Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

Oromin Explorations Ltd OLEPF



GREY:OLEPF - Post by User

Comment by iop42on Dec 13, 2010 10:16pm
420 Views
Post# 17841504

RE: RE: Teranga, JV, etc

RE: RE: Teranga, JV, etc

Basedon todays closing prices, Dec. 13, 2010.

MDLpre demerger and post rollback $10.70

About$600 million capitalisation.

MDLshareholders received 2.632917 shares for each mdl;

2.632917times $2.87 (tgz closing) = $7.56

1demerged mdl $4.99 (can. close) = $4.99

pre-mdlshareholders worth =$12.55 (new-mdl + tgz)

Thenew MDL has 60 million O/S shares for capitalization of about $300million. And, TGZ with MDL Sabodala and existing mine according toStockwatch has 241 million shares O/S, which

wouldindicate an extreme capitalization. On the other hand If you go withTGZ's pdf presentation there is just about 40 million shares O/S foran approximate $300 million capitalization. Anexploration/developing property equal to a producing mine with wellover (if memory serves me right) 1000 sq. km of property, up againstthe Mali border, to explore?

Theseguys have also forward sold about 250,000 ozs of gold at or around$800, to be delivered by the end of 2014, in steps. It is about halftheir production and at todays gold price the loss would be about$750 million if they had to buy them back.

Myopinion is Chet is not going to merge with TGZ, the shares tradedprovide some kind of tie alright but I'm not sure what. Maybe forore processing?

Whywhen OLE is the operator and the other 43.5% partner owes it to OLEto finance the mine development costs, at least that is what newsrelease indicate when the deals were struck a few years ago, doesanyone feel the percentages should be adjusted. The operator isrunning the show and the partner has to put up or the deal is broken.Maybe this point will be the mechanism for Chet to acquire over 50%ownership for OLE.

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>