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.
Rich,
All of your questions have been clearly answered, often with the facts (or direction on where to find the facts) to support those answers. This has been done for you multiple times by mutlitple people. You've choosen to either not accept those answers because you don't like the answer or becasue of your own confusion.
Honsetly, at this point, I hope you're trolling. If you really aren't, I'd strongly encourage you sit down with someone you trust that has a financial background or a professional financial advisor and discuss some of these questions with them.
There's a big reason why a credible thrid party hasn't been retained to complete even the most basic (affordable) technical report.
The report would show there isn't 1 million ounces of gold reserves and the gig would be up. At least without such a report, the dreamers can still dream and PT can keep on collecting investor's money.
Another thought is perhaps this kind of report has been completed and it hasn't been shared becasue the results would put an end to this scheme.
They still can be considered an insider and would likely end up in trouble if it was discovered the CEO liquidated a large portion of thier holdings prior to negative news, like a company was filing for bankruptcy or closing shop.
But in less extreme circumstances the CEO can buy or sell when they choose.
Yes, technically CEO's can sell anytime they want to with two conditions.
1. They must report their share sales to the SEC via a Form 4 within 2 business days of the transaction. PT has routinely exceeded that deadline in his reporting. (In fairness, this isn't totally uncommon and won't necessarily call down the thunder from the SEC, but still viewed as extremely unprofessional by investors).
2. Usually mass amounts of selling and/or buying by a CEO shouldn't occur before big events are announced. The Securities and Exchange Commission doesn't prohibit executives from stock transactions ahead of earnings or major announcements as long as the transactions are registered properly. But many companies self-impose a black-out period for executives prior to earnings releases or announcements of other significant events.
Are the restricted shares part of PT's comp and/or bonus payouts?
As for the wash trade theory, it's certainly a possibility, but who's doing it and why? The MMs for the loan conversion?
Since April 1st. over 55 million shares have exchanged hands. That's almosty 25% of the eligble float availble for trade in the last 2 weeks.
Another indication that something significant happening behind the scenes.
The 20% drop didn't happen until today. Prior to that It sustained the .005 -.0555 level pretty well. Given the extremely high volume last week I would have thought we would have seen this drop into the .004s happen then.
I still can't get my head around why someone would be buying $20k - 50k of stock per day based on the public information available and Mexus recent confusing and contradictory PRs. So that makes me believe either somebody knows something or someone is way too emotionally attached to a falling stock.
Time will tell.
Perhaps.... but the timing of the PR related to the swell in price seems a little too coincidental.
The large volume spike is intriguing because it was initiated by a rally up to $.0075.
Someone was buying.... and willing to do so at a premium. Why?
If I had to take a wild guess, I would think someone was anticipating different news. There's no way the PR that was released would generate a demand to buy (especially not at a 30% premium of current price). I would guess that someone is pretty peeved right now.
How happy are you now after learning PT lied to you.... again.
Irmex is the (alleged) JV for the Mabel Property.
Umm..... That's an odd way to announce a CEO is retiring/leaving.
I also believe a toxic note conversion was projected to start today.
Why would having a JV established improve Mexus PR writing and marketing personnel?
Also, considering Mexus past experiences with JVs, I don't think it's a given a new JV equates to an automatic upgrade in operations and finances.
It's possible a JV could help Mexus improve in those areas, but it would most likely need to be a JV that is experienced and well funded. Not an unheard of start-up with limited resources.
Again, congrats on knowing McEwen and his Aussie buddies. Glad they invited you to thier birthday party. Too bad they weren't able to attend the one at Peppermill.
If they had attended, perhaps they could have taught the group where to find the term "solid modelizing".
You do realize you've still not provided a definition or link to any credible professional use of the term solid modelizing? Is it that hard to admit Mexus pulled the term out of thier butts?
Do I understand this correctly? It was asked what the term solid modelizing means or where one can find that term even used.
Your explaination/defense of Mexus using the never heard of term is it's legitmate because "I know McEwen".
Now I'm absolutely convinced the group of mexus longs are trolling the rest of us.
Again, the PR creates more questions than answers.
1. Who is Irmex? A "co-owner" statement is given, but no name is given for the IRMEX company rep. Given Mexus' history with Mar Mar's JV deception, this creates a lot of questions and uncertainties.
2. Is Irmex under a LOI or an actual agreement? There is a difference between the two. Previous PR's seemed to indicate a bona fide agreement was in place for cash and 10% net profit. Today's PR has this word salad that sounds like an agreement has not been signed
Significant isn't an accepted measurement for data. Nor is "noticeable".
The PR stating October revenue was made on Novemeber 1st. By any definition it can not be a forward looking statement as it has a number to a past month's revenue. Nowhere in the PR did it say "anticiapted refvenue" or "predicted revenue". It stated "...revenue for the month of October totaled $128,000."
Not sure what test mining exceptions has to do with anything, but I guess when one starts to lose the argument it's time to bring out the straw man and red herrings.
If there were a main reason an attorney wouldn't take the lawsuit it's becasue there's little chance of getting paid. While the case might likely be successful to litigate, Mexus has no money, and their assets are all rebuilt junk or next to worthless land.
Quack, quack. I hear today is the 21st and some quacker was promising news.
Guess the rumor wasn't all it was quacked up to be....
With gold being produced constantly at ever-increasing rates, why would there be a need for a JV or a buyout?
Or a need for a pirate ship to be built? Those are all signs that the gold mining business isn't going as smoothly as being portrayed in the PRs.
There's been a ton of volume the last week all while the price remains flat. What gives?
It can't all be toxic note conversion unless the MM's are playing games trying to create the illusion of buying and selling.
The only thing being spewed is old Mexus PRs. We are agreed that they are BS.
Wow what great news. Forgive me for not being just giddy with joy. We've heard this song and dance before.
How many times will you let Paul flat out lie to you before you stop trusting him?
I've been asking the same thing. Also, cash flow statements should show incoming and outcoming cash for sales regardless of expense offset and test miner exceptions. But I've not seen anything called out in that document either.
A correlation between increased gold prices and increase in Mexus share price will only occur IF
1. A the value of established mineral reserves are increased (which currently can’t be done because there are no official reports on mineral reserves)
Or
2. An increase in actual gold sales.
Considering Mexus gold sales are at approx. 33 oz per quarter a $100 increase in gold spot price would mean an increase of $3,300 in quarterly revenue. Annualized that means an increase of $13,200. Divide $13,200 by 367 million outstanding shares that ends up being an increase of .00004 cents per share.
You've been told where you can find your answers you choose to ignore them.
Nobody can tell you the exact number of oz of gold sold. The 10-Q only provided a dollar amount of $59,889. Assume a $1,800 spot price and you get approx 33 oz.
Toxic notes have continued at previous levels if not slightly higher.
If losses have reduced it's becasue expenses have reduced not because revenue has increased to offset those expenses.
One should then logical ask why would expenses have reduced? Have the mine operations slowed or scaled down? Are we using less consultants? Other?
Now, can you tell me where I can find information on IRMEX?
Yes. Given the recent 10-Q we can now clearly make the claim that Vlad is a liar. After all, according to you, Vlad and Kitco do their own independent research and don't just re-word company PRs.
Why does the 10-Q state $59,889 when the PR from Nov 1st clearly states $128,000 was sold in October?
Now I know you're trolling. So far Mexus has been the text book definition of toxic death spiral.
So no gold sales reported. And still no mention of the name of the refiner the carbon filters are being sent too. Maybe there was so much gold in the filters that customs hasn't finalized their assays for tax purposes.
One would also think if a deal was inked with IRMEX an 8-k would have been filed. Maybe it will show on the upcoming 10-q.
But hey, I'm sure those "who know what they own" have all those answers.