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 : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: seventh_son who wrote (32049)	11/3/2004 10:24:50 PM
From: Amark$p	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Thanks, that is a nice analysis... Do not follow Northern Dynasty as closely as GBN and ANO which are much better plays IMO if you can stomach SA risk. Believe your criticism of HDI management is a bit harsh, HDI has an excellent management team (one of the best in the world) but yes one should be well aware of their propensity to issue PP and issue management options, but their actions in regard to PP and options are within industry norms it appears to me... ANO will be highly interesting since HDI apparently will not be able to issue any material PP/options since this would reduce Pelawan shareholding and thus violate BEE 51% ownership guidelines. HDI actions with GBN are noteworthy since no new PP has been issued in almost 2 years (last PP was Jan 03). That has to be some sort of record for HDI...!! I will be disappointed if GBN issues a PP anytime soon, GBN should be able to internally finance Burnstone via Hollister internal cash flows... Would not mind a new GBN PP so much if it came at prices above US$2.25 and was without warrants. But issuing a PP without warrants would be a first for HDI... FWIW, HDI management largest ownership positions are in ANO and GBN. just my opinion...

To: seventh_son who wrote (32049)	11/4/2004 10:52:12 PM
From: The Vet	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 39344

seventh son, I generally agree with your views on Gold reserve but I am a little disappointed that you continue with the "throw away" statement used by almost everyone in a discussion of GRZ. "Venezuala, which is near the bottom of people's lists of geopolitically favourable areas" Now while that may be a reflection of the political opinion of some of the current US administration, it isn't necessarily true in reality or of the market sentiment. There are dozens of examples of riskier political enironments. In my view it is simply an excuse market commentators use to justify the unreasonably low valuation of GRZ because they can't find any other reason (and the market must always be right). On a MC/P&P basis GRZ weighs in at about $15 an ounce. Crystallex, on Las Cristinas on the same ore body (but without copper rights and inferior title) is valued at over $75 a P&P ounce, 5 times GRZs valuation. Bolivar Gold, Hecla, GFI and a number of other gold miners or potential miners also have significant operations in Venezuela and their gold in the ground is valued even higher than that of KRY but none of them trade at anything like the discount that GRZ does. So what you and most other analysts are suggesting is that GRZ is singled out as being in "risky" Venezuela, but that risk doesn't extend to any other miners operating in the same country or even in the same district of the same country. If you are aware of any political issue that specifically targets GRZ in Venezuela that is not important to all other companies that operate in Venezuela, please tell me....