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

To: jpthoma1 who wrote (16511)	7/18/2006 11:28:08 AM
From: koan	Respond to of 78409

jpthima, thank you so much!

To: jpthoma1 who wrote (16511)	7/18/2006 12:47:21 PM
From: LoneClone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78409

For nickel juniors, there is also DNI.V, CRO.V, JNI.V, CML.V, UMJ.V, even RNG.TO. Sounds like someone should start a nickel thread on SI. LC

To: jpthoma1 who wrote (16511)	8/11/2006 10:52:47 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78409

Did not believe it but found out it is true. They are suing again! Ungava Minerals Corp.'s Subsidiary Files Motion in Quebec to Commence Litigation TORONTO, ONTARIO -- (MARKET WIRE) -- August 11, 2006 -- Ungava Minerals Corp. (the "Company")(Pink Sheets:UGVAF) wishes to announce that its subsidiary, Ungava Minerals Exploration Inc., UMEI, has filed a motion in Quebec Superior Court to commence litigation against six parties. The claims to be made against the parties relate to trespasses onto UMEI's Ungava Property in the years 1998 to 2000, the making and publication of a false Report respecting a discovery of mineralization made as a result of the 1998 trespass, concealment from UMEI of valuable material information regarding the Ungava Property, fraud, perjury and the production of an altered document in the course of the 2002 arbitration to which the Company, UMEI and Canadian Royalties Inc were parties. The text of the Motion, without Exhibits, will be attached to the Company's Material Change Report to be filed in connection with this press release. This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the "safe harbour" provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company's results to differ materially from expectations. These include risks relating to market fluctuations, investee performance and other risks. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date hereof. The Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements. Issued and Outstanding: 25,596,610 Common Shares Contacts: Ungava Minerals Corp. Lorne H. Albaum President (416) 304-1932 SOURCE: Ungava Minerals Corp.

To: jpthoma1 who wrote (16511)	8/14/2006 1:53:00 AM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78409

At what point does a low base case become false and misleading? A company would risk law suits if it used outrageously high base case price data. CZZ uses such low prices that even the +20% case fails to do justice to the actual situation. Base case assumptions: Nickel price: US$5.00; copper price: US$1.25 Using a base case of prices 50% lower than actual would result in a base case for Ni of $6.625 and for Cu of $1.75. True that when the IRR was calculated actual prices may have been lower but my point is, is it normal practice to use base case price that are less than 50% of actual prices? Would it not make more sense to start the base near actual prices and show how price drops of up to 75% would impact a project? A range showing impacts fro 25%, 50% and 75% would be much more informative than using ultra low base case numbers.

To: jpthoma1 who wrote (16511)	8/15/2006 10:37:17 AM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78409

CZZ news today. Canadian Royalties Inc.: Bankable Engineering Feasibility Study and Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Study Awarded Waitng for trading to see if anyone cares. Very interesting article yesterday in WSJ on POSCO's nickel problems and vertical integration comeback, especially in metals sector. BTW I realize that no one can predict the future price of any product but using a downside range to understand the impact of volatility provides more information than phony low base cases. The bank or lenders can always choose to use the 50% or even 75% worst cases as a basis for provision of funds.