Old habits die hard. I tracked Diana Shipping for very long time (since inception) and as of now look for good point to swap DCIX for DSX.
Bear market doesn't leave any room for mistakes and lack of financing at the time when practically all small miners desperately look for financing...
Hotle can be used. They should expect volunteers coming and taking care of shaft digging while construction crews are disbanded. Piopuke and goldmania could easily operate shovels, after little training (not quite sure about pio, wonder whether he ever passed any training).
Ladies and Gents,
Normally, I don’t advertise my trading/investment activities. It is too common; these boards are full of this stuff: guys duly reporting big victories or, at worst, small paper losses, certainly preceded and followed by even bigger victories.
However, sometimes people get noisy; they want to know; they make assumptions and they put these assumptions on paper. I feel obliged to help them (more specifically, to the specimen going by ‘bonanzagrade’ moniker).
Last week I didn’t have gold shares at all. Now I already bought GG raising my exposure to gold to about 2% of total portfolio. I plan to buy, depending on market conditions, second and, maybe, third position. It is unlikely that even in max case the exposure could exceed 7-8% of the portfolio. I am looking in bona-fide producers only and, yes, IAG is on the list and I traded this stock in past. Frankly, I look more at EGO or NEM right now, but it depends on market conditions; it is possible that I will buy IAG soon.
I don’t plan to keep shares too long but you never know (it depends on market conditions). If profits materialize (5-10% would be perfect) then I take them.
Hopefully, it is enough information; but if anyone has serious questions (take note of the word “serious”) related to this message then feel free to ask them.
Think5x, I agree about undue confusion inherent to bulk samples. This confusion creates potential for marketing and that’s the reason why BCSC presence was such a big negative factor (for the marketing). Any confusion is subject to interpretation, but when market regulator watches then it’s only one interpretation available, the interpretation made by BCSC.
Basically, I agree too about 1st quarterly production results to serve as a “bulk sample”. The only disclaimer would be that 1st quarter cannot be representative, especially for an underground mine. One year could be enough, though 2 years would be even better. Every mining startup takes time and it is sometimes bumpy.
Jde, I guess #8 was posted in sarcastic sense. Anyway, when I really suggested selling (in one of recent messages causing some anxiety in few skulls), it meant selling on pop, i.e. waiting for rebound and then selling. For example, most recent rebound was very short and still very furious (did it get to about 1.50?). Anyway I have no idea how market or sector or this stock will perform in near-term, i.e. tomorrow.
Good luck with your future investments. Frankly, I used to believe that you are better than average long on this board.
I didn’t see any signs that Lalonde thinks about old bulk sample as wrongly conducted. Please correct me, if I missed something in this regard.
Shortly speaking, bulk sample is a thing of past here. This company is in construction mode while bulk sample stories pertain to purely exploration outfits. BCSC presence disallowed RBY to get any marketing gain by doing bulk sample. Actually, it was a marketing loss. I would say more here: any bulk sample made under close watch of BCSC would result in marketing loss.
In other words, RBY marketing misfortunes started before bulk sample; they started when BCSC got involved and the reason was in “fantastic” initial resource estimate. Company (under old management) overplayed its hand, BCSC came in and it became impossible to do any marketing tricks anymore.
Again, this is an old story. Moreover, marketing tricks affect mostly outsiders (retail investors). Insiders have tools to see beyond marketing. More specifically, McEwen and/or AEM knew it better than any bulk sample reader/dreamer.
Think5x, I am very unsure about "W"-idea. At present, it looks to me as 3rd leg down (April, June and now) and it seems to me every leg claims new victims. I would consider any rebound (it is always possible to get a rebound) as another bear market rally: furious and short. In other words, I still believe that swings have better chance to succeed than long-term. Needless to say I try swings in bona-fide producers only.
Think5x, thank you for information about TRQ. It is helpful to know this TRQ story. Frankly, the last time I checked this Mongolian saga was 4-5 years ago. If I understand correctly TRQ is only going to make right offering, i.e. it is early to say whether and how it will affect share price. In my opinion, "rights" means the same dilution as share sale, just another name and slightly different mechanism.
I see that TRQ announcement is very recent (sorry, if it's not correct, didn't check history). Stock is down but let's wait until smoke clears before making judgments.
"Florida-travelling" pio forgot to switch to his puke7661 alias, still staying in Canada. This guy (both aliases) is clueless to the most pristine state.
Califmale, it seems you forgot that BCSC was in play. It kept the process (bulk sample reporting) under tight control thus disallowing any marketing tricks; the latter are quite common in this sector.
Once in play, BCSC is still in play.
Think5x, thanks for your reply. It raises many interesting issues that require more than one message.
First of all, I don't know how much capital was sunk into F2 since 1940s. Honestly, I didn't even know that it started in 1940s. I don't think that the number is too important, but if you have it then share it, please. It would be interesting to have it for reference purposes.
Again, I don't think that past capital spending is more important for current stock situation than present market environment. In my opinion, fundraising $150M for a small non-producing company now is more difficult than fundraising, for example, $500M in better (bull market) times. Small companies have no chance to get conventional financing now, because they don't have cash flow producing assets (general reason) and because banks will hardly lend to money-losing industry, especially without collaterals.
One can see that major companies are still able to get financing, but it was always easier for them and, moreover, they still have cash flow to some extent, some profits at least.
Puke7661…aka park7661…sorry aka pio, I didn’t plan to spy on your phone conversations. It is all those evil guys on black helicopters and you made terrible mistake telling them about your Florida plans. Beware of ghosts in your hotel room and don’t make any unnecessary phone calls. Call 911 as soon as helicopters appear in your window.
If it was a question, then you should use question sign in your message. Really, edmund, you could learn how to use punctuation signs. Your dear leader could even decide that you were born in a third-world country and your insufficient knowledge of the language makes you ineligible for posting messages.
Regarding “promoting impossible”, I think that mining project won’t be permitted these days if it assumes dumping tailings in a lake. However, I didn’t call it (the lake idea) “fraud” or “promoting”; I just said that it is impossible. Obviously, it is not a fraud. It is disclosed, every person can check this fact and make own opinion. Also, if they file for permit, it is not a fraud either. Everyone can file for a permit and if permit is denied is not a crime too.
Accusing Quartermain in fraud? Please show me the message where I did it. If you are unable to do it then, hopefully, you are mature enough to offer apologies.
Regarding lakes, both Northgate and Taseko tried it and it didn’t work in British Columbia. I didn’t even check whether CDE did it in Alaska. Frankly, I am not sure whether your words are correct. By the wya, Kensington would have zero chace to get approved if Obama administration would be in place that time.
Anyway, Canadian precedents are more important. Dunkan lake that Northgate wanted to use also didn't have any inhabitants. By the way, water from Brucejack lake goes to salmon-habitated river in U.S., welcome to Obama environmental police.
I have to apologize for a type (not quite material, but still requires correction). It should be read: "After all every gold stocks, EXCEPT zombie cases, which get multiplied with time, will go up with gold."
Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Every assumption in your message is ambiguous to the point of non-transparency. For example, you say “150M is not too much in the scale of things”. Excuse me, what scale and what things and why 150M is not too much? What is too much and by what scale?
Please, show an example of a company, similar to RBY, that successfully raised about the same amount recently. This would be a factual argument. Regarding “rights”, if I remember correctly MUX is the only example and it was done before April confirmation of the bear, and still it inflicted serious pain over there.
For sure, you are entitled to the point of view that fundraising is not a challenging issue. However, I don’t find so far that your argumentation is factual and convincing. Please note that company already reported, as it was referred on this board, significant delay in construction schedule and, it can be speculated, that market took note by punishing share price. If fundraising is easy, as your message implies, then why the delay? Go ahead and make it.
Regarding hopes on sudden increase in gold price, I already mentioned that this is only factual thing on your assumptions. Again, I can’t figure out why it is 70% chance. Why not 90% or 50%? By the way, this bear market already had such increases; bear market rallies are short and furious.
Analyzing past sector rallies, one may see that even in case of super-lucky timing (buy point) one should still be careful to sell in time: next low is lower than past lows. In other words, “normal” investment is still a losing proposition, one can talk about swings and it is safer to do it in safer stocks. After all every gold stocks, especially zombie cases, which get multiplied with time, will go up with gold. However, imagine that your timing fails and/or you bought a zombie. Swing attempts can result in long-term portfolio disaster.
First of all, I agree that some reduction in dividend would be reasonable; cash on hands is more important. Anyway, the whole story about dividend here is blown out of proportion. IAG can continue paying dividend or it can stop it; it is not too material at this point. Gold price is more material.
Frankly speaking, this message board is getting too emotional too often. When gold price goes up, it is filled with idiotic messages of bullish flavor, and when gold goes down, it is filled with idiotic messages of bearish affiliation. Essentially, it is all the same noise.
Some guys should not invest too much in risky and volatile sectors especially if they cannot keep their mouths in check. IAG is not going to zero and it is not going to the moon. Relax. IAG is one of more solid gold producers; it provides enough protection on downside, while upside potential cannot be realized until bear market in gold ends. Either buy it for swings, or accumulate for long-term; it is a matter of investment style (I would prefer swings). Both ways, do it in reasonable amounts, diversify your portfolio.