Avocet Mining Share Discussion Threads

[andy] 21/7/2004 11:53

biswell,

just for you!

[jeddah jo] 21/7/2004 11:50

LOL @ Zengas. Quality...

[goml] 21/7/2004 11:44

Biswell, can you answer my question (ref. post 4695) regarding one of your previous recent posts please?
goml

[zengas] 21/7/2004 11:36

The only gold Biswell ever bought came from Ratners.

[jescome] 21/7/2004 11:28

Biswell, crawl back into the hole from which you emerged

and never come out again.

[biswell] 21/7/2004 11:18

POG on the way down

Miners will ditto do

Expect some severe pain

Mr G conned them all again

Sell now or you will rue
B

[the fox] 21/7/2004 11:16

Not only is gold production increasing, the life of the main mine is being extended and net debt has been massively reduced. N. Lanut is exceeding expectations and I would not be surprised to see an acquisition or two. The company is also sitting on over $23m in cash!

I reiterate that compared to peers AVM is at least 50% undervalued. A fair price would be £1.50 IMHO.

DR :)

[holdontight] 21/7/2004 11:09

No. AVM is undervalued on current prod levels alone. Outlook seems to be circa 120000 from Penjom plus 55000 again (rising to 100000 in following year) from ZGC, plus prod starting end of 2004 at North Lanut. Possibly therefore iro 200000 for 2004 to 2005 in total, with significantly more for the following year. Against a backgroud of anticipated rising POG and target of 300000/annum by 2006, I struggle only to put a lid on the potential EPS....massive !

[phillis] 21/7/2004 10:43

sorry gammabod, got my pres and my posts mixed up. F/casts were from EVO and Seymour Pierce. Exchange assumptions responsible for any difference.
Still feel that the outlook is the key driver and whilst interesting we need much more exploration momentum to move the price
Pejom steady at 30k ozs per 1/4

[gammabod] 21/7/2004 10:23

Phillis - who estimated £8.8m for YE 2004?

1) Pre tax profit was actually $15,592 (you have quoted after tax figure)
$15.592m is £ 8.6m(ish) GBP at 1.80 - so not a big difference.

2) Pejom production stagnant ? At record levels - and more importantly - the 'life expectancy of the mine is the same today as it was in 1996'.

3) High cash cost - but the reason for this high cost is growth (aiming for 100k oz). I agree the 'Government negotiations remain a problem.

[phillis] 21/7/2004 09:49

Nothing wrong with these results in isolation.
For those plaintiff cries about lack of reaction to the results ,try this:
1/ Forecast £8.8m pre-tax was missed. Actually $11743 at say $1.80 = £6.5million. Big difference.
2/ Gold production stagnant. Pejom 2003 =124k ozs, Q4 30k and Q1 04 30k, ZGC 2003=56k ozs, Q4 15k and Q1 04 12k
3/ ZGC Note high cash cost, forecast of no growth in 04 which would reduce high cost and caveat about negotiations with Government. No great expectations therefore in 04 for ZGC which is a disappointment
North Lanut becomes v important in moving this business forward

[jimmy cricket] 21/7/2004 09:36

Why is the P/E ratio so low? Surely a price rise is due?

[goml] 21/7/2004 08:57

gammabod,

there was evidence of only a small amount of pre-results trading going on, so what you have is long term holders happy with the results plus a few escaping T-traders. that doesn't mean that the mm's won't try to wind it down now for a day or two (afterall it's what people usually expect, sell on news). any big institutional or other investors will take a few days to review the results and forecasts before committing funds.

Any news on revised forecasts from EVO's anyone?

[carntyne] 21/7/2004 08:53

Wait till t10 finished ?

[gammabod] 21/7/2004 08:47

But why so much selling ? Only 17k of buys against 120k of sells - and on those results ??

[goml] 21/7/2004 08:39

Very happy with those but would still like to see a substantial effort to move Russian 'P' and 'C' into JORC 'Inferred'.

[gammabod] 21/7/2004 08:37

What a strange reaction to what appears to be excellent results. What am I missing ?

[sideburnsam1979] 21/7/2004 08:14

What a set of results! Profits, Cashflow, Reserves and Exploration all positive very little there to be concerned about, this has to be due a serious re-rating soon on this results as unlike other miners AVM is delivering now and how.

[goml] 21/7/2004 07:19

Yes, looks robust. Continue to hold.

[mieke] 21/7/2004 07:19

As predicted the new mine will produce much more than the originally estimated 50,000oz - and they estimate first gold pour no later than November.

'We are pleased with the progress made at North Lanut which is the Company's
first new gold project in over nine years. As forecast, gold production is
likely before the end of 2004 and there is reason to believe that the project's
performance will exceed feasibility estimates. With the increase in the grade of its ore reserves, next year's gold production could reach 80,000 ounces at a
cash cost of under US$150/oz.

If POG stays at over $375 that means the extra gold (lets say 70,000oz) adds an extra $16m revenue (at costs of $150/oz). Blimey!

[mieke] 21/7/2004 07:07

RNS out.
EPS 6.6 and 20% increase in resources, looks pretty damn good to me!!!

[holdontight] 20/7/2004 20:02

= = =
WHERE TO GET LEVERAGE...
From another thread.....what value AVM on this basis ?

To:Howard Sinclair-Jones who wrote (10381)
From: Claude Cormier Sunday, Jul 18, 2004 7:33 PM
View Replies (4) | Respond to of 10449


I would think that the juniors would move more then that. If gold move 10% from here, it will then have broken above two major resistance ($US 414 and $US 432), this will have confirmed the resumption of the bill and juniors will react in a frenetic way.

AT US$440 and up, we should start to see juniors valued at $75-100 per ounce of resources. On average they are now valued near US$35/ounce.

@:

[jeddah jo] 20/7/2004 20:01

You're dreaming man. Negative real interest rates for the next 5 years minimum.

If interest rates ever get to 4% then we will have 6% inflation. Simple, any dummy can see that despite all the BS coming out of Greenspan.

Just tell me Biswell what transatory event will occur to convert -ve short term interest rates in to positive ones. It simply will not happen until all the excesses have been worked out of the global economy. That includes all asset bubbles that have been created by Greenspan's policies since the late 90s.

JJ.

[goml] 20/7/2004 11:47

BISWELL,

Please could you clarify over what timeframe you are talking about. At the moment your post reads as though you are saying that at some point over the next 18 months (i.e. before the end of 2005) the HUI will fall to 150. Is that what you're saying?

goml

[mieke] 20/7/2004 11:38

Excellent - the worlds most effective contraindicator has spoken again. Prepare for rises ahead.