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 : GEOMAQUE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ogi who wrote (174)	5/31/2000 12:12:00 PM
From: Claude Cormier	Respond to of 260

Ogi, An analysis tha make sense. But I would probably go closer to $1,00 based on cash flows approaching C$8-9 millions. A multiple of 6 would be reasonable I think. Time will tell. Lets hope for gold $350 by that time.

To: ogi who wrote (174)	6/1/2000 9:15:00 AM
From: russwinter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 260

I think I'm going to jump into this one for the same "value related" reasons alluded to here. Supposedly there is a nearly finished mine ready to produce 60,000/yr @ 169. In normal times that's a valuable asset. In today's climate, deposits and projects (most) fitting this cost profile have very little if any value. The play is of course a rerating (from nearly zero to somewhere north of zero) of this asset class. The San Francisco mine is probably a negative in the valuation. Another data point worth evaluating is the "leg breaker" financing GEO got from the Rothschilds on the $3.5 million bridge loan: The loan facility has an interest rate of 5% per annum, and a prepayment option at any time prior to expiry on September 30, 2002 is provided. Fees payable to RCF are an establishment fee of one million common share purchase warrants exercisable at Cdn$0.28 until September 30, 2002; and $0.825 million on each of September 30, 2001 and September 30, 2002, payable in cash or common shares at RCF?s option. Should RCF elect to receive common shares, the price will be based on the 20-day average of the market price at that time. RCF is entitled to nominate a representative to the Board of Directors for the period of the loan. My goodness, mining appears to be the wrong business to invest in, finance is the way to go. Does this deal illustrate that 1. Capital is nonexistent for small company mining startups? 2. Bankers consider the risk to be extremely high? 3. GEO management makes bad deals? In the final analysis this financing is probably a small part of the story, but it signals in my mind a need for these companies to combine into larger entities. I am seriously questioning the small producer model period, even with very low cost deposits. The concern is that they need to keep going back (a la Greenstone) for more of this Vito and Guido money.