Re: Too many are under water here
in response to
by
posted on
Sep 29, 2012 02:56AM
CUU own 25% Schaft Creek: proven/probable min. reserves/940.8m tonnes = 0.27% copper, 0.19 g/t gold, 0.018% moly and 1.72 g/t silver containing: 5.6b lbs copper, 5.8m ounces gold, 363.5m lbs moly and 51.7m ounces silver; (Recoverable CuEq 0.46%)
FED UP Says:
WEbgogs. You say you are stuck with 800 shares of bgm, in your post o Yournadir. , and sold the rest. Question than, why no message from you on the bgm site saying you did so, just one that you are contacting or sending a message to management. Did you tell your group yo only had 800 shares, or is it not true? Your arrogance with Nadir, and daily Decisions are rather funny, If any on this board asked for investment advice, I missed it.
T2T asks
PEM has a small but fairly marketable resource. They are quite a few years out from where they'd have a marked change in share price. They are under valued in a very big way. Far too much emphasis is being placed on the cost of money. Looking at the track record for raising money, I think they will continue to need patronage. Continued patronage shows support but limits the companies ability to make strides. Will the style of the deposit continue to dictate resource or with they pull a BAR? Without a detailed geological assestment I would say that basing value off current expectations is a wise way to trade this stock. This type of deposit has a small chance of becoming a real mind blower.
Given the properties I would suggest a price of 30 cents in the next couple of NR's indicating more results or positive steps. If I applied the timelines of SPA and costs etc I would say $3.80 6 years from now. That is the cost of money in action.
Punk:
My grandad used to say "It's better to be thought a fool than to opens one's mounth and remove all doubt"