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 : MONETA PORCUPINE ME.t -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: denis J who wrote (342)	12/3/1997 1:01:00 PM
From: D LEE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 440

"With michaud it is 60-40 (barrick-moneta) Barrick had wanted 70-30 on these claims also but did not get it. as I said earlier there are plans to do some work on the property this drilling season what and how much has not yet been released by barrick there is no question in my mind that if the price of gold could only rebound this property would be developed for sure." Hence the reemergence of the question. and an ideal environment for the accumulators. I see no reference to the price of gold going down on Barrick's web page thus no indication of their behavior responce should it do so. I know they know the price of gold will be different by the time such a newly planned mine can be put into operation, making this part of their formula equation a non event. As well, they can continue for some years selling their gold produce at $400.00 per oz. simply ignoring the spot due to their well planed hedging. "A worm may turn" as newly emerging rhelm of expansion opportunities become available for Barrick when less prepaired mining companies suffer the price decline seeking to sell-off/simplify and consolidate for survival. An interresting home town example can be seen at: timminspress.com where a Royal Oak Mines Inc. is feeling the pain and a net loss of $62.5 million for the first nine months of 1997 simply due to slumping gold prices. Wouldn't they enjoy the $400/oz Barrick has insured themselves! Perhaps a poor example of legitimate distraction that may come to Barrick's table to be ballanced with the prospects of opening a new mine. However, I beleive the bankers know gold prices will be up when their selling commences which works onto the time frame for opening the new mine entrance even today. I also beleive, Barrick knows that better than I do. They won't afford to be taken in by "blips", rather, will seek to take advantage of them.

To: denis J who wrote (342)	12/12/1997 3:38:00 AM
From: D LEE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 440

please read the following entry in techstocks.com Message 2945371 In making this entry, I am not suggesting that Moneta fits into the category as one of the mining companies swimming in deep water. On the contrary, I believe the price of gold today will have no adverse effect on Barrick's continued involvement with the Michauld development (save perhaps a re-negotiation for more than 60%.) Barrick is a more valuable partner now, due to the gold situation. The leverage offered by investing in Moneta will be enhanced more than proportionately should it be known she is going to become a gold producer. This would largly be due to Barrick's continued strength in the present market as opposed to weakness that has developed for most other gold producers. Moneta has done well in keeping cost down and finding the best possible partner, but I expect no real news for a good month or two on the truer status of the partnership. Money into Barrick at this time would be conservative, but into Moneta, possibly quite exciting, not so much a contrarian as a more speculative move, one that might benefit greatly from the squeeze being put on any die hard, stock searching contrarians who find Barrick remains serious about this. Dave