All, Below is an interesting post from Lew Green for your enjoyment:
I've been wanting to do a post there [S.I.] for a while, but I can't because I am too stubborn to let those dweebs who run SI make me send a damn postcard... after _not_ warning me at the start of their ridiculous login procedure. Also, I want to avoid getting on any more mailing lists, which seems like the only point, as I have no idea how a Postcard really adds any "security/verification" of people if that's what they are after.
I thought of having you post one for me... maybe you will re-post this:
It is the short version.
I could tear Zeev's posts apart, literally to shreds, piece by piece, but I am too busy to give him that much time. No I can not tear them apart with science, but with psychology. Any, rational, careful, thoughtful examination will reveal this is _not_ a sincere person. And I am the resident nihilist and skeptic, I believe in dd not being a "believer", have many questions myself and love to see IPM and _any_ stock/management questioned and fact-checked vigorously, yet I have come to the conclusion there is no value to Mr. Zeev Hed's posts, as at their core, the motivation is either disturbed or malicious.
Realize again, I am not interested in the happy police/company sycophant/grunting fartel thing. I don't like hype, and even less, don't like unnecessary BSing that gives the appearance of hype. I don't like $500 or $700/share numbers being thrown around, wish a whole _page_ of caveats accompanied them every time they are thrown around. IPM's shareholder activist, and staunchest supporter is of course CL Miltmore, and I can't remember him throwing such numbers around very often if at all, and I respect that. Speaking of CL he recently posted something that _really_ impressed me: his motivation. (paraphrased:..."The small shareholders will make me rich as they sell out to institutions..." )
As I understood it, CL felt it was important for there to be a lot of small investors in IPM, as many as possible... because under a complete success scenario, he felt institutions would eventually take over the stock, and possibly as I read it, try to control it to some degree, and he wanted there to be as much stock as possible out there in separate hands, to _gradually_ sell to the institutions, helping the sales price reflect "full valuation" to the fastest/greatest extent possible. I am far from an expert, but this makes sense to me as if (a big, speculative, caveat emptor if) IPM makes
it to "proven & probable reserve" status, institutions like insurance companies, pension funds, will not be likely to be trading it, but buying and holding a long time. I don't know if that is his sole motivation for all his work, but it is a very credible one.
My point is: We _all_ have agendas. We all have motivations. And they need to be carefully considered as we do our dd and weigh touts and pans, and information. I question Mr. Hed's agenda.
It just seems he has one, and only one sole motivation to all his posts: Be negative about IPM.
Not, be skeptical... not be cautious... not, let me "play devil's advocate" to explore worst case scenarios, so we can compare best case to worst case scenarios. Any of these require a degree of objectivity. If one _really_ looks past the surface of his words, one sees it is completely lacking. The subtext is simple: Attack IPM, attack IPM, attack IPM.
He expresses concern for small investors, but all I see going on is an attempt to rattle and scare people, wrapped in the sparkling aura of scientific nomenclature. To give only a few examples, his recent posts on "valuing" a "successful" IPM, have been terribly unscientific to say the least. They have solely been "worst case" scenarios, not an objective run from worst to best. They have taken a ridiculous, completely fictitious extraction cost of $300 oz. ($75/ton) for IPM (a cost that literally would probably not allow IPM to happen all in it's present form/the present market) and extrapolates its potential value from there, building with a very warped logic, to then ridicule IPM; i.e., " Well, at $500 a share, (using his warped extraction costs) you must therefore mine X times world demand for gold to get enough for this number..." Further, he throws out a way of valuing a company as a multiple (1X) gross sales...
Maybe that works for a Mailboxes etc. franchise (then again maybe not)... but even I with limited background in this area, would think that "cost of sales" _might_ affect such a valuation, and multiples other than 1 might come into play. Yet I doubt any companies are valued this way.
These are but a few small examples... there are many more. But I don't recommend going into them, his goal I believe is to get us bogged down in his numbers/nomenclature, all the while creating negative "HYPE"... If you carefully study his modus operandi, he shows zero objectivity, which a "scientist" must have. Every point of his that is dispelled/challenged/corrected/pointed out to be unsubstantiated or completely speculative leads him to the next,
without a moment for acknowledging a mistake, or mis-calculation... He called into question photo's in IPM's brochure, the subtext of which was _clearly_: IPM management are flim-flam artists -- which forced CL to waste mgt. time
explaining what made them chose/how they did some microscopic mineral photos that are just window dressing in a report... and then when CL _had_ credible answers, or certainly enough to ameliorate Zeev's suspicions, there was not even a hint of contrition, or concern for the innuendo in the line of questioning...
Instead, he merely circled in the water, looking for a new area to attack.
Lew Green
IPM shareholder |
