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.
Non-Tech : The Woodshed

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: SwampDogg who wrote (39141)5/14/2006 7:29:43 PM
From: ItsAllCyclical  Read Replies (1) of 60926
 
>> IMO it has been way overdone but we will see <<

Agree. I'm glad Bolivia went first. Maybe Peru will see the reaction this will/has provoked w/the investment community and the mining co's. I believe mining is smaller scale relative to natural gas for Bolivia vs Peru. I can't see Peru making the same mistake even if Humala wins. I don't see nationalization, but maybe some higher fees that everyone could probably deal w/if needed. Right now the royalty fees vary between 1-3% and PAAS is on the lower end of that scale due to their smaller size (big silver company, but smaller company/mines compared to the big cap golds/base metals). So my assumption is that even if PAAS had to pay 3-5% royalties we're not talking about a huge hit to operations. About 40% of their reserves are currently in Peru as you probably know and I think about 60-70% of production currently, but that's set to decrease as their new mines come on-line in Mexico and Argentina by 2008 making Peru less significant (maybe 50% or less by 2008). Of course perception matters more than reality so I likely won't be taking a full position ahead of the elections unless it gets really cheap. Right now it's looking more reasonable than it has in many years, but still not cheap in my book.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext