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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Ego Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hubris33 who wrote (3866)	6/2/2009 1:11:42 PM
From: John McCarthy	Respond to of 12175

Hi H3 Lets agree your smarter than me but you asked me. (a) The San Juan charges i.e. $490/oz -- stunned me -- iow - where the $hit did that come from? (1) have they suddenly decided to report "honest" and now I am seeing "honesty" (2) or has something changed in the UG methodology? (your area of expertise) (b) only "I" would be "awestruck" that the blog and web site did not mention this ($490) high cost/oz. In any event I am glad for the difference 908 - 490. realizing that gold prices next minute are anyones guess Cash flow - Sorry - can't bring myself to look in part because the net $60 million (if real) will wash-away all sins for at least - 2 years? (3) If I could look I would want to compare the balance sheet balances for -- end qtr 3 -- end qtr 4 -- end qtr 1 (2009) in the property section because thats where they squirrel away those off the P&L and onto the balance sheet -- what I am going to term CASH EXPENSES. IOW - the growth in the balance changes by line item would capture the quarterly increases (debits) to these items. (I am ignoring the fact that some line items are net line items and there have been both debits / credits to the items) EDIT I am curious how much UG cost is in Peru for a junior regards John