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: E. Charters who wrote (59674)	5/25/2008 8:24:22 PM
From: ogi	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 78424

Agree I don't like the back in rights either, but VIt is on to what is beginning to look like a substantive deposit so there is value in the stock IMO. Now I wish they would get after the Summit property which had very impressive historic numbers near surface. Can't find the original news from Feb. 09 2007. Never have I seen such a lousy website either!!!!!!! The headline is there but not thews release. Oh Well, VIT. V still about geology and geologist workouts not investors :):) Cheers, Ogi

To: E. Charters who wrote (59674)	5/25/2008 10:01:25 PM
From: philv	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78424

There has to be some incentive for these Juniors to expand the resource. A disincentive just doesn't make any sense. Why would they sign these back in agreements if they can't get a substantial reward for the risk and work done? I must be missing something.

To: E. Charters who wrote (59674)	5/25/2008 10:12:27 PM
From: TheSlowLane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78424

Eric - I am not a big fan of back-in's either, but I imagine that the properties are offered with those strings firmly attached and it's take it or leave it. In AGC's case, it's only a 'problem' if they prove up over 7.5MM ounces, I believe. Then they get 3X whatever they spent on development and 30% of the property. Not nearly as good as having 100%, but I would submit that the stock will respond if it looks like they have a multi-million ounce project there, regardless of the back-in situation. It's already generated a good return for anyone that bought it two weeks ago. I've owned it slightly longer than that.