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 and Silver Mining Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: goldsheet who wrote (1625)	7/16/2001 4:10:22 PM
From: russwinter	Respond to of 4051

Bob, of course there are several reasons ounces might be scored resources rather than reserves. One of course is marginal economics. We saw this often at year end when reserves at 350 were rerated resources at 300. Except now we are at 267, so some of those same resources may now be rated zip. As investors, how excited should we be about $300 basis resources in old deposits? The answer is some, especially if you are a strong gold bull. If the debate is about the survivability of production at 267 (or less, heaven bid), then that kind of resource is nearly worthless. The evidence is that producers are making nominal attempts on those ounces. The resources I like are the ones early in the exploration cycle (also scarce now)where more work needs to be done, often infill drilling, etc, to tighten up deposit quality and predictablity. That's a different animal from the resource mentioned in the first paragraph. The microeconomic question should be, how many resource ounces in these older operations are resources because it's early in the exploration cycle and more work needs to be done, versus how many ounces are now rated resources because frankly they are marginal at 300 POG, and worthless at 267, and plenty of work has been done? Very good observation on microeconomics. I do however consider derivatives and carry trades to be in that "micro" class. I just don't believe the manipulation aspect of it (even though I believe there is manipulation) can be coherently debated. I'm kind of like you, have mostly given up on the "Monitor" thread.