SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor
GDXJ 118.97-0.9%Dec 24 4:00 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Rarebird who wrote (54465)6/16/2000 8:55:00 AM
From: Enigma  Read Replies (2) of 116823
 
I will of course second your remarks on Barrick! It almost seems expected of me on this thread - but usually as a riposte to some anti- Barrick posting. I passed on yesterday's beauty which described ABX as a hedge fund with a few holes in the ground! Ah well, what can one say?

The hedging started as a project financing vehicle and then spread to an ongoing policy. Control of production among the producers was impossible because of competition - I think it has been pointed out here by Bob Johnson that the 'majors' account for less than 40% of world production. And there's always the fear of sanctions by governments in the event of a runaway POG.

However this FN/GOLD merger will have wide ramifications - and companies may unwind their hedge books to some extent. It will make people look at other takeover targets eg ASL which was mentioned by Chris Thompson yesterday among others.

Still, FN and GOLD are both majors - so nothing changes in total - except that the XAU will need another holding.

IMO, and this seems obvious, the name of the game will still be to find more gold and produce more, at less cost. Some marginal mines may be closed through rationalisation. In a theoretical world it might be otherwise. Nota Benes!
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext