meh, looking to much into the charts imo
head n' shoulders is a very strong signal , if the miners can't make money at 1700/oz gold they never will .
the only miner i would buy is one that pays a good dividend.
it seems all they do is borrow hugh sums of money .
i would rather buy the phy metal than the miners.
MUX has been a pretty terrible performer. Gaddafi, what do you like about it so much other than that the CEO has a big stake in it(which is very good).
The best way to play the "miners" is to buy the streamers/royalty companies. FNV, RGLD, SAND and a new one (and very undervalued imo) GRYCF. If you are a believer in silver go with SLW. These guys have their costs locked in and will move with gold. All, other than GRYCF, seem to be a bit overvalued at the moment so I will be buying physical for the foreseeable future. ANV is the only other traditional miner I really believe in.
Golden Showers As Goldman Tells Clients To Sell Gold
By: ZeroHedge | Wednesday, December 5, 2012 at 03:14 pm
It's around that time of day again - when precious metals are sold hard for whatever reason you care to come up with (collateral requirements, margin calls, alchemy perfected). However, today there is a more mundane reason: Goldman Sachs has suggested its clients sell Gold on the basis that the gold cycle will turn in 2013 thanks to improving US growth offsetting the need for further Fed easing. Of course, Goldman telling its clients to 'sell gold' means Goldman is...
![]()
I've done great with mcewen. It's double from where I entered in. Plus, they got the best CEO in the business. He's merged two companies without destroying shareholder value. He's reiterated his support for providing a shareholder friendly dividend once production ramps up, oh, and not the 1% yield goldcorp and silver Wheaton toss to their shareholders. You might as well keep that money to buy back shares or do some capex. Don't bother sending me a check for 1%.
All I know is my CEO ain't raiding the treasury with ridiculous salaries, he won't do boneheaded buyouts where he grossly overpays for mediocre assets, and he's a good guy. How many ceo's worth over $250 million actually send you emails to RSVP to eat lunch with them while they do a slide show presentation in front of a group of a dozen other people? Not that it adds much investment appeal, but it demonstrates his character. They just finished a rights offering for shareholders, something extremely rare for American companies to do, and in the conference call he made his direct line personally available if shareholders, big or small, needed help converting their rights into shares priced at a 50% discount from the market share price. So, how bad is MUX performing for shareholders when mcewen just offered each shareholder the chance to buy more shares 50% lower than the share price? It's essentially a one time massive dividend if you decided to sell your rights. If not, you just bought shares at a substantial discount..
You won't find a better guy in any business. Buffett's too into his own jokes to bother thanking loyal small shot shareholders, and the other 99% of ceo's just care about the big bonus check and only make themselves available to the biggest shareholders.
![]()
You must have gotten in at the very bottom.
Diluting the shares, even if everyone gets part of the shares, doesn't increase share holder value. It's just like a stock split.
I got in 4 cents from the bottom. Lucky, I guess. He didn't dilute shareholders. Dilution is when you issue more shares, but don't allow access to all shareholders. The rights offering allowed shareholders to purchase more shares proportional to their current ownership, or they can sell the rights and treat it like a dividend. In the end, you aren't adversely affected. Dilution does adversely affect you.