Replies to post #13424 on Petaquilla Minerals Ltd. (fka PTQMF)

[mjkiii]

Hi Loji, a friend e-mailed me your Kitco post.

Your post #13424 makes the case perfectly why it was not worth
continuing to follow the board. I wish all good fortune and good luck. Continuing to purchase ever larger quantities of stock as disposable income permits. In my case it is still averaging up, but with our revenue due to hit over one billion dollars a year, or 600,000 equiv. Au. oz. with the millions of pounds of copper from Panama in the mix, it is a no-brainer. All is well in Panama. I know it is customary to say what stocks one goes to when leaving the board. Can't do that, since I can find a better place to put money at this time.

I did not go back and read the posts, but I am sure that they are probably the same as ever. Too bad so many who actually put effort into their analysis and posts moved on...

BEWARE OF FALSE STATEMENTS, LOOK AT PAGES #23 & #34 OF CORP. PRES. AND REREAD CAREFULLY THE APRIL 2011 BEHRE DOLBEAR REPORT ABOUT GOLD LOCATIONS.

Saludos,

[VBgood]

Lo, I fully agree with your post , just wanted to add : and which junior is going to give you free IPO shares (PDI)?

[Implanting]

First of all you're entitled to your opinions, beliefs, theories, etc. That's fine, so is everybody that posts here. To date none of what you've presented to this board has come to pass in regard to an upward direction of the SP, so why do you continue to insist the objective information you're presenting is correct, relavant, or even to this point matters? The numbers you keep posting haven't amounted to a hill of beans to the reality of where this stock currently trades @.52/sh. Yes, it's cheap, a real bargain, a buy, whatever..., but that's just on paper. I don't believe all businesses can just be valued from a balance sheet perspective. This company fits that bill to a tee.

You say the data suggests the EPS should be trading @$2/share, but when in reality we're trading at .52/share. Hmmm, that's really close. I would like you to make the case why we're trading at where we are instead of why your data says we should be at $2? Can you give the board that objective, analytical, information? I'm not being a smart-ass. I really would like to know. Please make your case why we're at a 52 week low instead of a new high?
Please don't say you don't know.

I base my opinions on what I see. The company hasn't made it's projections for the first two quarters of the year and had to lower the Q3 projection. They've been behind on getting milestones completed with the HL and fourth ball mill. They aren't making the revenue needed to pay for their expansion requirements, so they were forced to do this silver lease deal for unfavorable terms IMO. They'll have to average 22K oz. for Q3 and Q4 just to do 80K oz. for 2012 when they projected a 100K oz. year. In short, they aren't doing what they claimed they would do.
I don't have to crunch numbers or compare them with other companies to know just simple facts.

Yeah, I would say I'm unhappy with what's been going on, as I think most shareholders in this company should be too. I don't follow any other 70-80K gold producers, but if I did I would be surprised to see they were valued as cheaply as this one. I'm a believer in actions speaking louder than words or in this case, company guidance. I believe to this point this management has a credibility issue and you can't measure that with analytics. That has to be fixed with accuracy and detail. So far that hasn't been happening.

The reasons I gave make a better case IMO why the SP is where it is more than the reasons you're giving me.

[joverke]

I approve of your post.
How did you calculate those comparisons?

(Our relative cash flow is better than 90% of our peers)

IMHO sometimes it can get too emotional here.
What we need is objective facts.