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.
Tex, I couldn't agree more. Yes, a JV or buyout may leave us on the short(er) end of the stick than what we would like to see for PPS. I think gold will turn sooner, but I certainly don't expect it to shoot up to $2k like some people expect. I'm thinking more along the lines of $1300 gold, but I think that could happen in early 2016...time will tell.
Banro will make it through. I believe the fall would've come 9-12 months ago, but they were able to pull through. Too many good things on the horizon now. Holding BAA requires a lot of patience. Sure, some might be able to flip for gains here and there, but I'm going for the grand slam. Granted, when I first bought, Namoya was supposed to be going commercial just a few months later...well, now here we are almost 2 years after I bought my first shares and I'm still waiting on Namoya going commerical. Gold prices are incredibly beat down, yet Banro has shown me every quarter in 2015 that they can be profitable. I know some people are calling for gold to go lower, and others are calling for $2k+...I guess I'm more of a realist, or maybe just focus on the shorter term, but gold at $1250 or $1300 isn't out of the realm. Sure, I'd love to see the prices higher, but $200/oz higher than where we are at now is $10M on 50k ounces.
I'll be interested to see what January brings...We had a nice run in gold early on in 2015, and I think we'll see the same in 2016.
No way buddy. It's do or die for me. In my opinion, gold and metals are going to turn upward, no matter what all the other talking heads say. Namoya going commercial, potential JV's or a buyout....not to mention that I think Banro can be plenty successful with 2 producing mines and rising gold prices. It might take a while, but we are golden.
Alright, I've got to get in on this...Afterall, it's only a virtual Coke. Just out of curiosity, if I come within 50 ounces can I get three fingers of a virtual Captain Morgan too? LOL
My guess is 53,645. On a side note, some exciting news for me is that in a couple of weeks I have a boatload of .125's that will be long-term shares. Since I'm not trading out of an IRA, the tax implications for long-term shares are a big deal for me.
Tough to move anything on ~25k volume.
BOOM!!! That was a big buy.
No problem. Just caused me a little panic if they ended up bailing from it.
Sorry, I was following MRJ25's link, and didn't see Banro listed.
I opened this link and it doesn't list Banro as an exhibitor? Also, I thought there had been something on Banro's website talking about this convention, but that is no longer there...did they decide not to go?
Hey buddy...found something interesting today...Not sure why I get myself wrapped up in Inst Ownership, but it has to be something to do with the inconsistencies between sites...in particular with Nasdaq.
For the heck of it tonight I decided to go to some of these sites that I check on a regular basis and check both the BAA and BAA.TO ticker. Yahoo had something interesting...Yahoo under BAA shows 16.9% Inst Own, but under the BAA.TO ticker it shows 46.5%.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=BAA+Key+Statistics
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=BAA.TO+Key+Statistics
I tried the BAA.TO ticker on the Nasdaq site, but it doesn't recognize it. I also noticed the Nasdaq site for Insider Ownership specifically points to the SEC filings...I've got a hunch that Nasdaq, and possibly other sites too, do not include any information from shares purchased on the TSX.
Anyway, not sure what all of this means because there are still differences between sites. Plus Martin responded to an email of mine a few weeks ago and said that the company estimates Inst Own at ~20%.
Agreed...but here's where I'm going with this...Gold at the beginning of this year was ~$1350, right...and I think it was even higher at a point last year with Namoya still under construction...so my question is in all of these previous Q's, as gold fell under $1300, then under $1250, then under $1200, why didn't they have to take these impairment charges?
If it is because everything was based off of $1200 gold, and they had to recalibrate, then why did they only recalibrate at current gold price instead of looking at a longer downward trend...maybe making the new base on $1000 gold instead? That's my only complaint if you will...I would've rather them taken one huge hit in Q2, and then been able to proudly post their .04 EPS in Q3. To me the Q2 hit of ~50M was ugly...if it would've been ~$73M, it would've still been ugly (in my eyes)...no better, no worse.
Overall, very very happy with the progress they are showing and I'm excited to read the CC transcript later today.
My overall thoughts was that this was a very good report.
My only frustration (albeit slight) is the impairment charge. I want to start seeing headlines of "Banro Posts QX Gain", not Banro Reports Q3 Loss. I realize that they cannot control gold price, but like I posted yesterday, they should be able to have a view outside of 3 months. I would have rather them post the ~$75M impairment all in Q2, rather than take a partial then, and then some more now in Q3.
The flip side of my frustration is that I'm not even going to pretend to understand all of the impairment stuff...so maybe there is very good reasoning to do this, as others have suggested "cleaning the books before Namoya goes commercial". Maybe this is the best thing they can do given the POG and it's recent trend.
Anyone on the conference call please keep us posted. I can't call in today as I am way too busy at work.
I want to know wtf is up with the impairment charges? What happened to last Q when they said "a one time charge"? Surely these guys can look further ahead than 1 Q...
Overall, things look good. +.043 without impairment, -.05 with. I know what this means, but hate to see the AP headlines that simply read "Banro Reports Q3 Loss". Killing our chances of getting more eyes on this imo.
Yeah, not sure. I know they were saying 11/11 before, so I just wondered if their software was built in to automatically trigger once 11/11 hit.
Yeah, that was a big dump earlier...like you said, either someone exiting, or someone trying to trigger some stops...
Weird...Fidelity shows that BAA reported earnings. It doesn't show what they are, but it says last reported 11/11/2015, and the next report due is Q4 ER.
Hmmmm....
Yeah, yeah, that's what you said 2+ months ago too...another one of your failed predictions in which you lost money shorting...
I was able to get to the article on my phone using Google and searching Banro Wall Street Journal, and it popped up a link that opened for me.
I find this to be very good for us longs. Maybe I'm wrong, but to the new and uninformed eye this might be an issue...however most of this info in the article is all 4+ years old....so just what would be the purpose of reporting this now? The only thing I can think of is to try to get some egg in the face of Banro so that shares can continue to be accumulated cheaply. Namoya commercial very soon IMO.
Do you have access to this full article that you can copy and paste? I'm not signing up just to read it and not use WSJ again.
Good job in doing your DD on one site. Bravo....Bravo....YAAFJ...
Do yourself a favor and check Morningstar, iHub, Yahoo, FinViz...or better yet, email the company like I did. Here is a hint...You'll find everywhere that it is higher than 6%.
Martin replied to my email already. He said that the company estimates Inst Own to be around 20%. This is pretty consistent with what he has told me going back to the March/April timeframe. I recall at one time he told me 20-30%, so they've drifted to the bottom in their estimate.
Naomi used to give me great details on Inst Own. She'd have stuff broken down by owner, and the number of shares, etc...then she'd give a rough estimate as there were some Inst's that didn't have to report. Now I just get a percentage, with no data behind it.
I will write him an email. It has been a while, so it won't hurt me to ask him again.
Back in August when I contacted iHub about where they get their data they told me this:
Efren Q:
All the data for institutional ownership comes from the Security Exchange Commission (SEC). Each company has to file a form. You can see that data for BAA under the tab Financials. Under the CIK Number which in this case is 0001286597, it will give you all the filings done under that company.
I have been to the SEC site, I have entered the CIK number and I have selected to show "Ownership". There are no filings that I see that have come recently that would make me believe that these sites had information to update their Inst Own. Basically they are all 6-K's, and it is the same info we've received in the PR's from the company.
I've always wondered the same thing myself. I think some sites, FinViz in particular, just must not update numbers.
Morningstar shows a little more detail, but it shows a bunch of institutions that sold, but most of those dates were as of 6/30/2015, so that is older info, and wouldn't explain how sites like iHub and Morningstar themselves were showing ~60% ownership in August.
As for Nasdaq always being so low, I started to wonder if they are only looking at shares traded on the AMEX/NYSE MKT, and not the whole picture.
Question for you buddy...and really for anyone on this board. As excited as I am about the insider buying, a lot of sites are updating institutional ownership and the percentages are going down. What is crazy is that it's not just slightly down, it significantly down...even crazier is that the percentages are down, but I cannot pinpoint what institution(s?) is unloading.
As you know, I check various sites...
Nasdaq - Remains at 6%...It has been here for ~6 months as I recall, and has always shown significantly less Inst Own than any other site I've checked.
FinViz - Remains at 57%...It has been here for close to a year at least...
Yahoo - Recently updated to now only be ~16%. It had been at ~32% for the ~6 months prior.
iHub - Recently came down to 30%, had been at ~60% 3 months prior.
Morningstar - Recently came down to ~31%, had been at ~62% 3 months prior.
Anyway, just wondering if you have any thoughts or opinions on this one...sure is odd.
Looks like more changes on the Inst Ownership front.
Yahoo has been holding steady at ~32%.
FinViz hasn't changed in God only knows how long at ~57%.
Nasdaq remains mostly unchanged at ~6%.
Interestingly enough though, since I last posted on this on 8/26, Morningstar and iHub both show significant decreases from ~62%, now down to ~31%. That equates to about 75M shares in the last couple of months. I sure can't find anything though on who is dumping that quantity...and it seems it would have to be bled out little, by little, as we haven't seen any crazy volume days...
Agreed...Very controlled accumulation here in my opinion...Been interesting to watch...The volume is exciting though, and a solid break of .22 will send us flying...
I think you are confusing him with WarChest...That guy disappeared, just like Keyotee...Go BAA!!!
In my opinion they didn't need to at this time. Maybe a later PR will come (post conference), but I don't think we'll hear anything about this until Q3 Earnings. They still have a long time to get a handle on this issue, and if the $0.20 is true as some users here have posted, we are golden then.
You guys would get a kick out of the PM's that WarChest is sending me...LOL. BAA holding nice here after DW dumped this morning. I think WC is a little upset that this is only down 5%.
Yeah, no movement premarket, but have you seen the gap between the bid and the ask. .27 on the ask. This is significantly higher than what we saw yesterday and late last week.
Some interesting points that I noticed from the PR. They left the years guidance (60k-70k ounces) for Namoya untouched, but made direct points that Twangiza would be near the top end or above the revised guidance. They also pointed out a couple of times that the consolidated figures would be within their guidance of 175k-195k ounces.
To date, Namoya has produced 31,936 ounces, so they will need to produce a minimum of 28,064 ounces to hit the low end of their revised guidance given in Q2. I really don't believe this is possible, so I find it interesting they didn't touch on that.
Twangiza has already produced 105,092 ounces, so combined we're at 137,028 ounces with Q4 to go...need a minimum of 37,972 ounces in Q4 to hit the low end of their consolidated guidance for the year.
If Twangiza only hits the high end of their revised guidance, then they only produce ~20k ounces. I think Twangiza will exceed guidance and will easily produce 30k+ ounces again...I don't understand why they didn't say that though. Surely they don't expect gold production to fall off that drastically.
Well, lets see what the market brings today with gold back-tracking a little. Also, hopefully the conference goes well and they get their name out there a bit.
We'll see who is right soon enough. Do me a favor and short 500k tomorrow at .20. POG is working in your favor as of right now. Quite frankly, I don't believe you know anything. You do no DD, and can provide no data to back any statements up. You are just like Blue, and you have one agenda. It's funny to me that you are looked down on by your peers. Even they have nothing good to say about your penny pushing. Too bad for you that you can't see my PMs.
Ok buddy. Why don't you just make your way back to the Orions board where you can continue your role as the L2 Jedi Knight. Shouldn't have been surprised that you would show up here after I called you out on your BS earlier today.
That is old news to me man. The loss was based off of an impairment charge due to the POG. Without taking that loss, the adjusted EPS was actually a postive .01.
So please share with us what you are seeing on L2 that leads you to believe that they are diluting? I can offer no proof that they aren't, but based off of comments they've made throughout this entire year...even prior to they $100M in forward gold sales...they have said that diluting at this low of a PPS makes no sense, and wasn't even being tabled. They have been taking care of any cash needs with other gold streaming transactions, so again, I'm highly doubting dilution. Thanks.
LOL...OK...
Doubtful based off of previous comments from the company. Please show me how you know this since you made a statement like it was fact? I'm sorry, but I expect more from a board moderator on Orions.
Naomi hasn't been with Banro for quite some time. I believe someone posted before that it was in April. As I recall, the company she went to was another mining company that was founded by Arnold Kondrat, so there were some connections there. Also, her title is now VP, so it was definitely a step up for her.
I agree. This has been sub-$1 for as long as I've been investing, so it is a bit surprising to see it come now. The update is very vague too...it looks like they have a lot of options, and quite frankly, it doesn't say anything regarding a minimum price, so I'm assuming if we start progressing from the teens to twenties to thirties and so forth, that they'll be considered compliant...or at least have more to bargain for to extend beyond the 6 month period.
I realize an R/S is an option, but as some have posted, that rarely works out good for the common shareholder. Yes, they'd become compliant, but I think they'd fall down closer to $1 than the $2 they'd start at if they did a 10 to 1 at yesterdays closing price. The only exception would be if the company starts putting out solid news (Namoya Commercial, Solid Q3 Results and ER, etc).
Hopefully we'll hear something from the company soon. The position this puts me in sucks, but I think I'm going to wait it out. ~73% of my total shares are shares at .125, so I'm still profitable on those. I could sell them for a ~30% profit and get over 50% of my original investment back out. Lots of thinking to do here.