Victoria Gold Corp T.VGCX

Nick

[Whateverrr]

You make some outstanding points from your 1st hand experience being invested in a project that had a bad incident in a multi project company and how VG is obviously single project risk.  The items you bring up are all yet to be answered in reality YET many of the new day traders who think this is a slam dunk winner multi bagge don't understand to look at in their 'gamble'  VG was not a big cash machine, held plenty of debt, struggled to get close to their 200-210k per year numbers, the stock did basically nothing for years and a decade plus.  Only lucky traders did well, very few of them.  Your warnings in the post will go unheard by who would be best served by them, the day traders.  This is okay though.  Those who saw disaster and were already owners sold out, those who will try to ride it out hold.  The ONLY trading going on right now is daytrader vs daytrader and their stupid charts that have NOTHING to do with what, how and when this situation resolves itself.  zero correlation with a chart.

Comment by Nick2021on Jun 27, 2024 3:11pm

54 Views 

Post# 36109479

RE:RE:RE:Ouch bid 1.17

I bought into Mandalay a few months after they had the accident at their Chilean mine, which was their 3rd most important producing resource; in that accident, the mine was flooded and two miners were killed.  The stock price had been cut in more than half, at 30 cents (equivalent to 3 dollars today, after they had a reverse split a few years back); I figured it was on sale and a good bargain.  Over the next year it kept going down and down (bear in mind that they had other producing assets) and bottomed at 5 cents (50 cents today).  The company barely avoided bankruptcy, I averaged down, and was lucky to get out with a decent but not great profit.  Looking back, here are some of the things I didn't consider:

- debt leverage:  it's a shock to a company to have an expensive situation occur which at the same time reduces its ability to service debt

- credibility:  at exactly the same time money is needed, credibility is lost.  The management team that is going to need funding is the same management team that oversaw the disastrous loss of their ability to generate cash.  (note:  this is catastrophic)

- risk:  what happened once can happen twice.  Due diligence becomes a lot more diligent.  The money that is borrowed comes with a lot more conditions, and there is a lot less left over for shareholders.  

And the thing about Victoria is they have no other asset -- Mandalay almost went under when its least important mine flooded.