Valid points for sure, just not particularly interesting imho because here and now precious metals stocks with a touch of cannabis is where i'm at, and you know what my main point of that post was ... at least you could ridicule one of the perps for his wonderful twelve-cent Barisan bg.v, just for a mild alteration of topic to perk up interest ... but wait, that would be the same participants, hard to break a habit that way ... look, why don't we rip Otto a new one for the following comment, maybe Nevada will check in with some common sense on the matter, he has before -
'"optionality" is just a fancy phrase for the age-old Greater Fool theory isn't it ' -
incakolanews.blogspot.ca
No it is not Otto, geez go back to your Basick MIning Speculation 101 handbook, optionality is not only legitimate but is where your greatest gains and losses come from ... reason - because the prices of the metals you produce are not fixed, your expenses are not fixed, both of these fluctuate wildly
As reasonable projections of metals prices rise, resources that were uneconomic become economic, ceteris paribus, and the reverse is true, when prices fall ore becomes waste, presto chango, been in the ground a million years, never gone anywhere, not gonna go anywhere any time soon, but on your books it went into or out of your reserves, the latter being a class of critter highly regarded in some circles
Same with expenses - fuel goes up/down, or steel, machinery, tyres, govt payoffs, any expense, and the space between income and outgo lines gets wider or narrower, and perhaps crosses the other line, which is a notable event, and this brings your reserves into or out of economic class ... ceteris paribus - which of course is never true, there's always multiple factors moving at once, but you know what i mean
The term 'optionality' refers simply to the power of perceptions those appearing/disappearing resources/reserves have to alter values in markets, there's even little things called greeks to describe various facets of how they go up/down, and no i don't know nothing about no double entrendres in this respect, nuh-uh ... you cannot deny that optionality is real, and there is no point in calling it illegitimate, other than what, i guess stress relief
What you're actually doing Otto, is looking at the particular assets our favourite bouncer RR is about to promote, you don't like them, or some of them anyway, and on that you may be very well right ... but you cannot deny the reality of optionality ... not effectively anyway, geez all my favourites have plenty of that, and it's what i like about them
ktn.v/inm.v - be double optionality there with five-yr wts soon, whoop-de-doo, check it out
svb.to - two-metal optionality, can't have one without the other
dmm.to - optionality on big gold, also on place called Ecuador, you ever heard of it? ... buncha lefties they say ...
gqc.v - optionality on considerable drilled-off metal, on open prospective claims, on history of mgmt, and on the DR
ckg.v - optionality on a whole whack of metal, in an even greater whack of rock comparatively speaking, and on a non-bouncer RR
... there's a saying about throwing the baby out with the bathwater, well in attacking the concept of optionality you're trying to throw away the tub as well ... maybe should just stick to value judgments on specific projects, and the promotion thereof, and leave the Queen's english in peace eh
[edit] - en.wikipedia.org - no wiki page on optionality but it is referred to here
en.wikipedia.org - trouble with actual options is they expire ... often before some flakey junior we consider as an alternative |
