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 : Blue Chip Gold Stocks HM, NEM, ASA, ABX, PDG -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jrhana who wrote (1052)	11/22/2003 8:26:18 PM
From: Wade	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 48092

Hi jrhana, I am not trying to compare over valuation of senior or junior golds at the first place. Secondly, Yes, this is not 97. Now, we see many same players using the same mine, touted the same stories as they did in 96-97. Some of the juniors are for real, of course. Oh, I forgot that I owned Pangea Goldfields, which was an excellent one introduced to me from a friend, sold to ABX in 98 as I can recall. As you can see from many discussions on other SI threads the records of the juniors were not so good. Were you in gold stocks during the 96-97 run? I told myself and many people using almost exactly the same words you just wrote at that time: " .... would argue that the larger cap golds are over valued-that in fact well selected juniors represent better value." In fact, how many % of junior gold stock investors made money? This has been my curiosity for years. No doubt, there are many people made good fortune from the juniors. I am absolutely confident in your ability to own the well selected ones. Actually, I like all 3 of your junior picks. Just couldn't make decision which one to buy right now . But, I will be ready by tomorrow night. BTW, <If POG goes to $250 all my juniors will probably go to zero also> Well, last time POG went to $870. Many juniors went to zero as well. Just found this from my rusty memory archive. Wade

To: jrhana who wrote (1052)	11/23/2003 6:18:00 AM
From: Andrew	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 48092

Valuation is I believe subjective in the markets and perhaps even more so in the Gold shares. In the past few months we have seen Goldcorp have several sell recommendations from ANALysts who cite the fact that Goldcorp is overvalued relative to its peers when valued by reserves and other criteria blah blah. I believe this company is specially positioned to have a higher valuation than ANY other producer in the world and is why I continue to hold it. 1 - Growing high grade reserves 2 - New shaft being sunk / increasing production 3 - I think lowest cost mine in the world 4 - Underground mine in a politically stable country * 5 - Pays a higher dividend yield than IBM or MSFT or for that matter most any tech and will continue to for many years *This is an intangible, we have no knowledge of what the future holds in the current geopolitical environment and I feel that in certain unforeseen events although gold might rise dramatically in value some gold mining companies might lose value or become worthless depending on their exposure to certain geographic areas. I thank the market for allowing me to buy Agnico last week at such a depressed price. For these reasons I am limiting myself to have no or little exposure to in no particular order China (and all of Asia), Russia (and all former Soviet), Africa (including and especially SA which is a quagmire IMO), Venezuela (no explanation needed). I am wary of certain other Central and South American Countries as well. Of the majors I own or will continue to own, some have limited exposure to these areas but are well diversified so having one mine out of a large portfolio of mines in one of these regions limits risk. As an example I sold the last of my BGO at 2.98 due to highly concentrated exposure to Russia and SA. Missed some of the move but made up for it elsewhere. Yes there are many juniors that have not participated as much in this gold bull. I believe the reason for this is that some of them do not have a sexy story to tell. I have a short list and am doing my research now to see which ones have the best upside potential so that I can rotate some % of my portfolio into them. My criteria for these is proven reserves which have not been given fair value by the market, potential for growth of reserves and having assets based in politically stable climates. I have not directly owned any grassroots explorers throughout this entire gold move and nor do I envision that I will unless I find some which are very compelling but at current valuations for explorers I am staying clear. Despite this I still have been able to manage a 2 year 400% return and above all else I want to keep it.