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: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (9276)	3/27/1998 1:39:00 AM
From: Mr.Staya	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14627

Hello Elizabeth, I would hardly call $6 dollars a share for PFG a premium, as there is a strong possibility current reserves will be upped by %30 - %50. Early estimates on this property alone are for .80 - $1 net profit annually, once into production. Given average P/E ratios for producers $6 a share is definitely not a pipe dream. Keep in mind PFG's cash position and their zoning and drilling extensions, on the current property. There is alot more in the works here taking place, it's not just a matter of splitting the pie two thirds to one third, and Barrick saying we'll have this pile here, and there's your (PFG) pile there, have a nice day gentlemen. Debate Welcomed, Ric Staya

To: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (9276)	3/27/1998 5:52:00 AM
From: Phil Jones	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14627

Elizabeth: The point about why Barrick would also want to buy out PFG's 30% if it exercised its option for the 70% was one I raised here three or four months ago. No clear answer emerged, as I remember. Others have raised the differences from Aeroquipa. Barrick's first choice wasn't to take all of Aeroquipa, but Catherine McLeod made it all-or-nothing. You raise a lot of good points. It's hard to stay objective when you're too involved with a stock, so it's good to get fresh views from outside.

To: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (9276)	3/27/1998 7:03:00 AM
From: David R. Schaller	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14627

Elizabeth, In defense of our new management team; they have never raised expectations beyond the excitement generated when they came on board. Every time a new team member was announced... the stock went up some more. I think the assumption (and expectation) was that this group was not assembled to pass the time of day, but rather saw an opportunity to grow a small exploration company into a major player. From the start management actually talked the stock down. I was told by IR that they intended to take the speculation out of the stock. Differences between RC/DD results were minimized. Cerro Blanco "showed us nothing". The resource (at Diablillos) generally thought to be between 3-4mil oz GE evaporated at the Kreiging computer terminal. Zanz...b's 4mil estimate & report disappeared from the PFG web site & he was described as having made a mistake. On & on it goes. Barrick is another issue. Should they decide that they want the other 30% of Diablillos, they needn't take out PFG shareholders as they own 70% of a holding company & we own the other 30%. They only need to buy our 30% of the holding company. Had Barrick been poking holes all over Diablillos we would have guessed that they hadn't yet defined an area capable of carrying this property. But, that hasn't apparently been the case. They have drilled over 100 holes in one particular area. It would seem that step out holes & exploratory holes are in order (into the undrilled 85% of the anomoly) if you were trying to expand the ore body. Again we electronic shareholders rationalized an answer..Barrick had found an ore body that would meet their needs and didn't want to get carried away with further exploratory drilling since it would only raise the cost of a buyout. Therefore the drilling seems to be an exercise in tweaking the numbers. Stepout-infill-stepout-infill. In other words the drilling pattern seems to indicate a property status that doesn't harmonize with the announced resource nor does it conform with expectations of how a drilling program would proceed should a much larger ore body be required. The strike length gets longer the width grows wider & the resource goes down? Sad but true & it lays at the heart of why this stock has been humiliated over the last year. Logic says "STOP THE DRILLS!" while we still have a resource left. And that, thank goodness, is just what Barrick did. They may have saved us another 500,000oz Poorer but wiser, Dave