Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I don't know for a fact exactly what it is they're going to be doing with the rocks in China... so, I can't say for certain that the work that is being done there now... could be done in Canada at all ?
The work being done... might not be possible to do elsewhere ?
Separations processes are often "proprietary"...
Unique rocks... often require unique efforts in addressing them.
So, every study of this sort is something of a "custom job"...
But, not all custom made products are equal in value ?
China has been the market leader in separations for a while, but, the "state of the art" in separations is hotly competitive, currently, and it is no longer as clear as it seemed even a year ago, that they're going to remain the market leader. It's still not at all a bad thing to have China helping you out by doing the work on metallurgy studies...
It's a HUGE value to have that happening now... for SRSR...
The number of companies outside China that have succeeded in establishing relationships that enable winning access to that value China controls... you can count on one hand.
It's a HUGE deal...
The market reaction to it... proves the market is ignorant.
People who know the market reality... if they're being honest... would not be posturing the garbage I've seen posted addressing that here in regard to SRSR. No doubt, that's exactly why some are trying to dismiss that bit of progress occurring as "only" addressing those concerns in metallurgy... right after having failed in pitching it as China "re-accomplishing the assays" to check to see "if" there is any value in SRSR's rocks ? LOL!!!
Yeah, those are the opinions of "SRSR's supporters" /:O
It's also pretty clear that SRSR isn't the only company out there that is looking for ways to address many of these same issues, just now.
SRSR isn't close to being unique in being a defacto market leader in their specific niche, by a very wide margin, while being roundly ignored by the markets. SRSR is clearly "it" in primary niobium producers... with Globe and Wildcat as much smaller also rans... while IAMGOLD and the Nebraska outfit, and a couple others, bring up the rear with efforts to "promote" their potentials after proving they don't measure up. There are a couple others focused more on REE values that occupy a similar space in the market... with "rocks" and "relationships" that are vastly better than much better known competitors, by a wide margin.
Noting that there ARE a couple of very similar situations that exist in REE's, with a couple of vastly better potentials that are VERY obviously better positioned than most others... based on the facts in "the rocks" and in their relationships ? The pattern is worth noting... because there are reasons for it... and its meaningful... and revealing to consider... what the choices are.
The "rocks" define the fact of value that exists...
The "relationships" with those that have proven ability in separations defines ability to realize the value...
"Price" is not "value"... "rocks" and "relationships" are.
And, in this business, having access to large quantities of money is still no guarantee that value can be realized...
Most of that value in the "relationships" is about having functional access to the proven ability to enable extraction of the "better" values from the rocks that have them. That's why you see those with the proven ability in separations, pairing up with those that have proven to have better rocks ?
Ignorance of the facts in what the drivers of value in the business ARE... what the requirements for success are... is pretty clearly responsible for the obvious error you see postured in the flagrant bogosity addressing SRSR... but not just SRSR...
You see the same errors in analysis being repeated and having obvious impact in other corners of the market... including at Molycorp, where those same "issues" resulted in the need for a mid-course change of plan including spending a whole lot of additional $ in an acquisition spree... conducted by a company that had not yet even begun meeting their planned "start-up" production targets ? Molycorp's mis-steps have cost hundreds of millions to correct... thus far... vastly diluting holders while loading the company up with debt... and its still not clear the "fix" is going to work...
It may prove, as it often does, that the "first mover advantage" isn't much of an advantage.
Others in REE are similarly are depending on IPO's enabling them in spending truly massive amounts of investors money... in efforts to solve those same sorts of problems... while assuming that having the financiers enabling them in spending lots of money will mean solving the problems. But, there isn't any assurance that getting and spending the money will actually result in a meaningful success. The REE market myopia being developed, could easily generate a billion dollar white elephant or two, soon... in a couple of very high profile failures... while smarter actors (with better rocks and better relationships) work quietly and patiently to resolve those issues first, early on, before creating a need for spending additional billions of their investors capital trying to solve problems... that should have been solved long before they started ?
The guy making the most noise and bragging loudest... before the race starts... isn't always the best bet to win ?
In the race to be the next niobium producer... SRSR appears to be the only one that is making it to the starting line...
Where the proven capability in separations already exists... starting out on the right side of that "barrier" separations issues impose means the effort is not as overly fraught with risk. Lowered barriers in this business... is an issue of "billions"... hundreds of millions, at least...
The market reality is that there are a couple of issues that are being "promoted" as "the next major producer of REEs"... which have won a disproportionate share of attention from the market. Those that are far more likely to actually BECOME the next major producer (because of rocks and relationships) are proceeding toward doing so with vastly less risk and much less fanfare... and they are roundly ignored by the market.
Having the "the rocks" and "the relationships" is what will enable success... with the least risk... at the lowest cost.
Less real confidence in what you have... or knowing you don't have "it" and need to buy "it"... is what drives the requirement for promotion... to enable selling shares in the risk you don't want... to others ?
Price... will follow market recognition.
Market recognition... will follow from success... or promotion.
I prefer finding those companies that are working to enable success... expecting success will enable market recognition... to those working efforts promoting buying the risks those running those companies don't want...
I'm not paying attention ?
LOL!!!
That's too rich.
I've been telling you for a couple YEARS now, in spite of your objection to my opinion, that the CEO DOES NOT EVER MAKE OTHERS INVESTMENT DECISIONS FOR THEM... while you've been busy claiming it's the CEO's "problem" that things HAVE taken the amount of time they have, and WILL take the time that they do ?
Of course, its true that someone else could easily have made a bad decision that would have enabled a crappy deal to happen for SRSR, sooner (as the guys at Globe perhaps did... or perhaps their willingness reflects "the relative value" there ?) A deal could have happened sooner... by giving away more value than should be surrendered. Encouraging that was obvious error, either in failing to recognize the fact in the nature and extent of the advantages that SRSR's rocks DO provide... or simply because of a lack of patience... driven by a failure to recognize the facts that WILL determine the timing of events in development... are what they are.
"your making it out that we are moving slowly out of choice"
Yes. In exactly that sense that patience in seeking the right deal is EXACTLY what I've advocated over the last few years. I note, again, that the terms being discussed now... VASTLY exceed what you'd suggested was possible, years back ? "Less" could easily have happened sooner ? I'll still support the effort in doing it right, while holding out for the deal that is better than the deal you wanted... which is clearly a better deal... for me ?
I've noted carefully the effort by noisemakers lobbying to "replace the CEO"... because of the claim that "he's the problem" creating obstacles to SRSR's future success ? Because others would "make it happen faster" ? LOL!!! You did not see me posting that blather... which I've identified here as delusional. I'll still prefer the right deal done right, at the right time, to the promise of "faster" by those who've proven not to have much useful understanding of the situation.
So, instead of "faster", I've consistently advocated patience... including advocating that the CEO should continue being as patient as is required... while seeking the "right" deal, with the "right" partner, that is the deal he thinks he should get.
I STILL want to see the effort remain focused on "maximizing the value" and not on "making it happen as fast as possible". And, what I see occurring in the metallurgical work being done now... appears to me it does sustain EXACTLY that focus ?
So, I think I'll continue to ignore the opinions of those who don't know what a metallurgical study is... and what its for ?
I'll continue to hold, and acquire more, while thinking anyone selling a single share for $0.02 now... is a flaming idiot ?
SRSR is now optimally positioned to enable SRSR's boat to be floated by the rising tide of niobium demand. Yelling about it... isn't going to make the tide come in any faster... and lying about the facts... isn't going to prevent the tide from coming in.
I've not EVER been lined up behind the serial effort focused on fictionalizing the calendar, and posturing artificial "deadlines"
like those others make up... rather than focusing on addressing THE FACTS in the markets and the reality in the markets AS THE DRIVERS.
That focus enables the sort of steady, patient, confidence that is easy to sustain... when you DO UNDERSTAND the nature of the market situation, and the value that is in play... and how much of that value depends on being patient, doing the right deal, the right way, at the right time... with the right partners.
Scott Keevil controls SRSR, and he makes the decisions that determine how SRSR will proceed in doing what SRSR will, as SRSR addresses SRSR's opportunities. Scott does not determine the pace at which China determines it will build steel mills, or the extent and pace of the investments driving global demand growth in niobium. A single steel mill... costs more to build than does building a new niobium mine which will supply hundreds of steel mills. So, the niobium mine itself is not ever going to be what determines the pace at which investment in development of niobium mines HAS to occur... to enable meeting the niobium demand new investment in steel production generates. The customer creates the requirement for the niobium. The customer will determine the requirement in timing the delivery of the product. Scott does not control the timing issues in global markets, that will determine others willingness to make their decisions. Scott doesn't determine whether the IPO market in Hong Kong will be frothy, and support HKHE's plans this year, or next... or not. And, he doesn't control the choices of competitors, or those who oppose SRSR's efforts in the markets. That's all just reality.
But, Scott has exercised proper control over the things he does control, in EXACTLY the right way. That steady leadership has sustained SRSR and improved SRSR's position in the market... at very little cost... while SRSR's competitors have spent vastly more in ways that only help improve SRSR's position in the market... while SRSR's boat is being kept ready to float.
It wasn't at all clear we'd have the advantage of being in this position now, five years ago... before SRSR's competitors did us the favor of proving themselves much less competitive. Proper management focus, and "the rocks"... are the reasons that we are here now.
Reality is... SRSR's never been in a better position than SRSR is in right now. The only reason SRSR isn't trading higher than it is now... is that markets are inefficient... because people are stupid. So, if some idiot wants to sell you a few more shares for $0.02 now ? LOL!!! Thank them.
The management focus is a function of Scott being confident enough in what he knows to be fact, that he is persistently and appropriately optimistic about SRSR's opportunities. He doesn't allow others "moods" to influence his decisions... while instead persisting in addressing the market reality... appropriately. The value is there. SRSR owns the value. And it is the value that is what matters.
Patience in addressing the reality appropriately doesn't mean he'd not prefer to have seen the markets behave differently than they have, or prefer others decisions were made earlier, or differently? But, patience has enabled improving SRSR's position with each new step. Having reasonable patience in the quiet confidence that "inevitability" will happen... in the time it does... works better than effort forcing square pegs in round holes... while burning through cash at an accelerated pace in ways that dilute the value, but do absolutely nothing to improve the value or ones relative position in the market.
The changes occurring in the markets still aren't going to pay attention to Scott's preferences, or mine, yours, or anyone else's. Things will still happen as they do in the time they do.
Investors will still make their decisions to invest, or not, when they do, and those decisions will still be influenced by other things they respond to... more than they will be influenced by your own interest in having them happen faster... or your "insistence" that they must.
The reality SRSR addresses is still pretty obvious...
The pace of growth in demand for niobium is inexorable... as economic reality determines it must be... given niobium makes better steel for less $$$ than steel made without it. Niobium makes better steel... and competitive advantages for those who use more of it. There are plenty of reasons to believe that the pace of growth in niobium demand will accelerate. It is a fact that the number of known viable development potentials... are in the aggregate not CLOSE to being enough to meet expected future demand. CBMM is 85% of the market ? And, we need a new CBMM equivalent added to supply... every couple of years ... just to sustain the EXISTING pace in growth ? The reality in the market, and the reality in "the rocks" creates a number of "inevitability" factors... which I've addressed as "it makes WAY more sense to develop Nemegosenda than not to." Niobium is still a tiny drop in the bucket relative to the steel market whose participants are the primary customers. Niobium is used now in only "a portion" of steel that is made... and in that portion it is still only 0.06% to 0.12 % of the product.
That tiny fraction... shifts the value equation in the entire market... in a HUGELY disproportionate fashion. It still won't make that much difference to steel producers if niobium makes up 0.18% or 0.36% of the product, or 2% or more, instead of 0.06%.
It will make a HUGE difference to niobium producers... to have the need to double current output every couple of years... which the benefit of niobium usage in steel appears it enables and requires.
What will Nemegosenda's probable mine life be, anyway ?
"the "market" doesn't perceive it that way. "
Maybe that has something to do with "the market" telling lies about the facts ?
What the rocks have in them is proven: its long since been reduced to a matter of fact, and is not an issue generating uncertainty.
The fact of what the rocks have in them has ALREADY been proven sufficient, even using outdated 1950's technology for extraction, that SRSR's rocks are KNOWN to be "better" than potential competitors...
Part of that is true because SRSR has already done the work to duplicate and validate (and expand upon) the work done in the 1950's... and part of that is true because others have also recently tested their potentially competitive alternatives, enabling us in making comparisons that weren't possible before that work was done.
SRSR's work has identified "no barriers to extraction"... which is not true of some of the others... ?
So, that's not a bad starting position to be in, when demand for your commodity is growing rapidly, and you have a 100% ownership stake in what is already known to be both the "best" and the "largest" known resource that is able to be developed to meet future demand.
I think the knowns in hand already require that Nemegosenda makes WAY more sense to develop than not... The market needs it, and SRSR has the rocks.
However, that leaves two other elements in uncertainty that have yet to be resolved...
First: It's one thing to know the fact in the bottom line value using 1950s technology for extraction. It's quite another thing to know for a fact what the OPTIMAL VALUE might be, when using some one of many potential variants of more modern technology in performing various separations and post separation processing steps. And, there, things instantly become more complex... because there isn't a simple linear choice to be made. Each deposit is unique, and thus presents unique challenges and opportunities. Innovation is often necessary to optimally address both the challenges and the opportunities, particularly when they have the same source ?
Additional work in metallurgy being done now isn't about effort "validating the known value" as that has been described in relation to the proven use of 1950's extraction technology...
It is instead work focused on OPTIMIZING THE POTENTIAL... maximizing the value... given a wide range of possibilities in alternative approaches.
The difference in value is potentially huge. There is a very big difference between establishing 'another producer of a generic commodity product' and establishing 'a market leader in quality that sustains lower cost production than competitors'.
So, the metallurgy work is important... in addressing the value the rocks do contain.
SRSR would be being pound foolish to rush into concluding any deal, because one is shoved in front of them, if it is based on some lowest common denominator... in their partners "presumed" ability to maximize current and future value ?
What's in the rocks is known. Proven ability in extracting that value optimally is still both an uncertainty, and a variable...
It is nowhere near a certainty that all of SRSR's potential future partners are (or will remain) equally as capable as others in maximizing the current (or future) value the rocks contain, that, because of features in the rocks, "should" have them prove to be a source of a remarkable set of competitive advantages.
The rocks contain potential sources of advantage... but, you still have to prove an ability to realize that potential ?
I don't have any issues with SRSR being patient while enabling the Chinese in proving they're the right partners to work with. It appears they are a good match based on the congruity in market interests, as the Chinese are a primary source of growing demand. I'd still want to see proof of physical capability that matches the market interest, including proofs that they're able to do what needs doing to optimize project and product values in the long term, before agreeing to enable them in addressing the near term opportunity in ways that will close off other options.
I don't see anything in SRSR's behavior, thus far, that suggests to me that SRSR is in any way desperate to conclude a deal. Scott has been patient, thus far. I've advocated that patient approach, and applaud it. It appears Scott understands the value and potential of what SRSR owns far better than some in the market.
Of course, you should expect that would be true. I see plenty enough evidence that there is not a shortage of clueless idiots and overly impatient shareholders... including many who don't begin to understand the issues, or how the issues there are in the market... will tend to dictate requirements... in many things ?
I've noted that before in addressing timing issues... noting that timing will not be determined by shareholders impatience... or by efforts in fictionalizing deadlines... but by other factors.
The market has a growing set of needs... and there are clocks ticking, and timelines that need to be met... that address timing in investment on a scale vastly larger than that required to build one new mine. A single customers steel plant... will cost more than building a mine that serves a hundred plants ? So I expect Nemegosenda will be developed (because that makes way more sense than not) in time to enable production that will meet future demand growth.
The right partner for SRSR still will not be "one who can make it happen in time" but "one who can best optimize the value"... ?
SRSR isn't the one with primary timing issues and concerns...
Perhaps Scott is from Missouri.
So, "proofs" re partners ability in optimizing the value the rocks do contain and enable as potential is clearly the first issue...
Whether you choose to see that as a "glass half empty" issue instead of an issue of a "glass only half full, that is still in the process of being filled"... ? I don't think that is an issue of "fact" rather than a choice one makes in adopting a particular perspective. I still don't see anything in there that suggests I should care a whit about the opinions of silly people who posture that explorers should produce revenue, or those who don't know the difference between a mineral assay and a metallurgical study, or those who fictionalize timing issues.
The second issue... is optimizing the deal.
I don't see how you can get too far in addressing the second issue, without having already addressed the first well enough ?
It appears they've addressed a bit of that... already ?
I think it MORE telling that they've begun talking about "the deal" that is on the table... than that they've proceeded in doing the next round of work without yet having signed it. Both suggest nothing other than that things are moving the right way...
Its still true, always, that no deal is a deal until it is done. It's possible the metallurgy study work will be completed, without a deal following in its wake. It's also possible there isn't any real linkage between the partners effort in proceeding to do the metallurgy work, and the time lines on which they'll address completing the deal... other than the demonstration of continued cooperation revealed both in the agreement to proceed, and in the agreement to extend the exclusive period.
If China proves wholly incapable of optimizing the values that the content of the rocks clearly should enable realizing ? Then, it will be better for us to find a more capable partner. I still think it is pretty unlikely that will prove necessary, at this point. Technology now is a LOT better than it was in 1952.
Hmmm. It's stuck in my head it was SDSMT that did the work back in the 1950's... for some reason. But, I've not gone back to the source in the NI reports to check that bit of history. If you've already done that... I'll accept it...
It is not the CEO's job to somehow make anyone understand the last PR... when they chose not to understand it... or pretend not to... and address it in error.
The CEO doesn't and shouldn't try to control what other people may choose to post on the internet... whether that effort is sincere, and addresses the truth, or represents the opposite in sincerity and truth.
What people do say... is their own responsibility...
No CEO controls what people choose to do in buying, selling, or day trading shares... as they respond to what others post on the internet.
No CEO controls others choices... whether your own choice in timing buys and sells, or the choices that are made by partners that result in determining their level of participation or the timing of their investments....
The CEO's job is to manage the company... and the company's message... not to micro-manage things the company does not control... like others trading choices, and the choice to be honest or not in what they post, their "interpretations" of plain text, or the content of messages they may find it is useful to attach their name to.
"In order to advance the project during this exclusive period, Nio-Star and the SOE" are working together... doing metallurgical and process testing ?
Yes. I read the PR saying that.
It obviously doesn't appear to be an "extension of the JV"... as you put it. It appears instead to be an announcement of a wholly cooperative effort that "advances the project" while extending the exclusive period.
The PR is a proof of exactly what I said... "The Chinese are not focused on "re-testing what's in the ground" at this late date. There is not a question about IF the SRSR rocks have value... or if they have the values that have been reported."
Metallurgical studies... are not about "re-accomplishing assays"...
China accepts, already, that "SRSR has the rocks"... or they'd not be engaged, still, and would certainly not be funding the next round of effort, advancing the project with work that required to support the feasibility study... particularly without China having signed the papers that create a JV... ?
That they're proceeding cooperatively to do the work the proposed JV would require... without having formed the JV... says China has a lot of faith in the company and the project... not the opposite.
My post is not an "attack" as you have mis-characterized it... I've simply pointed out obvious factual errors in your posts, which errors you acknowledge as "fact I was not aware".
In addressing the error in an instance, I provided the exact context, the direct quote, and a link to the direct quote.
Of course, in my post, I also provided you with an obvious opportunity for you to make an effort in correcting that error in fact... while pointing out what making the error meant in its implication ?
I mean, it's a pretty big error to suggest "China doesn't trust SRSR and are checking up on their claims about the rocks" instead of suggesting "China trusts SRSR, knows what's in the rocks, and are cooperating in advancing the project to the next stage" ?
So, it is not true, as you had suggested, that China has any questions about "what's in the rocks"... but they have instead demonstrated solid confidence in SRSR management and in the fact of "what's in the rocks"... by opting to proceed BOTH in continuing negotiations, and in helping to advance the project.
And, it is exactly true that SRSR's cooperation with China has now progressed to working on additional metallurgical analysis... which is not work done "verifying the samples"...
I note you did not choose to consider at all or discuss what it does mean that China is (not checking samples but are) proceeding... and doing work in metallurgical analysis...
"You misunderstand my posts."
I don't misunderstand them... but I think you may misunderstand some of what you have been posting, or else you are grossly misinformed about a couple of things re the facts in the business and in "where things stand now"...
I've noted it a couple of times recently that you've been posting stuff about the Chinese partners still being uncertain "if there's value" ??
That's total BS, of course...
You'e not alone in posturing that the last PR (announcing that SRSR and China had agreed to ADVANCE the project to the next step, with China performing the work in metallurgy necessary for supporting the Canadian feasibility studies) is about China second guessing "if there is value" ?
"If the Chinese were to not feel secure with what is in the ground through their testing"...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=81531225
Those posts are a gross misrepresentation of the fact...
The Chinese are not focused on "re-testing what's in the ground" at this late date...
There is not a question about IF the SRSR rocks have value... or if they have the values that have been reported.
The fact that the Chinese are still involved and are moving forward in performance of their agreed tasks... is itself a proof the values are there. They'd not be involved and negotiating a deal if SRSR didn't have the rocks, or if the rocks didn't have in them what SRSR (and independent third parties) have said they do.
We know the fact in what the values in SRSR's rocks are...
We know the fact in how those values compare to others rocks...
We also know the fact in how those values in the rocks translated into values in end products... using only the 1950's era technology that was applied in the original metallurgical studies funded by Gulf Dominion...
China is doing additional metallurgical studies...
That's because technology has advanced, and we now have different extraction technologies than were tested in the 1950's... ?
That work they are doing is not about "checking SRSR's values"... and that work is not going to invalidate the work done by the South Dakota School of Mines and Technologies (probably STILL the best mining engineering school in the U.S.) back in the 50's.
So, it would be useful to see you address a correction that properly considers all of that, along with addressing the actual purpose that exist in doing the sort of work that is being done now by the Chinese... that is NOT what you've said it is.
You might also address what completing that work will do... in terms of what it might mean in relation to the "values"... that isn't about "confirming" them...
Or, here's your post claiming the right number FOR BACK IN AUGUST... was a bit over $3.5 million to a bit over $4 million produced:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=78361506
I got the DD and the math exactly right...
You got the DD and the math horrendously wrong...
And, we'll see the proof of that soon enough...
Assuming they do file...
That's why I addressed that as I did then:
Claiming they are "in production"... when they are not ?
Claiming they are making millions of dollars from production... when they clearly are not remotely close... and the claims made are a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY ?
Claiming they ARE doing things that have LARGE fixed costs... which means their filings PROVE they are not doing those things ?
Total FRAUD.
I agree it is likely people are tired of the FRAUDULENT math being applied in propagating lies about this company...
I know I am tired of it...
That's why I found it useful to take the time to expose the fraud.
"I wouldn't mind seeing a post of mine saying they would be "making big money" by Nov 18 2012."
Here's yours claiming they'd already produced $2 million worth of silk back in August... while also claiming you were off on the low side:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=78342751
And here's my response to that... also claiming it was way off.
So, I guess we'll soon see IF they've produced $2 million worth of silk as you'd claimed already back in August ?
I'm betting... no $2 million plus windfall in silk production...
Why don't you update us, though, on how much MORE they should have produced by now, given another three months on the ramp up to commercial production ?
I wonder where they're storing that "more than" 30 tons of silk you thought they'd already have produced in August... given you thought that was on the low side ?
Dude, that doesn't even make sense...
It has you arguing both sides... claiming they're wrong...
I agree something is about ready to explode...
But, I think it's not news, now, that it is the failure of "the story" KBLB has flogged that has the wheels coming off at KBLB...
The shameless flogging of fiction as fact in addressing every facet of this "story"... has impact... and the impact will tend to aggregate, over time, as those being fooled by the effort in scamming begin to recognize the reality, and they won't support the continuation of the effort.
KBLB... is a slow moving train wreck...
It's been grossly mismanaged... as well as over-promoted...
There is no possible way to justify the "ramping up to commercial production" claims...
They appear to not even have a plan to make a business happen, much less a viable commercialization plan...
But, the stock has been touted as "almost there"... ?
We were told we could expect PROFITS this quarter ?
LOL!!!
Total misrepresentation of the fact.
SRSR has advanced their projects significantly, if not dramatically, in the last five years...
The market behavior... appears to have ZERO connection to any of the facts apparent in the company's effort, or in the steady string of proofs that they're making progress... save perhaps in the level of desperation apparent in the effort to distract from the facts...
I don't see anyone, anywhere, flogging the story... in any stock... that the known or suspected participation of shorts is an inducement to or a reason for... making any investment ?
That claim made here... is patently bogus...
Maybe a couple of traders here and there are focused on chasing the various short squeeze potentials that fictionalized market data may reveal... but, not much of that is apparent here... where trading volumes are such a small fraction of the shares, that there is very little trading occurring here at all, much less a trade based on anyone assuming a short squeeze must be imminent ?
I don't see any evidence there is a trade occurring here with that "error" in expectations as it's driver...
The claim anyone is here trading SRSR because of the advantages created by the shorts participation in markets... is ludicrous.
All I see here is a tacit admission that it is fact that shorts do exist, participate in the market, have crafted rules that enable them to operate secretly... while they have no real obstacles to defending their secret trades... but, the FACT in the lack of transparency means no one ever knows what the real short interest in any issue might be.
That's a market reality... which still doesn't create any reason to fear shorts participation... or to participate because of them.
In SRSR, the short position could be ZERO... or it could be 450 million shares... and there is no way to prove which it is, or which it is more likely it might be...
That's the FACT the lack of transparency in the market requires.
It's still not a reason to participate in the trade... either way.
I've still not seen anyone even PRETEND they can show that there is a trade based on expecting a short squeeze... that is occurring... ? I don't see anyone even CLAIMING that's what drives their interest in SRSR... ?
So, it seems a lot of wasted effort is going into countering something... that the advocates for shorting say doesn't exist... which the opponents of shorting say doesn't matter ?
There IS NO TRADE in SRSR... that is based on 'expecting a short squeeze'... ?
So why would anyone want to discuss that ? And, only that ?
The only trade I see... is based on expecting the company will succeed in bringing its projects along...
And, the company IS SUCCEEDING in bringing its projects along ?
That leaves the topic of discussion here being about the stupidest thing I've seen in the markets... which is revealed as stupid if you reverse the claims made ... which would have "longs participation in the market" being a reason to invest... or to not invest ? It's totally ludicrous.
And, NO ONE is making that claim here... ???
But, we have to see it "refuted" daily... inspite of the fact no one is making the assertion ? LOL!!!
And, we're subjected repeatedly to endless blather about shorts and how they don't exist... along with the claim that anyone claiming they do exist is lying about it ? Until the same people change their minds... admit they exist... and then continue with the same behavior as before ? LOL!!!
I think what we see occurring in the market behavior, instead, is that the shorts that do exist... will tend to be intent on trying to do all that they can to try to make "shorts" participation into the story... rather than any other factor that one should consider in valuing an investment... because they intend to use that discussion to foster fear...
That's the market behavior I observe...
Reality... behavior in betting on prices to go up or down... doesn't actually make the company succeed or fail... ?
So, "let's focus on discussing shorting" and nothing but shorting... instead of discussing the company, and what the company is doing ?
And, it seems suddenly there's a pattern in "the rules"... again ?
I think that's also a totally bogus market behavior... that exists for a reason...
That behavior is also "suppressing" the market... ?
The value the company has will out... and that value will not be determined by shorts efforts in fostering fear... when you have a management who are adequately aware of the nature of the market participation that is enabled by liars, cheats and thieves being enabled in making the rules...
That IS the market reality today... for all companies and markets.
The FACT is... the rules we have... were enabled by liars, cheats and thieves... to benefit liars, cheats and thieves at others expense. Participation in the markets is less useful than it should be as a result... and market participation is declining because of it. Capital is not raised, companies are not funded, economic activity doesn't occur... because of that. Assets are undervalued as a result... stocks are undervalued as a result... and real value is destroyed as a result...
The trading patterns in SRSR... the market behaviors... are fully consistent with shorts participation in the markets... and with other facets of the "broken" rule sets that dominate the markets.
That participation is routine... not unique or extraordinary.
The reason for considering SRSR as an investment or a trade... has nothing to do with shorts... or their stupidity... or their criminal behavior... or their outrageous excess in doing what they have...
The market is what it is... and they're a part of the market... which the industry is doing all they can to defend... which still means that fact has already been largely discounted in pricing of pretty much everything over the last number of years...
SRSR's VALUE still isn't overly influenced by them...
Those denying SRSR has value... as a tactic in manipulating share prices... are being proven wrong.
Shorts that exist... will lose out in the trade if they bet wrong.
Tough for them...
So, I consider the FACT of their participation in the market an annoyance, first... mostly because they're insufferable in making noise... and they foster a general erosion of market integrity by insisting that the market should tolerate and be based in fraud.
It's an annoyance, again, in that they are generally disruptive of trading as well as conversation, and they generates market and price suppression as a purposeful by product...
The error that enables tolerance of shorts and the lack of transparency in the trade involving them... enables broad destruction of market function generally... which is clearly apparent in the markets, now.
Those things are already priced into the market...
And, they still don't matter much... in general... relative to the fact in the market reality that exists because of them... when market prices already discount their presence and behaviors...
In a specific issue ? The accomplishments of the company in advancing their business... still trumps the ability of the liars, cheats and thieves operating the banking system to manipulate prices...
The behaviors of those claiming "shorts don't exist" are behaviors that intend to enable masking the fraud that is being practiced...
I'll not support that fraud.
I still think SRSR management are right to mostly ignore them... while continuing to focus on advancing the business...
That's what matters... to investors.
It's unfortunate that shorts are allowed to practice the frauds on the market that they do... but, that is the market reality we face today... and will, at least until there is sufficient recognition of the fact that the trade we have is based in fraud... to require that the component based in and enabling the fraud will be excised.
Meanwhile... the market continues doing what it does...
There is no way in hell this company is making money.
I've not been fostering the fiction that they are.
I'm addressing others who've been flogging that fiction re "commercial production" "revenue" and "profit"... with a bit of a reality check...
And what that means... is that the bankers' choice to ensure the system of finance doesn't work... is an issue that any company has to address and come to grips with as a fact... without expecting they're going to obviate the market function that has been enabled.
The bankers are ignorant of the fact their destructive choices... are destructive ? They find it useful to lie... and expect others will believe the lies ? Their focus on destroying the economy for profit, one piece at a time, by restricting companies access to the markets... is a choice. It's not a good choice. And, they're not dealing with reality very well in ignoring the implications. Shorting and the effort in dissembling about it is one minor "part" of that... that proves far more that matters, in the effort made in defending the lack of transparency, than transparency would prove. Changes in the "rules" have led to the financial system being based in and dependent upon fraud. Shorting reflects that. It is completely based in the fraud of conversion... because the rules enable that. That doesn't make shorting inherently fraudulent. It makes the shorting we have fraudulent.
At SRSR, I see plenty enough evidence that "the markets don't work properly"... which is still not anything I find unique to SRSR. I don't see the SRSR management making decisions based on "how things should work" instead of based on "how things do work"...
And, that's the rub in any "game"... where manipulation of the "rules" is practiced in order to elicit errors in behavior.
SRSR management aren't going to be sucked into making errors... ?
And, that's what we see in the proof in their performance...
While the effort in distortion has proceeded, as it will... SRSR management have gone about minding their knitting...
Focused on managing the business, as they should be, SRSR has made steady progress in advancing their projects over the last three to five years...
Both the niobium and gold projects are VASTLY farther along now than they were three to five years ago...
The market STILL undervalues them... even relative to where they were prior to the progress of the last few years ?
I don't see anyone even bothering with trying to argue, much less prove, that the market is efficient in pricing value...
The FACT of significant progress occurring and advancing the projects... doesn't mean liars, cheats and thieves are ever going to choose to recognize the fact ?
SRSR has been doing the right things the right way... and, whether the financiers like it or not... doing that, while recognizing that financiers can't be trusted... can ensure success, in time.
SRSR management know the value of what they have... and they're doing well in advancing their projects in a way that ensures the markets will recognize that value, in time... as success leads to success... in procession...
Metallurgy work being done by the Chinese partners now ?
That's not about "proving the value"... or "seeing if its there".
That work doesn't happen until AFTER the value is proven... and that work isn't about "looking for value" to see if its there... but is about optimizing the extraction of the KNOWN values...
The data from the 1950's proved "no barriers to extraction"...
The 1950's data already make Nemegosenda a superior alternative to the other niobium potentials...
But, there is more value that might result from employing optimal processes... than has been recognized yet...
I guess the question is...
What should you be thinking about ?
I don't see that there is a short path to gaining clarity on the OSG issues... and thinking about it more doesn't actually help to enable knowing that much more ? Looks like we'll not get much potential for that until February ?
Probably more useful to follow OSG in BK than to "think" more about what DHT's options are ?
I think you are correct that they'd previously moved to limit the risks in their OSG exposure... and it was that effort which likely resulted in the prior reductions in DHT revenues, prior to the filing... but, clearly they'd not had enough time or the benefit of luck in the direction in the markets, to have eliminated that risk... If the shipping markets had bottomed and turned as some expected they would over the last year, then OSG wouldn't be where they are now either... ?
OSG's filing says they have a need to eliminate over-payment on leases they're committed to... ? Much depends on how that issue will be addressed in BK... and on what will be required of OSG in addressing their contract obligations. For OSG, it isn't an issue that's defined by DHT's two boats... but by similar problems in deals that control the majority of the boats they have under contract.
It's "only" two boats for DHT... but, DHT isn't very big, and that is still a pretty big chuck of DHT...
That pretty much leaves it wholly up to the bankruptcy court how OSG and DHT will be settling the difference between the contracts and what the market will bear in the current environment... in the exposure that DHT still has...
Maybe DHT will do some deal with OSG... before the court does one for them ?
Maybe OSG and the boat owners they depend upon for having a business... will find it useful to consider finding a new balance that includes payments made in equity and not just $$$ for leases they've signed ?
I don't and can't know how OSG is going to address their issues in BK... so, for now, I'll wait and see how it shakes out.
The requirement for patience here isn't new...
Bigger picture stuff still matters... as much or more...
Timing still the key factor...
Are we going to be seeing a bottom and a reversal occurring in global trade ? Are we going to be seeing the surplus in hulls being resolved ? How and when ?
Right now, it looks like China is bottoming, and will be picking up... IF things go as they're planning... but, China isn't planning on helping "the global economy" rather than "China's economy"... and that is only more true in shipping... where China will be building new boats while allowing others to rust...
Europe is hopeless as a source of potential economic growth. Not only does Europe "not work"... it's also not looking like it is possible to "fix it"... all of which has been obvious for years, and all of which still doesn't mean that known and purposefully adopted dysfunction is easily worked around.
The U.S. should be growing, again, but have opted instead to accelerate adoption of policies that prevent economic growth from occurring... (and, that's not mostly about tax issues in isolation, but mostly about adopting Euromalaise more generally as a purposeful policy choice... while ignoring that capital doesn't have to stand still and accept being taxed. ) Those who can are switching from using imported (or domestic) oil to domestic gas as a fuel source... because its plentiful and cheap. That long term trend has been slower to develop than is reasonable, and it is unlikely to change.
Seems everyone is rethinking the "benefits" of global trade...
And, every instance of existing conflict continues to grow...
LNG carriers are making money and seeing decades of smooth sailing ahead... but pretty much everyone else has nothing to cheer.
So, I'll wait and see what things look like here in February ?
"management is horrendous at increasing investor awareness"
Or, investors are far more aware than management gives them credit for... and it is that awareness that's the problem... given that management aren't adding or creating value ?
I don't think this POS is going anywhere without change happening.
Either...
Proof in performance that existing holders recognize...
Or, a new group of investors who are clueless enough about the pillaging going on that they're willing to ignore it...
So, if gold and silver break out and double... ? You might see this attract new eyes. Otherwise, the eyes on it now aren't ignoring the wool being pulled over them...
Parker had the company on the right track...
When they fired him, they threw you under the bus...
Since then, they've done nothing but "taken" value from holders...
"Hiring a new management" cost holders 1/3 of the value... ?
And, the new management cabal don't appear to be happy with only that...
USSIF was a profitable producer that should have been controlling its costs and increasing profits... reinvesting in expanded production... and considering diversifying holdings...
But, there's no excuse possible for the "takings" occurring which are "justified" as a necessary cost of management...
Why aren't profitable producers valued as if they ARE as precious as the metals they produce ?
Well, because Wall Street is populated by liars, cheats and thieves, and management works for them, not you...
The bogus claims that have been made about KBLB's production of worms, and the fraud being practiced in flogging the "value" being generated by that production... ?
The due diligence required isn't that difficult...
Claims were made... and they'll prove out... or not.
Your posts forecast they'd be making millions off of the "ramp up to commercial production" by now... just from the silk being produced by the company in the "ramp up" phase...
I pointed out that was totally bogus... in large part because your "forecasts" were based in things that were physically impossible.
So, will their next filings show they ARE making millions, as you have claimed they will be ? Or not ?
There are a couple of fairly linear relationships that exist between the effort in doing things... and the cost of doing them. You can't do what you're unable to pay to do... because all the money is being spent on other things.
The company's financials... reveal something about the POSSIBILITY of accomplishing what you claim they are...
And, either they ARE making millions, already, or they're not...
LOL!!!
The "trade" can't exist... because you don't see a "motive"?
LOL!!!
Alan C has it far more right... that the hedgies short and distort because they can... and, on average, that works for them...
There is plenty enough proof that they don't care if the trade is legal or not... they do participate in it and they will for as long as they can get away with it... including through accounting sleights of hand the industry has enabled as "back doors" that spoof the regulators...
The FACT is that there is a purposefully enabled LACK OF TRANSPARENCY...
That doesn't mean "there is no evidence"... it simply means there is a plan to deny access to the evidence.
The "rules" don't exist in a vacuum... they were CREATED... by SOMEONE... for a purpose...
And the purpose in the rules is one intentionally designed to enable the industry to benefit itself at others expense... while sustaining deniability.
The industry lies about the trade.
Goldman Sachs... got caught lying about the trade.
That there is a deliberate lack of transparency in the trade... which is deliberately created... doesn't mean there is a LACK OF AWARENESS OF THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY... ?
That someone is flagrantly lying to you... doesn't mean you have no recourse, but must accept their lies as truth ?
Wall Street Bankers are liars, cheats and thieves... which isn't exactly news.
The defense of the liars, cheats and thieves... is that they don't have motive ? LOL!!!
Charts for silver and gold each turned positive a couple weeks ago, with both now showing MACD reversal and cross over...
Most mining shares have continued to drift lower in spite of the change in the pattern in the metals.
Look at a five year weekly on the gold chart, and you'll wonder what all the traders are whining about. Gold's been on a tear for five years, got a little ahead of itself, and traded sideways for a year... without coming off the larger trend...
A proper correction in gold should have taken it down to 1450 at least, that defining the top boundary of the volume weighted trading bands, with 1170 defining the lower limit in the volume weighted trading range. Gold has been trading above the bands since August of 2009... and it still trading above them.
Silver stuck to the top of the bands until August of 2010... then went parabolic before correcting back to trading inside the bands, which its done since Oct of 2011, under-performing gold substantially, but both are still in solid uptrends, with volume weighted envelopes making beautiful upward sloping channels.
The fundamental conflicts in the economy aren't being resolved.
Inflationary pressures continue to mount, with the printing presses running flat out. Inflation is subdued only because banks are sitting on the mountains of paper being printed, using it in trying to fill the black holes in their balance sheets, instead of applying it in more economic fashion. Very little real investment is occurring, now, which means there's little reason to expect a change in fortunes tied to market innovation ?
But, deflationary pressures continue, too, with depression in Europe coming close enough we can see more and more people are able to recognize it, and the ongoing trend in wealth aggregation by fewer and fewer wealthy people means there are fewer and fewer people who are participating in chasing after fewer and fewer investment grade goods... We've changed the rules that govern our economy to the rule set that existed prior to 1929... so why is anyone surprised that the economy is slowly adapting to the changed rule set, and reflecting exactly what it requires, while the global economy is looking more and more like we're heading back toward fascism and the Robber Baron era, which is exactly what that rule set gave us before... ?
U.S. economic policy, in particular, is an abject failure. It's not dissimilar to the situation we faced in the late 1970's... as inflation spiked and interest rates climbed into the teens and higher... only, this time, we've saddled ourselves with the rule set and the economy from 1921... and we've just opted for four more years of Carter instead of Reagan... virtually guaranteeing nothing will be fixed before it breaks completely...
The problem with the economy is not too few taxes... but economic policy based on fraud instead of free markets. Tax increases in the middle of a depression being a well known cure for failed policy... we should expect to see more taxes, and we should expect more taxes to provide ample additional proof of the problem with failed economic policy... that almost no one in government (now that Ron Paul is retiring) is willing to recognize...
The problem that creates in PMs and PM stocks... is that everyone knows there is going to be a price to pay for printing all that money... But, if the taxpayer funded effort in filling in the black holes in the banks secret books only ensures the accelerated effort in printing doesn't generate additional liquidity... but it merely transfers obligations from one owner to another without having any other obvious economic impact ? The longer the situation persists... while the masses of new paper mount without being recognized... the larger the problem becomes...
The banks aren't investing... because the rules allow them to benefit more from destroying the prices of things they don't own... than from successful investing in things they do...
The bull market in gold and silver are evidence some "get it"... that value isn't determined by price. Real change will happen, whether because policy gets fixed, or because failure makes it irrelevant.
Similar drivers of long term cycles exist in other things. For decades, the Cold War balance helped contain conflict we see emerging if not yet erupting everywhere, now... and, as is true in the economy, the forces containing conflict can succeed for only so long before something breaks... and we get a discontinuous spasm in reaction... when there is sudden recognition that having faith while depending on the things we have been is folly...
I don't see much that will alter the current trends in gold and silver... The printing presses aren't stopping anytime soon... There is not any policy correction on the horizon that will allow anyone with a clue to make any input into any "fix"...
What that leaves... is more of the same in pounding heads against rock walls... while expecting change will result...
Communist China... still has a vastly better bead on how to manage liberalization of economic policy and grow the economy... than anyone in either party in Washington D.C. ? So, China continues to grow... while we choose to avoid policy that is adequate to even allow us to pay for what we're spending... never mind growth.
And, all of that would probably matter here... if USGIF were still "steady as she goes" making progress... containing costs and increasing production... instead of wrapped up in management intrigues that have removed 1/3 of the value in favor of rewarding insiders self dealing... while letting costs spiral out of control... even allowing the shares to be suspended from trading for a month ?
I've never seen such abject stupidity...
The market fundamentals and the "big picture" matter... only when your own company fundamentals are well enough in hand that they are less of an issue than the market context...
That's not true here...
I continue to think its well worth the effort in ferreting out undervalued opportunities in gold and silver...
This isn't one of them...
I think USGIF is over-valued by half or more... as the current price doesn't begin to reflect the damage being done to share value by a management still working hard at proving it has no respect for the investors. Apply the appropriate discounts for the light fingers leadership... expecting they'll be looking for ways to take more, over time ? Apply the appropriate discounts for the expectation that a need will be discovered for loading YOUR INTEREST up with their commitments forcing you into using money borrowed from others... ?
Read my posts here...
It's been explained, repeatedly...
And, it's not like a single thing has changed in the last six months or more ?
The only thing I see changing... is that more people are more aware of how ridiculous the over the top promotion of the "story" here has been...
And, when you bother to dig through it... none of what's been flogged holds up to basic effort in doing the DD...
It's not like they haven't had time to figure out the basics of the markets they're claiming are going to make KBLB investors rich... if and when they succeed in giving away the IP for some promise of a miniscule royalty interest...
I still don't think they're EVER going to con anyone into building out a worm ranch for them...
No one else is ever going to "make it happen" for KBLB...
And, KBLB appear incapable of "making it happen" without having someone offering to do it for them...
So...
There's nothing "proprietary" in the basic market stuff anyone who knows what they're doing will easily find in considering this...
The burrs under the saddles of the "promoters" here is only that the bogosity that has been flogged depends on people being stupid and lazy, and not questioning the most wildly outrageous crap...
I'm neither stupid nor lazy... the DD on the markets here is EASY WORK to accomplish... for anyone who knows how to do the DD...
And, as a result, I've flagged a time or two when the ridiculous crap exceeds limits of tolerance, not just in business practicality, but obvious limits in physical possibility.
The "story" here looks like it is nothing BUT a story...
And, it's been told as a tall tale...
Look at the posts here from six months back... forecasting the revenue that was to be generated by now, from KBLB's "ramping up commercial production" ?
I'm telling you... if those guys were right six months ago... WOW!!! How many generations of worms should have been produced by now ? So, they should be getting ready to see the reporting out of millions and millions in revenue in the "overdue queue"... ???
There is no commercial production occurring...
There was never a "ramp" building TO that still non-existent potential... because the potential didn't exist... ?
Had a quick look at the CCTC charts today.
Clearly is the case that something doesn't add up right...
Looks to me like "someone" is mis-marking trades...
Reading more carefully... is going to make there be "something there" when there isn't anything there ?
Well, I can see clearly enough that some in the market believe that works and have applied the theory in addressing KBLB.
I prefer the proof in the fact of performance to the manufacture of worm manure that has passed for DD here...
What I've seen here is primarily dependent on the opposite of due diligence... beginning with flagrant misrepresentations of the market potential, and the value inherent in the company's own effort in (not really) addressing it.
Frankly, I've never seen another issue in the market that has depended as much as this one has on the sort of desperate bogosities I've seen touted here...
That the company hasn't even bothered itself with doing basic work in analysis of their own markets... ?
That's why you see that sort of crap posted here, as you do, claiming KBLB "can't miss"... because it isn't doing anything differently than has been done in a couple thousand years of human experience with sericulture...
Silk is good stuff, and, its enormously expensive to produce it... It's clearly not profitable enough to have lured more people into the business of manufacturing silk ? But, KBLB owns an interesting new innovation... that will make it MORE expensive to produce ?
Brilliant.
That explains why they don't want to bother themselves with figuring out what making the stuff will cost... ?
And, their continuing refusal to do that requisite bit of basic business planning themselves... doesn't seem to be convincing anyone else that they should go into the worm ranching business ?
Shocking.
KBLB's brand of magic elixer depends on people believing that sort of overly obvious crap... that KBLB's intended customers are going to do KBLB's job in planning their business for them...
Otherwise, there is no reason that the company shouldn't be able to demonstrate they've done the basic work in market analysis, and can develop a roadmap to commercialization based on having a viable market to address... that considers all the costs of production... without lying about any of it...
What we see happening here, instead, is effort made in ramping up to "and a miracle happens here"...
If they could make a solid business case for "doing it"... it would probably be happening already.
That sound you hear is "crickets chirping"... not the squeaky wheels of industry participants racing to be the lucky ones who get to figure out how to farm KBLB's worms for them...
Does the three year old video say when they're supposed to... accomplish anything ?
Pretending anything has changed here in the last couple of months ?
Months ago... KBLB couldn't demonstrate they had even a CLUE about how to commercialize anything...
Their planning consisted of saying... we don't have to plan, because our commercial partners will figure out how to make our business work for us...
I don't see any suggestion here that they've made any progress...
And, I don't see anything suggesting they've figured out how totally stupid their approach is...
Maybe the promoters have given up on flogging all the bogus crap they were about the "numbers" ?
Or, are they still claiming each of KBLB's magic worms are going to produce a larger mass of silk than of worm body mass ?
"a sesame street episode where Grover shows you how" to tell a bogus promotion of a POS from a plan being executed by a real company would be more useful...
But, agree that Sesame Street is about the right level of awareness shown by the promoters of this "opportunity"...
Rip van Winkle could keep current on this POS without worrying about losing any sleep.
Wasn't their filing due already by now ?
I did note someone saying they were looking at a filing and were noting that it was full of typos and misspellings... ?
I assumed that meant they'd met their filing deadline.
Apparently not ?
It's not like they've got so much going on that they should be missing filing dates ? So, seems reasonable to me to expect it should have been filed...
Find it strange I don't see any analysis of the numbers.
What has "ramping up to commercial production" cost ?
What benefit has resulted ?
Maybe I'll find time over the weekend to look over the numbers... since no one here seems interested in them ? How odd is that ?
The key issue here really is that there have been loads and loads of bogus crap used in flogging the stock as a story... the vast majority of which has no rational connection to the real story in the development effort.
KBLB is a vehicle for funding the university lab work while paying the CEO a salary...
Beyond that... it's a lawyers hobby project and a long shot high risk... not because of the tech, but because of the market realities that the company has taken pains to avoid addressing.
The R&D is interesting... but, its not a business.
I noted in prior visits here... that they appeared not to have a business plan that made a lick of sense... and that lack of planning was clearly apparent in the misguided expectations.
They've clearly misled investors re the state of their development and the probability of a business success occurring.
They clearly don't have a viable commercialization plan, at this point...
The issue there isn't that they COULDN'T have a viable plan...
The issue is that they DON'T HAVE ONE...
The proof in performance that you see... is a proof in the lack of performance... in the elements that matter most in the market.
"we will see financials for sure this week"
And, no doubt, they'll show big profits from the "commercial production" ramp up we've been told is occurring ?
Or, will the proof in the numbers show more of a "commercial production off ramp" ?
So, the whole "we're ramping up to commercial production" thing, proved to be bogus ?
Who'd a thunk it...
Ouch! Not a good week at IAG...
The Bedford Report has released new equity reports today. As a leading provider of free in depth reports and timely market updates, Bedford is an essential resource for hundreds of thousands of investors across the country.
IAMGOLD Corporation (NYSE: IAG) (TSX: IMG) shares of the gold miner fell nearly 20% on over 3 times the average daily volume Wednesday. President and CEO Steve Letwin commented that performance of mines not operated by the company in the third quarter were "disappointing."
Looks like they have neighbors in that neck of the woods...
And, the neighbors address the local geology a bit:
http://www.alliednevada.com/properties/exploration/wildcat.aspx
Ran across this description of the Seven Troughs project that was published at the time of their acquisition:
http://www.canadianminingjournal.com/press-releases/story.aspx?id=1001479513
In addition to some interesting numbers:
"Exploration data generated since 1977 by several operators including Newmont and Teck includes 111,565 feet (34,005 metres) of rotary drilling from 159 holes, 11,501 feet (3,505 metres) of core from five holes, extensive geochemical and geophysical data, and surface geologic mapping. A considerable database of district activity is included in the purchase and is expected to contribute to the rapid development of several drill targets."
Looks like another obviously decent potential, already reasonably well explored, that had its development disrupted by changes in the market price in the early 80's.
The daily numbers reveal nothing other than current aggregate data.
Those claiming they prove more ?
Total fraud.
Meanwhile... the pace of growth in demand for niobium, stated as a "steady" pace of 10% per year... ?
The market data, prior to revelations of recent improvements in technology that might tend to drive a faster pace, already suggest that the actual pace might be closer to 12% to 15% annually.
The economics certainly still operate to make a faster pace make solid sense... while a slower pace would only perpetuate systemic inefficiency and waste resources and $$$...
Plant capacity limits seem the only obvious obstacle... and those limits are being addressed aggressively in China, now, if not elsewhere.
It still makes perfect sense that Niostar would partner with the Chinese to meet their current and future demand... as that would pair growth occurring in capacity with growth in supply...
I think that either we're going to see Nemegosenda being put in production in the next 3 to 4 years....
Or, we're going to see niobium prices begin ramping up and moving toward doubling and more in the 3 to 4 years following CBMM reaching their planned peak output capacity...
Rising prices would cost the industry far more than funding the timely development of new supply would...
I doesn't make sense to NOT develop Nemegosenda...
But, I think the price will begin to move higher in any case, in the next five to seven years, as new production of higher quality products enables addressing new markets. It is increasingly likely we will see demand increasing more rapidly than new supply is able to address it... when the quality in the product produced enables that... at least until niobium and tantalum move closer in price than they are now...
The FINRA numbers reflect only daily aggregate data in trading occurring here, now. They do not address proper accounting for short positions generated and held outside the United States.
The intended result is that the new FINRA "rules" enable practicing a fraud... based on claiming that transparency exists where it does not.
The aggregate data do help expose shorting that occurs now... but they do nothing to illuminate significant positions that existed, offshore, prior to the rules being implemented.
Not remarkably, FINRA still appears to be vastly more gullible than the average pink sheet investor...
Probably, it's not an accident that the leadership of the industry self regulatory body... are incompetent in regulating themselves ?
Bankers are crooks... unless and until they prove worthy of trust.
Thus far... they've failed... and failed again in seeking to sustain their failures rather than correct them.
As far as SRSR... you do not know what the short position is...
No one knows what the short position is...
And, no one CAN... who does not have access to the accounting for the trading conducted by CSTI in London, and the transactions conducted in sales of interests in CSTI, and the sale of CSTI itself to Canaccord.
Without proper transparency provided through access to the accounting for the transactions that have occurred... ?
The short positions that did exist in SRSR... may have been covered through the CSTI transactions... or, the CSTI transactions may only have preserved and "transferred" existing short position liabilities... or, they may have expanded existing positions or generated new ones.
The short position in SRSR could be zero... or it could be larger than 450 million shares... and nothing in the market data now available can operate to reveal what the true position is...
What is obvious is that the operation of the CSTI trade we observed occurring here... appears it was a trade conducted in full awareness of the changing nature of regulations... that could easily have intended to use "regulatory arbitrage" to enable continuation of the short trade, in London, after rules changes in the U.S. made that possible only through regulatory arbitrage.
That does nothing to illuminate what the driver of the foreign trade was... whether it intended to enable accumulation... was effective (or not) in enabling covering... or enabled only an temporary effort in defense of and a "re-treading" and transfer of an existing short, paired with accounting sleights of hand that have enabled masking it.
Any short position that still exists... seems it has no relevant ability to influence current events.
Shorts... will not determine the company's success or failure.
They'll not have much remaining ability to exercise influence over trading, either... unless through more overtly obvious efforts in market manipulation...
If there were no shorts in SRSR... we'd expect to not see the sorts of market behaviors that are typically associated with their presence ?
Hmmm.