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.
Tekky is fine with me, put him on, or in charge. He's pretty good with his research. I don't see any spam.
I know nothing, but a well respected group from a mid sized US oil company was seen in the area. Perhaps just passing thru.
TEKKY your posts are like watching a Soap Opera. Tune in tommorow to see if he gets her pants off. I love it.
To Clearthinking; there is nothing to look at. A web site that is down. No way to get any information. The whole two hundred and fifty million shares is worth less than one million. Unless you have inside information or public sources that I am not aware of, your not using clear thinking if you invest in this stock at the present time.
We on our way. We have a Friday buy rule. It looks like in the next 10 days we should get a quarter report. Me thinks it will be pretty good.
YOUR WRONG, HE HAS OUR MONEY.
No one said sell it. There are 3 posts that are deleted, if they were there it would make more sense to you.
Don't pick on EARNEST DD. Hes just trying to protect you from your self. Theres a reason these things are penney stocks. They should not be more than 10 % of your portfolio. Hes just saying be honest with your self when looking at penny stocks. Don't let emotion over rule the facts.
With insiders owning over one third of the stock this indeed could run.
Relax frankie, the guys a Yahoo. Guys like westerfer who have more stock than all the rest of us together are buying more. Thats whats important. That guy just likes to hear him self talk. I am still here and I have over 200 shares. What more could you ask for ?
It gets it over .07
Any one know the date of the 200 to one reverse split. HE HE HA HA
For what its worth, last week when I talked to Mr. Signorello I was impressed by his candor and demeanor. I checked out a few things he told me. The most important being the key people for the last 3 years have been taking half of their wages in stock. None of them have left, which shows there belief in what there trying to do. It looks like they now own a third of the stock. So in the last week I have doubled my position.
GOOD LUCK TO ALL THE OLD GUY
With 13 million ozs of gold this will be at least a 12 dollar stock.
Something to read while we wait.
HOME > WHATS NEW WHATS NEW
SMALL AND MID CAPS OFFER BEST GROWTH
Higher gold price will come so keep the faith - Sprott Asset Management
Charles Oliver and Jamie Horvat, both senior portfolio managers at Sprott Asset Management, explain how gold will react in the New Financial (dis)Order. Both foresee $2,000 gold in the next three years and, ultimately, "significant" hyperinflation on a global scale over the next decade. Interview with The Gold Report.
Posted: Saturday , 27 Jun 2009
VANCOUVER, BC (THE GOLD REPORT) -
The Gold Report: Jamie and Charles, on your site you've posted a recently updated report, "Reasons to Own Gold." In it you say that the impact of the derivatives has yet to express itself. Can you explain that for our readers?
Charles Oliver: There are many reasons to own gold. I think one of the biggest ones is the actual devaluation and debasement of currencies. Having said that, one of the lesser-known ones is the derivative market; if you look at the derivative market on a global basis, it is absolutely enormous.
And the downfall of the financial system last year in part was the fact that many of the banks in the financial system in the U.S. and around the world had a capital base that was leveraged up 30 times or more on their balance sheet. The derivatives market is hundreds of trillions of dollars. When you look at that relative to the capital base of the whole financial system, the whole financial system gets dwarfed.
So, in periods of volatility, you can have some huge swings in some of these instruments. Some of these instruments may be off balance sheets, and there's certainly an element of risk should some of these need to be unwound.
Jamie Horvat: We're in a deleveraging process now and we need to get our personal savings rate back in line, as well as our personal balance sheets and the banking balance sheets. When you have that leverage you get less lending. You need to continue with that growth; so, as a result of all of that, we're seeing governments move to quantitative easing, which is printing money and trying to force money into the system and force spending. Then what happens is currency is debased against all hard assets; and gold, as the ultimate store of value and a hard asset class in an exchange of money, over time reacts to that environment. It will have a positive bias going forward.
TGR: We read a lot about U.S. dollar devaluation and expected worldwide inflation. Why hasn't gold gone over $1,000?
CO: That's an excellent question. My own personal viewpoint is that today it should be at $2,000 an ounce, but it's not. I think that sometimes these things take a long time to work their way out. For example, look at something like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Last year they basically fell out of bed. There were people shouting out very loudly four to five years before that these companies were effectively bankrupt and insolvent. It just took a long period of time for the valuations to work their way out. In the case of gold, I do believe that it will be higher, but sometimes you've just got to be patient and wait for these things to unfold.
JH: The other thing we've been witnessing is the battle between deflation vs. inflation. People in the deflation camp think we're going into another Great Depression, the Dow is going to 1000 points and the only thing you should hold is cash, as the global economy will continue to shrink.
Since we have come off the gold standard-and the reason I believe we will never go back to the gold standard-governments have used quantitative easing or the expansion of money supply to reflate the system. We're going through one of those periods again where they print massive amounts of money and debase currencies vs. hard assets, in an attempt to reflate the system. I believe we are in a bottoming phase in the market; but we may retest the lows. The markets will continue to move sideways and be volatile as consumers continue to save and balance sheets are slowly repaired. Governments will continue to print and throw money into the system to expand the monetary supply and reflate the system. As you do that, you simply debase currencies.
So, you have this short-term fight between deflation and inflation similar to the sideways moving markets of 1973 - 1976. Gold moved from $33 an ounce to $38 to $180 or so, and in that sideways, volatile market from '73 to '76, it was knocked back down to around $100. Unfortunately, the end result of the quantitative easing resulted in stagflation. And that set up for the euphoric run of gold into the $800 range in the early '80s.
TGR: So would we expect to see something like that again, where gold will cross, and continue to trade, above $1,000? Or would we expect it to cross $1,000, spike and then come back down into that $900 range again?
CO: I don't think $1,000 is a magical number; it is a round number, so people look at it. But as I said, my own personal viewpoint is that gold will go through $2,000. I think there will be a spike at some point in the future, but I don't know how high that spike will be. I've heard people talk about $5,000, $10,000-I've even heard some numbers higher than that-and I can see the potential spike going to such levels. It's not a forecast at this point in time; I will keep a conservative call of $2,000 in the next three years, which is what I have been saying for a while. But, yes, I expect the spike will likely be significantly higher than that.
JH: The other aspect of that-where gold falls back to after the spike days-is we have to look at it in real terms and think of what the new marginal cost of production will be after that spike. So, whether it's $600, $700, or $900 gold as the new marginal cost of production, we will have to make that call at that time.
CO: Marginal production-and I may have a debate with my co-partner on this one-is a very valid comment. I think one of the other things you also have to look at is, in the spiking period, a number of other things will be going on. There will be a huge expansion of the monetary base probably over the next decade from a number of governments on this planet, and there will be a significant amount of inflation that occurs during the next decade. We do believe that hyperinflation is going to occur, and it will be quite significant.
So, I think in the next decade you've got to put it into a relative situation. I think the long-term norm price for gold will actually probably be well over $1,000 when we look back 5 to 10 years from now.
TGR: When you say hyperinflation will occur, are you expecting that to be worldwide or isolated as it is now while the major countries look at a large inflation period?
CO: I believe that hyperinflation is probably going to be on a large global scale, as most of the countries around the world competitively devalue their currencies. But it's a fact of life right now as the quantitative easing is going on, and in this type of situation, you are going to get significant inflationary impacts.
TGR: Once we go into stagflation or hyperinflation, I'm going to guess that it makes sense to be holding gold bullion.
CO: Gold bullion or assets that hold their value against inflation. And the stock market, funnily enough, can act as an inflation hedge. In fact, if you look at a lot of the studies, the stock market has been one of the best ways to protect your assets against the ravages of inflation.
JH: As Charles just touched on earlier, the hard asset classes-the companies with clean balance sheets that can pass through cost price increases, whether it's precious metals companies or gold bullion acting as a hedge or agricultural companies or other commodities companies-they tend to significantly outperform all the companies that are financially-based "lever" companies that don't produce real goods.
In terms of companies acting as inflation hedges, we've been looking for companies with sound balance sheets that are not going to go bankrupt in this environment. That's been a lot of our focus over the last year. If there is a product out there that people need and will continue to buy, it doesn't matter if it's a technology company; it doesn't matter what kind of good it is as long as there will continue to be a market for the end products. Even if times get tough, they will continue to buy it.
JH: Yes, you have to look at the balance sheets of the companies and really distinguish what is, and will, trade as a financial-based levered asset vs. those companies (whether it's technology, commodities, healthcare or consumer staples) that will be able to pass through those cost increases, has a clean balance sheet and will act as a store of value.
TGR: So, if we do find something that is acting as a hard asset and not a financial asset, how would you suggest investors look at something like gold sector equities compared to technology or other types of equities?
CO: When investors put together their portfolios, they have different needs, long-term objectives and risk tolerances. Ultimately, you've got to put together a well-diversified portfolio that has a number of different sectors and asset classes. One of the things that we individually, and over at Sprott, firmly believe is that in the current environment gold should definitely be a significant component. Over the last 20 years, most people were selling their gold and many did not own or believe in gold as an asset class.
JH: I would agree with that. Like all sectors, you have to look at the companies individually. Since about November of last year you saw people gravitate more toward the large liquid names in the gold space versus the small caps.
Since the start of this year, there's been a resurgence of the small-cap names. But even then, you still have to diversify and dig down deeper to look at companies that are pure explorers that don't have the balance sheet. They may not have the ability to obtain funding and may trade as a financial asset because they need to come back to the market; they have been overlooked and left behind.
The companies that are developing stories, or have production and are bringing on a new project and have cash flows and growth, are able to benefit in this market. So, even in the gold space you have to distinguish between which companies will not trade up as a hard asset.
TGR: Since last November and December, the gold majors have had quite a run up. Would we expect to see any more significant appreciation in the major gold equities?
CO: The simple answer is yes, because I believe the price of gold is going higher. So, I think many of these companies will benefit from increasing earnings and cash flow. Having said that, being the largest gold producer in the world is not a good thing because it's very hard to grow when you're at the top. In fact, most of the big guys, they're just doing mergers and acquisitions to maintain their current level. I believe that on a long-term basis, the best value and growth really comes from the smaller- and mid-cap sector of a well-diversified portfolio of gold companies.
JH: Along those lines, you have to look once again at the individual companies, the projects they're bringing on, the net asset values, IRRs or returns on those projects. Are they going to add value in the gold price scenarios under which they work? So, that's another aspect of looking at valuations between the various sectors of small-, mid- and large-caps-what projects they have, the viability of those projects, and how you would skew the portfolio to the various names as well.
JH: The other thing that we should just touch on is that we also like unhedged producers-the guys who are going to benefit from the upside in the movement of the gold price.
TGR: Following the guidelines you've just outlined, do you have any companies in that small- and mid-cap sector that you're looking at that you can share with our readers?
JH: Some of the names that we like and hold in the portfolio include: Allied Nevada Gold Corp. (TSX:ANV) (ANV), Lake Shore Gold Corp. (TSX:LSG), West Timmins Mining Inc. (TSX:WTM), International Tower Hill Mines Ltd. (TSX.V:ITH) (NYSE.A:THM), IAMGOLD Corporation (TSX:IMG) (NYSE:IAG), Osisko Mining Corp. (TSX:OSK), Romarco Minerals (TSX.V:R), Wesdome Gold Mines (TSX:WDO)-a mixed bag of some junior producers and growing production, some mid-cap names, pretty strong balance sheets and located in geopolitically safe jurisdictions of the world.
CO: In the juniors that are currently producing is a company like Wesdome, which is in Quebec. In Canada we also have Rainy River Resources Ltd. (TSX.V:RR) and Detour Gold (TSX:DGC), which are multimillion-ounce deposits currently undergoing studies. Another producer in the junior area in Canada would be San Gold Corporation (TSX.V:SGR).
A lot of our focus currently is on areas of the world that are politically safe and sound; so within the names Jamie just mentioned are a number of companies that are focused in North America, where you may be paying a bit of a premium for that. But I'm quite happy to have that safe jurisdiction because there are places around the world where you may think you have an asset, but the asset either gets taken away from you or the equity terms are renegotiated. So, there are risks that you try and minimize as best you can.
TGR: Could you tell us at a very high level what "baskets" these companies fall into (i.e., near-term producers, small producers, explorers)?
JH: Our all-cap portfolio is a blend of mid, large and small. We have a component of large-cap names at the core of the portfolio; but, as Charles mentioned earlier, the larger part of the alpha return of the fund comes from the small- and mid-cap names. One of the things we've done well over time has been manage on the margin-based on valuations and movements in the sector over time-a movement between mid-, large- and small-cap names on the margin of the portfolio to take advantage of the valuation discrepancies.
So, the list of the names that I gave earlier-they're in more politically safe jurisdictions focused on North America. We lean towards producers or near-term producers, development stories and away from pure exploration companies, and skewed towards that basket and all-cap approach, as well.
One of the names on the list is a development story; they're building a mine right now. One of them is a late-stage exploration company development story doing feasibility work. Three of them are ramping up production even as we speak. One of them is a mid-cap name. Osisko has all the financing in place and everything to build a mine. So, it is a mix, but it is skewed towards the late-stage development and near-term producers or ramping production or producing companies.
CO: In terms of the larger producers, some of the names that we have on our top-10 would be companies like IAMGOLD, Goldcorp (TSX:G) (NYSE:GG), Kinross Gold Corporation (K.TO) (NYSE:KGC)-we like all those names. In the slightly smaller areas in the development stages-and Jamie mentioned some of them-Osisko is going to be bringing on a mine in Quebec next year. Lake Shore Gold is ramping up right now. Allied Nevada just commenced commercial production.
As Jamie said, we're somewhat cautious on exploration because it's looking for a needle in the haystack; and sometimes it's hard to find the right haystack in the first place. One of the things we do engage in is a little earlier stage. We put a portion into names that usually have a fair amount of drilling, and although they've been given credit for this in the market, they may not have an official 43-101 confirming that they have a resource or a reserve. The amount of data that we can see in the public domain leads us to believe there's a very good chance that this will be a mine at some point in the future and has the potential to grow into a big resource and, ultimately, we will get a big multiple return.
TGR: One of the holdings that you have, Colossus Minerals Inc. (TSX:CSI), was never mentioned in your all-cap portfolio.
CO: If you look at the Precious Metals Fund, one of the first acquisitions we made when we came over to Sprott was Colossus. I went to Eric [Sprott] and said I was buying it for the Precious Minerals Fund, and he was very interested in the story. So, if you go and look at the annual reports, you will see that we've been a big shareholder of Colossus.
JH: Colossus is an example of what Charles touched on earlier-the very few and far between. A company that we could wrap our head around their geological setting, the historic database and holes being presented, the fact that it was a past producer, etc., and we could get a very good sense even before a 43-101 that this has a large potential of being a mine one day.
TGR: During 2008 you increased your bullion percentage, but I see right now from fund stats that bullion is at 5%.
CO: As we all know, the market was horrible last year. Gold stocks were being treated like any other stock; they were, in fact, probably being treated worse. So we felt that bullion was probably better, and increased the bullion weighting. We actually ramped up bullion from single digits to about 20% when we peaked in November, and that was because we liked the defensive nature of bullion. In retrospect, the bullion held up much better than the stocks, so it was a good thing to do.
As we looked at the valuations last fall, we said, "You know what? These stocks are so cheap it's ridiculous," and we started to reduce our position in bullion and redivest into the market. If you look at what's happened since that point in time, it's been a good call. We've taken our bullion down to about 5% of the fund, and if you look at the stocks, year-to-date, we're up 50%. If you look at gold bullion itself, in U.S. dollars, it's up 5% to 10%. In Canadian dollars, I think it's actually flat to down.
TGR: Well, that turned out to be a brilliant move. Let's talk silver. Many people are saying silver is really going to run up faster than gold due to its increased volatility. Do you have any thoughts on silver, and is it a counter-hedge inflation play like gold?
JH: We like silver. We expect silver to move with the gold price. Obviously, silver is often viewed as poor man's gold. Basically, it's easier to buy in smaller quantities because it's cheaper by the ounce and it's easier to store for the smaller investor.
If we want to look at a cycle and break it up into thirds, during the first two-thirds of a gold cycle, as we see it, silver largely trades as an industrial commodity. But in the last one-third of a cycle, it tends to play catch-up to the gold price and close that silver-to-gold ratio. So, historically, if you go back to 1971 when gold really came off the gold standard and you look at that silver-to-gold ratio, the median has been about 55- or 56-to-1. If you go back to the 1980s, it's hovered around 65- or 66-to-1. We got as high as, I believe, 81- or 82-to-1 in that gold-to-silver ratio, and now we're back down to that 65-to-1 range. So, it depends on your viewpoint of how much movement you see in the silver price going forward. As we see the precious metals or gold price appreciate, we obviously expect silver to move along with that.
TGR: In the last third you would expect it to move faster than gold, but it would really be more of a spike?
CO: If you look at what's happened in the last six months, silver has way outperformed gold. And I would say it's now sort of getting to that point where it's pretty close to fair value with gold under the models we've been running. So I am almost indifferent to owning either gold or silver right now, but silver's momentum from the last six months is probably still with it somewhat. So, it could overshoot to the downside, but, again, I think I am largely indifferent at this current level.
TGR: Are there any other observations you'd like to convey to our readers who are precious metals investors, as we look across 2009?
CO: Last year was very tough-it really took a toll on all of us. I've got scars on my back to prove it still. What I want to say is continue to believe in that higher gold price because that it is going to come. I am still convinced of that. Keep the faith.
JH: I was going to make a comment along similar lines. You know there were a lot of people who, I think, were in a very similar cycle from 1965 to 1984. We're experiencing that again, and we're in the '73 - '76 volatile sideways market. A lot of people made significant money from that first gold move from $35 to over $180 an ounce. And then a lot of people lost the faith during the quantitative-easing phase in the sideways volatile market and got squeezed out of gold. Whether you believe in this conspiracy theory or not, gold was pushed down to $100-or just below a $100-an ounce and missed that last euphoric run from '76 to the early '80s.
So, as Charles said, I would keep the faith; don't lose sight of the larger picture. Don't lose sight of the quantitative easing and the debasement of currencies versus hard assets and real things, and you will do well going forward.
TGR: Very good. Jamie and Charles, I appreciate your time.
Bringing more than 21 years of experience in the investment industry, Charles Oliver joined Sprott Asset Management (SAM) in January 2008 as an Investment Strategist with focus on the Sprott Gold and Precious Minerals Fund. Jamie Horvat joined SAM in January 2008. Jamie is co-manager of the Sprott All Cap Fund, the Sprott Gold and Precious Minerals Fund and the Sprott Global Equity Fund.
Article published courtesy of The Gold Report - www.theaureport.com
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
First let me say I have a love for that mine going back to 1960. It was then owned by ASARCO. Its not a silver mine. It is a base metal mine. LEAD and ZINK. At the present run rate if SILVER goes up a dollar an oz. It only adds 200,000 to the bottom line. If ZINK goes up .10 cents a lb, it adds one million 200 thousand to the bottom line. They are not even running at 50 % yet. This is a long term hold.Will double this year and double the year after. If the SILVER price takes off it will be a winner. If it does not, it will still be a winner.
I talked John Signorello later in the afternoon. He called me and while we were on the phone he had his tech department fix the problems with their E-MAIL. He didn't reveal anything new, but was up beat about the company. He assured me that they could in time reach scale. The stock price should then follow.
BEST OF LUCK TO ALL THE OLD GUY
Maybe its time for me to sell this stock. I tried to send e-mails to this company using two of the addreses on there web site. They both came back as undeliverable. Tried calling the company, can't get a live person. Was going to buy more. NOT FOR NOW.
I'm sorry TGB
Take a look at TBG TASEKO Triple play and NY listing along with the money to make it happen.
Another factor is that there appears to be an official Chinese policy to slow down export of rare earths. Chinese exports have decreased by 8% or so each of the past three years. Chinese suppliers have placed foreign customers on allocation, at reduced quantities from years past. The Chinese explain that they have closed mines for environmental reasons. Yet the Chinese also promise adequate supplies of rare earths if foreign users will move their industrial facilities into China.
According to Yoichi Sato, head of the Rare Earths Department of Japan’s Mitsui Industries, China is displaying its long-term strategy toward these critical elements. Mr. Sato believes that China is playing a complex game with the world’s rare earth consumers.
First, China is restricting rare earths exports, to provide its own high-tech industries with the chance to flourish and gain a competitive edge over rivals in Asia, Europe and the U.S. And second, it will force many foreign firms to move their high-tech factories and research centers to China to circumvent quotas. China, to be sure, has a small army of highly capable scientists and engineers who focus on rare earths applications — over 15,000 Ph.D.-level individuals, by one count.
Mitsui’s Mr. Sato believes that China will use its existing monopoly status in rare earths production to crush any competition that emerges. While about 42% of worldwide rare earths resources are outside China, there are NO non-Chinese sites with any significant processing or refining capacity. In the game of rare earths, China holds almost all of the cards.
Mr. Sato has stated, “Many people are looking at establishing alternative refineries and sources outside China, but the investment is not necessarily a sound one because of the threat of price revenge by China. If new projects emerge, as they have recently in Malaysia and Australia, China could just drop its prices and force rivals out of business.”
And as if on cue, in April 2009, Chinese firms used their financial muscle to buy large stakes in potential foreign rivals in Malaysia and Australia.
I hope that you now understand the importance of rare earths to the 21st-century economy of the West, particularly to the energy future of the U.S. I’m following this situation very closely. There ARE some potential investment opportunities in rare earths, but only in very small, thinly capitalized firms.
China’s Rare Earths Monopoly — All But Insurmountable
China’s support for Brazilian energy development is not the only angle that the Chinese government is pursuing for its future gain. China’s large reserves of foreign exchange, as well as its national strategic focus, has enabled incomparable — even insurmountable — progress for the Middle Kingdom to corner the world supply of substances called rare earths. Here’s the production chart for the past half century. Obviously, something is going on here.
Now that we’ve seen this chart, the questions arise: What are rare earths? And why are they important?
Rare earths are the 15 elements within the lanthanide series of the periodic table, plus the elements yttrium and scandium. The best known are lanthanum, cerium, neodymium, praseodymium, gadolinium, europium and samarium.
Here’s why rare earths are important. They’re used in a wide range of industrial and electronic applications. For many years, large amounts of lanthanum and cerium have been used in petroleum refining, with the result of increasing yields from each barrel of oil by about 10% while extending the life of other expensive catalysts like platinum. And rare earths find their way into myriad other applications, from aerospace super-alloys to rechargeable cell phone batteries.
More recently, large volumes of rare earths (especially neodymium) have gone into magnets. In fact, rare earths are a key component in strong, permanent magnets. It’s not those cute little refrigerator magnets; your computer contains a number of tiny magnets in its hard drive. If there are no permanent magnets, there are no computers. Or DVDs or DVRs or iPods, etc. Say farewell to your wired way of life.
And then there are the giant 1-ton magnets used in large windmill assemblies. Each windmill magnet is about the size of a car engine and uses 560 pounds of neodymium. The implication is that if the U.S. wants to erect windmills to generate electricity, the nation is making a long-term commitment to buy and use unprecedented amounts of neodymium. And there are NO substitutes. For just this one “clean energy” application, large amounts of rare earths — and the ores and mines to produce them — are essential.
There are many other clean-energy applications for rare earths as well, particularly in the now forming electric car industry. Neodymium magnets are key components in electric motors and regenerative braking systems used in hybrid vehicles. Without these magnets, no electric cars will ever roll off an assembly line, let alone whiz down an American highway.
Another significant demand for rare earths will come from large rechargeable batteries for electric cars. Nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) rechargeable batteries, for example, contain cerium and lanthanum in a form called “mischmetal.” And right now, NiMH batteries are the battery of choice for many hybrid vehicles. Overall, a typical hybrid electric vehicle can use about 50 pounds of rare earths — between the rechargeable battery pack, the permanent magnet motor and regenerative braking system. (Plus other tiny magnets for the sound system, power windows, power seats, windshield wipers, etc.)
So clearly, demand for rare earths is set to skyrocket. Just clean energy applications will drive unheralded demand for metals of which most investors — let alone consumers — have never heard.
It’s also important to keep in mind that almost none of the rare earths used in large power systems (like windmills) or electric vehicles (such as with NiMH batteries) are currently being recycled. The long lifetimes of the magnets and batteries, coupled with the lack of recycling technologies and dedicated facilities, means that any increase in supply can only come from new mining.
I will accept defeat. You are obviously a far better trader than I will ever be. So I will ask for your advice on the following positions.BEYS OPEN. MNCN NOW CLOSED BUT NOT FORGOTTEN. SGR AND SPM. THERE ARE SEVERAL MORE BUT THEY ARE THE ONES THAT I HAVE 3 OR 4 HUNDRED SHARES OF EACH.
BEST OF LUCK TO ALL
THE OLD GUY
The point is simply this, take some off the table and don't look back. There is always good news comming on every stock. But more times then not, it dosn't happen.
In september I will be celebrating 50 years of trading. The one mistake I have found that 98 % of all investors make, is that they NEVER sell. They ride them up and they ride them down. Even if they sell a little, they never take any money out of the market. Money is only good at one time in your life, WHEN YOUR SPENDING IT. Other wise, a pile of ten thousand rocks is just as good. When you got a nice hit, take the seed corn out. Take a bunch more and spread it around to your family. Let the rest ride. BEST OF LUCK TO ALL
THE OLD GUY
Any one who bought a ton at .08.
GO BABY GO
PATHOS THROWN INTO THE FACE OF DISPIRIT.
Due to a lack of responce to my calls and E-Mails, I have sold my position and moved on. The 10 Q sucked and no one will talk to me. It was 500000 shares. If they won't talk to a share holder of that size. Its goodbye. I have taken the money and added to my positions in MNAP SPM SGR and BEYS
BEST OF LUCK TO ALL WHO STAY THE OLD GUY
Now SPM is breaking out ITS GOING TO BE A GREAT YEAR. Now grandma can get that operation.
It is shapeing up to be a barn burner. This along with MNAP is going to make a big year for me.
This is a lonely place to be. But at this price, the right place to be. It will be slow, but it will be 1.50 in 18 months. Sooner if ZINK takes off.
It would be hard to respond to all this enthusiam with out sounding derogatory. IF YOU WANT TO SURVIVE PLAYING THESE TURKEYS please look up my old post on how to play them.
Best of luck to all. THE OLD GUY
Hello di4, nice to see someone here. I will be participating in the second offering. I was also in the first. Damm near loss it all. But the new management looks very strong. So I am taking another shot. At the present price my personal opinion is a strong buy up to .25. Please use only money you can afford to lose. I am also buying large blocks on the open market from time to time. I have a large position in MNAP, something that you should look at. Have a nice day and best of luck in all your endeavors. THE OLD GUY
I hope your right. Because I now have over a thousand shares.
It looked so good today, plus it gave a friday rule buy signal. I just had to buy more. So I added 200 more shares to my portfolio. Best of luck to all. THE OLD GUY
SSTP all over again ?
That go broke.
Go to SHORTSQUEEZE.com no float but lots of other info. Good site.