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.
Heard about this a while ago. Hoping they still plan to attend. But hopefully we will get a PR soon confirming they are attending.
http://ldmicro.com/companies/spin/
Hopefully a little more exposure will get back over $1.
The way I read this interview, that is Perry's plan. It sounds like all of the mines he plans to get running again are going to be EB-5 funded. It also sounds like he will be creating a new company to qualify for funding and also run each mine.
Here is the link to the whole interview:
http://www.northbayresources.com/GermanInterview-052811.pdf
Here is the pertinent information (PL=Perry):
JK: Well, once in operation this mine should give North Bay and the foreign investors a healthy profit.
But first you have to buy the mine. How does that work? North Bay is still a small company.
PL: We currently have two primary sources of funding. We have a $5 million equity credit line with
Tangiers Investors, which we are drawing upon now to make our Ruby mortgage payments, and
which alone can accommodate the entire cost of the acquisition. The second source of capital, which
is what we will be using to fund the start of mining operations, is a US government program called
EB-5. EB-5 is intended to stimulate the US economy by creating new jobs in areas of high
unemployment. To do this, the US government makes up to 10,000 visas available each year to
foreign nationals who want to immigrate to the United States by agreeing to invest a minimum of
$500,000 each in a US business that will create new jobs. The Ruby fits perfectly in this program, as
unemployment in this area of California is quite high, and we expect to receive up to $7.5 million in
this way.
JK: Sounds “innovative” to me. You had to convince Tangiers investors to put money into North Bay.
They would not have given you convertible debentures for the option payments if they would not
have done their own due diligence, right? Not to forget that the replacement value of the mine is
higher than your purchasing price!
PL: Yes, Tangiers has been quite supportive. They recognized instantly that we had negotiated a
great deal in which we are acquiring an asset that would immediately become accretive to our
balance sheet. The Ruby has $3.5 million in infrastructure in place, including buildings, an operating
mill, 6,000 feet of tracked haulage underground, and all the support equipment necessary to begin
mining. We believe the replacement value of the infrastructure is now several times higher than the
appraised liquidation value. Considering that the entire acquisition is costing us $2.5 million, we look
at the transaction as the purchase of the equipment at a discount, and we are getting all of the gold
in the ground for free.
JK: But that’s not all that is unusual for European investors. You want to start the Ruby mine with
money from foreign investors who want to become US Citizens. How does this work and what part of
the profits would they get?
PL: Essentially, we have formed a series of joint-ventures, each of which will receive a portion of
equity in the project. First, we have a JV with ACG Consulting, which is an expert in EB-5 financing,
and has offices throughout the world to bring in the foreign investors. For this JV, we have formed
an entity called Ruby Gold, LLC, and which will be the actual owner/operator of the Ruby Mine once
the EB-5 funds have been received. Second, we have a joint-venture with the Northern California
Regional Center (“NCRC”), which is the designated EB-5 Regional Center under which the Ruby Mine
will be assigned. Third, NCRC and ACG have formed an entity called Ruby Gold Foreign Investors, LP,
which is structured as a limited partnership, and which is the legal vehicle into which the foreign
investors invest their money. The LP then loans the funds to Ruby Gold LLC to create the jobs at the
Ruby Mine and begin operations, and NCRC monitors the project to make sure we create the
required number of jobs and pay back the investors from mining revenue within 5 years. It is all
rather complicated, but at the end of the day, North Bay will be the majority owner, with no less than
58.65% equity, and all of the other participants combined, including ACG, NCRC, Tangiers, and the
foreign investors’ partnership, will be apportioned a certain amount of project equity, that is to say, a
share of the net profits, from the remaining 40%.
JK: So the government can stimulate the economy without using own money. Interesting. And North
Bay would end up with 58.65 % of the profits after loan repayment of the Ruby mine but you don’t
have a further dilution of stock with that kind of financing.
PL: Exactly. And you raise a good point in noting that the funding is non-dilutive. That is the key
aspect of this type of funding vehicle for us. We are not financing it on the backs of our
shareholders, which leaves the company in a strong position to enter into any number of similar
deals without diluting our shares.
JK: This might be a model to be applied for more mines than just the Ruby. I can imagine that many
historic mines become at the current gold price economic again.
PL: Yes, precisely. Our plan is to acquire additional projects using the same formula, though
depending on the nature of the transaction, they may each have a different structure. If, for
example, we can acquire 5 mines in this way, each one capable of producing a minimum of 2,000
ounces of gold per month within the first 2 years, in a short period of time we will be producing a
minimum of 120,000 ounces of gold per year. Each project, through a separate joint-venture LLC,
will have its own infrastructure and team in place that focuses on that specific project and that
project only, leaving us, the parent company, with the resources and capability to continue acquiring
new projects, building reserves, and increasing shareholder value.
What do you suppose Mr. Giblen will be doing for SPIN? I mean on a day-to-day basis?
No problem. Apparently I will be able to see how many people are following, searching, etc. So occasionally I will post that info here.
Hope the additonal exposure help the PPS. But hopefully not too quickly, I still need some more shares. But I need some powder.
OK, now anyone can follow this board on Twitter. I have set up the RSS feed to post to Twitter using TwitterFeed.com. TwitterFeed will check every half hour for new post and then Tweet them.
If you want to follow this board on Twitter you can follow @NBRIOniHub or click on:
http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/nbrionihub
I was going to set up a page on Facebook for NBRI, but the terms of use say:
. Any user may create a Page; however, only an authorized representative of the subject matter may administer the Page. Pages with names consisting solely of generic or descriptive terms will have their administrative rights removed.
So it sounds like I would need special permission to set it up for them. They also probably want some say in what is on their Facebook page.
Dr. Seymour, please accept responsibility for your mistakes and delays! I am getting tired of our CEO pointing the finger at other people.
For the late filing he is blaming the company that filed the paperwork (at the last minute). And for the delay in setting up the Pre-IND meeting he is blaming the labs that they decided to use to help do their research.
Dr. Seymour, you are the CEO of this company. Take credit for its successes, but please also take responsibility for its shortcomings and failures.
Hoping to hear about a new center soon. In order to get to 7 this year they need to open one this month and one in December. Or they can open two in November. Either way works for me.
I would imagine the new CPA would need to be involved in the process now. I would imagine he would need to get up to speed with all of the day-to-day issues before he is able to 'seriously' look for financing.
I agree they have mentioned financing for a long time, but now that they have a CPA onboard that task may be handed off to him.
What kind of background do they have? I checked out the website and it has not been updated yet. Is it odd that they don't mention any experience in the PR?
I read on another board that below $1 you can use the weird fractional cents. Above $1 you cannot.
Excellent! What a great post. Thanks for asking Seeker and thanks to Dr. Seymour for responding!
It's nice to see that management is truely listening to investor concerns. I still believe they will miss their date of September 30th. However after being reminded of all of the things that NNVC has accomplished and how close they are to getting a real product to market I am definitely going to hold my shares.
It seems to me that people are not as concerned as I think they should be over missing the Sept 30th deadline. It seems to me that people believe that NNVC has an infinite amount of time to get their products to the market. That no one else is working on the same problems that NNVC is working.
I haven't seen many recently, but Nanopatent has posted a number of potential competing technologies. My growing concern is NNVC is slow to the party, or late to the party. We are all hoping that NNVC will show up and immediately stake its claim to the whole Flu market, since it it far superior to any product out there.
But if another product is in testing at the same time as NNVC and shows up before or close to Flucide's release it will probably take some of that market.
I have been an investor for about a year and it seems like we are always waiting for the next thing/PR that never seems to appear. Anyone think that this summer was all that great?
You're right. Reading comprehension has always been a problem for me. So now my calculations are in line with yours. I liked 0.06 a lot better, but 0.04 is a very nice number.
I guess I got that from Tchauncy:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=66488190
Gross Revenue: 3,250,000
Net Revenue: 1,560,000 (48% of Gross)
Cost Of Services: 390,000 (25% of Net)
SG&A: 300,000 (Supposedly won't change that much)
Net Income: 1,000,000
Shares: 17,403,396
EPS: $0.0588
These numbers are based on information that I got from the conference call. Of course it was my interpretation of what was said. Is there anything I am missing or mistating?
According to my calculations that will be around $0.06 a share!
There you go! Up to $0.94. That's my contribution. I have no powder left.
My guess is that those other 4 locations are related to the current 5 centers. Since these procedures can be done quickly and usually all on one day, they probably have other office space for convenience.
I am not sure I like them being listed as it seems a little misleading.
You are getting hung up on the health insurance issue. SPIN does not get involved until months after the accident/incident.
These are personal injury cases where the injured person is suing for his/her injuries. The doctors involved are doing these procedures to show/prove that the injured party is still suffering from the accident that happened months ago.
My understanding is the procedures that the doctors are doing are diagnostic only. The procedures are done the doctors are paid a fraction of their fee and then SPIN waits for the case to be ruled on in court.
If the plaintiff wins the case then SPIN gets some money. If the plaintiff loses then SPIN is out the money they gave to the doctor. According to SPIN this has happened one time in 1200 cases.
It's possible. It's also possible it is you software firewall (or if you are at work a hardware firewall). I was researching a little today and it could also be the codecs. Or out-dated Windows Media plug-in/software. And on and on and on.
Don't feel bad, I am in IT and I couldn't get my home computer to play the audio. I was able to listen to it at work.
So there must be a setting that is preventing you from listening to it. Do you have access to another computer? Or maybe try another browser.
Like I said I wasn't able to figure it out after 20 minutes of troubleshooting, but I imagine it is a security setting somewhere.
I was just checking their website and it looks pretty good to me. Except I always check a website's copyright to see how often a company updates their site. And SPIN's is a little out of date.
Wish they would up date the copyright and add the additional locations on their Locations page. And when they do, make sure to include the sixth location.
Wow. I never knew people used astrology to predict the financial markets. What kind of information from his predictions have you been able to use?
How accurate is the information? I am trying to be open-minded but I am very skeptical of astrology in general.
Glad to see you got it working.
That is what VortMax did to share his projections.
Create a Google doc and then link to it. If you have a Google account (or take a little time and set one up) you can upload you spreadsheet and it will be converted into a Google spreadsheet and can be shared.
You can go to docs.google.com to get started.
No one here is unbiased.
That was my first reaction. Not sure if I am just ignorant or what, but I assumed they had a candidate already. The only news to me is the name.
I think they miss the September 30th date. Why else would you put out a PR that gives a name of your drug candidate WITHOUT any other information.
I agree that the PR was well written and easily understood. But that is because there was nothing in it.
True. Someone with deep pockets would be a threat. Hopefully, SPIN will have deep pockets after they get some financing.
Anybody know how soon they wanted to get their financing done? They talked about it during the conference call but no real mention of a timeframe.
In general competition does not bother me. They will have proved (or disproved, let's hope not) the concept before anyone takes notice. By then they should have a leg up on the competition.
Besides, it seems to me that there is room for a few competitors, in other cities of course. My main concern about competition is if they find out that their business plan only works in a few states due to the laws of the state.
During the last call John Talamas was researching other states to see if they could expand into them. He specifically mentioned NV, CO and LA for expansion.
Does anyone know if they have excluded any states? States that perhaps cap personal injury cases?
The board has been a little quiet lately so I figure I will share my attempt at some projections.
Management has stated that they hope to have 6-7 centers open this year and a total of 10-14 centers open by 2012. So I tried to figure out how frequently they would need to open centers to meet those goals. Below is a link to a spreadsheet that shows three scenarios. The first is the most aggressive, 14 centers by 2012. The second is 12 centers and the last is the minimum 10 centers. For scenario 1 they would need to open a center every 55 days. Which is not unreasonable. There were 66 days between the opening of center 4 and center 5.
Scenarios 2 and 3 should be 70 and 90 days respectively. So based on those schedules I have put together some revenue projections in the Revenue tab. The first table shows my projections for the aggressive scenario (14 centers).
The projections assume $200K gross revenue per center per month (per the latest conference call). I also assume a discount of %48 for the net revenue. Then the Cost of Services are fixed at 25% or Net Revenue. And I have SG&A fixed at $300K.
Let me know what you think. Criticisms? Questions? Suggestions?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApRwZeTOBHbTdENwVTlnNnpENEJ1bFNpckw2bXpybHc&hl=en_US
It's up 3,000%! Looks like an easy target to shorts.
During the CC, it was said the goal for 2012 is to have 10-14 centers up and running. I am trying to do some projections, does anyone have a feel for how Operating Costs and Cost of Service will change when they add more centers?
I know they mentioned that Operating Costs were going to stay about the same, but I can't imagine that those costs would not go up when they get to 8 or so centers.
If no one has a better idea, I was going to divide the current average costs by the number of current centers (5) and use that as the cost per center in my calculations.
Anyone have an idea of how much they are looking to borrow?
Also, how much does it take to fund a new center? I thought I read that they set aside 300K per center.
Very interesting article on the future price of gold.
http://profitimes.com/free-articles/gold-headed-to-5000-per-ounce
Excellent information! Thanks.
In your experience, why would a gold miner not release the details of their 43-101? Is this typical?
I am currently in PCFG (what a rollercoaster) and one of things that eats at me is the fact that they have a 43-101 and have not made it public. Would you consider that unimportant? A yellow flag? Or a red flag?