. Pointing out this difficulty about coarse gold you accused me of trying to destroy value in the stock. Sometimes the truth might do that, but most of us would prefer the truth anyway.

    Your "belief" that YOU informed ME of this characteristic is laughable and when called on it you (typically) resort to more mumble jumble about something that wasn't even under discussion. Can't admit to being wrong - ever, about anything, can you!

    I am impressed how the whole message board had become a discussion about ol' bogfit. On slow trading days or when I'm out of the market I enjoy teasing Prof. Marbles. He makes it so easy.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    For boggasmiasma

    by sewells831 Aug 20, 2014 6:07 PM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 20, 2014 11:37 PM Flag

    Bogfit, give it up. You're embarrassing yourself. You're out of your league and obviously do not have the mental capacity to carry on a valid and accurate argument. Stop embarrassing yourself and wheel yourself away!

    Johnny you've aged a year! 73 now! You thought I wouldn't notice. Silly rabbit! But you're right I am out of my league but consider the lack of semi-worthy opponents in my class, especially one who made a mistake by insulting me with a public statement that I was naïve and gullible. I offered him an opportunity to retract those obviously now inappropriate comments with an apology, but he refused. Now if one were to choose a target, why not select a pompous fool? I guarantee you he will do most of the work by providing material that you couldn't dream up yourself. Take the $25,000 option play! That said it all. A gambler, perhaps using monopoly money, who knows - none of us have provided credentials (have to be judged by reason alone, goody). so here we have a gambler (as we later learned) pumping this stock, and attacking along with a motely crew of jackals in support, anyone who might have a negative concern about Rubicon. I watched his circus for a few months and besides gaining a good laugh I thought he isn't hurting my interests in the stock as I had placed some of my winnings from the Fronteer BO. Then the company's report was questioned by the BC whatever and the company issued a blackout of all information including to stockholders, except apparently according to his posts, one shareholder had a special relationship with a VP in the company and claimed to have information not publically available. Guess who that one shareholder was? That's right! It was Professor Marbles himself. I might be naïve, certainly parochial, but I wasn't falling for that one. Turns out the insulter, who claimed secret knowledge was and is a gambler, and nothing more. Well, the wagon and the crystal ball are nice touches, let's give him credit for that.

    Oh you're also right, my mental capacity is so full of valid and accurate argument on almost any subject you could imagine, I could hardly be expected to add another, but then without a foil one is just skewing windmills. Think about it. LOL

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    For boggasmiasma

    by sewells831 Aug 20, 2014 6:07 PM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 20, 2014 6:33 PM Flag

    " ... it is a fact that coarse gold deposits tend to be difficult to measure by conventional means. Actually I believe that I was the one to point this fact out to you a few years ago."

    Incredible! The fact I was a registered share holder in Apollo Gold going back before 2004, and personally watched the struggle to develop Black Fox over the next several years; and brought Alamos' Mulatos mine into production in 2006 and now YOU BELIEVE YOU INFORMED ME on coarse gold environments!!! UNBELEIVABLE!!! Since this appear to be merely just another mistaken belief on your part I won't label this as another of your falsehoods. You are seriously confused.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Famous Bogfit quotes

    by powersd74 Aug 19, 2014 1:23 PM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 20, 2014 6:20 PM Flag

    Actually it sounds like something I might have said. So you see I'm not claiming I didn't say it, I merely asked to have a link posted so we can see the context in which that comment was made. That is a common and responsible expectation in all debate, of course you and your alter-ego prefer to misrepresent the truth with misleading snippets lacking context. It's a cheap trick but then, that's Prof. Marbles game isn't it! LOL

    In truth, last year was my first losing year (2007-2008 out of stock & in physical for 5.56% gain, bot back AUY in 12/08 for 30% less than sold in 11/07).

    FYI - I sold out of PM stock all together @ end of 2013, and bot. NCU.TO for a 53.57% gain YTD which about equals RBY gain this year, which makes comments like "your own results are pitiful." just plain stupid.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Stock Price is falling

    by johnnywilks72 Aug 19, 2014 11:35 AM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 20, 2014 6:00 PM Flag

    "And, what if they do produce at least 8 Moz of gold at F2?"

    I noticed that you neglected to include your least favorite word - ECONOMICALLY! As you well know our argument has never been on how much gold is at F2, (no one knows for sure) although you constantly try to reframe it that way. I maintain, and have consistently stated that the value of any mining operation is measured by how much money can be gained through selling its production, and that my friend can only be predicted by having a firm understanding of the cost of production. Phoenix and all coarse gold deposits I am familiar with have a long way to go before reaching a point where a bankable feasibility study can be established. You seem to wish away all thought of cost or even the long time for development of this kind of project. I warned the board about these difficulties and Rubicon's record over the past few years seems to have bore out my concerns. Didn't you ever learn that timing is everything? You continue to claim that some day your predictions will be proved right. Rubicon's long and difficult road to production has proved mine right already.

    "Will it be the case that I caused anyone a problem if I turn out to have been right?

    Revealing, that you would even ask! Really? The person who bot. @ $5 all excited by your blue sky cheerleading has not only lost nearly 75% of their capital but their money has been dead for three years! But you don't see that as a "problem", do you.

    "I don't recommend anyone purchase ..."

    Oh no you wouldn't do that, you just tell them in so many words they're an idiot if they don't. Give up trying to pretend you have no memory of the blatant cheerleading you've led on this board all these years. Those of us who have been around that long know better.

    "At the grades I project?

    If, when the F2 ore body is exhausted, it is found that the average head grade was even close, let alone the same, as the grade you predicted it will be of one of the world's greatest coincidences! The mine plan has changed and will change again. Different owners, different managers will proceed to access the ore body differently, fall-ins, other accidents will change the grade processed, chemical problems in the crushed ore may cause some areas to be considered uneconomical to mine although gold may still be present in the ground. There are just too many variable to mention, and sure as Hell too many unknowns to make any prediction of grade or total production without a mine plan with a feasibility study PURE FOLLY. But that's just what a gambler like yourself loves.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Stock Price is falling

    by johnnywilks72 Aug 19, 2014 11:35 AM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 20, 2014 12:23 PM Flag

    You continue to maintain that your estimates must be correct since it is a fact that coarse gold deposits tend to be difficult to measure by conventional means. Actually I believe that I was the one to point this fact out to you a few years ago. Nonetheless, 43-101 numbers ARE the measure that virtually all bankers, mining investors, and the industry as a whole uses to evaluate a project's potential which materially impacts share price -as we have seen with RBY over the years.

    Who's misleading whom? I would say it was the person who speculates the total reserves of a mining project long before the drill results and industry recognized ore body model would support such expectations. For you to suggest that the Phoenix Project contains 8 million ounces of economically producible gold is IMO irresponsible, and has led many previous Rubicon share holders to ruin. I preached caution, while you cried "Bonanza", and I ask you ... seriously ... who has been harmed more, those who minded my warnings and restrained their investment in Rubicon, or those you convinced Rubicon was on the verge of sudden riches and should go all in?

    You never take least bit of responsibly for the harm you've done to Rubicon investors over the last three years, just as you continue to cry from the roof tops, "I'm right, I'm right, I'm right"! I say let the record speak for itself. Over the last three years gold is down 30% and RBY is down TWICE that amount and we're not talking due to leverage on profit margins, are we! Just facts - try it you might like it! LOL

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Famous Bogfit quotes

    by powersd74 Aug 19, 2014 1:23 PM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 20, 2014 11:39 AM Flag

    Gee, powersd74, (whoever you really are) I had no idea you hung on to my every word! A little suggestion if you wish to claim a quote is mine, you should include a link to that statement, just to make sure you aren't making things up or quoting out of context. That way we can determine the date the post was made and better understand the intent and ultimate result.

    Oh ... it isn't understanding you are trying to establish, but merely posting nonsense! Hmmm .... now why does that sound so much like someone else we know? Yahoo's record shows you only became a member LAST YEAR, yet you claim to have knowledge of postings for a dozen years before! LOL

    That's all right, most of the Wizards of Ahs' few remaining supporters aren't any brighter than you either.

    b.

  • Reply to

    Stock Price is falling

    by johnnywilks72 Aug 19, 2014 11:35 AM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 19, 2014 2:25 PM Flag

    Speculating 8 million oz. BEFORE a single 43-101 number was produced (and that's what it was) you now claim didn't "encourage anyone to buy"? That is what I call really dishonest and irresponsible. You might think I'm "stupid" but not stupid enough to believe anything you write.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    Stock Price is falling

    by johnnywilks72 Aug 19, 2014 11:35 AM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 19, 2014 12:52 PM Flag

    Amazing how you encouraged anyone who would listen for months and years even to buy at $5, $4, $3, $2, but now, now you claim (retrospectively) that you yourself only bot. right near the bottom - that is if it proves to be the bottom.

    Why you think you have any creditability left with those of us who have read your shameless pumping of this stock for several years, watched you gamble away (supposedly) 25K on a recklessly irresponsible option bet, or the consistent vicious thuggery laid upon anyone who would expose your nonsensical interpretation of the geological record.

    I believe you - sure I do! LOL Unfortunately these stocks and their boards pick up newbies who haven't had the opportunity to see your dishonest behavior previously.

    b,

  • Reply to

    Traders Steal From Investors

    by goldmetalmania Aug 6, 2014 4:59 PM
    bogfit bogfit Aug 17, 2014 4:56 PM Flag

    "A good trader does well and beats the market by a significant margin. Unfortunately, most traders are far too greedy and have no disciplined plan to profit and move on. They keep retuning to the same proven stock until it turns against them and wipes out all gains in short order."

    All true. The answer is to trade markets not companies. Buy companies in favorable markets, sell companies during adverse times. Really quite simple. The pendulum swings both ways. However stock prices on exploration plays, even when in development, move dependent upon the specifics of the project AS WELL as market fluctuations, and that requires a level of knowledge not commonly acquired by stock traders; but knowing even far less are those gamblers who speculate with option plays on a purely speculative stock. JMHO.

    b.

  • Reply to

    RMX drills 6.8 m of 14.1 g/t Au at Phoenix

    by sideline1000 Jun 23, 2014 7:02 AM
    bogfit bogfit Jun 26, 2014 5:18 PM Flag

    "I argued with a few gold geologists over this same issue on that board too."

    Yep, we're all out of step except for the Whiz, who can't seem to make money even when POG $1800. Go figure.

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    RMX drills 6.8 m of 14.1 g/t Au at Phoenix

    by sideline1000 Jun 23, 2014 7:02 AM
    bogfit bogfit Jun 26, 2014 5:15 PM Flag

    "... bogusfit is a nut ...

    There's Whiz's argument in total! -

    "Ignore the man behind the curtain!, he thundered, flashing lights and causing loud booms to confused the visitors.

    OK, I'm a "nut", but it is also "empirically verifiable by anyone who is willing to do the research" that the Great Bonanza"was confined to only three claims among dozens every 30' along the face of Mt. Davidson. It is also verifiable that mines next door were barren, not to say that F2 is barren - I have never made that argument. What I have urged is caution should be used when extrapolating the results from other locations even in the same mining district. The Whiz considers his calculations as Gospel. That just seems un-reasonable to me. Of course anyone who blows off 25K on a long shot options play has neither a record of caution nor of reasonableness of judgement IMHO.

    I think we should use the record as a measure. Anyone interested could I suppose go back over this board's messages and learn precisely when I bot. and when I sold the last @$3.20 in the summer of 2012. I walked away money ahead, not that anyone should care, but the fact is this "nut" made money swing trading this stock for a couple years, while at the same time the Great and Mighty Whiz claims to have dropped to about even after losing that stupid option bet. I haven't seen where he reported any gains with RBY since. So the "nut" walks away smiling all the way to the bank, while the Whiz of Ahs gives up all he had gained over a multi-year period of investing. Which would you like to be? The loser, or the "nut"?

    Let's face it, if Prof. Marbles had a life would he be camped under a bridge roasting a hot dog, and living daily on a message board for a stock in which he has no financial interest? Honest to God you got to feel a little sorry for a man with no more existence than his egotistical and arrogant persona on a MB. Sad!

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    RMX drills 6.8 m of 14.1 g/t Au at Phoenix

    by sideline1000 Jun 23, 2014 7:02 AM
    bogfit bogfit Jun 23, 2014 7:36 PM Flag

    "The key to this is that there are no mines, not just next door, where the coefficient of variance is above 200% to 250% where the linear forecasting used at F2 comes even remotely close to the actual production once in production."

    They say that figures don't lie, but .... well, you know. What surprises me, while acknowledging not a whiz at math myself, is if your system of calculations were correct, accurate, or most important, even reasonably predictive of mine performance, then why doesn't the industry and the real mining experts use the same system and were buying all the Rubicon they could get their hands on? You've been flogging these same predictions for several years, published the same for all the world to read, and yet no one, other than yourself and a hand full of morons on this board you mislead, are impressed. If your calculations were actually so predictive I would think every banker in Canada would be using them and reaching the same conclusions as you, BUT THEY DON'T!!! In my 13 years of investing in the PM market I have never before read of anyone who was absolutely certain that in a particular geological regime there must have been metal deposited in the exactly the same proportions as in another geological environment based at best upon fragmentary data. Much of which is actually immaterial or inconclusive to the economics of the project. No one, only you. Before you point to recent results that fail to blow holes in your theory, let me remind you were singing the exact same song years ago, long before there was any additional data to consider.

    " because you are lazy..."

    Lazy? LOL But I know it is just more name calling when you haven't a valid argument to support, typical Prof. Marbles folding under pressure. You have no idea, but apparently you are once again forming an opinion on fragmentary data, simply because I have better things to do than chase down your crazy ideas, but then there is a whole gold mining industry that is just as lazy as well. One other thing I can't understand why Canacord hasn't hired you to analysis the gold mining sector for them. After all you say you are brilliant and understand mining better than anyone else.

    "One might suggest that you change your moniker to bogusfit."

    Wow, how clever of you! Did it take you long to think that one up? Looks to me like all you did was put us in the middle. I've already given you a couple suggestions of a moniker appropriate for your lack of integrity and I'd be happy to take the time to think up another, but gee, I'm just too lazy. LOL

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

  • Reply to

    RMX drills 6.8 m of 14.1 g/t Au at Phoenix

    by sideline1000 Jun 23, 2014 7:02 AM
    bogfit bogfit Jun 23, 2014 3:15 PM Flag

    " the 43-101 figures for F2"

    Did I read this right? Sewell is pumping 43-101 figures now? Wow! Magical transformation of Prof. Marbles into the Wizard of Ahs right before our very eyes. Never thought I would see the day.

    Now just WHICH mine next door are you referring to? McEwen's old Red Lake mine or Placer Gold's old Campbell mine? They are different although situated in basically the same geological setting, which of course F2 is not. Didn't I explain to you how the MacKay's Bonanza at Virginia City was located under only three contiguous claims, and how the mines "next door" were practically barren, and we are talking TWO FEET NEXT DOOR, not a couple miles away.

    I guess the rest of us are allowed to use 43-101 now that the Wiz has given his approval. LOL

    b.

    Sentiment: Hold

AUY
8.41+0.03(+0.36%)11:10 AMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.