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 : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: d:oug who wrote (56144)	7/13/2000 8:18:20 AM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116801

The word 'criminal' is bandied about very loosely and wrongly here. You weren't involved in my replies. Re: PGD - it's key property in Tanzania is Tulawaka. It owns 70% - a company (symbol MDN) owns 30%. A shareholder of MDN wrote the letter that Midas published. His comments re:the resource at Tulawaka were completely inaccurate and inflated. All the same I can understand MDN's problem because they have been left out in the cold by the ABX/PGD deal. One really has to read the PGD thread to get the feel of what has happened. My comments may be the strongest of all. Many feel that Pangea sold out for too little - and ask why did Pangea raise $10 million in a pp at $4.50 and almost immediately sell to Barrick at $7.00? It raises a lot of questions. It's interesting that Pangea is $6.95/$7.00 when the Barrick shares have to be tendered, for $7.00, by July 28. So the question is whether there could be a counter bid. It doesn't seem likely but some people seem to be betting that there's a chance.

To: d:oug who wrote (56144)	7/13/2000 1:27:44 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116801

a post from kitco by ted butler...i highlighted the statement that imo brings the whole point of the hedging nonsense home from a shareholders PoV: Date: Thu Jul 13 2000 13:08 ted butler (@Dizzy talk) ID#317184: Copyright © 2000 ted butler/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved AngloGold ( AU ) has a total gold short position of around 15 million ounces, or around two full years production. You can slice it and dice it any which way you want, but at the end of the day, it comes down to this - AU management has decided at these prices to commit the shareholder to lost profit opportunity on two years production on any price above current prices. Otherwise, they would cover their all shorts at these prices ( and book a profit ) and allow the shareholder full exposure. If I were a shareholder of AU, I would be pissed at management's arrogance. As a shareholder, if I was worried that the price of gold was going to decline severely, I would not be a shareholder. I would not need, or want, some miner turned hedge fund wannabe to decide where gold should be sold. Just find the resources and mine them, and leave pricing decisions to the real owners.