Recent

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

BRD Message Board

bosar53 12 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 6, 2016 3:33 PM Member since: Mar 15, 2006
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Silver liability

    by bosar53 Feb 5, 2016 7:49 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Feb 6, 2016 3:33 PM Flag

    -
    2
    -
    Following the completion of the
    Silver Wheaton transaction
    ,
    Silver Wheaton
    will have
    approximately 72
    4 million
    common shares outstanding of which approximately 75
    % will be held
    by Wheaton.
    In conjunction with the closing of the private
    placement, Chap has moved from the NEX to Tier 2
    of the TSX Venture Exchange. [aug.5 2004]

    Wheaton river minerals had purchased Luismin mexican silver assets including SD, they then took a low level shell co and created Silver Wheaton out of it and agreed to sell 100% of silver output to it @$3.90/oz in exchange for less than $50m.

    When GG took over Wheaton River minerals in 2005 they also got 65% ownership of Silver Wheaton which they sold off over the ensuing years into 2008 for several $Billion, leaving them with long term exposure to delivery liabilities with little cover. Enter Conway and Primero 2010 to solve that problem. gl

  • The term of the Amended and Restated Silver Purchase Agreement is for the life of the San
    Dima
    s Mine, with an initial term expiring October 15, 2029, and automatic renewals for
    additional terms of ten years each, subject to SW Cayman’s right to terminate;

    The purchase price for the Refined Silver is equal to the lesser of (a) a fixed price of $4.04
    plus an increase of one percent annually ($4.20 commencing in August 2014 plus an
    annual one percent increase) and (b) the market price of
    Refined Silver at the time of sale;
    -
    If, by October 15, 2031, 215 million
    ounces of Refined Silver (the “
    Minimum
    Silver
    Amount”
    ) have not been sold and delivered to SW Caymans by Silver Trading under the
    Amended and Restated Silver Purchase Agreement (inclu
    ding amounts produced under
    predecessor agreements equal to approximately 37.25 million ounces as at April 30,
    2010), then Silver Trading will be
    obligated to pa
    y to SW Caymans an amount (the
    “Minimum Silver Payment”
    ), equal to:

    Looks like roughly 150m ag oz to be handed to SW over the next 15 years or so. If nobody pays "profit taxes" on these ounces, Mexico gives up substantial revenue. 7m oz this year to SW at current price would result in roughly$70m untaxed revenue and $21m foregone tax receipts @ 30% rate. gl

  • Reply to

    Lawsuits

    by aubollocks Feb 4, 2016 2:05 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Feb 5, 2016 4:24 PM Flag

    Check it out sniffer, SD has continued to spin off copious amounts of cash but BF has eaten it all. gl

  • Reply to

    Lawsuits

    by aubollocks Feb 4, 2016 2:05 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Feb 5, 2016 9:51 AM Flag

    There was a high level of '" misrepresentation " in the BRD acquisition..." large long life reserve base, immediately cash flow accretive 100k oz 2014, 120k oz 2015 " none of which appeared to be true at the time based on BF history and reconciliation.

    Conroy was recruited by GG to take unwanted liabilities off their books, princpally silver obligations but also exploration properties at inflated valuations.

    Promotion associated with the merger allowed GG to dump all of their PPP shares at inflated prices and PPP management pocketed $ multi-millions in " share price performance" bonuses.

    In the roughly 2 years since this "financial engineering" fiasco, common shareholders have seen their company go from strongly net cash positive to precarious net cash negative while cash was flushed down the BF rat hole leaving PPP with a lack of financial wherewithal to withstand a potential tax assault. gl

  • Reply to

    New Year's Eve prospectus

    by bosar53 Jan 4, 2016 6:21 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Feb 3, 2016 8:25 PM Flag

    We expect to deliver our common stock against payment on or about February 5, 2016.

    "in satisfaction of up to..." i.e. the amount lode's debt to varilease is decreased depends on what verilease nets from the sale of stock. gl

  • Reply to

    New Year's Eve prospectus

    by bosar53 Jan 4, 2016 6:21 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Feb 3, 2016 6:34 PM Flag

    ___________________________________
    We are offering 2,250,000 shares of our common stock to Varilease Finance, Inc. (“Varilease”), pursuant to this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus. The shares to be offered pursuant to this prospectus supplement are being issued in satisfaction of up to $993,489.55 of lease payment obligations and all or a portion of the purchase option pursuant to that certain Master Lease Agreement, dated as of May 12, 2015, between Varilease and Comstock Mining Inc. (the “Lease”). Based on the closing price of our common stock of $0.43 on the NYSE MKT LLC on January 28, 2016, the shares issued would have an aggregate value of $967,500

    This dilution is being done under january 2013 prospectus since SEC seems reluctant to grant "effectiveness" to lode's december 31 2015 submission. gl

  • Reply to

    Conference Call

    by mookster65 Jan 29, 2016 8:15 AM
    bosar53 bosar53 Jan 29, 2016 9:41 AM Flag

    So we'll have that information flung, we'll have reports from geology, discovery and development over the next few weeks and months, the permitting for the Dayton in the second half of the year and a real possibility that by the end of 2015, better than having one starter mine, we could have three active mines between Lucerne surface, Lucerne underground and the Dayton. That's from CC of yearend 1 year ago mookster; keep in mind the fact that gasbag is a professional liar, his only skill. gl

  • Reply to

    Producing

    by mookster65 Jan 28, 2016 1:46 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Jan 28, 2016 2:04 PM Flag

    No certainty that Lode will ever mine again mookster but gasbag has that covered with his "Look...a squirrel" obfuscation in today's CC.

    Apparently Lode's land could potentially, maybe some day, be worth more than Lode's current market cap, in the event that someone actually offers to buy it. gl

  • Reply to

    So basically CMI comes out with some good news

    by billnorris64 Jan 22, 2016 12:00 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Jan 22, 2016 2:57 PM Flag

    Yes sparks,assay results showed less than 6% of core assayed above apparent lower cut-off of .09 oz/t and average width was a paltry 5', not conducive to profitable UG mining. gl

  • Outlook

    The Company has been cash positive from operations for the first nine months of 2015, and expects to be cash positive from mining operations for the full year 2015 (excluding drifting, exploration and road construction costs), net of a weaker fourth quarter as the Company transitions from the final phase of surface mining in Lucerne

    " we were slightly cashflow positive from operations except from areas of operation where we ate a lot of cash" so we registered an offering of common,covertible preferred,debt etc for up to $50m which we intend to mine asap.gl

  • Reply to

    Crunch Time

    by bosar53 Dec 23, 2015 1:22 PM
    bosar53 bosar53 Dec 24, 2015 10:36 AM Flag

    Yes whatisall, $1m production revenue vs stated q4 expenditure $7m leaves working capital deficit $7-8m and only enough cash to pay "management costs" and mandatory debt/interest repayment through q1; nothing for continued "exploration and development".

    If Lode survives to see 2016 yearend there will likely be more than 200m shares outstanding. gl

  • bosar53 by bosar53 Dec 23, 2015 1:22 PM Flag

    We’ll have some continuity of revenue and continuity of ore because we’ve stacked a lot of ounces the past few quarters, but there will be some planned drop off in production. We saw a little bit in the third quarter, and there will be some more in the fourth and the first as we’re transitioning.

    Without question, our preference would be to fund all development activities out of cash flow, but we couldn’t quite do that, so it was prudent to fully fund the first phase of the development activities so that there would be less risk of disruption from a capital resources perspective. It was really the only responsible way to do it.

    With "phase 1" likely completed and funds likely depleted, it's nearly time for the next large fundraising circus with gasbag as ringmaster and "assay results" projections as the likely tool.

    There's very little production left to elute from leach and nothing within sight to stack so $15-20m will be required to see Lode survive much beyond mid 2016.gl