SI
SI
discoversearch

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 Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: maxncompany who wrote (3509)12/24/2005 12:27:38 AM
From: hubris33  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78410
 
Max, I agree that Minera is a far better resource play than Magistral: data in hand, feasibility study complete, intial construction well at hand, etc. However, let me play devil's advocate for a bit.

Wasn't the Red Lake property 'dead' when McEwen bought it and the reason it turned into the low cost producer was that he was able to "get" the geos to find high grade ore viens? So how do we know that Magistral doesn't have a Red Lake-like future? I assume costs at Magistral were too high because they were mining low grade ore, using less efficient heap leach technology, therefore had low recovery and low total ounce production which lead to high per ounce costs. Fixes would be - finding high grade ore, using more efficient (tho more capital intensive) extraction technology and taking on cost cutting measures: labor, tires, fuel, etc.

For USGL isn't a merger with NPG more likely than one with MAI? Doesn't the local company that is doing the construction work at Minera have a large stake in the company?

You have a good point about McEwen merging companies into USGL and how that will effect the share price. I agree that revenues and profits will be key. Any chance that this time around McEwen will decide he doesn't want to get his hands dirty exploring, developing and mining and build USGL as a royalty company, like RGLD?

H3