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 : GMD RESOURCE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rick Seavey who wrote (432)	11/16/1997 5:30:00 AM
From: Richnorth	Respond to of 1030

Excellent post! Eye-opening post! Thank you for putting things in perspective. To be sure, your post is a timely one for a lot of investors in that it reassures them of the great potential of GMD and, at the same time, cautions them about the nitty-gritty that still lies ahead. It strongly appears that if anyone wishes to profit from GMD realistically, s/he must be prepared to hold it for the long term. To be sure, your "look-before-you-leap" type of post will be greatly appreciated by lots of folks. I am concerned that gold may be headed below $300/oz and stay there for as long as bonds and equities remain in favour. But I hope not. On the XAU-GOLD thread, just in case you are not yet aware, there are two posts (#1 & #2) that are at once somewhat ominous and very positive about the prospects of gold in the near-term and long-term, respectively:- exchange2000.com exchange2000.com.

To: Rick Seavey who wrote (432)	11/16/1997 11:14:00 AM
From: Richnorth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1030

You wrote: If gold were at $400 per ounce, I could agree with your $12 share price and even say that that was conservative. Think of what that would mean to GMD. First, it would mean a profit of $150 US per ounce rather than the barely break even amount of 40-50 currently. It should also be mentioned that taxes and interest would have to be deducted from that amount. But a $150 per ounce profit would mean that GMD could speed up their gold and diamond explorations perhaps transferring potential to reality. My C$12/share price was a back-of-an-envelope type of calculation--a very rough guesstimate done when gold was at U.S.$320/oz, or ~C$442/oz. The number of ounces of gold and the shares (fully diluted) considered were 3 million and 20 million, respectively, and I reduced the asset value by 80%. By contrast, you assumed that gold has to be at U.S.$400/oz for GMD to be valued at C$12/ share. If gold were at U.S.$400/oz, then my calculation would give a valuation of C$16.8/sh. Furthermore, GMD plans to extract about 137,000 oz. gold annually, not 50,000 oz. by your estimate. May be you are right but on the other hand GMD might be able to extract more than 137,000 oz. gold annually. That certainly would change the bottom line significantly, wouldn't it? It seems your estimates tend to be rather conservative. I guess at this stage of the game, it is better to be conservative and indulge in sobering thoughts than err on the side of undue optimism. But of course, there is no gainsaying that the bottom line ultimately depends on the price of gold and the perception of investors. I understand that GMD has, to date, explored only about 20% of its properties. Whether the rest of the unexplored properties would eventually yield anything to enhance the potential of GMD remains to be seen. But ah! hope ever springs eternal........! It looks like investing in GMD for the long haul is the way to go, eh? And GMD should strive to reduce costs of operations as much as possible! Just like what so many major players are striving to do!

To: Rick Seavey who wrote (432)	1/24/1998 7:45:00 PM
From: Rick Seavey	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1030

Sorry to say that I made a big mistake in my post #432 on Nov, 15. It now appears that we are dealing with crooks who blatantly violate exchange rules as well as British Columbian and Canadian Law and dare you to do anything about it. Although contrary to what Phineas T. Barnum said, I find it hard to believe that there is sucker out there who would participate in any future GMD financing scheme. This should leave the company with no money for development of their properties no matter how good they may be. Futhermore, a company that would pull what this company has done would have no hesitation in inflating or outright lying about any so-called proven reserve calculations that may or may not be in the offing. In addition, we now have to doubt the validity of what is being claimed for the Royce property. It could very well be a hoax if the current revelation about management is any indication. I predict, like rats leaving the ship, that a few resignations are now in the offing not because of guilt but because those stock options are now worthless. Good Night, Don.