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.
Here's some mining basics for the neophytes like our friend at Motley Fool. He could have even googled this much but I guess that's too much work to learn the basics of an industry prior to commenting on a company (NAK) in said industry!
As per the definitions below one can understand the point I made prior as to why investors value on a M+I basis and then give a bump based on how much work has been done on the inferred side, but don't value that number as highly as M+I.
Measured Mineral Resource
A Measured Mineral Resource has a higher level of confidence than that applying to either an Indicated Mineral Resource or an Inferred Mineral Resource. It may be converted to a Proven Mineral Reserve or to a Probable Mineral Reserve.
Indicated Mineral Resource
An Indicated Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities,shape and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of Modifying Factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.
Inferred Mineral Resource
An Inferred Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity.
An Inferred Mineral Resource has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.
Max clearly doesn't understand valuation (mining or otherwise), nor resource analysis - we know that
1. Because he hasn't even valued the company just made some generic subjective statements based on no mining experience or knowledge- how do I know that? See below
2. Clearly did a google search to learn about Measured vs Indicated vs Inferred
The issue is, google doesnt tell you how to value a resource! LOL, he doesn't realize partners and/or a buyer values based on M+I as an industry standard (Measured AND Indicated) and a small bump for inferred.
Basics any one who's ever valued anything in this sector would understand :)
Thank you good sir! Looking forward to partnership news!
;)
We prefer to rely on NAK company information, equity research analysts who have spent their lives valuing mining companies and now cover NAK, and aligning ourselves with professional mining and value investors like the Flatt Family who have a material investment in the company! > 10%!
Motley Fool 'bloggers' who aren't even professional investors, nor even remotely mining 'knowledgeable' aren't really in the same category of credibility (which of course comes from a combination of industry experience and financial knowledge).
I certainly hope market participants are not making decisions (long or short) from bloggers and message boards. Not sure why there is confusion in understanding who has expertise and is credible and who is not!
Long and Strong see ya at $8-10!
Float Analysis and Why Retail Needs to have STRONG HANDS AND HOLD ON A MAJOR MOVE
All Longs this is VERY IMPORANT GIVEN THE RATE OF INCREASE OF SHORTING, the fact Institutional ownership is increasing, and short interest is now estimated at 30 mil alone on NAK and probably 2-3 million more on NDM.
RETAIL INVESTORS NOW HOLD THE KEY TO HOW SEVERE A SQUEEZE CAN OR WILL BE, AND NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
Float Analysis
Institutions as per recent Company Presentation own 30% of the Co Shares = 89 million
Insiders own 8-9% = 26 million
Assuming 295 mil shares Outstanding that puts the float at 295- 89- 26 = 180 million
Assuming 30 mil shares short (NAK +NDM) – for conservatism we’re assuming that includes NDM as this is an inexact science but we are fairly confident to be in that range now, even though the last report stated 24 mil.
Simply, we've calculated the increase off daily short volume since the last report and mathematical ability to cover (based on % shorted and how much longs were selling). As mentioned in the short analysis today, we know at least 2 mil new short shares have been added to short interest in the last 2 days given the severity of shorting over those two days.
Shares O/S Mil 295
Institutions 30.2% 89
Insiders 8.8% 25.96
Total 114.96
Float 180.04
Short Est 17% 30
If we assume the following % of retail holds strong on a material move, here are the sensitivities of what 30 mil shorts are as a % of float.
Obviously, the higher the % of retail holding strong, the higher the short % of float, which means the greater the squeeze.
This analysis ignores any recent institutional buying which is highly likely given dark pool activity.
25% of retail hold = 45 mil/ Short % of float = 22%
35% of retail hold = 63 mil/ Short % of float = 26%
45% of retail hold = 81 mil / Short % of float = 30%
55% of retail hold = 99 mil / Short % of float = 55%
The tighter retail holds / the more of retail holding, the more money longs make as a result of the squeeze
Keep the Faith, Hold yours shares for true value
Good stuff! Good luck and just keep your eye out for news! Hopefully we see that partner sooner than October! Or the off chance even better, a buy out!
Thanks for the kind words from you and others! Glad to be of help to people about this company and just how to think about things rationally!
Someone better be (and the other) as if people are actually trading on such "theories' oh boy! LOL
I really don't know what's more pathetic, being paid to do that, or actually believing the nonsense they write and trading on it! LOL
Sorry Cantor Not a PUMP!
It's an initiating coverage from a top Investment Bank and the analyst has an immaterial position relative to his wealth or potential harm to Cantor's reputation!
Longs win on facts! Weee!
Those of us who have invested in the markets before know what an initiating coverage report is! Message boards don't hold more weight sorry! LOL
Short Analysis 6/7/2017 77% of Sales Short Today - Big Squeeze coming!
Longs win!
Partner coming! Many groups in data room as per the company!
Yay too bad for shorts! Hold strong!
Link to full analysis of today's action here!
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131993611
Longs ensure you read the daily short analysis!
Parter SOON
STRONG BUY!
lol
Short Analysis 6/7/2017 77% of Sales Short Today - Squeeze En Route
Shorts sales were 77% of sales today suggesting shorts continue to grasp at straws and are fighting a wave that is seeing them likely selling into the hands of institutions, which of course decreases the float (strong hands) and increases the likelihood of a material squeeze on news. For the last 2 weeks we have averaged well above 60% daily shorting (as a percent of sales) and today was no different.
This is the highest level of daily shorting I have seen since Kerrisdale’s short and distort report and eclipses the 74% of sales we saw last week. The situation for shorts appears to be getting desperate by the day, and they are piling on to slow upward movement as NO ONE is selling. Only 394k shares were sold by longs today (1.731 mil sales-1.337 short sales = 394k)
Today and yesterday would have added a minimum of 2 mil shares short to the short interest, as such our estimate is now 30 mil shares short of NAK alone plus NDM which we have to find numbers for).
Buying continued to outpace sales again (4th day in a row), including yesterday even though we saw a 6% drop (1.94 mil buys vs 1.73 Mil sales)
Dark Pool activity (institutional activity) continues to be strong with 617K traded – Over 2.7 mil shares in the Dark pools over the last 3 trading days. Shorts appear to be assisting institutions in getting cheaper shares and trading into their hands. Institutions don't just purchase in dark pools, they do so on exchanges as well.
Short Analysis (Mil)
Volume 4.305 Mil
Buys 1.954 Mil
Sales 1.731 Mil
DPools 0.617 Mil
Short 1.337 Mil
Short % of Sales 77% (1.337/1.731)
Source: Short Data- Nakedshortreport.com / Trade Data- IHUB
It is hard to comprehend what shorts are theorizing here other than their hubris won’t let them cover, or something more nefarious like an wealthy activist shorting the stock, as on financial terms , the decision to stay short here given the fact pattern of information, who is buying, the decrease in the float, suggests an illogical play and high risk / loss potential.
There are many other ‘better’ short plays out in the market, and as such, the irrationality of shorts here is confusing but I suppose we saw that with STRP as well (yet another Kerrisdale FAIL that many are aware of).
However, I do not believe this is ‘smart’ money. No Hedge Fund would be shorting at this stage (unless hedged with calls and open interest is not material enough to suggest that), so perhaps it is a lot of naked shorting by MM’s hoping they can cover later, leave their position open but that typically only works with companies with very little to no ‘real value’ ie P&D.
As we know, $300-400bn in value in the ground is not a P&D (contrary to what many bashers want people to believe). It is possible that naked shorting is the reason, that MMs misread this company as a ‘typical’ penny stock and are now caught. An interesting situation for shorts to say the least.
All in all, a decent day as a solid base is being formed at 1.68-1.70 and the long term chart is bullish.
Remember focus on value, not price, stop worrying about pennies and hold your shares. Value will be recognized here eventually, and when it does, you want to be in this stock, not on the sidelines!
Keep the faith!
Honestly, who cares, facts in regards to NAK are on the long's side, alot of misinformation being spread out there about the company but reports like Cantor's has put an end to 'fake news'
EPA Settlement, that article I shared with EPA peer review facts, actual location of the mine LOL, mine technology that is proven to minimize enviro impact, the fact there is no mine plan to even assess enviro damage; all prove enviro commentary is propaganda and hyperbole.
I sure hope people aren't trading or making investment (long or short) decisions on message board misinformation on NAK, "blogger" opinion, motley fool contributors views (who by the way have zero professional investment experience) vs billionaire investors of NAK, reputable sell side firms writing about the company/giving educated and experienced price targets, and the names of the institutions acquiring shares.
This last comment, is about credibility and really common sense. If one is investing (or shorting NAK) on the comments of the prior vs the latter, I feel very worried for those people and their money!
Well, Kerrisdale has been proven false, and Stossel has been proven right based on the EPA settlement and EPA peer review
So I guess knowing which one is fact based and has credibility does matter to investors like us and the billionaires we have sat down with on this name!
Good investors, billionaires, and ourselves, invest on facts not message boards, blogs, misinformation and lies like those perpetuated by Kerrisdale (as has been proven).
Moreover, its ironic, Kerrisdale's material short position had no bearing on their views but an analyst at Cantor with an immaterial position to his wealth mean's he's conflicted? Laughable theory isn't it when one thinks about materiality.
Sorry! Patient Longs win!
LOL repeating Kerrisdale again -SMH
Wow
LOL Max Chatko's opinion on NAK vs TD/Gabelli (Billionaire)/Cantor (all experts) vs opinion of a guy on a blog!
Oh I forgot Bruce Flatt's family owns > 10% of the company!
We prefer to be aligned with professional (Billionaire) investors than 'bloggers!'
There's a reason Billionaire investors are BILLIONAIRES and one guy is a blogger, its called making good investments and knowing subject matter. It's called credibility.
Oh and David Lowell says hi as well
Hey anything come of those lawsuits that were repeatedly posted on here?
The Enviro propaganda against this mine has been PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY FALSE by even an EPA sanctioned and paid peer review and the media is catching on (second link and video)
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA646.html
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/24/john-stossel-new-york-times-pebble-mine-and-outrageous-smear-campaign.html
Great investment here
1. Technicals read oversold
2. High level of shorting (approx 30 mil shares) leading to a potential squeeze, with shorting as a percent of sales average > 60% for the last 2 weeks
3. Institutions continue to add according to data
4. 3 well respected Firms now covering NAK (TD/Gabelli/Cantor). With price targets ranging from $3.75 (but with qualifiers that its conservative) to $6 USD. TD and Gabelli had PT of $4-6 Preveto Prepartner. Cantor says potential for material upside based on JV terms.
5. Cantor's report was a terrific analysis of the company and that most of the perceived risks are much lower than pundits suggest.
6. Valuation in the cantor report confirms and lays out how companies such as this are valued
7. I particularly like how Cantor helped explained to those who don't understand JV's that dilution isn't what they perceive it to be! Great help to some on this board I would think! :)
8. Potential partners in the data room currently as per the Company
9. Cantor suggests NAK as a 'possible' M&A target as well and suggests on an M&A basis this is worth $5bn (in the same range as I had suggested, gee I must know how to value mines for M&A transactions!)- They list potential partners and acquirors.
10. Company is severely undervalued based on every metric!
11. Shorts continue to pile on and sell to institutions reducing the float to cover with! Squeeze potential!
Strong BUY!
Odd how a MATERIAL short position by kerrisdale meant nothing in regards to lack of objectivity but now an immaterial potential position by an analyst at a respected investment bank (vs a chop shop) seems to imply a conflict. Oh the irony of some!
One thing to consider is an analyst doesn't put his career on the line to 'pump' a stock. These guys make 500k-1mil plus per year, pumping stocks is a good way to lose respect and your career.
Moreover, his firm Cantor, has what's called a 'conflict' check. They ensure that his report won't endanger the reputation of the firm, this check guarantees his position is immaterial to his wealth and the company.
If he had the position Stirling has, ok, maybe there's a concern, but reality is, he has an immaterial position, he likes the company as is evident from this report, felt its a good investment and wants to own it, pretty simple.
Irrespective of that, it's all fine, TD and Gabelli don't have positions in the stock and both say $4-6 USD preveto!
Longs wins!
Anyone here know what ever happened with those daily lawsuits, you know the one's that kept getting posted on here? the class action stuff?
I recall some of those lawyers didn't have offices? But every yahoo notice was posted here?
What came of that? Nothing right?
Great report by Cantor! Great read! GO NAK LONGS!
I can't wait to see a multi bagger from this terrific investment!
Have to be patient but it will be!
53% sales from Shorting is not 'longs selling" just saying
:)
We make buckets of money and we're not retail
Good Luck!
Given they own 10% they are considered insiders. Why it doesn't show in the institutional runs you'd have to ask those providers, it shows in their 6K in their corporate presentation (recently updated on their site)
There is also another name in that presentation, which is another partially funded by the Flatt's so technically they have more than 10% and that second fund has the second largest position in the company
Short Analysis 6/6/2017 53% of Sales were Short Today
Short Analysis (mil)
Volume 10.710
Buys 4.744
Sales 4.616
DPools 1.350
Short 2.467
Short % of Sales 53% (2.467/4.744)
Source: Short Data -Nakedshortreport.com, Trade volume- Ihub
Shorts continue to suppress the stock and particularly on non news based moves. Yesterday was the second day in a row where buys outnumbered sales and the release of the Cantor report certainly added some heavy buying on sizable buys which drove the price up 20%.
While the morning started off well with a flood of heavy buying, the shorts waited for volume to slow then yet again came at the stock to protect their positions and ensure that they have time to exit if required. As this was not news driven, it is clear they felt the move yesterday would not be sustainable, and certainly based on price one can argue they were correct. That being said, we did have 4.7 mil in buys and 1.35 mil traded in dark pools, that’s not small, but there was also clearly alot of traders taking profits (2.149 mil ( sales by longs).
A mix of profit taking, heavy shorting clearly drove the price down. What is interesting from the data, however, is that buys still outnumbered sales today yet the price was down 6%. Further, it is now two days in a row that we’ve seen greater than 1 mil shares traded in dark pools. Dark pool activity has been heavy over the past month and in our estimation, it suggests institutions are adding heavily.
On that latter point, Dark Pool activity, something to be aware of. As the shorts continue to play this game with the stock, be aware that the float appears to be decreasing heavily assuming institutions are buying (and the data supports this). This is setting up nicely into a squeeze and every day it gets worse for the shorts as they continue to pile on and institutions accumulate those shares.
One may ask, well why is the price not rising if institutions are acquiring? Well if you look at the trend over the last 4-5 months the stock is rising, however it’s doing so SLOWLY. Why? Well, institutional traders are much smarter than this short crew. They study the charts, they look back at the trade flows and historical data for MONTHS prior to executing the trades. If they see ‘gaming’ of a stock, they don’t choose to come in and be the Police Man to jam the shorts, they TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM. Institutions will let the shorters short a stock down as far as they please while the slowly accumulate, why? TO LOWER THEIR COST OF ACQUISITION OF THE SHARES THUS ENHANCE THEIR RETURN AND LOWER THEIR RISK. THIS IS COMMON SENSE and COMMON PRACTICE
Finally, I will reiterate what I have said over and over. Think of value not price, ignore the noise and stay patient and focus on VALUE as the Flatts and institutions do. All have a great initiating coverage report to review, which has stated much like TD and Gabelli that this stock is heavily undervalued and is a potential M&A Target.
Cantor has stated a $3.75 price target and qualifies it with a comment that the stock has ‘MATERIAL UPSIDE’ depending on the JV terms which is a big question market at this stage. The author also stated his views are ‘heavily conservative’ again suggesting that $3.75 is a FLOOR and not an upside target.
Logan (ST) and I discussed this report and this ‘qualifier’ is not very common for analysts but there is rationale. Basically, the analyst is saying, he doesn’t have enough information (JV terms, Partner agreed upon mine plan) at this stage to make a fully baked call on the stock, but knows its heavily undervalued and has material upside.
One can see from his floor call of $3.75 to his upside M&A call of $18+ ($5 billion company valuation – which by the way is how they will value the JV, but since no JV terms he can’t make that call), that there is a very wide delta between his upper and lower bounds.
When a valuation range is that wide, it can be seen by institutional investors as meaningless and then puts the analyst’s knowledge into question, ie an institution will say “What does $3.75 to $18 mean? That doesn't tell me anything”. As a result, an analyst and firm lose credibility.
As such, in order to be ‘safe and conservative’, the analyst will take the bottom point of that range and make the qualifiers he did. It’s better for him to have his clients expect $3.75-4 ish and see the stock go to $8 or higher than to suggest aggressive JV assumptions (and that’s all he has (assumptions) at this point as no details have been disclosed by NAK), that the stock will be $8-10 and have egg on your face. This is conservatism and meant to protect his and the firm’s reputation.
Indeed, when having his report reviewed internally, which they do prior to dissemination, this issue of ‘valuation range’ would come up as that’s all they care about. The firm would push him heavily if a very aggressive target, and if no ‘facts yet to support it (JV terms) and merely assumptions, his internal approval committee would actually tell him to make the qualifiers he made and use a conservative estimate.
I suspect that once the JV terms are out, if better than his low end expectations (which they should be) there will be an upgrade note to his valuation.
One last comment, ignore insults on message boards, bagholder, stupid,etc. Longs are aligned with some of the best investors in the world remember that during the raids and noise, remember who’s on that list of institutions. Some guy on ST is not smarter than them nor is anyone here (most importantly none of them even have facts to support a thesis!). Learn patience, learn to invest and not panic trade on emotions. Some want pennies for day to day expenses good for them, some of us know how to be patient and become wealthy (ie the Flatt’s).
Yes, the swinging of the stock is frustrating, but take a breather from watching every tick, every penny move and message boards, your sanity will thank you, and you’ll learn to be a better investor. Those on those boards want you to trade on emotion, remember that.
Take a step back and think about ALL the noise around this stock, has it been right? No, but they've played with the price to make you feel like it right? You don't need so much noise for a bad stock, don't let them screw you out of money. Patience is all you need.
Hope his is helpful for some!
Keep the faith!
No one removed it - scroll down
The market seems to agree with us longs and Cantor - can't be good for shorties
Short Analysis 6/5/2017 SHORT SQUEEZE SET UP CONTINUES
64% of total sales today were short. We suspected high short interest given the dearth of shares available to short according to Interactive Brokers, which only had 45k shares available most of the day and at close.
It appears as though shorts continued to game this stock today in an effort to suppress material buying with size. Clearly, the shorts did not anticipate the release of a very bullish report by Cantor which is effectively calling $3.75 conservative and a floor valuation.
Cantor stated 'material upside' to their views depending on structure of a the JV and places a $5bn valuation on the company as a take out target.
Shorts are trapped and are now hurling themselves into a grave like zombies in the Walking Dead!
Volume 7.833 mil
Buys 3.823 mil
Sales 2.917 mil
DPools 1.093 mil
Short 1.877 mil
Short % of Sales 64%
Data sources (trade volume: Ihub, short volume: Nakedshortreport.com)
We estimate there are no approximately 28 mil shares short in NAK (up 4 mil from the last report).
CIBC, Cormark and Canaccord were on that Conference Call as well if I heard correctly, I suspect they will be initiating coverage soon as well which should help here
LIKE I SAID UNDERSTANDING VALUATION, HOW JV'S WORK AND HOW THOSE ARE TIED TOGETHER MATTERS! AS DO FACTS
I guess I know what I am talking about
Maybe this report from Cantor, Initiating coverage on NAK can assist those who need to learn those basics -a great report, very fulsome on facts, science, valuation and reality of enviro propaganda.
And from a highly reputable firm- Pretty much puts what I have said here in a formal report, some numbers and valuation behind it (which they can share, and I could not).
100% aligned with our views and note, this is a $3.75 price target with material upside on partnering!
Good luck!
https://www.docdroid.net/zyTqPkf/northern-dynasty-minerals-limited-cantor-fitzgerald.pdf.html
P.S I would be happy to read facts that refute this report from some other REPUTABLE source than Kerrisdale who we know is a bash and crash manipulator!
Many thanks for posting a great report, and a fulsome one that I'd be happy to see bears prove they can refute with math and facts.
And if not! oh well ;)
IB says 45k shares available to short
If that site is indicative of how 'tight' the availability of shares are to short across the market and I have been told as such then no, not much covering going on, actually none
https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?key=nak&cntry=usa&tag=United+States&ib_entity=&ln=&asset=&f=4587
It's in its formative stages - Looking at the trade data here and availability of shares to short
Squeeze takes time, and shorts seem content to hold out. Data tonight will be interesting but short availability is very low right now so to me that says no one is covering.
Float is being bought up, eventually when shorts decide they have to cover the squeeze starts if a float is tightened up
This is all part of the process. It doesn't happen spontaneously on 5 mil shares.
Don't worry, when its time to produce, NAK will be sold - typically JV partner will buy them out at permit or thereafter.
These guys aren't developers or producers and that's why you partner.
This group is top knotch and the quality of the institutional names in this stock reflect it, management is always a key part of investing (especially at this stage).
We're in very very good hands
I agree with all of your comments except from your CEO statement
Not sure why you think that is a good idea as he has stood steadfast through a very long and arduous process, kept the company alive by finding very strong handed investors in the Flatt family, battled down the EPA and is only now starting to move the project forward.
He has not sold a share and has battled very hard for shareholders, and given how insiders never sold even at 3.50 it shows me the type of confidence this man has in executing and more importantly staying aligned with shareholders
I've seen many a CEO and insiders take advantage of opportunities to sell the pop in small cap stocks
The man has integrity, is executing, is aligned with us, has brought on great patient investors, institutions with big names and checks are supporting him, added a strong advisory board etc.
He's executing perfectly so I fail to see what you have against him - noticed this isn't the first time you've said it. In fact, I think the market would not like it if he was gone, given what he has accomplished so quickly in the last 6 months.
And prior to Trump, we know what battles he was facing, and again, he stood his ground anyways.
This is a small technical correction (with alot more room to go), not a squeeze. You'll know a squeeze when you see it!
Anyone know if anything came from those fake lawsuits that were repeatedly posted on this site?
Nothing I believe, can anyone confirm!?
Some great posts here on shorts being trapped, fundamental information (stickied at the top, with links to FACTS, about NAK vs heresay) and as well on stocktwits for the technical analysis for those interested.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131740664
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131846997
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=131805847
It's not often fundamentals and technicals line up is such a material manner. Stock is also heavily oversold on shorting.
Short Interest is setting up for a nice squeeze as mentioned, shorts are effectively trapped here (see previous posts on the subject by me).
Wish all longs best of luck! Think Like the Flatt's and you'll make money like them!
As we all know there has been a great deal of misinformation spread around this stock since Kerrisdale. Ensure you rely on factual information from the company and reputable sources like TD/Gabelli price targets etc.
Good luck!
I would disagree with your views here on '4-5 years' for a return
One would have to understand mining valuation, how this company is undervalued and why. However, I respect the fact many here are not knowledgeable on that subject but rather are traders who 'chart', as you have implied in your comments.
Rather than repeat my points on the sticky at the top, I do believe there is material upside in this stock in the 3-12 month window. Not looking to argue this point as I have made my points clear but respectfully disagree with your view (on value).
As a side note, a comment on ST today provided a good comparable (this company itself historically! Best comp one can use!)
Prior to Rio partnering and committing $1.5 bn in 2007 NAK was trading at a $1.2bn valuation (we are at $485 mil right now). $1.2 bn would be approx $4.25 today
In 2007, Gold was trading at 1/2 the price of today and Copper at approx 20% lower.
Since then, the outlook for both Gold and Copper has improved materially (which matters more than spot), and given the lack of sizable, quality resources is safe jurisdictions, this resource is deserving of a premium in the market place.
Mining companies don't trade at 1.50 then suddenly accrete 10000% on production sir, suggest you learn about the valuation process as companies 'de-risk' and move from explorer to developer to producer. This is all in the company corporate presentation and includes comps.
I would also suggest, that when companies with material resource value stay undervalued for a great deal of time, this tends to invite M&A transactions (hostile or friendly), something to be aware of, and why the market tends to value resource companies (over time) quite inline with their comps over time (obviously adjusting for site specific factors).
And finally, as a reminder, TD and Gabelli, have 1 year price targets from LAST year pre-veto and pre-partner at $4-6 USD, clearly they consider the value of resource, risk, market behavior, and comparables when assessing value. Again, this was pre veto lift and pre parnter valuations, something to consider.
Good luck!
I don't think anyone here should be, or can "tell you" what to do with your money.
We all have different time horizons, risk tolerance, and financial strengths or constraints
That being said, when you say "all in" and have 777 shares and are looking for 1000 and are relatively young (college) and are making money for those additional 333 shares weekly, I'm confused how you call that all in?
It seems based on your comments after one week you'd have enough to get up to your desired amount of shares and the following week you'd have more cash to invest elsewhere?
If no one is selling, and there are limited shares available to push more (and irrespective of that longs have removed stops) there are not any outs left
They are trapped