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 : Winspear Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Confluence who wrote (17403)	4/2/1999 10:35:00 AM
From: Gord Bolton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

Welcome to the thread Confluence. I hold shares in both SUF and Winspear. I have been buying SUF aggressively under $7 and $6. I agree wholeheartedly that SUF is extremely undervalued and hopefully that will be corrected shortly. In answer to your question, and I think it is simple; Mr. Market is not always rational at all. Average Mr. Market only knows about the M1 pipe and the fact that SUF has a 40% interest in it. SUF soared to $20.00 on the M1 pipe before it was mined. Winspear has a potentially rich cone sheet that may prove up 40 to 80 times as much high grade kimberlite or more as the M1 pipe. Suf in the Margin Account. Winspear in the RRSP. Both will be the top mining stories in 1999. Have a good weekend.

To: Confluence who wrote (17403)	4/2/1999 10:43:00 AM
From: teevee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26850

Confluence, Very good post....I believe the big difference here is: 1. The initial valuations at Snap Lake are 3 times SUF's grades 2. The tonnage potential at Snap Lake is over 100 million tonnes 3. Africa is in the grip of an AIDES epidemic and deepening violent anarchy....Anglo American has restructured and moved out of SA because they believe that soon there will be no healthy workers for heavy industry and mining...it appears that the market has deeply discounted any African "asset", if you have the temerity to call it that. I do believe that SUF has good exploration potential in the NWT, given their land position in the southern pipe field. Given the price differential, I think the leverage is clearly with WSP. Good luck with your SUF holdings.... regards, teevee

To: Confluence who wrote (17403)	4/2/1999 11:51:00 AM
From: average joe	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 26850

Good point, the difference is SUF is a real company that does not need to create smoke screens (lawsuits) to hide bad results. This current fight is a deliberate staged pay for view event at the expense of the shareholders. The rats have already jumped ship and made shore a few weeks ago This is so staged I bet they had their legal costs put into their exploration budget for this season. Enjoy it while it lasts and make many $$$CDN dollars. average joe

To: Confluence who wrote (17403)	4/2/1999 1:26:00 PM
From: ddl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

Confluence, let me kick this can also. Because WSP is still speculation with apparent good probabilities these figures we'll assume are proven. WSP: 1.15 cpt @ $300.00 = $345.00 value per ton - $50.00 cost = $295.00 gross value per ton.@ .66% interest = $196.00 to WSP. SUF: .7 cpt @ $100.00 = $70.00 value per ton - $15.00 cost = $55.00 gross value per ton. @ 40% interest = $22.00 to SUF. Also, mine life for WSP = 25 years @ $196.00 SUF = 8 years @ $22.00 This is quick and dirty and don't know about your figures at all, but assuming WSP turns out it will be close.