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.
Which posts are fabrication in your opinion ?
You are probably correct the agreement not substantially different than prior ones, but so what ? After the results the past 18 months I consider it outrageous that this CFO is supposed to be worth $300,000 a year. Does this mean if he does another reverse split, price drops again, and mill permit not received, he should then receive the same or an increase ?
As far as "magic" concerned I would quite agree it would seem the company wont have the cash to pay him his full salary ( but that means also they wont have cash to implement their stated business plan).They have issued millions of dollars in stock for convertibles, services and properties- are we expected to believe the CFO wont be doing his best to squeeze out every penny from all these sorts of transactions ? It sems he should file a form 4 everytime he buys or sells, but based on this company's track record on disclosure it is not unreasonable to question how he will be paid. He has no credibility based on missing every stated projection,misleading and overly-promotional press releases, and now he is to be rewarded with $300,000 a year.
So if not paid it is a liability to accrue which in shares or cash just compounds the company's financial difficulties.
If I am wrong, please advise why it is justifiable this sort of salary compared to the dismal track record- or even the market cap or level of operations. I try to be objective, so really would be interesting how someone could justify this employment agreement.
No bid today. For what single reason could you indicate it will "skyrocket"?
Hecla lost money partly due to the acquisitions costs, but to gain traction amongst larger instiutional investors in needs to build market cap.I would like see a silver acquisition, in aprtiuclar in Idaho or Mexico.
Production ramping up at Lucky Friday, and they have exploration leverage right left and center.
This is a superb medium and long term play at these levels ,time to accumulate and forget short term fluctuations.
As usual I fail to see the point of the question in relation to the company that is being discussed.
However I will answer- I didnt make $300,000 but whatever I did make I earned through performance.I was taught that one delivered performance for what one is paid.
I think it is outrageous that the CFO even has the guts to claim he is worth $300,000. This is exactly the sort of behavior of CEO and CFO's that have given business a bad name in certain parts.
If my opinion incorrect please do let me know what track record of achievment justifies to shareholders this person making $300,000 per year.
Working for crums ? He has just filed an employment agreement to make $300,000 per year ! And judging from the shares issued for services, properties and to convertible note holders hard to believe he wont make every effort to pay himself first- regardless of performance.
There is still $500,000 in convertibles, and maybe havent hit yet because of the low volume. But there always seems to be some " true believers" who will absorb some of these shares.
There is no indication I can see from the last 2 years he has met any key objectives of the companythat makes him worth $300,000 a year. Please do enlighten me if I have missed something.
I admire the sentiment but management has created this hole- and now wish to be paid $300,000 per year for wiping out shareholders. Look I dont like to be negative but after months of watching this company it looks worse and worse as time goes on. My impression is they are not exactly pro-active in communicating with or listening to shareholders.
I do not think they have a chance at all in raising $10 million for following reasons :
1.Banks
(a) Not typical bank would lend to a mining company with no reserves, terrible balance sheet,and no colateral or cash flow to support a loan. They could not make a projection without a permit nor a source of mill feed.I dout anyone could find one example of a company in this status that in the last 5 years has raised any conventional bank loans.
(b.) The specialised banks lending to mining companies require reserves backed by a feasibility study, This company is probably years away from being able to establish reserves,if ever. Part of definition of reseves is that they can be legally and economically extracted- this includes permitting, legal ight to extract ore, meeting all permits , besides establishing the reserves through geology and engineering.
2. Equity
The junior mining sector is suffering a severe drop in capital availability. Over 700 companies in facing delisting this year ( and Canada raises over 65% of financing for junior mining companies worldwide).With a DTC chill and price under $.10 I do not know of any broker doing private placements in a stock like this that has a DTC chill. Plus to top things off who would buy equity without a huge discount due to outstanding convertibles.
Dont you think if CFO wishes to pay himself $300,000 he would found them if they exist ?
3.Quasi Equity- Convertibles
This appears to be the only game in town, and at some point if volume doesnt support may dry up as well. These guys though dont seem like they are likely to put in $11 million on the chance the company might establish reserves within several years. These sort of investors usually have 6 month time horizons.
4. Other investors based on business plan : I have a hard time believing someone with $11 million would buy stock in this company considering two reverse splits, track record of not meeting objectives, and very uncertain timing of when cash flow might resut.
Junior mining companies without reserves are traditionally financed from private placements of equity until they can establish reserves. This company even in the best of times would have problem raising capital with the outstanding convertibles. Plus anyone who has arranged financings for mining equities would look at this year's press releases about metal in the ground and probably run for the hills.The CFO's method of disclosure and press releases has done more permanent damage that the CFO seems aware of.thisis an early early stage exploraton company at best, masquerading as a short term production play.
I would be interested in 1mandband's take on this subject. I just do not believe there is any probability of this company raising $11 million in the next 12 months. Maybe CFO to pay himself has found some convertible debt buyer that will continue funding, but when price and volume evaporate and they sense more risk they will stop funding company at some point.
Quite agree that this stock cannot absorb these sort of payments,besides the $500,000 in convertibles, plus the running costs for the company. Stil believe they will shoot up to a billion shares, do yet another reverse, but eventually de-register.CFO must be dreamining at this point.
Pretty standard the change of control clauses though the 25% change in control is low.
No one in their right mind would merge with this company, there is nothing to merge with after deducting the liabilities. Besides the $500,000+ in convertibles ( which means another $400,000 the next 12 months)dont they have a $350,000judgement they are appealing ?
I certainly would welcome your opinion any any questions related to CGFI for debate and discussion. I am not quite sure that your question has any relevance to this stock.If you feel CFO's performance is worth $300,000 a year, by all means I woudl be interested in knowing why.
Outrageous employment agreement filed ! Considering the dismal performance of CFO by any criteria one can judge, for him to be paid $300,000 per year is simply wrong. Note instead of a 50% change of control provision it is only 25%, and if company were to terminate him ( not likely) all his shares have to be registered-and bonuses paid regardless of performance.
The untimely,misleading and ineffective marketing and disclosures alone are sufficient to justify termination or a drastic reduction in salary. The CEO situation just as bad.Does company even have money to properly pay employer taxes on these sums ?
This is an example of why there is such public resentment of CEO and CFO salaries that bear no relation to performance.
Completely agree. If company just does what it has done the last year, bringing in $100,000 in toxic debt per quarter, its price will go down and outstanding shares balloon up. If it raises more money that it say it needs to complete mill let alone find ore, even more pressue on price , oustanding shares, and more reverse splits. Might have been different if after first reverse they had handled successfully, but the die is cast.
I think important to point out that management claimed the first reverse would strengthen the company. It did not so then another reverse split done because first one didnt work. I do not see any indication the second one will succeed any better.
This is part of a pattern of management putting out press releases, promotional material, etc that not only is misleading and often untimely,but simply hasnt worked.
This strengthens the view that the company managementif not incompetent is aware their financing strategy hasnt been working with the exception of enriching those who have been receiving the stock.I could understand management doing one reverse but then switching gears as to how they plan and manage business. But to do a second reverse, to contnue doing the same thing with same results doesnt bode well for any future shareholders.
Thanks for the information. To my surprise they claim that some OTC QB stocks can be shorted with 100% margin.
They did state that there were no shares available of CGFI to short. The person I spoke to indicated this may be because of the DTC chill,but he wasnt sure.
Cover ? Well by all means please let me know a retail brokerage firm that would permit shorting this stock.
Instead I would be interested in knowing some plausible scenario by which one could claim (a) management has shown they can meet stated objectives (b) that their financing strategy and its implementation has resulted in stockholder gains.
There is no doubt on the way down that there will be some up days.
The company has :
-1/2 million in convertble debt
-based on past 18 months probably needs to take on another $400,000 in convertible debt
-poor track record of setting objectives and meeting them
- 2 reverse splits in 12 months
- Person responsible for this wonderful situation controls the board and votes
It therefore is highly probable that the share price will trend down and down outstanding shares will balloon up again. Did the prior reverse work? No. Will company meet their projected start date this year ? No. Do the company press releases result in an increasing stock price ? No.Does the company have a credible story for presenting this as a short term producton play ? No. I know it has been a down market, but I am unsure what examples of competence are indicated by the past 2 years to achieve results or be able to predict with any level of accuracy by the CFO.
Last time predicted a reverse split I was shouted down. Lets see how fast they break 50 and then 100 million shares this year.
I just think there are many alternative paths with this one, and people involved certainly have experience as deal makers. I am a bit surprised they dont do 1 for 4 reverse to get price more to area they can do something with it- many brokers wont even take stocks form a private placement under $.05 now.
I wouldnt buy for a very short term speculation, but over a 12 or 24 month period could do quite well.Same would go for a few other Pacific Northwest stocks such as NJMC, CHMN and perhaps ASLM.
As with the last time you posted such a comment- please be so kind as to define what comments you are objecting to or believe are incorrect. Otherwise how should one respond to such a post ?
time to buy : appears to have bottomed out. unlike many otehr sthat go sub-penny they dont have convertible debt. many projects that can be sold or joint-ventured in a stronger market.
my opinion is anything under $.10 is a good price to accumulate
Always interesting this board to be sure.
I cant comment on other industries but I can on this one. Just some personal info- I come from several generations of coal miners, and have had ancestors as young as 12 die in mine accidents.I agree that there have been many improvements since the 70's, some due to regulation.But I do not believe this is right-wing kool aid observations, just as I see it the current status of the industry. Look at the Montanore project of Mines Management, they have fought for over 15 years to get permits. I have become completely unimpressed with management of this company, and I just dont believe their track record on disclosure indicates their projections take into account delays in this industry. I do not know enough about Colorado permitting process to judge how they have handled. I do know they have repeatedly potrayed themselves as a short term production play, and missed most if not all projections in recent times.
I do agree the key issue is money and I do not believe this management with this financial structure and what I believe is poor credibility has any chance of raising $11 million.
I just believe that the company has underestimated the cost and time required to get permits and meet regulations under curent circumstances, and been misleading in all the implications from their promotions that this is a "short term" production play. Also, due to what I consider misleading and untimely disclosures it makes me sceptical CFO will ever deliver projections that he can meet.
How can they announce with great fanfare acquiring a property worth $200 million plus by a certain date and then date comes by and no announcement - this really doesnt breed confidence that the CFO can handle properly public company disclosure, let alone NI43-101 issues already discussed. Jut a pattern of questionable disclosures and press releases.
MSHSA does a lot of good but it also is pushed by Congress to show "results" from site visits.It is a different world than 20 or 30 years ago in the mining sector, permitting can often take years, and more costly to comply with safety regulatons. The CFO promoting this company as a short term production play has been misleading all along in my opinion.
What is the point if I may ask ? My point simply is that there are numerous regulatory burdens which are costly and time-consuming,implemented by agencies that are largely anti-mining in the first place.I dont particularly blame the lower-level inspector who is under pressure to show X number of violations from a site visit.
What I said I thought was clear- that the mania for adding regulation upon regulation administered by bureaucrats of whom the majority are opposed to the industry OR they get pressure by Congress or political appointees to increase regulation as if that in all cases would improve safety. I gave you one example of what this leads to, I am sure anyone in mining industry can give you many others. When a mining disaster happens somewhere, Congres reacts to show they are "doing something against evil mine owners".
No of course the miners dont pay, but when mines close down they lose their jobs, and EPA probably more the culprit here.
It is hard for industry often to protest because of the politics.It is equally hard to understand the general public not understanding the tremendous burden some of this regulation entails.
Well the annoyance caused by these regulators goes far past making sure mines are safe, and gets very costly because with every citation and fine it builds a type of "compound" fine- next time around the fine goes up as MSHA keeps up the number of claimed viloations.
An example-
1. MSHA requires underground that trash cans have the lids on at all times.
2. MSHA inspector cites company for an above ground trash can lid not being fully in place.
3. Company responds that that is not the regulation for above ground trash cans.
4. Inspector, says off the record, he has to give X number of citations, and if company wishes to protest he will just go underground and find something more costly.
5. Company says ok and pays the fine.
It is important to understand these people working for agencies like the EPA and MSHA are generally ( not all) anti-mining and anti-business in their ideology, so it is a struggle for mining companies to deal with these issues. Even the National Academy of Sciences in reviewing the Bunker Hill Superfund case cited faulty science on behalf of EPA- but EPA continued on their path regardless. It is great to protect the environment and have safety rules we all agree, but the thrust of these regulators is to make difficult or shut down mines ( as we have seen with coal mines).
Just my opinion but I would think 1manband or anyone else who has invested in this industry and talked to people in the industry have examples of ludricous and ridiculous regulations.
A miner once said to me " When MSHA stated we felt they were the worker's friend to help with safety. Now they are just people who want to put us out of work."
Well I will continue to give eveyone the benefit of the doubt- so that those writing GO BTDG I assuming must have some reason for their optimism. I admit though with the exception of the claim that the fake MBA qualifies CEO, I have yet to see any defense of their optimism that makes the slightest bit of sense.
I just try to be fair that those continually supporting BTDG actually have a reason besides just wishing to unload shares they may have purchased.
I remain fascinated with this company as a poster child of issues involving pink sheet companies. It is truly amazing how someone can walk into a BTDG office, claim a deal with hundreds of millions of dollars, and BTDG instantly puts out a press release.
OSHA ( or rather MSHA) is a standard issue with any mining operation and company seems well aware of it. MSHA compliance can get quite expensive - one can get a fine at a drop of the hat. Presumably the company will have to retain someone conversant with current standards and their application.
The company itself mentioned possibility of a NPDES permit. If not required no issue. If required a major issue as it can take years to get. There are companies who had their permits admiistratively extended in the 1990's who still havent had their permit renewed- and these companies often benefit from a grandfather clause. New permits to meet higher standards can require all sorts of water treatment facilities etc etc. I am sure 1manband will concur that if their planned zero discharge facility doesnt meet requirements this could push back any potential mill re-opening for years.EPA site of course a treasure trove of information about wonderful government support of the mining industry.
Just another issue amongst many. Key issue is whether they can raise $3 million for mill and whether they can have any ore ready to mill, which would maybe require another $5 or even $10 million or more. The research report itself quoted a CAPEX if I recall of around $11 million. Since they have no reserves to mill I am unsure why someone would "invest" $3 million to rehabilitate the mill at this stage.
Yes it would be nice if those promoting BTDG with constant GO BTDG messages provide 1 reason why company run by CEO who claims a fake MBA, has no track record of years of generating revenue,cash flow or profits, or of implementing any busienss deal annoucned,will see a rising stock price.
The only reason I have seenposted why CEO is qualified is that he had an MA, but it is a fake form a diploma mill.It has also been posted a big plus that BTDG makes its filings with pink sheets, but those filings contain incorrect financial statements.
I really wish for objectivity- please do someone provde an objective reason why this stock will do better.
According to balance sheet just over half a million( which I think you already know) , but I am not at all sure that (a) will be complete this year and all sign-off's received from state to process a refund if there is to be a refund (b) will there not be an ongoing bond requirement to operate the facility ?(c) if I understand the disclosures they have a $300,000 + judgement against them winding its way through the courts, certainly one would expect the mill and any bond would have another lien filed against it.(or has this been settled)
The other issue is in their reports it is not at all certain that they wont be required to have an NPDES permit- and that permit can can take years to get.
By the way, which recent filing shows the reclamation will be complete soon ? Do they have a track record of projecting and achieving completion dates ?
The convertible debt on last balance sheet had face value of $540,00,so at current prices 10.8 million shares.However I assume they cant convert more than 5 to 9.9% of shares at any single time. At $.01 another 54 million shares.
Does anyone have idea why they did reverse when there were still unissued shares that could have been issued to satisfy convertibles ? Or does anyone believe they can satisfy $540,000 in convertibles without price dropping to sub penny levels again ?
Please provide 1 single reason why you believe the price will increase
- results of operations?
- volume trends ?
- one single business initiative that has been implemented the last few years ?
It is wrong to promote a stock with no basis for that promotion onto unsuspecting investors.
Do you believe it is ethically correct for CEO to promote a fake MBA in his filings and website ?
Do you believe a company that reports incorrect financial statements can succeed ? I mean really , how can accompany have negative assets !
I believe in being objective and fair, I look forward to your response
So no bid at the close, do you still feel strong and long ? It seems even those promoting BTDG ( without ever disclosing a concrete reason) are afraid even themselves to bid for the stock at these prices.
I can completely agree, dont know exact timing though
If you look at the NI43-101 reports posted on sedar, both the 06/19/07 report posted under Sterling,and the 12/27/2012 under Sunshine Silver, they both make the same comment- the Sunshine consistently converted to resources to reserves for over 100 years.Being an underground mine, usually due to cost involved mine would only target developing 5 to 7 years reserves at any one time. Note that Sunshine Silver continued using Stelring's exploration plans, and apparently has increased the resources another 25 million ounces.
Sunshine Silver projected a life of mine cost of $14 an ounce ( higher than Sterling's). I note specifically for Chester vein area high grade silver, 22 to 32 oz silver per ton.
As far as Hecla Mining's decision to sell Consil remember the 90's had low silver prcies, and Hecla was battling EPA to survive at that time.
I note some former Sterling employees with sub penny start up First Colombia Gold.
SEC correspondence posted on edgar. While pretty standard stuff it could also be a sign that this company now on radar screen of SEC.
Excellent comments, and the percentage rise in silver in the future should be much higher than gold. Hecla has a growing production profile,and lots of exploration possibilities. Definitely a blue chip long term play on silver
What does CFO make? The cash flow statement shows a lot of money made by the convertible debt holders. Shares for services/properties are into the millions of dollars, though who knows what shares were actually sold for. Yet filings seem to give impression CFO not making much.
So several million dollars have been made off this company, yet is it logical that CFO not pulling out $100,000 to $200,000 per year ? If someone made a few million dollars for someone else in clsoe contact with company, is it reasonable to assume CFO doing all this and subjecting himself to poetntial liability for minimum wage ?
Well at least we agree on something ! I already posted my prediction for the upcoming year and yes I think the prospects for this company are poor. I did predict they will de-register at some point, then decline further until they are on the grey market.
Please post 1 single thing that shows evidence of any success past three years, or any solid indication of why company will do better. Do you think it is corect for CEO to claim an MBA when he doesnt have one ?