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

AuRico Gold Inc. Ordinary Share Message Board

warmcamp 8 posts  |  Last Activity: Nov 8, 2015 5:24 PM Member since: Oct 15, 2003
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • warmcamp warmcamp Nov 8, 2015 5:24 PM Flag

    Alex, I think your message misses following: it wasn't just Yellen words coming last week that suppressed PM sector again. It was mostly chain of reports that delivered strong reading on US economic situation.

    Please note, generally speaking, PM prices do not depend on nominal interest rate and they do not depend much on direction in rates. You may look back at 1970-80s. Gold prices went up strongly along with interest rates moving up in Carter years, and then gold prices crashed down when rate was lifted even higher in Reagan years.

    The point is that PM prices move in inverted mode vs. strength/weakness of US economy; it is the best for gold when public confidence in US economy hits low point. It provides both explanation (why PM sector looks awful now) and hint (when the sector could have a turnaround).

  • Reply to

    Too Many Assumptions

    by thino2 Nov 7, 2015 11:42 PM
    warmcamp warmcamp Nov 8, 2015 3:38 PM Flag

    Hello, Thino. I am glad to see you again after so many years elapsed since old Minefinders days.

    I visit this board on relatively rare occasions and post on very special situations only, and didn't do anything in this stock for many years. Also, I do not invest in any PM stocks now and do not have any big plans here. Sometimes, I visit PAAS message board, mostly because of old connection to Dolores mine. I don't post often there too; the board quality went down seriously, in my opinion; i.e. no messages there that could be linked to mining fundamentals or financials.

    However, I continue investing and have full-size portfolio across many sectors that look better at this junction. Most of my positions have either bad quality (common things on Yahoo:) or completely dead message boards; therefore, I don't post there either. Probably, I will have to wait until gold stocks make turnaround, providing better input points, before I would start investing in this sector and possibly posting on more regular basis too.

    Regarding RBY, this sad story is about finished. It was able to create a big impact affecting, as you mentioned, not just many retail investors; it affected quite credible companies, such as Royal Gold. Imho, it indicates one more time very challenging investment climate in this sector, where investors try to assess situations that may or may not arise only in few years ahead, relying on data that is often preliminary and incomplete in nature. It was difficult in better market times for this sector, as we are reminded by Minefinders story.

    Good luck with your business.

  • Reply to

    Case is closed

    by whompu1 Nov 3, 2015 11:45 AM
    warmcamp warmcamp Nov 3, 2015 11:49 AM Flag

    I tried to post continuation to my message, but unfortunately, Yahoo doesn't allow it. It is mostly conclusions and they are mostly identical with this message, posted by Whompu1.
    Some people do not have shame. It means Pio and Sewells. Probably, they were born this way.
    Unfortunately, it caused other people to lose money on this stock.

  • warmcamp by warmcamp Nov 3, 2015 11:39 AM Flag

    I am sure that most of present RBY shareholders are familiar with this stock and message board history. It ran high in the midst of bull market. Many plain folks believed in the story and expected huge gains ahead, even sitting on very high, as it became clear later, price. Any cautious remarks or even moderately positive assessments were derisively dismissed and posters attacked in the most obnoxious ways.

    Anyway, I feel obliged to remind few things. During bull market years RBY stock price achieved high levels based on assumptions that company has very sizable gold reserves. It was fueled partially by initial talk about geological potential (if I remember correctly the number was in 15-20 MOz range). Soon enough Canadian security regulator (BCSC) clamped on this strangely enormous number and forced company to return to more credible ways of reporting. However, the number went out and produced harm; many people swallowed the bait. It can be said here that message board pumpers made every effort to make sure that it is swallowed.

    Also, the same faulty reporting resulted in very high gold grades (something in high teens) reported for RBY project. Again, pumpers supported the numbers and attacked anyone expressing doubts. The same tradition continued, when company moved closer to development. It started to transpire on that point that it decided to go without normal procedures, common to the industry, such as feasibility studies. In other words, company went to construction and later tried to go to production without making thorough plans how to do it, i.e. how to do actual mining. It was an enormous red flag and again pumpers made every effort to dismiss and suppress any cautious opinions in this regard.

    Continued in next message.

  • Reply to

    To Abbaman

    by warmcamp Sep 12, 2015 12:59 PM
    warmcamp warmcamp Sep 13, 2015 5:30 PM Flag

    Thanks for your answers. I have IPI on my target list, and don't have any particular knowledge about the industry. I apologize that some questions may not sound smart.
    Is it correct that present weakness in potash pricing caused by Belaruskali dumping? If this assumption is right then could it explain that langbeinite pricing is a bit better than traditional potash? Also, I saw in some articles that overall potash demand is lower this year. What's the reason for that?

  • Reply to

    To Abbaman

    by warmcamp Sep 12, 2015 12:59 PM
    warmcamp warmcamp Sep 12, 2015 2:16 PM Flag

    I didn't intend at all to make an advertisement for IPI. Actually, I wanted to hear your opinion, as I try some DD there, and nothing else.
    I noticed "imminent danger order" too, but it seemed to me that the issue was addressed properly and doesn't affect production. Is this assumption incorrect?
    My main concerns about IPI are small size of the company and US location making it difficult now, as I assumed in general currency terms, to compete with major Canadian producers, taking into account weak Canadian dollar. In this respect, I would like to ask you more specific question. Does POT try to increase production in Canada and sell more in US?

  • warmcamp by warmcamp Sep 12, 2015 12:59 PM Flag

    I noticed that you posted for many years on this industry and your messages indicate clearly that you do research and know lot of things about this place. May I ask your opinion on IPI stock? Thanks.

  • warmcamp warmcamp Sep 5, 2015 5:05 PM Flag

    I don't think that present stock investment case relates to longs or shorts. I owned IPI in past and doing DD now; it looks to me that it is more an issue of company competitiveness vs. foreign potash producers. Strong dollar definitely puts IPI on defensive in this fight.
    It seems to me that US dollar reached max versus Canadian currency and it, probably, creates some optimism. If strong USD didn't kill this stock yet, then hopefully it provides some ammo when Canadian dollar starts reclaiming ground. In any case, I would be interested to hear other investor opinions on this topic.

2.860.00(0.00%)Jul 2 4:03 PMEDT