RE:RE:TD brokerage is showing estimate of $.53 compared to $.25I can also tell you right now with some quick math the current forward PE is around
13.5 conservatively...probably even lower.
This is ridiculously low for a growth stock like KL. How many precious metals stocks can actually be deemed true growth stocks?
And debt free paying a dividend.
The correction in KL since the spring is an excellent buying opportunity.
They are deep narrow-vein specialists. Certain on CEO.ca commenting about "lack of reserves" yes probably by definition...But their territory and land claims are immense, it's all just about defining reserves as they did in 2018 as announced in February 2019.
Excellent increase to reserves post-depletion.
The gold is there! Thus the premium market valuation.
Looking strictly at reserves and book value is totally incorrect way to value a true growth stock.
Use Net Income generation and actual ROE for shareholders and KL fits both perfectly.
JIN
JintsuGehan wrote: The good thing about KL is they always also compare to the most recent quarter.
Most miners will compare Q1 2019 to Q1 2018...very misleading.
KL always does both: Q1 2018 and Q4 2018.
Comparing to Q1 2018 is futile as there is no true basis of comparison for a "growth stock" such as KL.
There was a higher PoG for quarter, and they sold around 7000 more oz. vs. Q4 2018.
As mentioned, grade was much lower @ Fosterville, but throughput very solid. I doubt Fosterville will have as good AISC in Q1 2019 versus in Q4 2018 just because of lower grade, however the extra 7000 oz. sold + higher PoG should support higher net income than Q4 2018 adjusted of $ 109 Million USD ($ 0.52 in Q4 2018).
Maybe they do $ 0.53 - $ 0.54, but cannot see much higher than that.
The KL story is weighted towards H2 as everyone knows.
Will be actually more interesting & revealing to see the Q2 2019 production results in 1st week of July than Q1 2019 Financials. Still 2 months away from that.. JIN
peep2 wrote: last year Q1. That is how they compare Q1 of this year to.
I don't know where they got that estimate of $.53. Or what the earnings was last Q.
What should the market compare the earnings estimate of Q1 this year to? To Q1 of last
year which is much smaller than Q1 of this year, or to Q4 of last year which will be much
closer to Q1 of this year whether a little higher or lower?
Or do you compare Q1 of this year to both Qs of last year, 1st and 4th, and each brokerage
decides which comparison to judge KL's future price by?
Probably the comparison is to last Q since how often does earnings go up by 50% to a
previous Q.
Wait:
According to this link of Q4 reported in Feb 21 of this year 2019, the earnings tomorrow,
if TD's estimate is accurate, will only be a little better than Q4 by 1 penny. So don't
expect KL to rise by a spectacular amount. It will still be good, but leveling out now.
However each quarter is about what have you done for me this time to wow me. The
wow factor is not as much at least by earnings comparison. Maybe other things will
wow the market about KL.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kirkland-lake-gold-reports-record-002710861.html "
Key highlights of Q4 2018 results include: - Strong earnings growth: Net earnings of $106.5 million ($0.51 per basic share) increased 160% from Q4 2017 and 91% from third quarter 2018 (“Q3 2018”); adjusted net earnings1 of $109.6 million ($0.52/share), 73% growth from Q4 2017 and 79% increase from Q3 2018 "