Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: russet who wrote (4323)	8/13/1999 6:44:00 PM
From: GEORGES	Respond to of 7235

Everybody take a Valium...... We are at the mercy of margin calls and short term expectations. We are all shareholders of a company whose management has the uncanny ability to find diamonds where others have failed (DB), it manages it s projects within budget, and it has a very conservative approach to forecasting and accounting methods. Unfortunatly, it is a public co. and this puts pressure on management to always put on a happy face. Our president and his staff lack promotional skills, I agree. But this should not diminish the value of SUF except with the short term speculator......I hope it goes to $2 before it goes to $4. Time to load up.(Warren Buffet is right). I do not care what price the share is at on Labor Day 1999 but rather in 2002. I think it s time we stopped blaming management for the short term expectations of the stock market... The Co. is financially very sound ,( which never gets mentioned) with cash in the bank, no LTD and book value of about $3.50 per share. Now if this was a private Co. making an IPO, would ' nt we all jump in at an initial price of $3.10 or 2X 1999 cash flow. + Angola, + NWT +Brazil (and the bikinis) + Kipsplinger + Messina+ all the other Ms???????

To: russet who wrote (4323)	8/13/1999 7:21:00 PM
From: Shaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Hi russet, I didn't mean to sound like a wet blanket and I agree with almost 100% of what you said. It's only the one line in your post that I am alluding to. That being: "Their ability to get off their pitards, dust themselves off, and get on with it has been ignored though." That, IMO, has been a fundamental problem. They have been hearing from shareholders (some of them very large holders who have been with the company for years and years) for probably a year now about the problems on the admin/corporate side of SUF. These people, as far as I know, have been ignored. What do they do then???? Correct! Sell the stock down to $3 or 20% below book. All of your production calculations and praise for management are certainly founded. What they have done with this company you can equate to "rocket science". Unfortunately, keeping big holders/institutions/friends of the company etc. happy (with simple communication through someone with market savvy) is not rocket science and can be done cheaply and quickly. They, IMO, have not grasped this apparently simple concept. Have a good weekend and good calcs on the post! Dean