The information on this Website is not reliable and not intended to provide tax, legal, or investment advice. Nothing contained on the Website shall be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or offer to buy or sell a security to any person in any jurisdiction.
CEO.CA members discuss high-risk penny stocks which can lose their entire value. Only risk what you can afford to lose.
@tltoooBefore you, newbies jump all over @KeithNeumeyer for proposing to do some drilling -- especially after reading the article from last May ("we're not actually planning to drill a single hole") -- keep in mind that he's never done anything that didn't increase the accretive value of each of your shares.
Some of these projects (especially Cameron) have the potential for a yuuuge "bigly" revaluation based on the results of just a small drilling program...so why let all the upside go to a Goldcorp or an Agnico Eagle?
If KN decides to do some drilling on the most prospective properties while we're sitting around waiting for the PoG to take off, you should be all for it. And if you still don't like it, may I recommend a good prospect generator (SMD)?
click to invite
@tltoooLoad up and yes that's what im doing. Shorts would love 72. I take my chances. I haven't been in this play forever but could resist taling 89!
• Upgrade Canadian exchange listing from TSX-Venture to TSX (Planned for H1 2017)
• 47,000 metres of drilling planned for key projects throughout 2017 including:
– 27,000 metres of infill and resource expansion at Goldlund (already commenced January 2017).
– 9,000 metres of infill drilling at Cameron to upgrade resources and to prepare for a PEA.
– 5,000 metres of infill and exploration drilling at Hope Brook to upgrade resources to prepare for a PEA.
– Additional drilling may be conducted as warranted.
• Update existing PEA at Springpole and prepare for a Pre-Feasibility Study
• Commence environmental baseline work at Springpole
• Seek further potential acquisitions to expand mineral bank portfolio
@LucTenHaveSummary Brionor Resources $BNR:
- projects total 103,000 hectares in the province of Santa Cruz, Argentina
- team/board: Lew Lawrick ( $SIR$ANX ), Michael Byron ( $NHK ), Paul Robinson ( $REN ), Denis Hall ( Minera Andes before it became $MUX ), Robert Ayotte ( $MQR )
- 14,447,000 shares of Northern Superior $SUP (worth ~C$ 0.8 million)
- 1,830,000 shares of First Mining Finance $FF (worth ~C$ 1.6 million)
- C$ 1 million cash post PP
- market cap C$ 3.4 million post PP
@Charliersi love this
2017-03-30 2017-04-03 $FF
First Mining Finance Corp. (formerly Albion Petroleum Ltd.) Neumeyer, Keith
4 - Director of Issuer
10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market +87,500 0.8100 10,205,313
@Vaughanmy apologies @Earnanickel, this would be my "fault". As both you and @Tltooo tagged your comments to $FF, your comments contained no opinion whatsoever, and considering gold has nothing to do with zinc or $TK, I went ahead and cleaned up some of the messages on the channel. Your comments are still visible in the $FF room. Sorry for the confusion.
@AlanThe same thing happened with me @TheNextBigRush. I think I heard about the arbitrage opportunity via Jayant Bhandari. I already owned $FF but when I heard about getting free shares in Irving, I bought. I didn't realise it was a 10x as it was only a few hundred dollars in my account.
@nobshere$FF VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwired - April 25, 2017) - First Mining Finance Corp. ("First Mining" or the "Company") (TSX VENTURE: FF)(OTCQX:FFMGF)(FRANKFURT:FMG) is pleased to announce the first assay results from the first 12 holes of a 106 hole, 28,500 metre diamond drill in-fill program on its 100% owned Goldlund Gold Project ("Goldlund"), located near the town of Sioux Lookout in northwestern Ontario, Canada.
•Hole GL-17-044 intersected 26.0 metres of 2.14 grams per tonne gold ◦Including 2.0 metres of 18.43 grams per tonne gold
•Hole GL-17-021 intersected 52.0 metres of 2.21 grams per tonne gold ◦Including 2.0 metres of 43.09 grams per tonne gold
•Hole GL-17-017 intersected 62.0 metres of 0.90 grams per tonne gold ◦Including 2.0 metres of 12.74 grams per tonne gold
@kjm$FF is getting hammered because funds in the know are front running the big gdxj dump. By June 17, gdxj has to sell around 50mil shares which represents 21 days worth of selling on an average volume basis.
anonymous@kjm$GDXJ$FF$TGZ Regarding the GDXJ re-balance...
a number of comments on the various CEO.ca threads are making it seem as though the fund manager (VanEck) is going to dump portions of certain ETF holdings by a certain date (or within a short-term time frame). Could you provide a link to any official documentation which supports that contention?
For background, the $GDXJ ETF seeks to replicate, as closely as possible, the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index.
If you read the information on the VanEck website, you will see that it is the rule change for the index that is being implemented on June 17th. There is nothing I have read which suggests that the fund manager of the ETF must then complete concentrated sales of the necessary securities within a set number of days.
Some writers on the internet have taken a look at the position sizes for securities that could be subject to selling and compared this against average daily volume, in an effort to calculate the minimum number of days that would be necessary to complete the selling.
But there is a big difference between making that calculation and then assuming that the fund managers will seek to eliminate the positions in the minimum possible period of time. They are not crazy and will not necessarily dump large numbers of shares into limited bids.
Isn't it possible that the fund managers will complete the rebalance over an extended time frame, to avoid adding additional pressure to the security prices? Is it also possible that the companies who will be impacted, could look to arrange for block purchases by interested parties, to partially or fully off-set the upcoming sales?
I have no particular information as to how the fund manager will complete this re-balance (or whether certain companies will try to facilitate work-arounds). But I think these alternatives are worth considering, rather than assuming the worst.
anonymous@kjm$FF$TGZ that's my point -- you are linking to an opinion piece on the re-balance, rather than anything official from VanEck. There is nothing I have seen from them which suggests that they've got to sell 'x' number of shares of $FF by June 17th (or any other specific date).
For disclosure, I do not own $FF but do hold shares of $TGZ, which is also likely being impacted by fears regarding the upcoming re-balance. We will learn soon enough how it all works out. Have a good night.
anonymous@kjm$FF$TGZ Yes, I have seen the charts regarding speculation on the additions and reductions.
Following is from the VanEck website (and their discussion of the Index Rule Change):
"Certain of the information provided above for MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index reflects an application of the announced index rule change to data as of March 31, 2017. Given that such rule is not currently in effect for the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index and will only come into effect as of June 17, 2017, the actual composition of the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index on such date may vary significantly from the information presented herein."
That means that the fund manager is not yet able to determine what the revised composition will look like.
And again, with regard to the number of days to complete sales -- that is based on average daily volume and not (from anything that I have read so far) a requirement to complete sales within a compressed time frame.