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 : Manhattan Minerals (MAN.T) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sailfish who wrote (3677)	9/10/1999 1:38:00 AM
From: Gerald Walls	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4504

Manhattan would seem to be holding most of the "aces" at this point in their program... But how can that be? Elizabeth stated that MAN would go down after the last set of number, since they were so bad and all... #reply-11183566

To: Sailfish who wrote (3677)	9/10/1999 7:02:00 PM
From: Jeff Dickson	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4504

Hi Ray, [Edit: This came out a little long, so I'm going to stress that these are all my own thoughts, I am not trying to put any spin on it for any reason, I could be totally wrong, and if it bugs the reader, or they don't believe me, hit next now.] Dilution is a difficult thing to assess. In the specific instance the money would go toward defining discovered bodies and possibly discovering additional deposits in this proven prospective area. This is a lot different than issuing paper for a pasture on a whim. It would be nice if the company could go out and shake the money tree every few months and finance and higher levels. There are a number of reasons that this isn't possible. Getting a financing together is no small feat. Not only are there regulatory hoops to jump through, it requires a lot of time. Graham and Pete are worth a lot more to the company than spending every second month getting money together. Even back in August when there wasn't a financing around the corner, the volume dried up and really nothing much has been happening since. Nobody likes that kind of uncertainty. Another problem with trying to ratchet the financing along is that if the stock price was higher then it might be a tougher sell, as the leverage is reduced. While the financing is done at an exchange regulated small discount, the stock is still not free trading. The people in the financing are taking a lot more risk, and they will want a situation that they feel is favourable. If people were interested in taking small amounts of shares they could just buy free trading shares on the TSE, which does little direct good for the company. Even with 5 million shares Manhattan is not very heavy in the paper, and is a long way from becoming an Eldorado with 75 million shares. That's a lot of paper for something that hasn't traded at a buck for over a year. The management at Manhattan have a lot of shares, and so do the people presumably that would be in this financing. So it is also in their best interest to balance the dilution with the benefits. Bob and Pete got Manhattan to where it is with very little stock, and even if I didn't like this one I give them a get out of jail free card for the amazingly well timed one at $9 a few years ago. Graham Clow has a great record too, and I was speaking to a broker a couple of weeks ago that had nothing but good things to say - highly respected. Getting what seems a large amount of money now lets the company drill and drill and drill, and get studies done on TG1 and TG3, free from the distractions of having to get money again for a long time. Moreover, consider what would happen if the company needed money and someone came along a made a bid for the company. It isn't necessarily the case that turning down a bid means you can turn around and find people throwing money at you. A company with money in the bank can turn it down if they want and keep on drilling, like Arequipa did with admirable success. I'm not expecting a bid to come along anytime soon though. If people come back from seeing the project willing to throw $25 million into it, that's fine with me. People can interpret spins and agendas all they want, but money talks. Especially in this market, where money is not thrown at everything with a property somewhere. Anyway, those are my thoughts on it. If you want you could call and discuss financing philosophy with Mike or probably even Graham Clow. I was a little taken aback by the possible dilution at first myself. Regards, -jeff Note that a hypothetical 5 million at $5.50 just about supports elizabeth's target in cash, although it comes in tranches.