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.
No, the link shows all transactions in the past 6 months.
The CD transactions were on the last day of May and filed in June.
If you use www.sedi.ca you will also find that those are the only insider transactions with filings for Jan 1, 2011 to date.
Hi Pastorboy, not sure why the reply was to my posting, and I take your usage of "you" as generic to the board.
While posting, let me add a couple pennies to the discussion this morning.
You PB if I recall indicated that the long haul could be another 100m in more drills to prove up TPW. I hope that is not before some deep pockets gets interested with $$s where their eyes/mouth are.
IMO the pps is reaping the combined impact of the global market and probability that financing/fund availability could dry up for exploration juniors plus the circumstances of EXS in specific. Even the darlings of the Yukon are today trading at half of their summer peak pps, and those are the well funded ones with drill targets ready for 2012 and the money in hand for their program next year. Of course concerns with weak money positions are being hit even harder.
From all I have seen/heard/read CD is good at his game - geology and exploration. He does not seem however IMO appear to he the correct business leadership for EXS. Maybe I am wrong, but it does seem to me that EL, Destor or other properties could have been worked up more inexpensively to the point where they could have been attractively optioned or JV'd for further development, possibly this could have been done for a couple properties even without further workup/cost to EXS. That would have a) reduced costs to maintain those properties in inventory, b) moved those properties forward sooner and largely at some other company's expense, and most importantly c) added some to the EXS treasury.
It is great to create a wall hanging by hammering brass headed tacks into a nice piece of oak, but you must be able to afford sufficient brass tacks else the project will end up on a pile waiting to be finished. I sort of see us as having a very nice wall hanging about 10 or 15% complete but the cost of tacks keeps going up and the pockets keep getting more and more empty.
CD himself was buying stock at much higher prices in May of this year
try the original for a real arggggghhhhhh !
any more simplified and the facts would not imo be captured
as I once stated to the board
I do not see much if any protection from this plan except against a Flip-in event
and
I would really enjoy hearing view of anyone that has taken the time to try to understand the convoluted writing of the plan
It is mainly the first few at 2.x, 2.3 if I recall, and 3.1 plus the definitions section that one needs to focus on.
There is very much that deals with how the board can adjust stuff, but most seemed to me either mathematically fair adjustment to events or else required shareholder approval, and there is also clauses about what happens if this or that, such as a split and again this all seemed to me to be mathematically reasonable.
Again, I would enjoy hearing anyone else that has formed an opinion on this plan.
The $100 in the summary mailed out seems, based on what CD said, to be a mistaken statement. In the current plan the $100 has no direct impact on the Exercise Price and so none on the pps of the shares obtained by exercising the rights. The offering of shares when a Separation Event happens is a placement direct from the company and the $100 is the minimum amount an investor needs to exercise in the placement. At current prices that seems to say if there was a takeover today anyone with less than around 200 shares would have no benefit (200 rights at 2 times Market Price would be close to the $100 minimum)
Well, CD emailed with a link to the Shareholders Rights Plan, but what I downloaded turned out to be the old plan.
CD stated:
"The new one will be the same as the old one just the dates changed. The shareholders have to approve it."
So, taking that at face value, the summary of material facts must must be in error in a number of ways.
i.e.
Exercise Price is not $100 as adjusted . . .
In the plan, the Exercise Price is twice the Market Price on the Separation Date. But any exercise of rights subscription has a $100 minimum, which must be where the author of the summary got $100 as the Exercise Price.
Market Price needed to be capitalized to indicate it does not have a common sense meaning but the 20 day average one.
The "double" was omitted for how to determine the number of shares resulting from exercise of rights upon a Flip-in.
In other words, per CD, the new plan is the old plan with the couple places that define expiration of the plan now moved forward (? for another 3 years ?), but otherwise the doc now on Sedar is what we are asked to vote on.
FYI I have already emailed asking for access to the new plan, and pointing out that Sedar does not have the new plan, contrary to what the notice seems to indicate.
Dog's breath (or breakfast) is a good term for it by the way. It is definitely a pile of lawyer-speak.
My attempt to translate likely seemed too complex, but believe me, not only was it about 1% the length of the actual doc, it did greatly simplify while trying to be accurate. It is not a straightforward piece of work !
It seems to me the ask on the Toronto has been tracking very close to the 0.45 ratio. The close pps today is at 96.66% of what it would be for 0.45, a whopping 3.33% discount. I am used to seeing larger discounts with the shareholder votes so far out. With MAI being the cash generator in the deal, one oould ask: why UXG is not discounted more via the MAI shares ?
WDRP setting new highs !!!
lol and $1000 plus a good dinner bought the entire day's trading
I will take a crack at translating, but up front I must say that the terms of the new plan have been modified extensively from those of the existing plan that ends this December, and the only info available about the new plan is this "summary of the material terms".
The copy of the plan available on Sedar, was posted Nov 1 subsequent to my contacting the company requesting a copy and informing them that contrary to statements in their news releases of 2008 the plan had never been posted to Sedar. The plan available today from Sedar is the existing plan and so does not help in understanding what we are being asked to vote upon (the provided "summary of material terms" is that different).
The existing plan defines one right attached to each share, and the rights have a nominal redemption value, if I recall correctly, of $0.0001 each. So, if the new plan is not accepted the announcement states that the existing rights will be redeemed (perhaps sending check, broker credits, or? of $1 per 10,000 shares held). The existing plan states that the rights will expire if the plan is not extended so the rights do not actually need to be redeemed.
Basically, the existing plan lets everyone that is not mounting the takeover buy shares, presumably diluting the issuance and making those mounting the takeover buy more shares in order to be successful in the takeover. It is not clear to me that the existing plan really accomplishes that, since once an event triggers the plan (i.e. there is a "separation" event) the rights separate from the shares and may be transferred independently (i.e. we could sell them to the takeover parties if we choose). The other reason it is not clear to me is that in one type of takeover the exercise price is "roughly" twice the share price (i.e. pay double for one share).
In the existing plan, for "roughly" twice the market price of EXS if an event triggers the plan, then we (non-takeover parties only) would be allowed to exercise the rights to obtain
1) one share of EXS if the event was not a Flip-in event
2) shares equal in value to twice the exercise price if a Flip-in event
(note: there are some "roundings" in that summary due to the way "market price", "separation date", and "exercise price" are defined; but imo the summary is close to the effect of the plan and the roundings are difficult at best as they make assumptions on how the market has reacted to the takeover)
So, trying to be more accurate, in the existing plan, for an Exercise Price that is twice the Market Price of EXS at the Separation Date we (non-takeover we) could obtain:
1) one share of EXS if not a Flip-in (i.e. "roughly" one share for double price)
2) shares of EXS valued on the Separation Date at twice the Exercise Price (i.e. "roughly" a two times two or four shares for twice the price of one)
The rounding, and "roughly", is from the defintiions that
a) Market Price is an average over 20 days
b) Separation Date is ten days after the event that triggers
separation
c) Exercise Price = twice Market Price on Separation Date
d) calculation of number of shares in a Flip-in does not use definition of "Separation Date" for the date of the Market Price used
(i.e. it is a mess - so I go with "roughly", and I have a Masters in Mathematics !! )
How does this "summary of material provisions" make the new plan seem to differ from the existing plan? Answer: Significantly.
In the existing plan "Market Price" is a defined term (20 day average), but in the summary here they did not capitalize it, so that is either a mistake or market price is no longer a defined term.
Exercise Price in the existing plan is two times the Market Price on the Separation Date. Here it is $100 "subject to adjustment and certain dilution provisions" (but we do not know what those are).
In the existing plan a Flip-in gives the "roughly" four for price of two, but that seems to have been written out of the new plan:
If a Flip-in Event occurs, each Right will entitle the registered holder to receive, upon payment of the Exercise Price, Common Shares having an aggregate market price equal to the Exercise Price.
If it is 110 volt it will not have a plug but will need to be hardwired.
4 x 1600 watt is almost 60 amp on 110 volt. Maybe there is a special plug for that, but I have only run on standard, 20 amp, and 30 amp.
Actually as I recall GM of MS was still a supporter, at buy, but visibly turning sour during the late summer placement last year that took a very long time to close. That was one of the factors that lead me to off 60% down to free shares (slightly under a double) when the pps recovered some later in the year. Since then this has gone no where, well maybe leading the TSX downward, but has appeared to follow the pattern that was visibly souring GM back then. I still hold all the free shares and have been tempted to cost average up based on the EXS basics, but have not yet based on the dominant macroeconomics and the more likely quick gain in the pure metals at some point.
IMO I think it is widely held opinion that elected officials no longer are able to do anything except look out for their own and their parties' own interests, and that they have totally lost sight of what it is for which they are thought to have been sent to Washington.
The polls for some months running have shown the popular approval rating of the US Congress is less than 10%.
We could IMO send nothing except total movices, randomly selected citizens, and faced with being forced to figure out what needs to be done they would come up with better, provided no self-interested "party or parties" could grab their ears (and minds).
Looks like the customer depository shortfall just doubled (or more?)
MF Global Shortfall May Exceed $1.2 Billion, Trustee Says
http://news.businessweek.com/article.asp?documentKey=1377-acRCnf0HYI5c-26HJ0P45ICJHSA2HCUDRDLBNHO
>> This is just a bounce for the dollar in a LONG trend down.... IMO. Commodities will rule.
Sure, without a doubt, real assets always rule . . . eventually
In the meantime imo players are sensing it is the US that will lead the western economies out, to the extent they surface out. IOW although the question of the surfacing is still very operative, it is not just a reflex flight to safety, per old school thinking, but a ranking of fiat vs worse than fiat.
More QE by that name? Well they have been having a very hard time shining up the armor so the Bernanke can play the knight riding to the rescue. Where does one find the current totals for volumes flowing through all the discount windows and trade facilities anyway?
Well, the PR announcing the third, announced it as a third patent that they did have (in process) at that time of the announcement, as in, to paraphrase, we now have three patents on the involved technology.
If they were counting the by then abandoned old Pulsar related patent then that PR is very questionable.
Markets need to know where the bottom will be found. Until then much money is sidelined. Look at PCY, was up early on news today that all final permits are granted, but now off 2 to 3%. Similar probably most everywhere news is being scattered into this headwind.
As Timothy said, "go figure" about the money ducking into the dollar all the same. Is it really force of habit, or actually an assessment of relative dangers and resiliency ?
IMO EXS is recently trading only on the basis of capacity to finance ongoing operations and going concern considerations.
I am sorry, but I read this release this morning and did not see any new information that addressed issues that have been raised, recently or further in the past. What is it you see that I do not ?
Finally the news we have wanted . . . and some interesting forward-looking info included.
Prophecy Granted Landmark Chandgana Power Plant License
http://www.prophecycoal.com/news_2011_nov21_prophecy_granted_landmark_chandgana_power_plant_license.php
I am wondering on the "by whom" for the sentence
Construction of transmission lines linking the two cities through Chandgana is seen as a top priority for a much improved and efficient national Mongolian energy system.
The target construction commencement date is Q1 of 2013
Yes. The pps, in this atmosphere + loss season, never has gotten recovery momentum after the day of the 1+ million share sell-off (looked like one big block that wanted out) shortly after the Argentina decree.
Still heading toward the initial NI 42-101 with a lot of drills in hand.
I believe if the application(s) are withdrawn prior to the 18 months they disappear. Isn't that what they claim happened to others?
WDRP investors will be waiting longer than that for efficiency numbers and for any closure on the AMF securities manipulation matter.
I wish I did have good (WDRP) news.
I scan that board now and then, rarely see a post to bother to read, post maybe once each week or two just to have presence or provoke Its almost funny (probably should not have said that with the post from eDD here some time back).
I have read this board for a long time, but this is the first I have posted, letting you all know.
There is just not much to say (and did not feel well enough known to have sympathized on the leg injury when it went down).
I scan the yahoo also - looking for a verifiable positive indicator.
Like Wrinkles I may be back in at some point, made some money on WDRP, nowhere near to the hoped, and I may regret not riding through these lows. It is just the chance I am taking, mostly due to how badly the company has handled everything these past couple years but especially these past four months. I have hopes for them, for the product, but it has all become an infrequent waiting game for me.
Cheers and good luck to you all.
How many more months now should WDRP investors be patient?
Thanks for providing the info.
I guess I need to reread the recently filed financials, as I was left with the impression that there would be around 3.5M in the treasury after the CA placement and after paying off the accrued obligations.
I hope your numbers are correct, in fact that all you reported is as it all sounds positive.
I have always assumed that since the ConfAgreement is public fact, if AEM had broken off that fact would have to be made public as a material fact.
Yes, many interesting reads and much speculation/interpretation on the net over MF Global. Jefferies sounded near insolvency just from its Eurozone exposure, now these lawsuits.
What I have not seen discussed, given the apparent role of MFG as commodities/futures "affiliate" for Goldman S, is what was the impact on, or rather for, GS and its positions. I see where the CME warehouse depository report for Friday the 18th for Ag shows about 1.5% of the Ag registered or eligible is indicated as unavailable due to MFG, but beyond that I have seen nothing of what, if anything, has happened relative to the size of the GS net short position, or the other major Ag/Au banksters for that matter.
Definitely worth monitoring. It is pretty hard to understand how so many see criminal actions, but the authorities do not, unless one is willing to twist one's mind. Sort of reminds me of today, I was driving listening to the NPR news editorials, in the one about the situation at Penn State, a local lady who knew the ex-president (of Penn State) was asked if she thought he knew - she said yes - was then asked if that made him a bad man - she said she guessed being a politician for so long let him have morals different from the rest of us - I am thinking she knows that "bad" is acting contrary to what is moral, so to avoid saying he is bad she explains why his morals are different !! like that is common and acceptable sense. It will be very interesting to see what all unwinds in the near future.
By - a possible question set:
How much money is needed at the present burn rate and drilling rate to keep the company exploring and solvent through the end of 2012 ?
and
How much free, not committed, cash is in the treasury now ?
and
What is the status of the US placement offering ?
Not to cut into a Joe/Tim discussion, but just adding that I really, really hope AMY does not release good or great news in this economic environment !!! There was surprising price strength (not volume) on the venture exchange Friday early, but that is about the only positive in some time, imo all due to the macro-economic terrain and the pending US debacle. I would just as soon see AMY holding its bottom-line through the storm and let the good/great news out when the markets are feeling a little relief rather than having it lost in the gloom.
jmo of course
Very possible he asked for an extension because they are crazy busy with the product launch, testing, manufacturing etc.
This one seems to be article from which McCoach lifted much of his quoted text
http://www.infowars.com/mf-global-looted-customers-accounts-via-internal-bank-run/
Your first link was a pretty strong message imo.
BTW, on the questions email, there is that confusion over where the drills are now targeting to clear up , per this post and its linked history
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=69071945
Yes, even though that does not sound as fun as walking up on you, looking like some scruffy prospector, from behind a hill out at the property and in talking mentioning Blackwater
I cannot PM else I would have send my email and it appears you cannot either (free accounts), and I know Google must have server time indexing iHub full-time given how fast posts show in searches.
Intending no offense, but do you have any source to which you may refer on these ? other than the blog
This board has know about the arsenic for a while, maybe not that it implies a high cleanup cost however.
Please recognize it is a bit of a stretch to take your appearance here with a brand new alias that has only posted here too seriously without some support.
News release: outlines revenue position
http://www.firerivergold.com/s/NewsReleases.asp?ReportID=491504&_Type=News-Releases&_Title=Fire-River-Gold-Corp.-Announces-Additional-Revenue-from-the-Nixon-Fork-Mine...
or
http://www.firerivergold.com/i/pdf/FAU111811.pdf
This goes quite some distance in answering what I have previously posted as one of my needed disclosures, i.e. continuity of concentrate shipments. After my earliest post expressing that concern the company issued a PR (Oct 28) that described their concentrate shipment practices
24 bags comprising 21.2 dmt (dry metric tonnes) of gold-rich copper concentrate. The bags are palletized and flown from the Nixon Fork Mine aboard a Hercules L382G airplane. Shipping lots of 24 bags are assembled in Anchorage at Lynden Air Cargo's facility and barged in secure 40 ft. containers to Seattle for ocean transport to the PASAR smelter in Isabel, Philippines.
Thx for the heads-up Destinator, I usually would not get to checking that email account for a little while . . . You are right, pretty harsh and possibly an accurate speculation on how it all went down
I wish the Financial Times article link was not goofed/broken in the McCoach email but it appears it is not the first, perhaps the second or later in
http://search.ft.com/search?queryText=Celente++and+%22MF+Global%22
I imagine there is something similar at zerohedge or the GATA site
Just thought it would be nice to find something for the others on the board outlining the claim of how MF Global going bankrupt caused the frozen account to loose its taking delivery of physical per the claim allowing it not to be seen that delivery could not be met.
Rough summary for those without . . .
Hi Joe, This is a perfect example of why I question the directorship of EXS. Getting a shallow open pit defined and going is so very cost-effective compared to hardrock/underground, so if one has the prospects of both types it seems usually one sees companies going for the open pit cash flow first as a way of funding the rest.
In this case LSG got this property from Barrick in Aug, did only a couple drills for comfirmation and one reported not long ago to test depth, but they acquired a huge resource with pit plan etc that was based on some 300 shallow holes. The 2m I&I resource is the tip of the iceberg for Fenn Gib given the info from the hew holes LSG has punched, and it is near the open pit they had already been planning on another property, but the downside is Barrick's backin rights.
Anyway, compare this to the amount of drilling LSG did for the 1M I&I reported just the day before for Thunder Creek initial NI43-101. It was something like 4 to 5 times the amount EXS has done so far on TPW property, 440 holes totally 131,000 meters and more than three-fourths of that they managed to do with underground drilling after they drift over at the two levels.
Now sure, Thunder Creek may end up with lots more AU after the full extent to depth and around the existing plunge structure is all known and worked. Probably even grow beyond Fenn-Gib in the final total (although Fenn-Gib has much upside both at depth and in extension).
But the point is it is much more expensive to get into production.
EXS has potential for openpit, but it has apparently chosen to go after a new underground mine without a cash-flow, which has to be the most difficult thing to do in the mining business even in a great and credit rich economic terrain.
Thanks for posting the LSG news, even though it is moderately far along the DP fault from the TPW proerty. It still shows what EXS could be looking at doing.
all jmo of course (except stats)
Blackwater2, I was thinking of making it over for a short camp between the weekly drizzle storms, almost thought for a minute we might meet, but too many changes on the land happening now that the last irrigation of the season (which they goofed up and had to rerun for me 3 days later) is done and the soil has dried enough to work without damaging it.
It is looking like I won't get over there until after ThxGivs now. (ps Tempe here) but maybe even not til after new years giving xmas shopping and all.
We are still very far away from bubble territory, as was the Hunt brother's days of your exampled 1980 gain date. We most likely will get to something similar, if there is a sufficiently stable economy.
Those of us with patience are going to have to endure such ridiculously excessive volatility for AMY and other juniors with the bears repeatedly milking the European debt problems for as much market doom & gloom as they can extract.
Well, you made me curious, so I logged into my most full-service broker and for AMY I found a new report by S&P dated Nov 16, and that the most recent (Oct 26) report by GMI for corporate governance and practices moved AMY from Average to Aggressive, and also had notes of actions after the last filings that may adversely impact that next report (restated filing, late filing). The new S&P analysis did not give a rating.
From what I could see it was all pretty much a normal poor showing for a non-revenue generating company being assessed by an industry standard, algorithmic technique (not geared toward resource exploration/development).
The one thing I have been watching, which may be part of your TD Waterhouse rating change is the cash position and probability of needing to raise capital soon.