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 : Royal Oak-RYO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Al Cern who wrote (1196)	8/16/1998 9:43:00 PM
From: Vieserre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1706

I have observed off and on the seemingly constant negative posts on this thread, and it has always been good for a chuckle. First, it was contended that RYO by now would be in bankruptcy, well it is not - then it was contended RYO would never get a loan to complete Kemess, and it did - then it was contended that Kemess would never be a viable producer because of hard ore, used equipment, adverse claims etc., well it appears it is, - its stock would collapse relative to its peers, and it has not - and now it will never be able to pay its debts to a sophisticated financier who lent RYO money notwithstanding unfavorable market conditions and being well aware of the risks because of an unstated desire to claim the lousy producing mine for itself. It does not take an expert to figure RYO is a call on gold. If gold rises nicely the stock being deeply leveraged should do very well - but if gold and copper stay at these levels or go lower for an extended time, RYO will most likely not make it, which it itself impliedly admits. The well-publicized negatives should already be discounted by the market and are included in the price. Thus all of this continued heehawing is much ado about nothing. It is not my intent to be rude but merely give some balance to the thread. Vieserre

To: Al Cern who wrote (1196)	8/17/1998 2:50:00 AM
From: Michael Bidder	Respond to of 1706

I couldn't agree with you more. Anyone who thinks you are a professional needs more help than you do.>>> Thank you Al. Some people will use professionalism to mislead. I don't have that worry. As per RYO .22%CUx82%recovery=3.96lbs./ton .016oz./ton aux78%recovery=.0125oz./ton Copper: 3.96lbs/ton x 0.80$/lb = 3.168$/ton Gold: .0125oz/ton x 285$/oz = 3.562$/ton Total Rev/ton = Gold + Copper = $6.73/ton ============================================= Debt Cost/ton = $3,000,000 month/1,500,000tons/month = $2.0 ton ================================================================ I can't find Royal's figure for cash cost/ton. I think it was aproxamatly $7.00 /ton. Assuming $7.00 cc/ton + $2.00 debt cost/ton = $9.0 total cost/ton. $7.0 Rev/ton - $9.0 total cost/ton = -$2.00 ton. ================================================ This implies that the Kemess operation is losing $100,000/day or $3 Million/month. If this is true then my original speculations about the Kemess project were correct. Note: I have little confidence in the $7.00 Cash Cost/ton number. It is an estimate. MB