Avocet Mining Share Discussion Threads

[trader horne] 04/10/2005 13:02

Peeps,
can we have a fresh look at the share NAV, if anyone has the numbers to hand, =
unhedged reserves * ( POG - production cost)
+ hedged reserves * (hedge price - production cost)
- debts
/ mktcap

[budevenwiser] 04/10/2005 12:51

no probs with you dixi
its just 3 of them who post on here with a holyer than thou attitude who try to look down on peeps

[dixi] 04/10/2005 12:36

budevewiser - I seem to have opened a can of worms here! I am more than happy with AVM - if things continue steadily as they are I have no complaints.

I had simply made a point a day or so ago about the anomally of Griffins market cap exceeding that of Avocets and the possible reasoning behind such a situation.

I think it is possible to have a few issues with a company without it becoming a sell. No harm in discussing as such on here - makes for reasoned debate, if nothing else.

[holdontight] 04/10/2005 12:32

POG showing a lot of strength again today

[budevenwiser] 04/10/2005 12:29

adny
did they not used to be called peter hambro mining if not correct me and where is the mention of gold in peter hambro
the people who matter fund managers and such will already know what avocet MINING do, not like someone who will need to do a search on google to bring up avocet GOLD searching for gold mining companies and maybe invest in 1000 shares
and how about producing gold for $200 and selling it for $3oo , make sense now take $200 from $300 still making $100 selling into the hedge
if you think adding gold in the name will make the share price soar then get on the phone and tell them
griffin mining , i've just had a cracking idea lets change our name to griffin ZINC and maybe GOLD in brackets that should get us another 50 % even after our stellar move
greystar resources not bad for a exploration company without gold in the name but they do have a large gold resource
if you have problems with the company either sell them or phone them up to discuss them instead of just whining on here

[andy] 04/10/2005 10:52

budenviser,

I make my own buy and sell decisions, and as a shareholder feel surely i am free to criticise where I personally think they could improve upon share price performance?

Peter Hambro IS the name!

And the PR and promotion far exceeds any negative to the "mining" (IMO)

Avocet mine gold, so say so!

I like the geographical spread, as my post states, I don't worry about country risk unless something serious happens.

Not sure how selling gold for $300 when the price is $460 "makes" $100, but I will buy it for $310 and take the loss!

[andy] 04/10/2005 10:36

Saucepan,

Yes considerng the recent jump in the POG, and the reserves AVM own, I certainly am disappointed to be honest.

I see a few adjustments, easy to make, could make a whole lot of difference to the SP, which was already undervalued compared to it's peers IMO.

I hope you're right about the chart!

[budevenwiser] 04/10/2005 10:02

if you are disapointed with the company you should sell them and move on to pastures new
regarding the name i dont think the mining part of peter hambro mining has done them any harm has it
regarding the geography of the mines holding the share price back anyone know of PET awarded a contract in iraq of all places look what happened to that share price , they may have a contract but who they gonna get to work for them
regarding pr what do we want the share price pumped up full of day trader nutters abusing one another ( ive yet to see a share make any decent money where there is a post every five minutes , mm's love them )give me this thread any time some good posters instead of a hundred one liners
imho the share price will come good , show me another gold miner so cheap doing around at this moment 20 000 ounces a month and in the next couple of months upto 22 000 a month and 75% to 80% at around $200 , as soon as we get proof of zeravshan coming good we will have 3 profitable mines now thats a foundation
i must be a half full glass guy because when doing the sums i look at the hedge as making $100 an ounce as apposed to losing $150
we also have taror , chore and indeberg for blue sky potential
i think we just need a little more patience over the next couple of months and give managment some credit for turning this company round from a nearly bankrupt basket case to what we have now they had to take the hedge to save it
my reason for shareprice underperformance is lack of reserves at penjom and north lanut which the city boys like to see , does'nt matter if you struggle to get the gold out the ground i.e HGM its all they can understand about goldmining their logic is the exact opposite of avm were avm gets the gold out of the ground but only just keeps replacing the gold taken each year ,could mine there for 100 years it wont matter maybe idenberg may change it so until we start to get their interest we are at the mercy of the mm's and shorters imho

[dixi] 04/10/2005 09:26

Well 16th November for results - hopefully a run up to this date, and solid news to sustain and move the price forward.

[saucepan] 04/10/2005 06:52

An interesting discussion today, obviously fuelled by disappointment at the lack of movement in the share price. Is it not a market adage, however, that value is always recognised in the end? I suspect we will not have much longer to wait. I see the AVM share price as something of a coiled spring and I don't think it is going to take much now to get it moving. It may only need a technical breakthrough over the 105p level to get a lot of watchers on the sidelines buying in, and that could be sufficient to propel the share price significantly forward. And once momentum is generated ...

If not in the next few days on a technical basis (and I still have some confidence on that score), we won't have long to wait for hopefully good news on Idenberg, resource upgrades, results, etc. Any or all of this will get the analysts re-doing their sums, etc.

Patience for just a little while longer, perhaps: and we all know how quickly AVM can move when it decides to.

[andy] 04/10/2005 00:06

Holdontight,

Some interesting thoughts, and we will have to agree to disagree on the effect of the hedge on the share price

With regard to the politics, I would be more worried about Tajikistan than either of Malaysia or Indonesia to be honest!

I actually don't worry too much about the political risk unless trouble seems to be brewing, and AVM have a good country spread.

I hold SEY, which underwent a military coupe in Mauritania, and despite having arranged contracts with the ex governnment, seem to be working alongside the new one so far.

AVM have let production forecasts slip, I agree, but most mining juniors seem to suffer slippage, so not too worried provided they are progressing towards the target.

AVM are due to update reserves with the interims I believe, and they always seem to add more, so again reserves don't worry me whilst they are adding to them periodically.

I think the name suggests a general mining company, not a specialized gold producer, and would like to see the name changed, but have no idea what it would cost, and maybe the money could be better utilised elsewhere, without knowing the figures, it's hard to say.

I bought at 37 or 38p, so not a 10 bagger for me by a long chalk, hopefully one day!

[holdontight] 03/10/2005 23:35

I must be the only one who doesn't necessarily view the hedge as the reason for low share price If they have a disciplined 4000 ox / mnth disposal, with clearance in full within 12 mnths or so, then for a co mining by then 300000 oz per year and increasing, I fail to see why market would mark down.

PR : I agree that they can be slow but again I have seen far worse

For me the issue is production forecasts being actually met; low current reserves; unpredictable political environment in Malaysia and Indonesia, and that is probably all. I think a name change would be a complete waste of money and have little doubt that patience will in the end be rewarded... LET'S NOT FORGET THAT 3 YEARS AGO THE share price WAS 10P....SO WE HAVE ALREDAY HAD A 10-BAGGER IN 3 YEARS....SAME AGAIN NEXT 3 YEARS WILL DO ME FINE !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[pecker1] 03/10/2005 19:12

Andy,

Perhaps they'll be asked if Idenburg looks good - let's hope so. A relaunch based on major new resources is what's needed.

re the hedge: if they finance buying in the hedge via the Macquarie $10m revolving facility, they will have to hedge 10k oz for every $1m drawn! So back to square one though a hedge at say $450 is better but it's still a hedge. Moral of the story is don't go to the banks - ask your shareholders instead.

[andy] 03/10/2005 18:58

Ashley,

Well I certainly think they need a broker with experience of the junior mining sector, and one that would be able to promote the stock, unlike the present one.

WHI seem to be one of those favoured by Aim junior miners, as indeed do Williams De Broe IMO, as you rightly suggest.

Maybe AVM need to present at Minesite again too, not a bad forum to update the market on your current prospects, and that should be done in conjunction with a PR excerise IMO.

[mr ashley james] 03/10/2005 18:01

Andy,

IMHO AVM Should sign up with Williams De Broe as Aquarius Platinum Plc did after Matt Sutcliffe left to set up Alexander Mining Plc.

Or Hitchens Harrison Plc

After the failure of the listing of African Copper Plc LSE:ACU (I could also give a plethora of real case mining investment reasons if required and what happened to them as and when asked for) I think they should avoid NUMIS like the Bubonic Plague(they just do not seem able to deliver shareholder value)!

Cheers

Ash:)

[mr ashley james] 03/10/2005 17:56

Andy,

Let us be honest here LSE;AVM hould have closed out that hedge as soon as Gold broke US$300 they should have had a stop loss end of lecture.

Cheers

Ash:)

[andy] 03/10/2005 16:41

kojak78,

I already own GFM!

And I don't subscribe to the £2 target price of some GFMers, not yet anyway, people are pulling figures out of thin air.

The hedge isn't a "problem", but it is a drag on the price, and I for one would like to see it cleared now, and believe they could finance it, and draw a line under the cost. Afterall, the POG could continue to rise, costing AVM even more, although clearly it could fall too, but POG seems to be in a bull run at the moment.

No need to be quite so sharp, even a holder has the right of criticism surely?


Dixi,

IF/When AVM clear the hedge, and promote their stock, it can go a lot higher, but they need to change their way of thinking first, and maybe their broker.

[dixi] 03/10/2005 16:28

kojak78 - a sharp response - but maybe you do have a point!

Having said that it has taken 5 years for GFM to get this far - AVM may well be worth considerably more 5 years hence than today.

I had started with the point simply that GFM market cap had exceeded that of AVM with some bewilderment - more at AVM languishing than GFM going so well.

[kojak78] 03/10/2005 16:19

Why not sell Avocet and buy GFM? "Quick 200p" instead of the sluggish Avocet with hedge problems..

[andy] 03/10/2005 16:14

chipperfld,

I understood that was for the by product of the zinc mining, not for full gold mining.

I attended the AVM AGM last week, and was disappointed at the lack of concern over the (seemingly) low share price in comparison with it's peers. Peter Hambro are frequently mentioned, but without some PR, how will anything change?

IMHO Avocet need to appoint a decent PR company, and inform the market where they are, and where they are planning to go.

Maybe they should change broker to a more mining focussed one, such as WHI?

If the POG continues to rise, the hedge becomes more and more expensive, maybe that's a reason for the drag on the price?

I would like to see a commitment to clear the hedge quicker than 4.000 ozs per month. Previously they mentioned this as a minimum, whereas now it's the rate, so no chance of clearing it early it seems.

[chipperfrd] 03/10/2005 15:49

O/T

Andy, the gold circuit was built into their production facility so they are ready to pour as far as I know.

Anything else we can discuss on the GFM thread.

Apologies for off-topic.

[andy] 03/10/2005 15:27

chipperfld,

Don't GFM first have to define a gold resource?

To the best of my knowledge they have no JORC standard measured gold resource, not even the equipment to process it. They have some gold as a by product of zinc production, they are allowed up to 3%.

GFM don't have a gold mining licence currently either, although I'm sure that would only be a formality.

Avocet are surely undervalued in comparison to GFM currently, but whereas others are promoted, Avocet, by their own admission, have no PR, and don't seem worried about it either!

Their other mistake, IMHO, is not taking out the hedge now, by financing it, rather than watching the price of gold increase, and losing more money in the process.

[pecker1] 03/10/2005 15:27

Ouch! Something to be said for that unfashionable adage "buy and hold"!