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.

SPDR Portfolio Short Term Treasury ETF T.SST.U


Primary Symbol: SPTS

The investment seeks to provide investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield performance of the Bloomberg Barclays 1-3 Year U. The fund invests at least 80%, of its total assets in the securities comprising the index and in securities that the Adviser determines have economic characteristics that are substantially identical to the economic characteristics of the securities that comprise the index. The index is designed to measure the performance of short term (1-3 years) public obligations of the U.S. Treasury.


ARCA:SPTS - Post by User

Comment by dlegovichon Mar 13, 2009 12:46pm
198 Views
Post# 15843064

RE: RE: RE: RE: A 0.25 ratio should be fair

RE: RE: RE: RE: A 0.25 ratio should be fairWhen you buy a company you cannot value it at this year cash flow, it's the future cash flow stream that counts.
Also, all the good potential of making new deals that you mention, even in a distressed market will need cash (capex) to get done. And capex need to be subtracted from cash flow.
So, it is fair to compare the companies basing on silver streams they have already paid for.
2009 cash flow will be something unusually high for SST, and steady state production will be lower.
And, anyway, even $45M of cash flow in 2009 would not buy to you an increase of future production of more than 30% if spent in new deals (which is substantial but we are not talking doubling the value of SST here).

We must also note that valuations based on market Cap per ounce in the ground is misleading in the case of SST because they have a very unusually low high production/reserve ratio from underground mines that will not be mined fast enough.
In the case of Neves Corvo they have 40 years minelife (not counting resources) and I think it would be difficult to find a financial analyst giving any tangible value beyond, say, 15 years.
If you look out there, many mine explorers/developers will stop spending exploration money when they reach 15-20 yrs of reserve.

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>