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.
Well, there is a point of view by which repeated placements is a vehicle used to deprive retail shareholders of their ownership and instead transfer ownership to the privileged group participating in the placements. If such was operative here then the placements can be understood that way. Otherwise one must just assume the past year plus shows history of a desperate attempt to survive financially. One might say it could have been both. Perhaps, so, however there is the possibility that the company does default, or has even been planned to default, resulting in the financing agreements providing a clear path for the transfer of control over the project assets. All things are possible in my view.
The thoughts you express are imo probably fairly widely held at this point. Just no incentive provided by the company to "believe", except for the AMF thing, the company seems to have been in a total standstill since the spring before last . . . aren't we just about exactly where things were for the meet and greet ? If this volume that moved the last two days is not just MM then that is encouraging that there is some potential for flips if the company does not just plain crash this thing by continuing as has been.
Maybe my memory is failing, but didn't a news release say that MUX was hosting site visits in January to Los Azules ?
Well, thing is, I tend to only count my chickens once the eggs hatch.
With luck an as expected or better TPW resource update will not be met with a wave of selling into the pps strength flattening it. By what PB mentioned earlier we likely first need to get past a placement and end of year loss taking. By then we may have an idea on the winter freeze-up and fund availability for KC. It is all looking like we may be on hold until a ways into Q1. Just what we all want, right, more waiting . . .
been a while since that sort of volume on Toronto exchange with pps increase
If that was getting out then be thankful it was not a large position
What's the Labrador Trough issue prompting the legal action ? Has anyone heard specifics ?
Yea, they must have been just about hitting send when I was - ha.
They make it sound like some headway - finally, but that overhang . . .
how long has it been anyway since the last update on the CIL circuit, on concentrate and/or dore shipments, assay results, funds receipts ?
It seems like very much too long if anything other than share placements and management/BoD changes have been happening.
Yes, although it is arguably James Clerk Maxwell, who passed away in 1879, that finalized most of what governs macro-scale electomagnetism's rules of behavior in the universe that we experience.
good luck with that point of view - lol
electricity is so well-known and the physical laws governing electromagnetism so rock solid for this local universe methinks you are hoping on a dog what don't hunt by goning down that road
Yep, 8 guage. I was going on the requirement they spec'd for running a branch box for 125 amp load center in the garage. There are a number of aspects of what the NEC specs that have mystified me.
But sure enough, there it is
Voltage 240, Watts 28, 500, Amps AC 120 . . . Wire Size (AWG) 8
for
Temp. Rise @ 1.5 GPM 129.77, Temp. Rise @ 2.5 GPM 77.862, Temp. Rise @ 4.0 GPM 48.6637
I would expect that every electric tankless would have very similar specs in terms of watts needed per degree-GPM deliverable
PS Did you notice this one
http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/EEMAX-Electric-Tankless-Water-Heater-6VEE9?cm_sp=IO-_-IDP-_-RR_VTV70300505&cm_vc=IDPRRZ1
Voltage 120, Watts 3500, Amps AC 29
Now that is not a normal plug-in, but an RV hook-up type plug-in
and it can heat
Temp. Rise @ 0.5 GPM 48, Temp. Rise @ 1.5 GPM 16
or, not quite handle a shower if one only needs to heat the water 16 degrees
which 100 million within TNR the markets might discount in the shareprice not fully reflecting that 100M because they cannot move it out of the conntry leaving CZX to wait it out or choose to realize only a percentage by liquidating the holding to others willing to wait
not sure if Argentina is making distinctions between income from resource sales and capital gains from sale of resource bodies
right, as long as the loss from magnetic drag is overlooked due to their forgetting to use copper instead of iron pipes
but then that is what development is for, right
try this and when it doesn't work maybe try that, ey?
They indicated before 4 magnetrons. I don't know if they ever said 1500 watt magnetrons, but that is the larger of the common, off-the-shelf commodity magnetrons available from many manufacturers at competitive prices. So yes 4 times 1500 is 6000 watts, which would be the max heating that could be delivered with all 4 switched on together (drawing something like 55 amps at 110 volt, not counting energy cost to boost to the kilovolt range needed to power the magnetrons).
we have been there already, as Beers' reply hints.
if you have 4 magnetrons, and only 2 are ever firing at the same time, then the max heat you can put into the water is the sum of the ratings of 2 of the magnetrons.
with 4 rated at 1500 watts each the total heating ability, 6000 watts, is way below other electric tankless units that claim to supply a (one) small bathroom usefully
120 amps @ 240 volts with #8 wire
! ! ! I don't want to be hanging around that overloaded wiring ! more like #3 or #2
Rick Rule: Be a Risk Manager, Not a Reward Chaser
Interesting read, interview with RR posted today
http://www.resourceinvestor.com/2012/11/27/rick-rule-be-a-risk-manager-not-a-reward-chaser?t=mining-investments
Some observations on the sector those here might want to read.
I will pull forward a few quotes.
Four years ago, an irrational metric appeared that sticks in investors' minds: ounces of gold in the ground per dollar of enterprise value. You divide the enterprise value into the number of ounces, without taking into account the capital cost of bringing the ounces into production, the cost of extracting the gold or the time value of money. Ounces were valued irrespective of whether or when they would be recovered.
somewhat hidden, is that we are coming into a discovery cycle. In the next 12 to 24 months, we are going to see reasonable, maybe spectacular, discoveries with increasing frequency.
TGR: How does an investor know when to jump into a junior exploration market?
RR: That is a big topic. In brief, the dynamic changes from market to market. You need to figure out which parts of the market are unloved and, hence, available. You have to pay attention to where the values are and set your strategies not by what you wish would happen but by the facts represented by pricing in the market.
The most common mistake I see speculators make is regarding the market as a source of information. It is not. It is a mechanism for buying and selling fractional ownership of businesses. Getting your information from the market is the same as getting your information from the expectations of 10,000 people who probably know less about the topic than you do.
Most speculators are reward chasers not risk managers, which is why most people who come into the sector fail.
TGR: At the conference, you are talking about The 9 Nosy Questions to Ask Mining Experts. What is the one fatal question investors do not ask?
RR: Can I have two?
First, you must ask a management team to describe its track record of success. For example, a promoter might tell you he operated a gold mine in Precambrian rocks in French-speaking Québec but his new project is exploring for gold in tertiary volcanics in Spanish-speaking Peru. It is important to understand management's track record of success in an endeavor that is relevant to the current situation. Investors are not discerning enough with regard to the specific expertise needed in every task.
The second thing that's critical is to ask management how funding will be obtained. Reward chasers will sit at a booth and the promoter will say we have 800,000 oz. (800 Koz.), we're going to drill 50,000m, there's going to be this new flow, we're going to do this and we're going to do that. What the investor has to say is, hmm, interesting, so how much money is this going to take over 18 months? How much general and administrative (G&A) expense do you have? What's the relationship between G&A expense and exploration expense? If you don't have the money, why am I listening to you? Many times I'll be on the exhibit floor and somebody will have a $10M exploration budget and a $3M G&A budget, so there's $13M to answer my unanswered question. And they have $2M in the bank. I say to them that I don't really have to listen to you anymore because you're $11M away from giving me the answer that's going to get me an increased share price.
I believe it was around last July or Aug when imho outrageous value estimates were being tossed about here, based on 30 times larger and virtually nothing else as far as I could see, that I then mention Moneta Porcupine, Brigus, and Rubicon as comparisons for in-ground values. Destinator, then not long before leaving the board, picked up on Rubicon being in a different camp, but otherwise that comparison post went pretty much without comment. Obviously in-ground values for resource not yet being mined has not much changed. Moneta is back off the mid-summer lows, but only back to a more accustomed trading range for it. Part of my post back then was to point out that Moneta also holds a very large land position in the area, which one would think also factors into their modest valuation. Point was, and is, that it takes much more than having a large prospective geological structure, a good land package, or even a compliant resource north of the 3 million ounce mark to bring the pot at the end of the rainbow so many then were, and in cases perhaps still are, focused upon.
Ouch - Fidelity, correct? That makes me glad my MUX is in my WellsTrade instead of my Fidelity, as I am being charged zero for the exercise and oversubscribe, which will be considered as one trade by them.
409 g/t (11.9 oz/T) Ag, 10.23% Pb, 8.37% Zn, 0.114 g/t Au over 6.68 metres and 185 g/t (5.4 oz/T) Ag, 5.22% Pb, 5.58% Zn, 0.478 g/t Au over 10.33 metres in hole LP1030
Interest seems to have slowly started to pick up in EXN/EXLLF but it doesn't seem many are onto the fact that exploration is closing in on the source flow for the mantos mineralization the company has been working.
It is much as if everyone is still cautiously watching whether the blockage issues are or are not behind.
Above results are from the NR:
Excellon reports highest grades to date at Rincon del Caido
November 15, 2012
http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1071645/excellon-reports-highest-grades-to-date-at-rincon-del-caido
CD buying must be error of your source as SEDI still is not showing any transactions by CD 2011 or 2012
0.50 meters @ 470.00 g/t gold and 224.0 g/t silver (474.5 g/t gold equivalent) starting at 106.5 meters in TU-12-224
1.10 meters @ 117.50 g/t gold and 229.0 g/t silver (122.1 g/t gold equivalent) starting at 123.5 meters in TU-12-222
the headlined intercept of the NR does not emphasize the grades seen
not many exploration projects showing these assay grades, and if I am not mistaken together these are more at these grades above 100 g/t than reported (grade*width) for the area in the initial resource estimate
Too bad one has to have a FB account to play this gold contest game. No way I play the invasionware game.
"I don't think most folks read it that way. I think most are expecting Intertek results on or before Dec. 6th"
"As a result, I am pleased to be shortly re-confirming a testing date at Intertek's Laboratory without delay, where this new protocol will further validate the unique microwave energy tank-less water heater's performance efficiency results. With this being said, I am hopeful that Wanderport will have a video to demonstrate a functioning unit and performance efficiency results on or before December 6, 2012."
Interesting that the CD trading does not show in the SEDI database.
Going straight to the horse's mouth
http://www.sedi.ca
and pulling transaction detail report for
"Transaction date range : January 1, 2012 - November 26, 2012"
all I see is "Frigon, Jacques Florien" exercising 100k options on 2/20/2012 and selling the same amount 100k shares on 10/22/2012 at 0.120 each, these all recorded as 3 transaction entries
Maybe other transactions will show up soon and there is some "glitch" with the SEDI web interface, but I have never seen such as Canadian Insider show transactions not visible in the SEDI database, and by the way, Canadian Insider is not showing any CD trading either
http://www.canadianinsider.com/node/7?menu_tickersearch=EXS+%7C+Explor+Resources+
Also, if I am not mistaken, if there was purchasing by CD last week that would mean that there is not going to be a Ni 43-101 update before 2013 wouldn't it, given the usual freeze on trading by insiders prior to release of major material news.
interesting observation on the Los Azules deposit
I've watched ppp since the sale/formation . . . big thing to me is what catalysts are in the future for mux or ppp in order to make comparison for near-term gains. Right or wrong I have noticed that the market seems to punish or over-punish producers that carry PM stream obligations. MUX is free of this burden and so can be seen by markets as fully leveraged (or deleveraged as prices might go) to the long-term trend in PM values (or as otherwise stated, to the long-term exhaustion of the value in fiat currencies). PPP on the otherhand is facing a double whammy in 2013, with the large Goldcorp shareholding coming out of restriction (and they did liquidate pretty quickly the shares from the note payoff this year) and the silver stream contract with Sandstorm hits its inflection from 3.5 to 6 million ounces per year, both coming up around mid-year. So what upside other than changes to production volume and economics might ppp have in store to counter these impacts? On the otherhand MUX has a pipeline of projects underway and could see catalysts from a number of fronts.
All jmo, obviously.
Doesn't matter.
Sorry Harry, didn't follow you. "orderbook" ?
seems to me you are making big assumption about the communication and how the future events were presented
my assumptions were along the line . . .
Hi, I am calling from xyz,a shareholder investigative agency with 25x years of law enforcement experience on staff, and we are planning on researching the background of your company, Wanderport, in the near future. We would appreciate cooperation in . . . .
ps - finding something an "Interesting info on the apprehensive response" as is what I had to say is one thing . . . but it seems to me the "alluding to something being fishy" was provided entirely by your brain and is quite another thing.
MUX For The Week Up 10.40 Percent Nice :~]
methinks shorts may be finding it hard to cover their arses by buying rights.
I will be calling my broker again on the rights exercise later in the next week, as I have not seen the involved cash encumbered (nor the rights replaced by shares - which I did not, do not expect to happen until after Dec 4). I thought the broker said the cash would be encumbered however.
seems insider know already more....
oh please, do tell . . .
The only required insider transaction filings I find from 1/1/11 to date are all in 2011, and except for a few option exercises all of the share transactions have been selling into the open market
PS
How is it that Rob McEwen does not show up in insider filings for LEX reported by SEDI ?
Good to hear from you Sushi. That compare to the water heater timeframe sure gives lots (and lots) of time. Interesting info on the apprehensive response, and your assessment makes sense. Please keep us in the loop. Looking forward to a look at that website.
not sure he knew what he was getting into when the initial contract was signed . . . technical advisor surely sounds like something different from the all--in-one (and only) product development, engineering, and test division - lol
IMHO it is fair to say that TMS is FOS. He has been systematically wrong on the valuation of gold since 2008.
lol - make a radical prediction about a volatile commodity and the odds are that eventually it turns out looking right even if it was only close for a radical swing
Of course we all know it is actually a matter of timing it that pays most.
I wonder if he has someone in mind now because he talking about it in the interview.
Don't you think that the reporter only mentioned attempts to follow-up with four Asian jumbos, and particularly that all had no acknowledgement to offer, telling?
My guess is that the deeper-capable drills have been at work 24-7 and as in-process holes are completed they are moving to the contested area as soon as pads and access can be prepared, all with the target of getting some initial cores and hopefully assays ready by the time
“We put a data room together,” McEwen said last week. “We’ll be inviting people who have expressed an interest down there in January.”
McEwen Mining will target qualification for the Standard & Poor’s 500 index during 2015 and will probably seek an acquisition before then, McEwen said.
That sort of surprises me Tomberry, particularly as I tried to indicate I thought I was giving my most optimistic with a maybe up to . . . if . . . kind of wording.
Why imo the investment community has this reception ? Management, or more specifically the lack of experienced, visioned fiscal management
why not ? if you reread the post probably answers that anyway
just keep in mind the Dec 4 expiration