Laurion Mineral Exploration Inc V.LME

Added this Morning

[LaurionLong]

https://www.laurion.ca/_resources/LME-FAQ-Shareholders.pdf

[matlas]

Very interesting.  My head is spinning after reading. I think that they must have sent someone down to Washington, DC to get advice from the politicians there on how to appear to answer questions without really saying anything.!

[LaurionLong]

There's a ton of info in that document to unpack.   Will take a couple of reads.   the highlite for me is that Cynthia is making it clear that there IS a view of the property at 10,000,000 GEOs and her view is that their work has enhanced their view "significantly".    Her words.    That's all I need to read.  

[Lambosntendies]

Hahah Yes Matlas! I found there was a ot of "side-stepping" answers especially surrounding the resource estimates. The general tone of 10M Geos does seem optomistic. The big question I have is how much of the the 10M (+?) in whole or in part is propable, proven, inferred or indicated. A freind of mine brought up a great point yesterday in conversation after GoldenL mentioned he had

[matlas]

Hi Lambo- I doubt that the 2 FN references were deliberately deleted. I am guessing that somehow that was some sort of transcription error. If they deliberately deleted, I would have thought that they would remove all traces, and made FN 3, FN 1. Also, if too much info, why would they include to begin with? I think the "side stepping" is not confined to the resource estimate. For

[Lambosntendies]

I would have thought they would have removed all traces as well, my guess is someone made a mistake and either forgot/didnt think to delete reference points 1 & 2. 

[Bracko]

Someone must be reading our posts to her this is the only forum that has engaging conversation and insight ,I haven't seen any other forums out there that has this much discussion on LME but definitely she is reading it or someone is reading it for her for this to come out now   My thoughts 

[matlas]

I think you are right about that because much that is there echos comments made on this forum. I also think that much of this is a lead-up to the AGM-this Q&A is the type of thing that could have been sent out in preparation for that.

[keen2know]

The rhetoric is relentless as 'maximising shareholder value'. Almost every piece of communication from LME it is stated. If you look at the share price over the last 2 years, they haven't actually done that, despite countless times saying it.  Of course we all want to see the positives from anything/everything that is said. However, if Cynthia was in the middle of negotiating a

[Lambosntendies]

I would argue that over the last two years they have been maximizing shareholder and they will continue to do so until that work materializes in the form of a buyout. The share price is virtually irrelevant, it only represents a maximum of 7ish% of the shares open to the retail market, many of which are held by us longs.  I think Cynthia absolutely would put together this fact sheet if she

[matlas]

I think that there is a lot to what you say Lambo. However, I would argue that, in most cases, she is disposing of or dealing with various questions in a way that does not really answer them to get people off her back. I think she has probably been getting lots of flack, including from some members of F&F and decided to "throw us a bone". Interestingly, she did not directly touch

[GoldBelt]

I've been investing in mining stocks for over 15 years. I've had around ten of my mining investments get bought out/taken over. A few of them I bought on connected information that a deal was in the works. So of those deals took YEARS to manifest. All the while the stock price when up and down in a narrow channel or dropped like a rock then the deal took place with little premium. Some got

[LaurionLong]

I love that for ages one of the chief complaints here has been that nobody could find a written record of the expectation of the mineralization of LME's property and the 10,000,000 GEO figure has been written off a myth then today we get explicit confirmation that 10mm is in fact the original target and the CEO is happy with how the property is displaying mineralization beyond expectations and

[fatlas]

Good day for us shareholders - I agree - there is a lot of info in this document. I've read it 6 times and am still digesting it. I'm landing on the following being stated / restated today: the original 10 million GEO objective confidence in their work to prove it - and exceed it active work in the past and continuing to sell the company confidence in their strategy to

[Drewman]

Refreshing to hear this. I'm in agreement - I'm long on LME, but I have enough experience with stocks to know that hopium is dangerous and you should always consider all possibilities. Also, your friend is absolutely insane for mortgaging his house to buy shares. This is how people lose their family, lose their house, and sometimes end up jumping off a tall building. Hoping that it

[Drewman]

whoops - I'm an idiot. Mean't to comment on a different post :P

[goldenI]

Hey @Goldbelt I wonder if you wouldn't mind a question based on this post. Laurion is the first junior miner I have bought. I have some shares of Barrick that I bought when it dipped below $20 beacuse of the dividend and for the long term, but LME is probably the most speculative stock in my portfolio. I wouldn't consider myself a "basher" at all. My views are based on

[Anthony13]

Hey @goldenl I enjoy reading your post.  You bring up some good points.  If you could give me some insight and understand why Kinross paid as much as they did for Great Bear resources would be much appreciated. thanks in advance 

[KaBams]

I thought I read somewhere that they paid 1.35 b cdn for approx 5.5 mil ounce of sort proven/ assumed reserves. Half open pit other not. Those number above were slightly different depending on report ya read. Some was cash and some was stock. why they did it not sure, other that obvious answer to make money.

[goldenI]

Thanks @Anthony13 I appreciate it. I am not a market analyst or geologist, so caveat necessary, but the Kinross/GBR acquisition was for me typical of the price vs value debate (price is what you pay, value is what you get). The fact that many shareholders on both sides were not happy with the deal I think supports this. So #1, I think the timing of the acquisition and it's affect in the

[GoldBelt]

Hi GoldenI...my strength is not necessarily in the financials/operations/geology of mining. I'm more of a swing trader/ technical analysis trader. However, as in real estate "LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION"  is a big factor in mine valuation. Some jurisdications are more favorable for mining than others due to polictical / permiting risk, support of /and relations with locals and