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: Chuckles_Bee who wrote (31600)	2/1/2007 9:15:40 PM
From: tyc:>	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78426

I don't think there is any disagreement between us. I guess I didn't make myself clear. I agree that the stock doesn't need to double. I was just providing a simplistic and arbitrary measure of how the warrant would react to a movement of the stock. No-one knows what the stock price will be when the warrant expires, and therefore one cannot judge what the warrant price will be then. The moot point is how to judge the relative movement even in the short term, and whether that relative movement is sufficiently attractive. I look forward to hearing your ideas; volatility is relevant, but volatility of the stock doesn't necessarily imply similar volatility of the warrant. Moreover, without leverage you might as well just trade the stock. I haven't done the arithmetic but I'll bet leverage is not attractive for AEMLW nowadays (per my definition). The time to play the warrants was a year ago when the warrant was way out-of-the money. (I bought aemlw @ 1.35 )