The market makes sense to invest in when it seems to make no sense. In other words when everyone else has sold and the stocks look sick as puppies with no future at all, that is the time to buy. If you have the money. The market will always come back. For 1000 years that we know of it has run on regular cycles. The trouble is, if you look in the back of the Canadian Mines Handbook at all the historical prices for 30 years, you see that the cycles which correspond exactly to the CDN discovery cycles highlighted by Hemlo, Kidd Creek, etc.. are about 7 years long. Somewhat the same as the animal cycle. The same stocks come back recycle the same properties and run to the same highs and eventually the same lows. The reason is 99% of them will never find a mine with their strategy.
When the market is as healthy as a hog that is the time to sell. Right now, the market is sale material. Stocks that are good to buy now are few. Low priced, new stocks with new stories are few right now too. All the old stories are kind of shop worn. Those nickel stocks that were supposed to worth a trillion are blase now. They came and went. Why? Because what I said was right. You can only extend a drill program and promo so far. Then you need to develop. And that takes a feasibility and a 100 million dollars. That money is not raised in the retail market. The feasibility is beyond the scope of 98% of geologists. They do not have the education, or the software or the experience. The usual people in the companies know only the basics, not even what is needed from the engineers, the real financiers of mining projects and the earth itself for economics.
If you pick a company with a different, i.e. development strategy, that knows how to mine and mill and knows the difference, no matter the history that is perceived, 99% of the people will not know how to asses that. I can asses that right from the get go with the character and flavour of their announcements. Do they have a mineable resource? Do they know what one is per tonnage of resource? Is it feasible possibly by infrastructure logistics? Do their announcements and private admissions reflect that strategy of develop towards production? Do they have an idea how much that will cost? Do they have in house expertise? Are the board, engineers or brokers? The rest is easy.
If the mining company has infrastructure and says they will mine and sounds serious, and is not a pack of liars then you can invest for a long term for smallish but far more certain gains. Guyana Goldfields and Roxmark are two such companies that know how to a degree and will develop. Guyana is not so experiences in the executive proper but have the consultative capacity. Roxmark has the most experienced hands on board of any company I know of.
Some other companies have miners on board but they are not serious about mining. All the names I hear from time to time don't impress. No real intent. Marcos fave play a while back, his open pit in Mexique was not my fave for several reasons. The complexities and sounds from he Alamo made it look to me like it was a long long road to get there. The iffiness coefficient vis a vis politiques and la drill off have to be taken into account as well.
Don't ask me where the market sits right now vis a vis total health. I don't want to be wrong. Ostensibly with the high metal prices that benefit producers, the market should reflect that. In a way it does. It ran as high as most speccies would go a year before that. Without production possibilities it therefore can go no higher.
EC<:-} |
