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.
PCY: Cork, imo you are right and have keyed into the main point of things. I have not been able to determine if Red Hill had anything in the works before Prophecy Resources acquired them, but whether or not, the move into Mongolian coal appears to have had the electrification of central Asia in view from square one. And it is a great game-plan, and one the government appears to see as needed and wanted. Going from entry into Mongolia and its coal to this
http://www.prophecycoal.com/news_2010_nov15.php
acceptance of the detail power plant environmental plan in some 10 months is what finally took PCY from my close watch to a position. The vision implied in that PR is worth the read and says much of what PCY is really about in Mongolia (to date). Selling coal along the way is a plus for operational cash flow, but imo is secondary. Now if they manage to stay with that timeline for almost doubling the electric power in Mongolia I will be amazed - it is very, very aggressive. PCY has very much impressed me in how rapidly it has pulled together this, and also the assembling of Wellgreen with the Northern Platinum takeover and subsequent restructuring with Pacific Coast Nickel, and all of the above in 18 months give or take, just leaves me wondering what else is in the pipeline PCY looks like it will be a fun ride.
Thx Joe. When I did a rough numbers headwork it seemed that tiny thingy is rated a little more than a ton/day (50Kg/hr) which really impressed me for the small size of the tanks. Hopefully they have gotten to a best guess at the min cost inputs by now so they are tuning that by doing steady-state runs. Some news as we move out of the tsx summer slumber, maybe as the markets loose some of this recent skittishness, etc. would be nice to get us moving out of the 0.53-0.55 stagnation.
Possible, but as the article mentions, the Mongolian part of the award carving up TT is to a Russian-Mongolian company, so Mongolian efforts to buy Mongolian would not have that clear of a way to do so. Also note that the article emphasizes the boom being fueled by mining, a fair part of which initially was with coal, and it mentions the coal demand from China.
I feel that signs for PCY will be if the power generation project continues to be fast tracked by the government. That aligns with the development and diversification objectives mentioned in the article. The increased metals mining to come will need power, as will continued development of the living styles of the population. There will be a huge availability of coal in Mongolia. Electricity ? Now that is something else.
What concern's me most about the Bloomberg article is the way it spoke of Erdenes TT - I had always just heard it referred to as the TT coal property, and I knew Erdene (tse ERD) took a big hit when the awards were finally announced excluding them, and they put out a PR about how it was not yet all said and done, but to see the property actually referred to that way. Makes one wonder what rules are being used.
What about Wanderport's filing of a Third Patent for Its Microwave Energy Tank-less Water Heater ?
Did I say it said anyone did something wrong? I thought I had said the doc said they were each CTO'd. Now that implies the AMF felt each may have done something wrong, yes, but that is not what I said.
I am tired of going back and finding the initial AMF doc over and over. If you do, then look at the line where it states, in a list of equal items, Wanderport Corp., Andrew's corp Quebec-12345xxx, their directors, officers, employees, Andrew, etc and ends in saying that they are CTO'd
I do not believe it is too big of a stretch that the AMF had sufficient concerns to move them to that action. I do not know about Canada but in the US doing such on frivolous basis would be leaving the agency expose to suite.
In the case of Ollu and Cortelazzi it appears that it will be a slam dunk for the AMF as they, like Wanderport the compnany, and like Richard its only Director and officer, did not file for a hearing by the deadline.
Yes, this will be interesting to watch. I wonder how long after Sept 13 before outcomes will be available.
Again, for those wanting to claim that Wanderport the company is only involved because their security WDRP was victimized, please read more carefully.
As we went through too many times, the AMF doc provides a comma separated list, which includes as one item WDRP the company, and as another item the directors, officers, and employees, and this equally includes Andrew, Andrew's company, Amyoit as list items, and then at the end states that these (all and each being the clear meaning of the sentence) are CTO'd
anything other than this is conjecture, misleading and inaccurate.
3.The AMF is investigating the MARKETING FIRM not WDRP as engaging in price manipulation
. . . I am very patient and am willing to wait until September
Pilot plant work is expected to be completed with results available for Wardrop’s pre-feasibility report scheduled for October, 2011.
So wait or jump ship
So, this guy Malema still needs watching
I work for no broker and I do not know GoWest alias.
I just stated my opinion as to why EXS has not done much in over a year. I think that was the post to which I replied, along the lines of why is the market not recognizing EXS in the pps.
I hold EXS, a position left after I sold off most during the highs late last year, leaving some free shares I have been willing to let ride, mostly due to the large land package EXS has assembled.
I am not fond of what I have been seeing with the TPW effort for the past year. A lot of money (and dilution) going way down holes that are not making that good of showings (to date). As a shareholder it seems the money could have been better spent on working up other properties, or other aspects of the TPW property than putting so much in the search for deep bonanza at TPW where even with deep bonanza there would be huge cap ex and the need for much more near surface to help fund a deep mine.
jmo
I have sort of a different viewpoint. There has not been a big flow of news that excites the market because there has not been much of that sort of thing to report. I am seeing a very expensive drill program at TPW, what surface cores to 3/4 and even 1 kilometer ? chasing the belief of deeper is higher grade is wider veining. That sort of drilling is not sustainable. The intersections being reported at those depths are not economic. Maybe if someone already had underground workings down that deep within a kilometer of drifting, but starting from no portal trying to go to mine with these showings is not appearing to me economic. And LSG has lots to prove out and work on and is only starting to explore closer to the boundary, they do not have any reason to rush to get their hands on EXS property, assuming all drills near the boundary have been reported. EXS has been letting other properties' potential see much less exploration due to the cost of the deep drills. Even if bonanza grade-width is found at depth the number of drills needed to define the find would cost a fortune. Investors remember last year with EXS doing a placement in order to stay afloat exploring, and there is not a whole lot that appears different now. EXS has a lot of property potential but it seems that it has yet of prove up an economic scenario.
You ARE jokiug, right ?
No drill map, database, for current 3D model, and you think people would venture the guess you do not provide ?
Hi Ed - challenging question, but . . .
I find it more interesting if not appropriate to speculate on whether AMY will exist in 2020, and if what remains is busy with much of anything more than wind-down reclamation at Artillery Peak area.
Let's see, 2020: 25% non-synthetic petrol blend has topped $22/gal, Au has established a bottom around $12,000/oz, whole grain 2 lb loaf of bread is north of $11, conversion of excess petro pipelines for near-potable water transport is almost complete but not keeping up with the advance of desertification in the old dust-bowl areas, . . .
I forgot to look at the average wages AMY's remnant was having to pay to have people work out there during the 6 months with average nightly low temps of 101+ F
Split ? It really depends on what value the market places on AMY, which I believe will depend on AMY moving to not be viewed as a one trick pony.
It sounds as if you do not deal much with resource exploration and development.
IN GENERAL ...,
I expect a company with 200-million shares o/s,
to have ... REVENUES of $200 MILLION !!!!!!!!!!!
I am not so sure that would fly in this case. What would be sold? The markets are used to ore concentrate and feromanganese, or at higher end MN flake. None of those products will exist here as I understand it. The intermediate form is a carbonate from the initial leeching. Would industry find that new? Could it be cheaply altered to what buyers are set up to use? Also, it is at that point a short hop to the final refined products where AMY has advantages of proprietary closed loop processing, low electric costs, and high on value chain products. So skipping that part cuts out most of the value-added, and presents an unfamiliar product for off-take. Also, I am guessing, the last part of the processing is cheap compared to the initial mining and leeching if only due to the mass moved.
With the REEs things are different as there may be a number of sources feeding a few processors that do the more chemically intensive part of separating and purifying the different elements, but most of the feeders at this point are free to adjust the form of their take-off (ex. oxides).
jmo
While that is all very good news Thermoking, if it is fact rather than opinion, that issue still remains that you are saying what Robert has, not what Wanderport has. Robert can sit back, let Wanderport unravel, accept what funding of dev and patenting it provided, and then move on, maybe with Dave, as a private company.
Sure he would loose whatever value 400m shares have, but how does 60% of a buyout deal (400m shares) compare to 100% ? How does a royalty percentage compare to the entire net profits ? (OK, so he may have minority partners . . . )
jmo of course but it seems a plausible scenario at this point, and it has the side benefit of shedding all the negative garbage Wanderport carries at this point.
Robert said he was looking to make his money from royalties, not Richard Martel. We are all wondering what Richard is getting out of this as he does not seem to have a salary based on the filings for the past two quarters, and if he has no shares . . . ?
Andrew should have run the CC like others do in his (supposed) position - introduce and moderate - - - not answer questions about the business when the CEO and chief technology consultant are there.
Of course NKL would be approaching 0.60 without that 10-1 reverse in June. I would be more concerned about the future dilution of NKL to fund beyond September than about the share of CPY outstanding. Who knows where to near-term top value is for NKL ? Who does not see that PCY is not even currently priced up at asset value?
When I started to see the pattern with prior companies by this crew, and saw Andrew was a founder of Wanderport, but is supposed to be only some contractor, I was out. Still watching, hoping for another green addition to the marketplace (given that people resist solar hot water where it works), but doubt more and more as time passes that Wanderport will survive as the vehicle that brings this to market, if it is what has been claimed.
PCY.v - The math is even more crazy at today's close, as now:
The holdings of NKL and NI alone are within 0.5 m of PCY market cap.
I noticed net insider buy Aug 25 of 56,000 shares NKL so I guess that tends to cloud the argument that PCY is this way because NKL is being overvalued. This has to change when cash comes off the sidelines (if not before). NKL is nearing its prior peak but PCY is down 40+% of what it hit then (and was probably still undervalued).
It really bugs me when I cannot see something and am just left with a "what am I missing", but I have not figured what it might be in weeks now.
Dateline: NEW YORK, Aug. 3, 2011
Mr. Richard Martel, Wanderport's President and CEO, commented on the progress of the company . . . we are anticipating completing a working multi-cavity microwave energy tank-less water heater (MCMHU) within the next few weeks barring any unforeseen delays
This is even more common sense.
Whatever the pps change in NKL, the contribuion for that to the PCY pps should be a bit above 1/8 of the change.
For example, today with NKL change of 0.43, if no other factors impacted PCY it should have moved about 0.054 instead of 0.10
So instead at week end we have, using market caps from Google:
PCY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131.28 m
NKL 281.92 (0.45) = 126.86 m
NI 43.42 (0.09) = 3.91 m
130.77 m -130.77 m
0.51 m
I pretty much agree with your assessment. One aspect that could be added is where you say
The thing is, Robert Simoneau turned out to have something that could be a successful product and these guys decided to try and make themselves look more legitimate. Problem is, it just doesn't work very well and many are seeing through the vail.
Absolutely there is time and room for gain - this stock was bouncing to 15% above here last year when the first good drills were getting reported and they were just starting the mine rehab, mill rehab, etc.. So it is certainly worth more than the present down-market value.
Then consider the road ahead. They have just reported results from the first 6 or so weeks of startup activity for concentrate production. With approx 1/4 of the AU recovered by gravity, about 1/2 going into the concentrate, we are still looking at the remainder yet to be (partially) recovered once the leech circuit comes on-line, and at the grades to change as the mine plan is executed. So we will see better production.
Think of the news ahead. First pout (soon). Full month numbers and interpretation of how things will ramp up to what steady daily rate. Leech circuit on-line and its recovery. New NI43-101. New life of mine estimate. More mine development and planned grades. Investment in properties in the pipeline.
This is the beginning for FR and yes there is room for some bags on this one even after today's modest 14%
jmo
here we go ! Hi everyone - have been with FAU since last year this time (0.5-0.6 then). Insanely cheap for final (?) load-up lately ! ! !
I liked the news today, oh boy - moving to new and easier/cheaper mining methods is good news, and approx 1500 oz Au (2/3 in concentrate, approx.) without the leach circuit.
I wonder how the head grade will compare to the on-going average. As is it sounds like they are on target for their guidance. Seeing a new resource estimate to get the head wrapped around mine-life located to date will be nice (winter?).
So here is what made me curious. That is the first time I have seen Mystery Creek mentioned in a long time. The last I knew Mystery Creek as wholly owned and private (as bought from Pacific North West with the Nixon Fork). Fairly odd to see the owning (of the mine) subsidiary mentioned in the headline along side the public parent.
Is something changing ? or has it ?
option/warrant info may be a little old, but it is in most recent financial report, available from their website, look at section 9
There is quite a lot of overhang through 2012
http://www.amydata.com/data/financials/2011-01-31%20AMY%20FS%20and%20Notes%20Q2%20%20ended%20Jan%2031,%202011.pdf
So if shares are issued due to exercise of options or warrants how do those show in the data you are using ? Buy without corresponding sell, or ?
Ha, just might be later rather than sooner if this market being so bearish on non-producing resource juniors keeps it up. AMY has held its ground quite well actually, a good sign, so maybe you will be right on that 200d line holding. I almost added today, but decided to wait out the news (disappointment) from the Fed thinking anything looking for signs of increased demand may be a new slamming.
Not tired of it. WDRP does need new management. Pure and simple.
And btw mgmt has not just failed to protect shareholders re AMF, it has failed to protect Wanderport.
We will have a finished prototype in the next month or so, not a finished product. There is a huge difference.
Robert did say the new patent applications are filed in Canada.
My main concern, assuming we get to a finished product, is the ability of management to get market penetration underway, get volume up across the globe, and protect it.
corrected: 11,000 tonnes 35% concentrate, not NI
reread the release, so that is more like $60-$65 million/yr gross
Which is more undervalued, PCY or NKL ?
So I would also go with PCY being more undervalued.
Short answer is that to whatever extent NKL is over or under valued, that sooner or later will be reflected in PCY as NKL adjusts.
Besides all mentioned in other recent posts to the board, showing very little value being put on the Mongolian or the other equity (NI) holdings or non-Mongolian project properties . . .
as NKL moves up, if and as it does, then so will (should) PCY
The fair value of the NKL project has a lot of variables in it, I feel it has a lot of legs but there is much uncertainty and time to production, and we have seen only one drill hole report so far. But the market should start to appreciate the value of the equities PCY holds (and/or of the Mongolian projects/properties, depending on what you think the current market cap reflects) at some point. Then, as fair value of NKL comes to light PCY ought to follow along.
Permitted: Victory Nickel on the move with permit announced today.
Up over 20% in early trade, NI has been undervalued for some time
PCY and Ni own 9% of each other if I am correctly recalling %age.
Before this move NI should have a bit over 8% (direct + indirect, shares from the reorg around 4% plus from owning PCY a bit over 4%) of NKL was bujmping around 50+ % of NI's market cap. With changes today their NKL is near 40% of market cap. (note: I have not been able to confirm NI still holds all their NKL and PCY but I have seen nothing about selling any).
This is the last piece needed to start to develop mine on their flagship NI property. New NI43-101 coming later, but present feasibility projects 11,000 tonnes/yr NI over 9 years at $2.12/lb cost net of credits. (that is north of $175 million gross revenue / year) Mine is open-pit with some underground later, potential grow resource perhaps double mine life. Completing funding of cap-ex for the mine is still ahead.
When the value of NI is realized, that is even more reason PCY is cheap, cheap, cheap
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/victory-nickel-granted-environment-act-licence-for-minago-sulphide-nickel-mine-2011-08-24-82140?reflink=MW_news_stmp
Maybe overlooked here . . .
Dave M. is only doing utility/co-op marketing in US (CA ?) right ?
Big box retail is yet to be negotiated with some party, right ?
So that defines limits of Dave's marketing effort.
Owen will be doing similarly but AFAIK for all market segments in AU, or is that AU plus other markets in SE Asia / Oceania ?
But point is Owen lines up production, warehousing, distribution, marketing fot that area, which is potentially as large as NA, and probably larger than the part of NA Dave currently has under exclusive.
Patents.
I agree with much of the comments. Holding IP protection is as good as you due efforts to defend that IP protection. Sometimes having the protection is useless in the face a big, deep pocket legal budget opponent. That said, lawyers are a fickle bunch, and there are some hounds that will get crazed if they smell blood from a big deep-pocket body at the end of the road.
Now, there are three applications (let's trust that). If they are not well written then they are useless. If they are narrow and only about key new art and do not make foolish claims there may end up being patents. So there might be defensible IP ub the product.
In all cases, if there is a good product and that draws attempts to saturate the market with cloneware, how does that impact Wanderport ? I would guess it would mostly impact in the retail segment of the developed world (ex. not the coop / utility segment, probably not the major builders). In the developing and certainly the frontier countries the cloneware would probably be a major problem. So why market at all in lesser markets while waiting for fully certified products to US/CA/AU/EUzone ? Is that not just feeding the cloneware problem if the time between the introductions their and first world is very long ?
Info, or absence of, being released:
I totally understand Robert's position about not making any IP public before necessary. I also understand, as an engineer, his not seeing sense in providing efficiency info that is not actual available. I do not however agree with not making "safe" efficiency and product characteristic info available now ("safe" meaning ball-park with will present the future product well but will not fail to be met by the product). Why ? It is simple marketing - start building up the awareness of what this will (?) be. We have no clue at this point if this is going to be worse than existing resistive tankless electrics, requiring 60 amp 220 V or what in the way of electrical. I for one would be a little uneasy about getting that sort of wiring put in under the sink !!!! Will there be a 110V unit possible, able to do 1.5 gallon per minute with 50 degree C temp rise for undersink ? etc.
Why no info on the plans for what sorts of units ? what sorts of needed site prep ? etc. Would it not be good marketing at this stage of the game, if product is that close, to start getting this kind of info out to the public ?
later
with you guys, banging my brain since the NI43-101 came out trying to see where the numbers or future value/risk factors are figured wrong - just don't figure it, although it has been a fairly bearish time for resource equities since a little before the reorg. Other than that I don't get it or see the big downside, but feel I have twisted my head around it looking. Discussions here have not really looked at the potential for supply (coal and/or electric) into far west of China either. So, I am slightly green at this price, not counting the Prof Pt shares, and looking to go longer as cash flows by while it is dipping.
With a product but without IP protection how long would the company have any market advantage from first entry ?
That does impact potential value of this as a speculation.
IMHO if there is a working MCMHU prototype this month or early September, then the product will be 2012 Q2 at best.
I imagine it would take only a couple months for clones to appear if the IP is not protected and market success motivated the cloners.
We should see evidence of 2 patent applications by then (Jan 02 timeframe) based on the info from Gold_Icon.
Yes, it does seem to, and also seems to be the same response.
I guess they worded it to mean as it says, any application ends up there forever.
As Tony indicated, we know Robert said he let the old (2005 era) application lapse, for a number of reason mentioned in the CC including dual patent ownership.
When I read through the international stuff I do not recall seeing anything referencing the original (if one exists) in Canada or elsewhere. Yes, we got off track for a while about the mention of the German office (evidently the one used for the international filing withdrawal). So I am still thinking that patent might be the initial IP brought to Wanderport and it was not ever a Canadian application, only international.
I am still missing two patent applications, unless they both are also within the 18 month window and Canadian applications.
Well, running out of posts for the day, so guess I am out of your hair folks.
Is it possible:
1) the original IP was only filed directly with the international patent agency (the one we found, withdrawn, long ago) ?
2) the Canadian patent office removes stuff from the applications database if
a) patent granted
b) application failed or withdrawn
?
The US patents search is in tow separate parts, for applications and for patents. Nothing similar in Canada, ey?
Does anyone know as to what the other two patents (applications) supposedly are or from when ? When the latest was announced earlier this year in PR didn't it say the new one was the third ?
Now clearly they knew the original (pre 2009) was no more. So it seems that leaves another two besides the newest for cavity and control system design.
Nice to see your head come above the waves (for a moment).
Ditto the sentiments and the strategy at this time.
Let this stand in place of the impossible (for me) PM reply.
Now, if a shareholder vote could make a difference (i.e. relative to Robert's 60+ % stake) I could always get back in
Very positive development, think of the attention it will bring to AMY and the project also !!
A lot of nice news while the US markets are mostly only caught in the headlight of the Bernamk. Oh well, there will be more.
probably does not include Andrew ? !
So I have been wondering what "rule" might exist that makes certain major shareholders have to abstain from some shareholder votes.
What got me thinking on these lines was a comment by Rob McEwen about how he would not be voting his shares in the votes of Minera Andes and of US Gold about merging the two companies (which as CEO and dominating shareholder he had proposed).
Is there some point at which a major shareholder is insufficiently ar arms length to take part in deciding the direction of a company ??
I have no doubt people will see the point here.