Replies to post #13434 on Petaquilla Minerals Ltd. (fka PTQMF)

[joverke]

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?

What point of 'the whole sector is undervalued' do you not understand? See previous posts for graphs.

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.

In short?
If the SP would rise 1 dollarcent for each post you talk about them not making projections, I'd be on holidays now.
We get the point and please dont refer to it again.
Be patient and wait for next numbers.

[Lojiko]

You bring up a good point, jal ... namely that the reason we buy stocks is on the assumption that they'll appreciate in value. You're absolutely right that fundamentals don't mean squat if they don't translate into returns of share price.

I'd be lying if I said I knew why we're trading so low. I have guesses, but guesses aren't very objective. ;-)

I've mentioned before that getting the right answer often involves asking the right question. Usually one question leads to another, deeper, more fundamental, more revealing question(s). The primary question seemed to be "If we're so awesome, why are we trading so low?" My first step is to check fundamentals. Fundamentals look OK, so I ask what else might be influencing the SP.

My second step is to see what other people are saying. So I do some Google searches, check some blogs, and what do I hear? Nothing. It's an extremely unreliable answer, I will admit, but I honestly think that we're trading so low because no one knows we exist. Even E*Trade has outdated earnings data on us (although they have up-to-date data on most other pages and list a trailing 12 month PE ratio of 2.74).

Your argument about missing projections is rational, but I would argue that projections aren't as important as you're making them. Personally, I'm more disappointed that PTQ has missed projections than I am upset or encouraged to sell by such misses. We need at least two points to draw a line and make a prediction. Using only PTQ data, we're missing that second data point to confirm or reject our assertion (that missed projections are the reason we're trading so low). It requires some homework, but if you wanted to confirm your hypothesis, take a look towards the bottom of the iBox, at companies similar to PTQ. Check to see if missing projections correlates with share price in otherwise profitable companies. I'm currently too busy to do it myself, but if you really want to know, that's how I'd go about doing it.

We exist, E*Trade, we really do!