Some PerspectiveHi everybody, I love the discussion on here and hope that it serves to reach a general consensus that would propel the management unlock the true value of its assets - rather than just "banter" or "showing dirty laundry". For this I decided to add my 2 cents. I have been a shareholder for 2 years when gold was at about $800. I bought the stock from this level upto about 17 cents when phase 2F results were released a few months ago. At the time OX was about 15 - 20% of my portfolio.
Let us put the cards on the table - i.e. be analytical and weigh the factors that got us here. We shareholders get paid by share price appreciation (not by marketcap, assets, etc. etc.).
Major factors (i.e., this is not meant to be an exhaustive list) affecting share price of a company : 1) Market conditions. Price of gold has increased by 50% since my entry point and from all indications the assets (be it with fits and starts) has increased significantly relative to the share numbers. We are in middle of summer doldrums with market jitters affecting many junior gold stocks specially those considered needing financing in the next 6-12 months. But still has about 3 million in cash, and there are still a good number of junior gold stocks at or near their 52 week highs not to mention some above that or going higher based on successful recent drilling.
2) Assets. This can be divided in hard assets and people assets (I will address the latter in the next section). Based on drill results OX's assets have only increased and qualitatively (i.e., economically) appear at least in line with previous results (although the total metallic screen / fire-assay grades are pending but should prove to be even better based on last year's results) - granted that the nuggety nature of the resource makes it difficult for the market to appreciate the initial drill results but that is not a good excuse if potential investors had been educated enough.
Which brings me to what I believe is the real issue hear. 3) Management. I basically consider the quality of the geo team (now basically Osisko), financing / accounting, and marketing / IR; all under the CEO. One issue is credibility which I believe OX is short of. Bringing of Osisko at the price of giving up roughly half of the defined asset in Goldboro was meant to address that, speaking volumes about the quality of the asset and its expansion potential. At the time Osisko had a very large cash position and had not done any deals with Clifton Star / nor Brett and the management (including Mark) tried to convince me that this was a great move. But the terms of the agreement at best a modest 8 mil over 4 years seemed very opportunistic. The terms negotiated with Clifton Star and Brett and the fact that Osisko has so far treated OX in relatively low key manner I believe has put OX in some jeopardy in that Osisko (irrespective of the asset potential) can play hard ball by slowing their exploration expenditures and / or offering a low ball take-over bid. Therefore, I believe the recent price action in a significant part reflects the anxiety about Osisko's decision (OX does not appear to be in charge of its destiny). On the other hand if this uncertainty is removed by Osisko on a positive manner it could present the stock with a significant boost. But I believe there is no excuse for OX management to leave the company's / shareholders' fate in the hands of another company (after all the other company if they are any good would look after its own / shareholders' interests which could mean lowballing OX).
So what could OX have done or should do. I would start by improving the company's credibility first by adding to its people assets (bringing professionals with known track records in gold companies, geo, financing, and /or marketing). On the marketing front make the Orex current asset well known to the general investor public (through mainstream junior goldstock media - take some clues by looking at what Clifton Star has done). OX should consider and implement a plan B diversifying itself outside of Osisko's interests (related to the Goldboro project) by investing in other gold assets / jurisdictions (I prefer this to share buybacks which from my experience often do not provide longterm value / share price).
I am not married to any ideas / or companies and would welcome your reactions in an effort to help our investment in this company.
GLTA
Ngobe