Fact checks and a few clarifications:
I respectfully disagree with Larry on the reason for the decline and I am not afraid of the D word -- I already posted _it_ as a contributing factor previously. The recent volitility was IMO caused by delay, shorts, and an uncanny confluence of bad press and two other very big factor: Bre-x and Delgf. While it seems strange to me to revel in hindsight and assign blame for volatility in a JR. MINING STOCK, none-the-less nothing we have been through would have been the same without these two events. I don't have a crystal ball and am wary of them. Imagine if we had gotten our sign-off five days before delgf, and the stock soared to $30 -- squeezed shorts see a plateau and double up as word of delgf hits and then a bunch of bad press comes reminded people that bre-x had kilborn etc... Jeez, we might have dropped like a rock to $16 and bounced back to $24! About the same equivilent we've had of late.
I also think people are having trouble distinguishing between the companies actual communication and posters and speculation and irrational exhuberance and yes even hype -- right here on SI.
As far as "clouding BD's role" that came up in the midst of the recent dominant feeding frenzy here of what I saw as negative hype, and frankly I find it absurd. People should _read carefully_...
IPM's PR stated:
"...Completion of this work is a fundamental requirement in obtaining the further necessary exploration and mine permits from State and Federal agencies..."
I think people have some very unrealistic expectations.
1. I can not think of a single mining company that is required to regularly put out a press release saying: "Don't worry, BD is still with us".
2. It is _standard_ for an outfit like BD to be doing more than one thing on a project -- especially preliminary reports -- and this one seems like a half-decent idea especially if we want to _avoid_ future delays!
3. The paranoid theory that BD went through auditing this whole recovery process, found nothing, and post-bre-x/delgf, just shrugged, yawned and took a nice fat enviornmental report instead just defies logic... _Especially_ in the light of Lyco coming in and doing a 2 week due dilligence and then _signing_ up!
To Bob:
<<To be brief, Lew, the problem I see is that he ignores all past 'promises'; his last msg says [IMO gold and] Pt at end of summer with no mention of previous expectations or their actual outcomes.>>
First, The quotes around "promises" don't make this word apropriate. It is still not, and I have yet to hear any logical rebuttal. Larry, summed it up correctly IMO: gave expectations... Yes, Le Furlong gave us his _expectations_... and greedy little optimists that we are we gladly adopted them, and IMO amplified them in this forum. I personally read the chickens coming in as the _results_ coming in, "hearing from a BD consultant" etc... really makes it sound like the data, preliminary reports, verbals reports etc _coming in_... this pragmatist did not interpret that as equaling: SCREAMING PRESS RELEASE of sign-off in hand by this date... I could imagine that easily taking weeks longer...
Second, your statement that he ignores things are taking longer than he expected seem incorrect IMO:
LF said:
"...impatience is probably one of the factors that also affects us. Careful and painstaking progress takes time, time for all the evidentiary data to be meticulously acquired, lest credibility becomes an issue..." (and then he mentions Bre-X!)
"Yes, it takes time. Waiting for assay returns from dozens of laboratories, from around North America - and the world - takes time.
That time has been well spent, despite all of our impatience, to acquire the most accurate assays and collect the most complete data."
I think this is clearly acknowledging it. This is a casual form of communication from the company -- 99.9% of companies would _never_ bother giving the little investors this courtesy.
I noticed the wording on this item was even less damning then even I had become convinced from this reading this thread. It's amazing what checking sources can do:
LF wrote:
"...Reports from the refiners are expected to dribble in during May. Dr. Sam Shaw III will compile the results as they are received and will complete a comprehensive report for management and Directors when all results are in hand..."
_Dribble in_... and then write a comprehensive report for management. This isn't even a missing chicken!
<<I don't want to be repetitious...>>
(witty retort to straight-line skipped) I want credit for this.
<<...Alan, but you like Lew are concocting plausible>>
I'm not concocting anything. I'm using rational logical analysis and a common sense approach to english and am not seeing any substantive flaws being pointed out, rather indignation over not getting a formal appology.
<< but it's up to _him not you to explain why things didn't happen in the way that or as soon as 'was expected'>>
Well, IMO he _does_ explain (perhaps diplomatically in light of the fact that 3rd parties are involved)by his statements. Key explanation: logistics take time, we have to put up with rigorous and slow scrutiny for the sake of credibility.
However, as far as wanting an "I'm sorry":
Personally, if I ever saw a Jr. that had to put out monthly PR's saying "Don't worry, BD is still with us" and where the CEO had to publicly apologize for being off on expressing his "anticipation" and "expectation" of _independent_ 3rd party work completion... I'd look elsewhere. Maybe I'm too macho.
But maybe such a Jr. Miner would be right for others, though I can't think of a single one that meets these kind of expectations.
<<(Lew also makes the IMO zany argument that IPM's actions were legally defensible>>
Sorry, you misunderstood, perhaps it was a poor analogy but I believe some got what I meant. My meaning was these words Le Furlong used _are_ in a casual forum and were clearly loose _estimates_ and as such a legally binding interpretation _would_ be absurd... _Just_ as absurd as calling them broken promises and insinuating some kind of major betrayal as I believe a slew of posts have done.
<<--not quite what I would consider adaquate to soothe an anxious,
news-starved shareholder>>
Well, I think this anxiety is exactly what could be fogging some of our reading glasses. Don't keep an investment you hate. But I just don't know any other leading "desert dirt" with a similar relationship with a BD, yet alone a Lyco signing on after doing dd. I can't think of many Jr Golds worldwide with a BD/ Lyco/ minproc/ Strathconia on board so early and so long, and I really can't think of any that give as much news and updates as IPM...
<<I do think there is often a bit much cheerleading here>>
I agree. And while some may be greed driven and some hypey -- I think the vast majority is innocent human nature.
<<but still have my original position and do expect things _will work out in spite of IPM's dismal PR.>>
While it certainly has had its ups and downs I think it's better PR than many Jr's, and I think some of your feelings might be associating the PR with the difficult "news" it has sometimes had to give and the even worse enviornment it has had to give it in.
Respectfully, I think we all need to take a break, shake out the heebie-jeebies of Forbes and scam-anoia, clear out the ringing echo of shrill voices screaming "show me the metal, show me the metal!" adnauseum, recognize the _risk_ of investment in any Jr, adjust our portfolios or our gin-to-vermouth ratio's -- and find our individual comfort levels.
Sincerely,
Lew Green
|
