Implanting
8 hours ago
I want to address another issue Dan talked about in this last webinar. I don't think it was discussed here.
That being the issue of the progress of the Springpole EA in 2025. Dan discussed it in some length in the webinar and IMO he may have said something that could tell us when we might have any potential deal closed with a JV partner. He talks about it in the part beginning around 13:30 of the webinar segment titled "Springpole EIA milestones and technical review".
https://firstmininggold.com/investors/media/
He said they expected to get questions back from the Feds in January and when those questions are given the clock stops on the process until FMG comes back with their answers, the clock would then start again. Here's where the rubber meets the road, so the speak. The questions submitted by the gov. will be made public and ANYONE, including our potential JV partners will be able to see what's happening behind the curtain. Dan, then went on to say that they expect that Q&A process to be over by the end of June. At that time, it has to get the final seal of approval by the Minister. IMO that will just be a formality, until the clock runs out in December.
So, what I take from Dan's EA timeline talk is this. MAYBE any potential JV partner will want to see all the questions the Feds have get answered BEFORE inking a deal with us. They want to be sure there are no landmines from the Feds holding up Springpole and at the point in time when all the questions are deemed answered the Feds give approval. Dan told me in the past that FMG expected to have a partnership with someone BEFORE the gov. gave the final EA approval, so this may be what he's talking about. Just my guess anyway.
Such a scenario would IMO open the door for a JV deal getting done sometime after June 2025, when any final questions from the Feds are completed. How Cat Lake and the FN folks play into the grand scheme I don't know, but we know the gov. approval is most important.
TexasMarvL
4 days ago
From Kinross Q3 Report:
They still have some debt, but they do have some liquidity. They sold the production mine in Russia. Would Kinross be able to build Great Bear and Springpole at the same time? If they bought into Springpole at 50% they might be able to stagger both projects. Plus, it would make sense for a company to buy into Springpole to maybe be first in line to bid on Duparquet later.
In 2 or 3 quarters Kinross could caseflow a 50% investment into Springpole.
Balance sheet The Company continued to strengthen its balance sheet by repaying $350.0 million on its term loan in the quarter and an additional $100.0 million following the quarter. As of November 5, 2024, $650.0 million has been repaid on the $1.0 billion term loan in 2024. Kinross had cash and cash equivalents of $472.8 million as of September 30, 2024, compared with $352.4 millionat December 31, 2023. The Company has additional available credit6 of $1.65 billion and total liquidity7 of approximately $2.1 billion. On October 28, 2024, the Company amended its $1,500.0 million revolving credit facility to extend the maturity by two years to October 2029, restoring a five-year term.
Implanting
4 days ago
I've never heard of her either, but in the interview, she made some good observations about what mining companies have to do to be profitable and move their mining assets forward. The first being to buy the properties at the right price (cheap) and secondly to have good management. We have both of those present with FMG.
I see she is affiliated with Kinross Gold. This last time I spoke with Paul H. he made mention of Kinross. I have no idea why he brought them up, but we were discussing potential partners for us and he brought up Barrick and somebody else, but lastly mentioned Kinross. I remember thinking to myself why did he mention Kinross? It seemed sort of strange that he brought them up, after mentioning the other companies. It made me think maybe we could be in some sort of talks with them. Speculation on my part.
Implanting
6 days ago
IMO they've most likely turned down some offers that have already been made. That's fine. We're all for getting the best deal possible for Shareholders, but we have two separate issues going on here.
1. The overall mining sector turning around. I don't see that happening in 2025, that's going to happen after a big market correction happens and money rotates into the mining sector. That event is going to take some time, the gold price is going to have to reverse and move much higher from here. It could happen in 2026.
2. Management gets the right deal/offer done and we become financially self-sufficient. IMO if thiis comes about before the move in the mining sector comes it may not move our shares in a big way, but it will set us up for a big move later on. The question to be answered is can we do a deal BEFORE the sector turns? If they want to partner with someone at Springpole, all potential partners may still want to see the final EA approval get across the finish line and some agreements done with FN. Dan and Paul told me on several occasions a deal most likely would happen before the final EA is given, but who knows.
I think for 2025 getting that deal done is most important for the perception of this Company going forward, especially with the share price down at these depressed levels. The big gains in our share price will come when the mining sentiment turns around.
Implanting
7 days ago
Yes, there was no doubt Dan attempted to dance around the question on whether we had enough money to get through 2025. IMO the answer to that is clearly NO.
I predict they have to raise more cash (if a deal doesn't get done) before mid-year. Dan obviously was less than forth coming on a timeline for it. My hope is that a deal can get done before we have to raise more cash, but I'm not banking on that happening.
His answer to my share price question was that it concerned him there would hostile offers coming in to buy us out and that a bidding war would likely ensue for the Company. Yeah, that very well could happen, so Dan without giving away too many secrets, what are You going to do about it? This has been talked about before when our shares were a lot higher than they currently are. IMO Keith and Dan think that most of the shares held in FMG are in strong hands that aren't going to sell on the cheap. I would agree with that premise, as many of us have held our shares for what seems FOREVER and won't sell for just a 5-10X gain. I'm looking for a 20-30X gain from where we are now, so I'm not voting to sell for anything under $2 a share U.S.
Dan made the comment yesterday they think the Company is worth $5 a share Canadian right now. I'm not sure how he can make that claim when our shares are trading at the current level they are, Sounds a little too optimistic to me, but that's what he's getting paid to tell everyone I suppose.
SeaBlue
1 week ago
I think I read 3 or 4 questions from you. Your question (and mine) of whether we had enough in the bank to sustain operations through 2025 was sort of danced around and mixed in with a question the moderator posed that had three or four other issues intertwined.
I laughed when they were addressing, or should I say, attempting to address your question about share price. A lot of the webinars are reruns of old issues with the same old language. I know they are helpful for newer investors, but at times it gets boring for me. Bad attitude, I know, I should be fired up about what happens and what is discussed.
I think Polissis had a good point a few posts ago about a stream or royalty agreement on Duparquet.
SeaBlue
1 week ago
Thanks for posting that. I think such an ill-advised decision would be viewed historically as highly as Gordon Brown's decision to dispose of half of the UK's gold at almost the bottom of the gold market.
Just off the top of my head I can think of a few problems with this:
1. China could acquire a substantial amount, run it up and then dump it and buy gold with the excess funds.
2. An intelligence agency devises a way to corrupt the ledger (assuming they did not introduce it in the first place).
3. Crypto is WAY to volatile. Gold is much more stable and has held value for thousands of years. How many cryptos have come to market and disappeared?
4. Is bitcoin mania the new Dutch tulip bulb mania of old?
4. Quantum computing advances to the point where it can hack any crypto.
5. Crypto WAY too vulnerable to EMP or other electromagnetic damage (solar flare, etc.)
I know why he would want to do it - you could capitalize on the rising tide. But imagine what a national security risk it could be if we divest all of our gold and then bitcoin goes south or disappears? We would be hosed. Our enemies could then acquire gold and set up their trading systems around it and where would we be? Out in the cold. I just hope it is more hot air from him. If we do it, back it with gold, so I can exchange it for physical, just like I do with the phony FRNs I have in my wallet.
I think crypto represents a great momentum trade, but I am not going into it as a long-term investment.
Implanting
1 week ago
The Moderator asked Dan only half of my question on if we had enough cash for 2025. The other half of the question was about more share dilution from doing more offerings. He didn't ask Dan about more share dilution and Dan didn't speak to more share dilution directly. That's most likely because there will be more dilution coming. I hope not.
Dan did come back with the same response he's been using for a while now. That being that they would sell off some of our in-house assets. So, I would ask this question, what assets are we holding that are worth very much? Most of the deals Dan did was for shares in the companies of our partners. Those shares are worth next to nothing currently. It would be stupid to sell any of those IMO.
The only assets we have left are Pickle Crow AND Cameron. I agree with You, that selling PC or Cameron is not what I would want to see, but what else is there? As usual, Dan's not specific about what he's telling us.
Guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.
Implanting
1 week ago
First of all, Dan's only been with the Company since 2019, so he's not been there 10 years to get this off the ground. I've spoken with Dan a couple of times since he's come onboard and my conversations with him were good. He was pleasant and said a lot of things I wanted to hear.
Does that make what he said true or exactly right? Absolutely not, he's playing a game, just like anyone in his position HAS to. I watch all these webinars they've done over the last few years and some things Dan's said have not been correct. One that comes to mind is the share dilution thing. He said that was going to stop years ago and obviously it hasn't. It's accelerated.
My money is on Keith, not Dan. I believe that's the case with most investors here.
I think they'll get a JV with someone. The question is WHEN and for HOW MUCH. I'm hoping for sooner than later.
Maybe this is taking this long because they're asking for a higher price and that's good.