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 : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (7326)	3/23/1998 11:51:00 AM
From: James	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10836

Basically you have a bunch of clowns in a low rent banana republic making fools out of all of you. Supreme courts, magistrates, mining commissions, judicial systems, its all a big joke down there. Only one thing counts and thats MONEY & CORRUPTION. So don't try to apply North American solutions to this problem.

To: E. Charters who wrote (7326)	3/23/1998 11:55:00 AM
From: Gutman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10836

Since you seem to imply that Las Cristinas is a viable property at present gold prices, I invite you to submit a discounted cash flow analysis based on the data that Placer has presented publicly: cash cost of USD$200 per ounce (including copper credits) and a capital investment of USD$600 million, with production to begin in 2 years. Make any assumptions you want about how the capital costs will be financed (debt/equity). Your approach to value is apparently at odds with that of John Kaiser,who has not commented on KRY but did warn his subscribers in another well known situation: Bre-X. Before the fraud was uncovered he said that even if Bre-X had 70 million ounces, only negligible value should be attached to the income from gold mined 30+ years in the future. Las Cristinas has the gold, but does it have the cash flow at current gold prices to justify its market cap? That is the $200 million dollar question.