PDA

View Full Version : AUN.v Aurcana



theycallmemrporterhouse
12-07-2010, 02:21 AM
Any opinions on this one ? pro or con .

I'm in and thinking about adding.

easy8
12-07-2010, 02:22 PM
Any opinions on this one ? pro or con .

I'm in and thinking about adding.


Don't know this stock... care to tell us what you know?

proudandrenewed
12-07-2010, 02:55 PM
I bought at .19 a few weeks back, sold at .75 yesterday, and now getting back in at this bargain price.
I think it is on sale.

canadianglow
12-07-2010, 05:00 PM
You might want to hold off until it corrects a bit more. Silver might be in for some more downside. I could see AUN headed back into the .50 range before it continues it's ascent.

As to where to find info. Stockhouse.com bullboards has a guy named "mattbigham" who has done some excellent analysis on the the stock. I also posted some stuff recently in BOG's penny stock thread.

I'm sure there's more info out there still, ya just gotta look... ;)

Ps. Congrats on your timing, it doesn't get much better than that. (.19/.75)

MyBids
12-07-2010, 06:20 PM
I've owned this since June. Bought more on the recent downturn when it did a private placement.

Don't hold your breath for the Shafter Mine any time soon.

canadianglow
12-07-2010, 06:28 PM
I see no reason for the doubts on shafter. All they needed was 13 million or so to get it off the ground. Plus with all the big bids coming in on the L2, there's probably a lot more institutional holdings, in addition to sprott. If there's one thing institutional holdings does for a stock, it's that it puts fire under the butts of management to live up to their promises. Construction was supposed to begin December 1st for shafter, I guess we'll get a news release soon to update us on the situation.

Good interview with the CEO

http://www.youtube.com/user/EvenKeelMedia

SilverIllusion
12-07-2010, 09:50 PM
http://www.insidestocks.com/texpert.asp?sym=AUNFF&code=BSTK

I'm starting to use the listed support levels to trade into stocks. If I would have used this site over the past three months of trading I would have done a lot better.

MyBids
12-08-2010, 10:05 AM
I see no reason for the doubts on shafter. All they needed was 13 million or so to get it off the ground. Plus with all the big bids coming in on the L2, there's probably a lot more institutional holdings, in addition to sprott. If there's one thing institutional holdings does for a stock, it's that it puts fire under the butts of management to live up to their promises. Construction was supposed to begin December 1st for shafter, I guess we'll get a news release soon to update us on the situation.

Good interview with the CEO

http://www.youtube.com/user/EvenKeelMedia


If you are going to focus on this company then the current focus is on the La Negra Mine. The Shafter Mine is a nice bonus when it happens. Not any time
real soon.

"All they needed was 13 million or so to get it off the ground." That's not correct for the whole picture. Maybe money wise but not permit(s) and license(s)

When you're in the stage that Aurcanna is in there are 2 squares:

Square One

and

Now WTF Do They Want.

This company does not have all it's permits and licenses for the Shafter Mine....yet.

canadianglow
12-08-2010, 01:58 PM
If you are going to focus on this company then the current focus is on the La Negra Mine. The Shafter Mine is a nice bonus when it happens. Not any time
real soon.

"All they needed was 13 million or so to get it off the ground." That's not correct for the whole picture. Maybe money wise but not permit(s) and license(s)

When you're in the stage that Aurcanna is in there are 2 squares:

Square One

and

Now WTF Do They Want.

This company does not have all it's permits and licenses for the Shafter Mine....yet.

Do you really think they'd go out and do all of that financing now, plus announce the start of construction on Dec.1 if they didn't have their ducks in a row? Don't you think the intense DD team at sprott would have investigated the possibility of no permits prior to sinking 12 million into the company?

According to the news release reported on the feasibility study:

Project execution planning is essentially complete, key personnel, consultants, and engineers are identified for construction, and equipment for developing the mine and constructing the mill has been identified and in certain cases, secured. All essential permits are in hand and are being updated to reflect the latest project configuration.

According to that interview that I posted with Al K., the PP was fully subscribed, that means they raised 80 million dollars inside of less than a few weeks. Think about that for a minute, a company with a market cap of less than 100 million, just raised 80 million in a few weeks - and their share price is soaring! You don't accomplish this if you've got a floundering management team with a mine and no permits. I think we're fine.

MyBids
12-08-2010, 03:17 PM
If anybody cares to read the Feasibility Study here it is.

http://www.aurcana.com/i/pdf/Shafter-Feasibility-2010.pdf

You don't even have to go very far into it until you get to Table 1.3 Permitting Evaluation. Some have already
been granted, some aren't needed until after construction, and some are still going through the process.

The ones that are not needed until after construction are still needed before operations can begin.

The one that bothers me the most is the last one:

Hazardous Waste Management Permit. You can see that type used for this permit entry is of a
different 'print type' than the rest of the report.

Like I said. Square One or Now WTF Do They Want

No, Aurcana would not have gotten the type financial interest they have if it hadn't been for their operating
mine. I doubt they would have gotten the financing they did if it didn't involve getting Silver Wheaton off their backs also.

I'm not knocking Aurcana or anything that they are doing. I own it and want to buy more. With Shafter in production
then this will be a giant. But right now Aurcana's best is with what happens with La Negra and it looks good.

Statements in mining reports pertaining to permitting that have something along the lines as "All essential permits are in hand" should
be thrown in the trash. Essential permits are always in hand no matter if you hold 2 or 3 of them or all of them. It's a truism that can
be inserted when needed.

An update on the progress of the permits would be great.

I don't know if the construction phase was started on Dec 1 or not. It's completion date is listed as June 2012.

canadianglow
12-08-2010, 09:32 PM
If anybody cares to read the Feasibility Study here it is.

http://www.aurcana.com/i/pdf/Shafter-Feasibility-2010.pdf

You don't even have to go very far into it until you get to Table 1.3 Permitting Evaluation. Some have already
been granted, some aren't needed until after construction, and some are still going through the process.

The ones that are not needed until after construction are still needed before operations can begin.

The one that bothers me the most is the last one:

Hazardous Waste Management Permit. You can see that type used for this permit entry is of a
different 'print type' than the rest of the report.

Like I said. Square One or Now WTF Do They Want

No, Aurcana would not have gotten the type financial interest they have if it hadn't been for their operating
mine. I doubt they would have gotten the financing they did if it didn't involve getting Silver Wheaton off their backs also.

I'm not knocking Aurcana or anything that they are doing. I own it and want to buy more. With Shafter in production
then this will be a giant. But right now Aurcana's best is with what happens with La Negra and it looks good.

Statements in mining reports pertaining to permitting that have something along the lines as "All essential permits are in hand" should
be thrown in the trash. Essential permits are always in hand no matter if you hold 2 or 3 of them or all of them. It's a truism that can
be inserted when needed.

An update on the progress of the permits would be great.

I don't know if the construction phase was started on Dec 1 or not. It's completion date is listed as June 2012.

Good observations, thanks for posting!

trbsht
12-16-2010, 11:40 PM
I bought this stock @ .628 and gonna hold for a couple months.
I traded stocks 10 years ago during the internet craze, and decided to get back in after slowly learning over the last 8 months about what was happening in the precious metal market.

My first buy was sohaf. Hopefully the same results are realized with aunff.
I am excited to be back trading though and love when I find a true source of free unadulterated information.
Thanks for being here.

theycallmemrporterhouse
02-17-2011, 02:37 PM
trbsht

Are you still holding aurcana ?

I've got some , curious about other opinions on this stock .

GeoMag
02-24-2011, 10:25 AM
it is funny..I just drove past the shafter mine the past weekend.
I did not know that Paul M. was appointed to the board. That is almost enough for me to buy in. Every company he has been with has sold out. I worked with him and the old Energy Metals

I think I will buy on any dip

theycallmemrporterhouse
02-25-2011, 04:14 PM
I sold out today , to much dilution for me . The market cap of Aurcana is to close to the market cap of AXU . I see AXU as a better value . Bought some RBY too, if the issues with BCSC are ironed out than RBY could have a nice 20% or so pop IMO

theycallmemrporterhouse
02-25-2011, 04:22 PM
Now that I sold , you will see it go up 50% . If history is a guide .

dakota15
03-26-2011, 04:09 PM
I'm still holding this one. I've got a fair chunk at a .72 average and I'm contemplating adding some more if it pulls back a bit. A lot of dilution here but they have the goods. Once in production, Shafter will be producing 3.9 million ounces in the first and second year, and with La Negra they'll be pushing 6 million ounces. Certainly nothing to sneeze at.

BOiPiNOi604
04-20-2011, 11:59 PM
I'm still holding this one. I've got a fair chunk at a .72 average and I'm contemplating adding some more if it pulls back a bit. A lot of dilution here but they have the goods. Once in production, Shafter will be producing 3.9 million ounces in the first and second year, and with La Negra they'll be pushing 6 million ounces. Certainly nothing to sneeze at.

Anyone has a take on Aurcana's possible lawsuit?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/18/aurcana-idUSL3E7FI38120110418


Does anyone has any update on their waste management permit?

tcg1022
04-21-2011, 08:00 AM
I sold about a month back when it was in the .90's and glad I did. I just didnt like what I was seeing but will probaly buy back in once the dust settles fwiw.

Savoy
04-21-2011, 08:01 AM
Anyone has a take on Aurcana's possible lawsuit?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/18/aurcana-idUSL3E7FI38120110418


Does anyone has any update on their waste management permit?

Apparently from what I've read they didn't actually sign a contract with Sprott only had some informal agreement. They had a very raw deal with them. Something to the tune of a 25 mil dollar loan that would ultimately cost them 50 mil in the end. Not a good deal at all. Based on the price of silver now especially makes that a horrible deal. I do not believe they will have any serious ligitation issues with this since no contract was signed.

At least, that's how I've heard the story. I'm still long Aurcana shares with an avg price of .80. I've traded in and out of this stock over the last 6 months a few times and made money each time. Just a fyi.

BOiPiNOi604
04-21-2011, 12:48 PM
The situation is alarming if SAM and SLP does have a case against AUN. On the other hand, if it is a non-formal, non-binding agreement, AUN is just going to waste some time with the court hassle that SAM and SLP are pursuiting.

In the meanwhile, I am just saving some money to unload on this mine while waiting for the final permit to be in place.

Nice to see AUN finally disclosing the lawsuit on their website. I iniatially found out from a third party source.. but yea good to see some transparency from AUN.


$25m for $50 is just ridiculous....

Savoy
04-21-2011, 01:06 PM
Ya from what I've read they didn't have any binding agreement signed with Sprott so it shouldn't be a big deal at all. This stock is so severly undervalued it almost makes me sick seeing the sp here.

Savoy
04-21-2011, 01:43 PM
Apparently a poster over at stockhouse spoke to the Gary Lindsay over at AUN. Here's what he posted over there.

I figured you guys would be interested.

================================================== ======




Just got off the phone with Gary Lindsay , requesting direct info on the lawsuit.

He assured me that the PP was a completely separate animal from the loan , unrelated , and that Sprott's participation in it , despite Sprott's point of view that he "made the day" for AUN , was in no legal manner
a binder to AUN's participation (or not) in the loan .

He stated that the loan agreement was non-binding because it was predicated on the AUN Board signing off on it - which they never did , thus there was never a legal consummation of the loan. I specifically questioned that Sprott
allowed so much time to go by (since last August) without a binding Board sign off , but he said that's the way it was.

I then requested specifics on the breakup agreement - I assume that if there was one , we , having backed out , are responsible for it , so the terms are important -

Was it what Sprott claims (800k-over a mil. oz. silver?) , or not?

He responded how that would be around $45mil. for a $25mil. deal and I said "well , yeah , that's why I'm focusing on the facts of this" , and could we see the agreement?

He said no , because it was "sealed" as a result of the litigation , but that the CEO had informed him that the breakup penalty was in the range of $1mil. , and was furious at the false claims Sprott was making - totally untrue.

I suggested that they consider releasing the correct breakup terms in a news release , as that is likely the main stumbling block to investor buying right now , and he agreed stating that fund investors are saying the same thing.

It seems ridiculous to me that AUN would agree to a penalty of around a million oz. of silver for a breakup of the deal since :

1) There was no assurance board approval woud be granted and such an onerous penalty for a "maybe" deal makes no sense to agree to , and

2) Sprott's "claimed penalty" wasn't for "almost $50mil. worth of silver" as has been commented often , because silver was much lower at the time , and its now future value is immaterial to the deal at the time , but even so , the then current silver price , I'm estimating as somewhere between 17.50 and the low 20's depending on just when the deal was made , represents more or less the entire value of the deal ! So at that time - if you make the deal , you owe $25 mil. if you take the money , and if you turn it down - YOU OWE ALMOST THE SAME AMOUNT!

I dont believe that. I think Sprott is lying , and our CEO is furious about that - I hope they have a news release regarding that soon.

PS - Apologies for repeating any info already discussed , this is current from the company.
================================================== =======