To: marcos who wrote (55268 ) 1/14/2008 1:07:26 PM From: orkrious Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78416 wonder what heinz thinks now someone pointed me to your post and asked me to ask him. I sent him an email. here's his reply:yes, it remains an undervalued stock. note though that i bought a lot of it when it was trading at and below $1. at the time it was under pressure as investors in its private placement shares had been selling for a few months or so. so it's not quite as undervalued as it was when i bought it. i did buy a big chunk at $1.70 before it went down to its bear market low, so i was averaging down, but at an opportune moment as it turned out. my remark re. 'MMG mania breaking out' was made when it had begun to run up quite swiftly, but i really beat the table on it well before that happened. that said, its current price does not reflect the value of its deposit. at some point the correction from the 2006 spike high will be over and the stock will be rediscovered. however, i note that i'm currently more interested in pure play gold producers than base metals stocks. gold is rising sharply vs. commodities, including base metals, with silver tagging along (since silver is a hybrid of precious and base metal). so right now, i would focus on marginal pure play gold producers. all the widely hated stocks, like DROOY, GSS, HMY, and in silver, CDE. imo these are the ones where the biggest profits should be made, as the rising gold price affects their earnings and earnings potential far more than e.g. that of the well-liked heretofore outperformers like GG and AEM (both of which have large base metals by-product revenue). MMG is a stock you can buy and tuck away for the long term - eventually it should be worth far more than now. but near term, i prefer the above mentioned marginal gold producers. also, CGLD should really take off once the flow-through placement sellers are out of the stock. it should earn between 2-3 cents this quarter, which makes it the gold producer with the by far lowest p/e ratio.