Barkerville Gold Mns Ltd BGMZF

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Chowderhead (aka cobalthead: HE'S A BELIEVER!!!

[yaponski]

halcro wrote:

bigbab wrote:
Good for us, as whomever is paying this minimum wage loser definately wants BGM........

Erm...the word you were groping for is WHOEVER.

Could you define, in non-private forum words, just who exactly is "definately wants BGM?

The trading since BGM came back to life and started trading again shows no major accumulations by any brokerages; (churnings don't coount in the real world, you BBoS); the price has steadily declined; and there have been no purchases or conversions of options/warrants by insiders or warrent holders.

I would venture to suggest that most bagholders are way, way underwater and they definately want OUT of BGM with as small of a loss as possible.

Here's the BigBagO sharting in:

bigbab wrote:

July 12, 2012
C'mon green , $50 or $40 is trading value .... $125/$150 is takeover value......
If say the dust settles and we get credited with 3M ounces at COW then 3.5M (+200k BL +300k BCV)
= 3.5M x $50 = 175M /136 = $1.28 trading value
3.5M x $150 = 525M /136M = $3.86 takeover value..... (Richfield got bought out for 157/oz ,and other deals have been done both below and above )

I wonder who fools like the BBoS believe they are going to influence, other than themselves?

I can not see any reason for optimism from the Rah Rah Rah BS the BBoS pushes.

IMO here is a more realistic valuation of BGM based on current real market data points (source Recent Gold Mine Sale Data Points

In finding the comparable for BGM, one needs to look at undeveloped properties. I believe the 27 January Hasbrouck, $18 per ounce of gold equivalent, inferred resource sale is the cloest reasonable match with the following deltas (all in production mines are excluded for obvious reasons -- CM doesn't even have a PEA):

1. There are zero permitting issues on Hasbrouck. The same can not be said for a large open pit mine in the Cariboo on T'Silhoqt'in land, the same people that fought the New Prosperity open pit mine to a standstill.
2. Hasbrouck is very low grade stuff. Cow Mountain has potential for much higher grade production. But can it be permitted for open pit mining? That is the huge question and although BGM might be spending money on internal studies, there are ZERO plans currently to produce anything like a PEA on Cow Mountain.
3. So without some kind of PEA on Cow Mountain there is no way to make a meaningful valuation because of the unknowns swamp the equations. If you can't open pit the area then you have to go with underground options but the past underground mining in the area by BGM was documented in the 2010/2011/2012 full financials as extremely unprofitable based on bottom line net losses. So, an open pit option needs to be explored but a large open pit is exactly what was blocked at New Prosperity. A PEA would provide some color for debate but no plans for a PEA (probably because a real PEA would cost on the order of $30M to $50M to complete).

If you believe the grade rewards balance out the permitting risk then you might argue that current price is roughly consistent for BGM -- 5M oz (I count Inferred) at $18 per ounce adjusted for current liabilities plus adding in full costs of a reasonable PEA gives me roughly 65 cents per share. An interestingly enough although the BGM stock price has been driven above 65 cents it can be supported at those levels and always drifts back down.

Of course if you can't get a permit to open pit mine then the grade doesn't assist and you are left with underground mining options when we know from BGM experience in the hood, is going to very unprofitable.

Seems to me therefore that BGM is at the high end of its most optimistic peer based valuation range (i.e. don't worry that you might never be able to mine) with much more room to the down side than the upside. A strong up move in the POG into a new bull leg changes everything of course.