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 : Pacific Rim Mining V.PFG -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David R. Schaller who wrote (8794)	2/24/1998 10:25:00 PM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14627

David - thank you for clearing up the financing arrangements - the reason I thought (wrongly as it turns out) that PFG was paying part of the costs was that each successive report on their cash position shows a smaller figure. I don't think overheads are particularly high, possibly some money has gone in payments on other plays. The exercise of the warrants and next lot of same will add to the coffers, so my hunch is that they will be running with about $10 - $12million cash. I may be wrong, and possibly naive, but I don't see Barrick playing games. In the past they have had some pretty good hunches on geology, and some luck too. I never followed the Ariaquipa situation, and don't know how mature the project was when they made their bid - but I'm thinking more of Goldstrike which turned them into a major player. Let's say they have a pretty good feel for the geology in the parts you mention which have not been drilled. Maybe the infill drilling is to give them confidence on the general situation - because they feel that the rest will be more of the same? I'm not a geologist, nor am I familiar with the property as a whole Is it not most likely that if they make a bid for PFG it will be for the 30% interest in the private company? It may revolve on the tax situation, however - if this scenario meant a tax burden for PGF - they may want a bid for PFG shares with Barrick stock which would mean a tax free rollover for the shareholders. All hypothetical just now.

To: David R. Schaller who wrote (8794)	2/25/1998 2:48:00 AM
From: Don craig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14627

David: That was an excellent post you just made. The questions you ask regarding the possibilities of Barrick leaving make perfect sense. If anyone is having fears of that possibility happening, then they need to read your post. Having said that, I think that a lot of people on the PFG thread here at Si, are possibly gearing up for a potential buyout offer to come within the next few weeks. Someone please correct me if I am wrong and have misinterprated what has been discussed recently. If I am correct in assuming most are anticipating a potential buyout offer upcoming, then it would be nice to hear what some of you think that offer might be. Hows about all of us taking a stab at what a potential buyout offer could be made at. This would take into consideration everything that we know today, but nothing more. I am saying $7.00 dollars, and it will come in the next 2 months. Anyone else care to take a stab at it? Come on, lets have some fun if nothing else. What else are going to do, we just have to watch and wait. Good Luck Don

To: David R. Schaller who wrote (8794)	2/25/1998 5:50:00 PM
From: Quickdraw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14627

Hi Dave: You said "(Of course with the scarcity of information it has to be admitted that Barrick may have already drilled other zones & hasn't found it necessary to report the results yet.)" I believe this is absolutely true! When I look at the July 97 prospectus and read paragraphs like the one below, it becomes crystal clear that if any information related to the property is provided on a confidential basis, or not provided at all then PFG cannot diseminate it ... lord knows they could be half way thru to China right now and we wouldn't know it. That said, once a decision is made as to which way they will go, they must provide ALL data to PFG as Tom Shrake has stated in a previous post. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As the indirect owner of 70% of Pacific S.A., Barrick is the operator and controls all decision-making relating to the Diablillos Property. The Issuer has limited rights only to information relating to the Diablillos Property. The Issuer's retainer of Peter Ronning, P.Eng and Mine Development Associates to prepare the reports relating to the Diablillos Property referred to below to provide an assessment of the Diablillos Property was not done in conjunction with Barrick. Barrick has prepared a pre-feasibility report for the purposes of satisfying the terms of the Abra de Mina Agreement, a copy of which has been provided to the Issuer on a confidential basis. The conclusions contained in the pre-feasibility report are indicative of the fact that it is premature at this stage of exploration of the Diablillos Property ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~