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 : WillP Speaks on Winspear -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tomato who wrote (29)	2/21/1999 8:38:00 AM
From: average joe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 177

"It is also important to note that the larger stones of poor quality were broken"??? Why is that important? It is also important to note that the author of that statement is the writer of a news letter that owns shares in that thing and has a very biased view of the matter. That writer is an engineer, not a geologist or a prospector, he will tell you that himself, I think that is important to note. Enjoy it while it lasts and make many $$$$$$CDN Dollars!!!! average joe

To: Tomato who wrote (29)	2/22/1999 2:11:00 PM
From: teevee	Respond to of 177

Author: teevee -- Date:1999-02-22 09:46:57 Subject: Hey buddy, can you spare a dime? With respect to Aber's diamond marketing and financing options, I somehow doubt that any arrangements arrived at will be mutually beneficial or from neccesity as in "enlightened self interest"-DeBeer's grip on the diamond market is still firm. The playing field is hardly level and to cite an old adage: "money talks". A recent example is the takeover of Sutton by ABX.....the bottom line is that Sutton didn't have the money, and couldn't raise the money to develop their deposit...... regards, teevee Top Reply Author: WillP -- Date:1999-02-22 10:13:34 Subject: Have Dime...Will Travel Money is money, diamonds are diamonds...and sure things are sure things. Aber has enough of the first item to see it through the first six months to a year of building costs. Most of those expenses will be procuring and transportation, after all. By that stage...diamonds being diamonds...the financial world will see permits in place, and a UK multinational merrily spending about $750 Canadian on building a mine. (Not counting a sizable hedge to account for cost over-run, and the already funded feasibility studies. Also not counting the recent change to the mine plan that reduces the dykes required initially.) Of that portion...Aber needs about $300 million. Approximately one third of that, they already have. At that stage, item three kicks in. Many banks have many dimes...and a quick resource loan for a sure thing is not easy to find. Cash flows freely to $300 per tonne ore in sufficient quantity. I can see a $200-250 million long term/short term/equity deal here...in any of a gazillion combinations. I don't see it as being a big deal. I wonder who 'needs' who more? Aber needs de Beers, or vice versa. One is eager for cash...one is eager for diamonds. But...as I said before...interesting argument, and one that can't be refuted as nobody knows. That's why speculation is rife. :-) Interesting argument...and I'll turn it back in your face. :-) Where does Winspear get the cash to develop a $300 million (plus?) project that would best take advantage of your cone-sheet (3-5000 tpd)? Your point re Sutton and Barrick is noted. That's a reasonable possibility. The 'rumoured' split of Aber can be seen by you 'rumour monger' types as fuel for the argument. (I don't use that term in a negative connotation, by the way! I always enjoy a good theory or three. Sort of like an Agatha Christie novel.) An alternative view could be...that current Aber management wishes to divest itself of a sure thing, and concentrate on what it does best; diamond exploration. In that case...if the information they are privy to as JV partners is favourable...then look out Winspear. Personally...I've seen just about all. Accordingly, I woudn't even hazard a guess. We certainly live in interesting times...and that's not a curse, either. :-) Regards, WillP Top Reply Author: teevee -- Date:1999-02-22 10:43:52 Subject: Have Dime-Will Mine WillP, << Where does Winspear get the cash to develop a $300 million (plus?) project that would best take advantage of your cone-sheet (3-5000 tpd)?>>>>> A big diference between a deposit like Snap Lake and Diavik, is that if need be, Winspear can start small, even at a few hundred tonnes per day (I'm assuming value per tonne stands up for the sake of discussion). If I shop around, I could probably get you a portable modular diamond plant for about a million bucks...how many would you like? With an open pittable resource to start off with, and with high margins, and given that diamond plants are of a modular design, over time winspear could incrementally increase production and generate the free cash flow to grow.....hey I like that...it rhymes....generate the free cash flow to grow.....on the other hand, if Snap Lake is the cornucopia of large white gems that we all hope for, given that the margins are higher on big white stones and that the price of and market for "high end goods" doesn't vary like the Indian goods that Aber will produce by the bucket full, I would like to speculate/wishful think/dream that a large company may be interested in taking Winspear over, and preferably two large companies, as it takes at least two bidding against each other to get the best possible price (ie. Falconbridge versus Inco for DFR). regards, teevee

To: Tomato who wrote (29)	2/22/1999 6:47:00 PM
From: teevee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 177

Author: teevee -- Date:1999-02-22 13:21:58 Subject: Post Script-don't deal me in- WillP, On a more serious note, the way JV's normally work is that the operator will provide a 30-60 day notice to its partner(s) to put some cash into an operating account AND demonstrate that they have the money to fund their ongoing projected share of costs...or face immediate dilution(asuming the operator is prepared to go it alone or take on a larger interest).......the notion that RTP would procede on the basis that Aber's board of directors would or could spend a 100 million without having the other 250 million bucks lined up is absurd....nobody in the real world of business acts this way or this recklessly......besides, there are feduciary liabilities in additon to duties and responsibilities that directors of Aber are no doubt very aware of........If Diavik is as good as you think it is, RTP will not hesitate or blink when it comes to diluting Aber because they can't ante up at the card table of diamond mine development(and neither will the Nevada's as lenders of last resort for that matter).....I'm afraid a $100 million bucks isn't enough when you are playing an open stakes game with dealers like RTP and DeBeers.....hmmmmm....maybe Winspear is nervous for good reason afterall? Perhaps our foolosophy friends, jspec and RealityCheck could jump in here and make a compelling argument for "enlightened self interest" as the basis for an Aber financing, via debt and or equity, for the balance of the funds required for Aber's share of capital costs for developing diavik? regards, teevee Top Reply Author: WillP -- Date:1999-02-22 14:37:01 Subject: Good Choice, I've Got a Full House Sorry for the poker title...I couldn't resist. Actually...only the current years expenses could be so included. It depends on how the deals are struck, however. I don't pretend to be privy to that. :-) I don't think that DDML or its parent would consider the possibility, however unlikely, of increasing its share of ownership to be 'reckless'. Not at all. :-) The problem with trying to speculate along this line is simple...there is no 'bankable feasibility' study...hence no bank. Nor is there going to be until there is something to 'take to the bank'. There most assuredly have been discussions with lenders, but that isn't going to make it into the public domain any time soon. The final words between them, I'm sure are: "Well, when you're done feasibility...." Or...back to the Winspear example...does Winspear have the expenses for 2000, 2001, 2002....on hand? You're correct about the 'dilution'. Assuredly the operator would be very willing to strike a side deal, or just proceed with an increased pro-rated share of the project. But it's not going to happen. Put another way...in simple terms...if Aber can't find $200-250 million in debt financing from a Canadian or international bank with proven reserves of 20 million tonnes grading just under an ounce of gold equivalent, and a further 10 million at a lower but substantial 'grade'...then woe betide the Canadian resource sector. I'm sure you didn't intend it that way...but it's starting to sound much like the equivalent of a "certain $2000 per tonne minimum ore value" refrain that keeps popping up. :-) A more pertinent question in that case might be...what are the banks going to do with their money for hire? There's actually an easy way to judge the future attitude of financial institutions towards Aber's prospects. Ahhh....speculation. Must be a slow day on the Winspear front. :-) P.S. I see one of my two primary interests had a good day on the market. Maybe someone put out a 'buy' on them. (rotfl) :-) Cheers, WillP