# CTO - Citigold Corporation



## Wilson (28 February 2006)

I dabble in small gold stocks and bought CTO at 14.5. It seems 'there's gold in them thar hills'  - apparently lots of it - but will it ever be dug out? 

In a relatively short time there have been a couple of new issues - is this watering down the stock or is the new money being used for genuine development?

(be good to exchange notes on small cap golds with other punters!)


----------



## sam76 (28 February 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*

The recent purchase plan is to advance the Warrior gold mine and for working capital.

the offer is at 15 cps.  

that's why the sp is hovering around that level.

I'm also a little dubious about the ongoing capital rasisng


----------



## Wilson (1 March 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*

Thanks Sam - I recall a few years ago I bought stock in the same company but it had a different name (same directors though) and the message was the same ie 'we're on the verge of becoming a producer, thenh watch us fly'. I think I might cut my losses on  CTO


----------



## nizar (1 March 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*



			
				Wilson said:
			
		

> Thanks Sam - I recall a few years ago I bought stock in the same company but it had a different name (same directors though) and the message was the same ie 'we're on the verge of becoming a producer, thenh watch us fly'. I think I might cut my losses on  CTO




if u r looking for exposure to gold:

producer: SBM
soon-to-be-producer: BDG
exploration: SAU (very undervalued ----> see SAU thread)

just my thoughts...


----------



## sam76 (1 March 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*

Wilson, check out *****com.au as there has been a more in-depth discussion on CTO 

I'll Private message you the address

Sam


----------



## Wilson (1 March 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*

Thanks very much Sam, I'm going I/S tonight but will check out that link on my return early next week.

Likewise, thanks Nizar - appreciated. BDG has been very good to me showing 168% so far (I really should take profits but at heart I'm an 'investor' not a very good trader!) SMB I've looked at and it was a toss up between it and BMO - went for the latter based on a good report from Hartleys in Perth. May keep some powder dry for SBM after the correction(!). MMN has been another flyer up about the same as BDG. The biggest dog I have is CRS down 39%. My fault for not doing sufficient research. Must learn to cut out the dead wood early as waiting to exit close to entry is not a good idea and shows that I'm an enthusiastic amateur.  All up still showing 83% so not complaining but more luck than judgement..

I'll check SAU next week too...


----------



## bvbfan (1 March 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*

I've held CTO before but in the 5 year gold bull market what has the share price done?
Gone from 10c to 20c then back again, probably one of the worst performing explorers claiming to hold a 1million ounce deposit

Better stocks elsewhere I reckon


----------



## Wilson (1 March 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*

BVBFAN - In think you're right. I'd like to know how much of the money from new issues goes into actual mining preps and how much into Directors' kicks. In fact, having verbalised the q  I'm going to write and ask them (in the reply  paid envelope for the new share issue) I'll let you know what response I get (right!) But don't they have to declare it somewhere, in their annual reports? 

Maybe we need a person who loves facts & figures to answer this, someone who can quote numbers, figures, data till the sheep come home...anyone on this site come to mind??


----------



## bvbfan (1 March 2006)

*Re: What gives with CTO?*

I'm still on their emailing list for updates for the projects, never read past the first one and just had a look at the website they are referring to the CEO as Mr Lynch, doesn't seem like they are approachable, at least in that article of self promotion


----------



## pancho (8 April 2006)

Hi guys, CTO on a point@figure chart is suggesting a 25% rise. What do you think?


----------



## suger (9 April 2006)

*Re: CTO*

 If CTO can dig up gold for $230 and flog it for $900 these shares are gunna moove. Looks ok to me


			
				pancho said:
			
		

> Hi guys, CTO on a point@figure chart is suggesting a 25% rise. What do you think?


----------



## brerwallabi (9 April 2006)

This qualifies for "The best RAMP of the month".


----------



## Porper (9 April 2006)

pancho said:
			
		

> Hi guys, CTO on a point@figure chart is suggesting a 25% rise. What do you think?




Don't know much about point and figure apart from it is trend based obviously.

How is it pointing to a 25% rise, I am sure a lot here on ASF are intrigued how you came to this figure.?????????????????????????


----------



## beach (9 April 2006)

This qualifies for "The best RAMP of the month".

i dont think you really no what ramping is. i dont hear anybody saying buy buy this is going to move, trust me. trust me. regards beach


----------



## beach (9 April 2006)

porper
what do you suggest it is going to do? id be interested in your opinion, i am not a charty mainly fundamentals, and i like them in CTO. regards beach


----------



## Porper (10 April 2006)

beach said:
			
		

> porper
> what do you suggest it is going to do? id be interested in your opinion, i am not a charty mainly fundamentals, and i like them in CTO. regards beach




As most people know on here I am very bullish on Gold, so any stock that has anything to do with Gold I like basically.

Very difficult to use charts with Goldies at the moment because they are just moving with the price of Gold, some more than others.

However CTO for me needs to break 0.195 and consolidate above this before the next push up.Looks like it will move lower from a "double Top" in the short term, then again if Gold breaks $600 this week all Goldies will rise.


----------



## Riles (10 April 2006)

Glad to see CTO getting a mention here.
I've accumulated  these for the last few years at average 16c. Kept waiting for the day they start pouring, sat through delay after delay.
Finally looks like things are on the up. Private capital raising recently injected a couple of mill$ to speed things up. 
Latest SPP just finished (@15c).

Volume and price is starting to increase  - seems the sleeping giant may be awakening (well they do own 100% of an _inferred_ 10 million ounce gold resource).

From the chart - I too have been keen to see it break 19.5c
Sitting at 20.5 as I type - up 1c on a day of red arrows for the gold sector.

Fundamentally they seem in good shape - over $100m in assets including processing plant ready to go.

Would love to hear opinions about this stock. I must admit I'm a bit attached to it myself.
www.citigold.com if you're interested.


----------



## fryzie (10 April 2006)

CTO is having a great day
im glad i got in fairly early on this, it aint going anywhere but UP ^


----------



## plutrach (10 April 2006)

brerwallabi said:
			
		

> This qualifies for "The best RAMP of the month".




Looks like it worked! LOL


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (19 April 2006)

I can't make heads or tails of this stocks fundamentals,

They have 300,000oz's of Gold as 'Probable'

But 10,000,000oz's Au as inferred ? ? ? ? ?

Wouldn't a company that had 10m oz's AU be taken over @ an ev of less than $25 per oz? ? ? ? ?

If they have so much gold and all the plant and equipment ready to go, why haven't they?

How can a company with 10m oz's Au just sit there and do nothing?


I'm a bit tired, so will leave properly researching this one till later, but in the mean time any fundamental additions from others would be good


----------



## nizar (19 April 2006)

yeh i was thinking the same thing

10million oz and 100mil market cap doesnt add up....

wat they need is experienced management with the knowledge and the cash to fast-track production, looks to be prime for a take-over


----------



## beach (20 April 2006)

what a classic charters stock this has been over the past 2 weeks,, bugger the fundementals, iam out now and will get back at some stage. well done to all who profitted over the last week or so. regards beach


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 April 2006)

From what I understand they have been setting deadlines for start of gold pour since 2000 and have obviously never met them 6 years is very slack! Something is up, there is no way a company with that much gold wouldn't get more attention + funding + JV/TAKE OVER etc, 

I think that they are yet to prove the gold is out there, ie Inferred is the weakest category around!


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 April 2006)

All systems go
By TONY RAGGATT
21mar06

LISTED company Citigold Corporation is adamant it will begin producing gold from the historic mining centre of Charters Towers this year after a series of false starts.

*The company, formerly called Charters Towers Gold Mines Ltd, produced 38,000 ounces in trial mining operations up to 2000 after listing in 1993 and developing a 1.6km-long underground tunnel. * 
It aspires to being Queensland's largest gold producer mining the original ore bodies that gave Charters Towers international renown in the late 1800s and early 1900s. 

*However, since 2000 dates listed for a start to production at one of its four proposed mines, the Warrior mine, have come and gone. 

Citigold chief operating officer Chris Towsey said yesterday the only thing holding back a start at Warrior had been funding. * 

However, the funding was now in place, they had sourced most of the equipment needed and they were now acquiring extra labour. 

"The mine is proceeding and we have the ore," Mr Towsey said. 

"The funding is in place and that's the only thing that was holding us up before." 

About $3 million had been spent developing a 477m-long tunnel incline for the Warrior and about another $2 million would be spent extending it a further 470 metres. 

The mine is planned to produce 40,000 oz a year. 

"The objective is to pay a dividend as soon as financially prudent to do so," Mr Towsey said. 

"We would expect a dividend to be payable 12 to 18 months after the commencement of gold production." 

The company announced last week it had raised $2.5 million through a private placement and with a share purchase plan, other placements, investment and debt reduction had strengthened its cash position. 

It said joint venture negotiations to secure another $46 million to bring a second mine into production were well advanced. 

Charters Towers Mayor Cr Brian Beveridge said Citigold was spending about $1 million in the city and the project was needed to provide as many as 400 jobs when other mines were exhausted. 

"I would dearly love to see Citigold pick up the slack," Cr Beveridge said. 

"All the reports indicate they are capable of doing that and I'd like to see that sooner rather than later."


----------



## nizar (20 April 2006)

YOUNG_TRADER said:
			
		

> The mine is planned to produce 40,000 oz a year.




Dont u think they could manage better than this considering the size of their resource ?

But i guess they could always ramp up production in later years...

I guess its a start


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 April 2006)

Niz, from what I gather, the resource is made up by a few different deposits, intially they are accessing the 'warrior' deposit, which would only allow for 40k oz's p.a.


But have spoken to some industry chaps today who reckon quote "they are full of ****" 
If they had proven that there was that much gold in them hills then prospectors like NCM, LHG, Barrick etc would have gobled them up @ current mkt caps,

But then no-one believed the FMG chaps when they said there's Iron Ore yonder, tonnes and tonnes of it!

Be interesting to see how they develop, after 5yrs worth of delays I am sceptical and shall watch for the time being


----------



## porkpie324 (26 April 2006)

*Citigold*

Anyone looking at cto? This queensland gold miner soon to come into production, haven't bought yet, but up lately on heavy volume. porkpie


----------



## Riles (26 April 2006)

There's certainly a lot more interest in the volume side of things now than there's ever been before.
Once it broke the shackles of the last SPP, and they announced funding to speed up production, new buyers jumped on board.
I expected a quick retracement to 22-25c but it seems to be holding its own around 30c for now.

Hopefully things can start to progress more quickly now and they get to their target soon and start producing.
Their gold production plan spans 30 years so this is just the start.
(Well it actually started back in 1969.)

Quotes from the website:

"The modern Charters Towers story began in 1969. The gold price was US$40/oz yet the project founder, James 'Jim' Lynch, believed the price would rise. He felt that with modern methods and sufficient capital, Charters Towers had the potential to yield as much gold again as it had in the past."


Interesting history about Charters Towers once being Australia's richest gold field...


"The Charters Towers gold field was Australia's richest major field with a total of 6.6 million ounces (over 200 tonnes) recovered over 45 years from 6.1 million tonnes of ore, at an average grade of 34g/t (1.1ozs). The grade was almost double that of Victorian mines and almost 75 per cent higher than grades of Western Australian (Kalgoorlie) gold fields of that time." 

"Literally 100s of shafts were sunk during the hey-day of the field and the ore raised was processed through many large Treatment Batteries. Throughout the first 40 years over 130  individual mines produced an historic 200 tonnes of gold – virtually by pick and shovel. As the miners did not have the technology to ventilate their shafts, the mines seldom reached a vertical depth of more than 700 metres. Rather than suffocate, the workmen ceased operations – the gold never ran out! And although production came to a halt in 1917, to this day the Charters Towers goldfield remains Australia’s fifth-largest gold producer." 

"This five square kilometre maze of shallow mines (controlled by the company today) produced the majority of the massive 200 tonnes of gold mined between 1872 and 1917. Only a few mines reached 800 metres in depth. South Africa, the world's largest producer of gold, mines the flat-dipping veins like those at Charters Towers to 3,000 metres and deeper." 

They own all the tenements 100% and have over 200 sqkm of granted exploration tenure.


----------



## Riles (30 May 2006)

CTO's price has help up pretty well throughout this correction.
I really like the look of the chart right now...
Could be good times ahead if POG holds or starts moving again.


----------



## Sean K (31 May 2006)

I agree Riles.

Looks like a flag or penant happening there, and could be about to breakout. Stochastics oversold but turning. MACD turning bullish. Looks positive.  

Right though, need POG to move up again. There lies the danger.


----------



## Riles (3 July 2006)

Has broken out today. Up 14% to 36.5 as I type.

A recent report about CTO remarked about a comparison with BDG. While the price of BDG was around 2.30 and CTO was around .19c it equated to a market cap difference of nine times more for BDG than CTO.
This is quite a disparity between two co's with a similar story and similar reserves, albeit BDG will _start_ to produce twice as much gold pa as CTO.

Interesting to see today BDG up only around 1%, while the sector is up around 4%, and CTO up around 14%. Could this be a shift away from one to the other??????. 
Still lowish volume so might just be a blip.


----------



## david11 (9 July 2006)

Hi there, I have shares in Oxiana and I am looking at buying into Citigold too, do you think they will go through the roof in August? Investing in 2 gold companies... is that wise?
David


----------



## Riles (10 July 2006)

Citigold are set to start producing later this year (Sept-Oct if all goes to plan).
Their cash costs are low around AU$250/oz and their reserves are large.
At the current price of gold, they represent very good value. If the price of gold continues to appreciate, in the runup to their first pour, I would expect a lot more interest in this co.

Will the price go through the roof? LOL I wish!
There's a chance that if the gold bull run continues, the local and international investors will pile on board junior miners like this who are producing low cost unhedged gold.

If the stars line up there could be some good short term gains with CTO.
But stay with them and there could be much better long term rewards.

As for holding 2 gold co's - why not? If you're bullish on gold you'll enjoy the ride. Beats holding Telstra.


----------



## Sean K (7 August 2006)

Looks to have been rerated, slightly. What a great past few weeks after breakout.


----------



## david10 (9 August 2006)

I know that you are chatting about CTO, but I noticed your coment on GML back in May. I just bourght some GML shares, what do you think the future holds for this company?

David


----------



## Sean K (10 August 2006)

CTO has held up very well above $0.50 since been rerated imo, in the past few weeks. 

I don't hold this yet, but am finding it harder to not delve into the margin loan a bit more for this.

*Background*:

Mineral tenements held by Citigold cover an area of over 200 square kilometres in the heart of the rich Charters Towers goldfield. The project has over 50 prospective geological targets for underground and open-cut mining development. Geological evidence indicates that Citigold's project area has a resource potential of *15 million ounces of gold*. Exploration and development aims to bring these areas up to mine status and gold production. The project plans to have several profitable concurrent mining operations feeding its already constructed centrally-located processing plant.

Management's clear focus is on developing profitable gold production. The project has a current resource of ten million ounces in accordance with the JORC code of reporting mineral resources. Mineral tenements have been granted for up to 20 years, giving long-term security of tenure to the company.

*Gold Production Plan * 

Citigold has just launched its new Gold Production Plan. It outlines the strategy with which to take gold production to 250,000 ounces per year over a five-year production period and maintain this production level for a total of 30 years, to produce a total of 6.8 million ounces. 

Citigolds then General Manager, Mining & Exploration, Mr Chris Towsey said, 'The plan shows how the company will produce 250,000 ounces of gold per annum after a five-year production build-up period. With operating costs estimated at a low US$115/oz, the project will be profitable from Year 1. 

*Warrior Gold Mine*

The Warrior gold mine development is continuing and the decline is expected to reach the deposit in August. Gold production is scheduled at 40,000 ounces per year with a planned minimum ten year mine life. Further progress has been made at Warrior with the decline at 830 metres from the portal. The access decline will junction with the ore body at 960 metres. 

The initial access decline is nearly 90% complete and is progressing in good mining conditions. The first ore will be mined from a horizontal drive in the ore body commencing approximately 110 metres below the surface. Ore will then be stockpiled and transported to the processing plants. Several levels will then be excavated in the ore body so that full rate ore extraction (stoping) can commence. Initial gold production will be from the stockpiled development ore followed by production stoping. 

The overall Inferred Mineral Resource for Warrior deposit is 1.9 million tonnes @ 14 g/t Au containing 840,000 ounces of gold (rounded to 2 significant figures - see Table 8 on Page 59 of the Report on the Inferred Mineral Resources for Charters Towers Gold Project May 2005) 

*Cash costs*

Current cash costs are estimated at $380 comming down to $250 with the development of the planned 4 mines. 

CTO is completely unhedged.


----------



## Riles (10 August 2006)

I'm actually hoping for the price to come back a bit, then I'll be adding a bunch more. It's defying gravity at the moment....


----------



## new girl (10 August 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> CTO has held up very well above $0.50 since been rerated imo, in the past few weeks.
> 
> I don't hold this yet, but am finding it harder to not delve into the margin loan a bit more for this.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sean K (10 August 2006)

Hi New Girl,

There's still a lot of 'inferred' resource. 

I'm also a litlte confused about exactly where the total inferred resource comes from. It seems to be taken from across all the potential sites they have pegged as opposed to just the four sites they have id as potential mines. 

I've no doubt they have the ounces there, it's just a matter of efficiency in extracting the stuff. If it's all over the shop then it'll add significantly to costs. Although, they are claiming $250 an oz cash costs which is pretty damn good for long term with gold going to $1000+ imo.

Do you have any more detail on this.


----------



## new girl (12 August 2006)

Hi Kennas

I  have a few comments on Citigold for you. 

1. Wise Owl has recommended it as one to rise this year.

2. The management recently appointed Professor Blood to the Board. He is an expert on Finance, which has been one of the problems causing funding delays in the past. Therefore, I think delays were largely due to funding problems. Management does not wish to be taken over.

3. Another reason for delays was the fact that many separate mining tenement leases had to be individually acquired over a long period of time to result in the current large area available for mining.

4. Gold looks set to rise beyond $1000 per ounce, partcularly if world oil price increases continue. This looks to be inevitable as it will take some time before alternative energy is available at commercial levels.

5. The mine has similarities to Bendigo Mining which is at $1.60 in terms of size and status asa a pre exisitng gold mine. I read this in Bulletin speculator.

6. I know an ex broker who has put all his money into this one.

 7. The joint venture funding is with a company that is likely to be a customer of gold in the Middle East or India (largest market for gold).

Hope this helps with your healthy scepticisim. What do you think?


----------



## Sean K (16 August 2006)

Failed at $0.55, and looking shakey. Time to bail for short term punters or could be a buying op at support around $0.45 IMO.

I still don't hold.


----------



## Sean K (20 September 2006)

Well, it's getting into buy territory for me now. Should be good support between $0.33 and $0.35 IMO. All the fundamentals are still there.


----------



## Sean K (26 October 2006)

The first gold poor is due at The Warrior mine in October. This hasn't been ann yet, so will be interesting to see the response once they start actually shaping bars.

CTO have 10m oz inferred resource in the Charters Towers project. Unhedged of course.

Chart wise it failed above $0.50 when POG drifted lower. Found good support as expected (see above) around $0.35. $0.40 looks to be new support level, with $0.45 resistance. 

Gold going up leading into and after the US mid terms will push this one up, and with first gold poor due could be going places. 

Not many mining leases in Australia with 10m oz au in them! 

(I did pick some up at ave $0.38)


----------



## Riles (27 October 2006)

Yeah, you've been calling this one well Kennas. And as you say in the chart - it's going up.
If everything falls into place we'll see gold break above $602 and start to run up towards $700 again around the same time as Citigold start selling oz's.

This has been my best investment by far, still holding over 100k - some bought at 11c. Will top up more when funds available.


----------



## Riles (2 November 2006)

Could be getting ready for another breakout run...


----------



## Sean K (2 November 2006)

Yep, I'd be worried about it breaking down from that triangle though. Below $0.40 is looking dangerous.


----------



## ned1 (2 November 2006)

Hi all

For the last 10 minutes someone is buying $200 + parcels at 43C every 30 seconds. Anyone know why someone would do this?


----------



## Sean K (2 November 2006)

ned1 said:
			
		

> Hi all
> 
> For the last 10 minutes someone is buying $200 + parcels at 43C every 30 seconds. Anyone know why someone would do this?




Bizaar. No idea.


----------



## Sean K (8 November 2006)

Good ann today, everything at Warrior is on track. 

Over 10 m oz JORC at the Chaters Towers project. A pitty it's not all in the one hole.....Still, massive resource base, one of the biggest in Australia. 

Just drifting sideways last week or so making some slightly lower highs. 

Found it hard to make it back through $0.45. Maybe this news will send it off? Good support for the minute at $0.40, but could test it if POG breaks down.  

But if POG makes a break through $640 then I'll probably be on this one, pending any other news from the company and relative price movements.


----------



## Sean K (14 November 2006)

Might be breaking out. I'm in @ $0.47 for a chance play. Stop $0.42.


----------



## Sean K (16 November 2006)

Well, I thought it had broken through $0.47 but it's been held up . Bit of past resistance here perhaps. Still seems to be generally going up recently. Hopefully gets through this traffic and $0.47 becomes support. Perhaps $0.45 is support now?


----------



## Sean K (23 November 2006)

Consolidating at $0.47 and forming a little pennant, on an upward move. Bullish to me. The actual break through this resistance point never occurred as I had hoped earlier. I jumped the gun a bit. Still, this consolidation is good and it seems to have occurred along with POG at $620-30. Still happy with the trade, but getting impatient for a push upward. A push though $0.50 and I might top up, as that will probably occur with POG going through $635/40ish.


----------



## tomcat (23 November 2006)

Be interesting to see if the first gold pour will kick the price over the 50c barrier...The real interest will come if the infill diamond drilling program continues to prove up the resource and verify the ore body as predicted...perhaps 70c by jan


----------



## new girl (24 November 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> A push though $0.50 and I might top up, as that will probably occur with POG going through $635/40ish.





Time to top up, @50c atm.


----------



## Sean K (24 November 2006)

new girl said:
			
		

> Time to top up, @50c atm.



 Done.


----------



## Sean K (27 November 2006)

Just announced first gold pour this morning from Warrior. Might be ok for the sp today.


----------



## vert (27 November 2006)

would have thought the first gold pour, pog up and unhedged would push the sp up a little more.


----------



## roxy (27 November 2006)

Thanks for the all the charts on CTO Kennas!

Where do you think it will head to from here? Support at 45cents?


----------



## Sean K (27 November 2006)

Hhmm, off a bit. Strange.   

Yep, should be support between $0.45-47.


----------



## roxy (27 November 2006)

Thanks for the quick reply kennas


----------



## Sean K (27 November 2006)

roxy said:
			
		

> Thanks for the quick reply kennas



_Should_ be support Roxy, but strange things happen in this mad world. Cheers.


----------



## roxy (28 November 2006)

Its only the first hour, but looks like that support is evaporating quickly.


----------



## Sean K (28 November 2006)

roxy said:
			
		

> Its only the first hour, but looks like that support is evaporating quickly.



Market's awash in red ink. Hardly anything safe. Profit taking on a little US pullback after a very steady solid run. Sh@#it happens   

Gold in theory should be staying up but the markets not a logical beast sometimes. Too much emotion.


----------



## new girl (28 November 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Sh@#it happens




Sh@#it does happen, but on a positive note, after the AGM yesterday, I went to say hello to John Folly (chairman) and say thank you. As it turned out, he'd booked A BOAT for dinner AND I got invited  (don't ask why, I have no idea).

Can't say much except that they are down to earth (family) who have big plans for the company. 

What surprised me and I think could've affected the sp is the initial operating costs for the Warrior mine est. at A$380 per ounce combined with low initial planned production 40,000 ounces per annum. In time cost should average out to A$250 and production should increase to 120,000.


----------



## Sean K (28 November 2006)

new girl said:
			
		

> Sh@#it does happen, but on a positive note, after the AGM yesterday, I went to say hello to John Folly (chairman) and say thank you. As it turned out, he'd booked A BOAT for dinner AND I got invited  (don't ask why, I have no idea).



Do you look like Prospector, New Girl? That would explain it.


----------



## new girl (28 November 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Do you look like Prospector, New Girl? That would explain it.




A little more than average in the looks department, but only just  (not the blond type, fake streaks)


----------



## dj_420 (28 November 2006)

looks to have found support at 44 cents, this stock seems to have a very solid support line that has been tested on a number of occasions and held well.

was trading in channel which top of channel seems to coincide with medium term resistance. i thought the break above 50 would have sent it on a run but it has pulled back.

now i would like to see a break above 52 cents for confirmed breakout.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (28 November 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> Do you look like Prospector, New Girl? That would explain it.





lol, that would explain it   


New girl, Kennas has a boat too you know and I'm his first mate, want to go for a cruise?  :


----------



## new girl (28 November 2006)

YOUNG_TRADER said:
			
		

> lol, that would explain it
> 
> 
> New girl, Kennas has a boat too you know and I'm his first mate, want to go for a cruise?  :





Only if it's six stars or more


----------



## roxy (28 November 2006)

thanks for the chart dj


----------



## EasternGrey1 (29 November 2006)

No posts on this thread since May. Everyone given up and gone home?

I've calculated a NPV15 of 0.56-0.63 per share for CTO at $US600 gold, still nicely above the market. Anyone else worked out a value?

Obviously the value is higher at today's $645 gold, and goes up as gold goes up - which IMHO it will.


----------



## EasternGrey1 (29 November 2006)

oops! I was on page 1. But comment re share price still applies.


----------



## noobs (29 November 2006)

I'm still on the CTO train although it appears the interest in this stock has dried up considerably. Long term this is still a goer in my opinion but short term looks like going sideways until volumes pick up or POG continues northward. There are just so many stocks out there outperforming CTO recently that its been put to the back of the closet!


----------



## Sean K (29 November 2006)

The reason this isn't jumping is that the resource is defined and the upside through exploration and upgrades is now limited imo. It is now a producer, and the way it will appreciate is through solid operations and POG increases. So, when they bring out production figures that could determine furture prices. It's operational performance that will drive this now. Will be happy to be corrected on the exploration side of things.....


----------



## new girl (29 November 2006)

noobs said:
			
		

> I'm still on the CTO train although it appears the interest in this stock has dried up considerably. Long term this is still a goer in my opinion but short term looks like going sideways until volumes pick up or POG continues northward. There are just so many stocks out there outperforming CTO recently that its been put to the back of the closet!




I totally agree with you Noobs. I held this stock for two years now. It tripled in value so can't complain, but I am gradually replacing it with other stocks like BSG (up almost 90c since I bought my shares a few weeks ago) and EPG (nearly doubled in the last two months and has much further to go)


----------



## Sean K (11 December 2006)

I've been wondering where the future upside in this is, or risks and I suppose it's around the inferred resource of 10m oz au. If this is adjusted up or down then obviously it will effect the sp. The company has stated that they believe they can expand the resource to up to 50m oz au, so I think the risk is on the upside. 

The other upside factor could be the quick development of the second mine - Sunburst. If this can be brought on line quicker than expected then the planned 80k oz a year on top of Warrior is going to be great value. 

Probably due for another ann regarding gold pour at Warrior too. 

Might have found the support expected at around $0.45/46. Might.

As dj's chart showed there is a trend line there, with support line drawn. $0.50 proved to be resistance as expected and I topped up a little prematurely when I thought it had broken through. 

Still happy to be holding at this stage. POG is worrying me a little. Hope it holds above previous resistance at $620, to continue the uptrend. The darn $US has held too well!


----------



## EasternGrey1 (19 December 2006)

kennas said:
			
		

> POG is worrying me a little.




Here's something to ease the worry: Bloomberg: Gold may rise as Investors seek alternative to Dollar 

Gold May Rise as Investors Seek Alternative to Dollar (Update1)

By Choy Leng Yeong

Dec. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Gold may rise, snapping a two-week slide, on speculation Russia and Middle Eastern crude-oil producers may shift reserves away from the dollar, boosting the appeal of the precious metal as an alternative investment.

Seventeen of the 34 traders, investors and analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News from Sydney to Chicago on Dec. 14 and Dec. 15 advised buying gold, which fell 1.9 percent last week to $619.30 an ounce in New York. Eight respondents said to sell, and nine were neutral.

The central bank of Russia, the world's second-biggest oil producer, increased gold holdings by 2.2 percent to 394.1 metric tons in the third quarter, the London-based World Gold Council said last week. Gold rallied 7.6 percent in November, the most since April, as the dollar slumped to a 20-month low against the euro.

``Investors will start anticipating Arab oil producers are not happy with recent declines in the dollar,'' said Stephen Leeb, president of Leeb Capital Management, which oversees $152 million in New York. ``If the dollar is seen weaker from a longer-term perspective, that has to be positive for gold, one of the primary alternatives to the dollar.''

Gold may rise to $1,000 an ounce over the next 18 months, driven by a falling dollar and rising energy costs, Leeb said. Leeb Capital has 4 percent in gold equities.

Gold for immediate delivery rose $2.78 to $618.13 an ounce at 11:34 a.m. in Mumbai.

Gold futures on the Comex division of the New York Mercantile Exchange fell $11.90 an ounce last week, after sliding 3 percent the previous week. The decline surprised the majority of analysts who predicted a gain when surveyed on Dec. 7 and Dec. 8. Respondents have forecast prices accurately in 83 of 138 weeks, or 60 percent of the time.

European Central Banks

Sales of gold by central banks fell 31 percent in the third quarter to 59 metric tons from a year ago, according to the producer-funded World Gold Council. A group of European central banks this year sold 395.8 tons, below the 500-ton limit under a special accord, the Council said.

``Gold is just pausing in a secular bull market,'' said Michael Metz, chief investment strategist at Oppenheimer & Co. in New York, which has about $10 billion in assets. ``The Western central banks did not sell their quota. It's just begun to turn up in central banks like Russia.''

Belarus, Ukraine, Greece and South Africa are among countries that have increased gold reserves this year, according to the World Gold Council. The dollar has fallen 7.8 percent against a basket of six major world currencies this year, and gold has climbed 19 percent.

`Trend Will Accelerate'

``Dollar weakness, based on major central banks reducing their dollar exposure where possible, will continue to drive gold up,'' said Stuart Flerlage, managing principal at NuWave Investment Corp. in New York. ``This trend will only accelerate as Middle Eastern reserves are switched out of dollar- denominated assets.''

The central bank of United Arab Emirates, the third-biggest OPEC exporter behind Saudi Arabia and Iran, said in November its ``medium- to long-term objective'' was to boost euro and gold holdings to diversify out of the dollar.

Gold also may get a boost from speculation that higher energy costs will increase the appeal of the metal as a hedge against inflation.

Some investors buy gold to preserve purchasing power in times of accelerating inflation. Gold futures surged to $873 in 1980, when a jump in the cost of oil led to a 13 percent annual rise in consumer prices.

Crude oil rose to a two-week high of $63.43 a barrel on Dec. 15 after the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries agreed to production cuts.

`Buying Opportunity'

``Crude prices have moved up, and that will support gold,'' said Siddharth V. Kothari, an analyst at Sunidhi Commodities Pvt. Ltd. in Mumbai. ``There is also more non-commercial and institutional buying emerging. Any drop in prices to $617 and $620 should be taken as a good buying opportunity.''

Gold may rebound to $650 this week because ``weakness in the dollar will persist in the long term,'' he said.

Higher oil prices are ``generating background support'' for gold, said James Moore, an analyst in Kettering, England, for TheBullionDesk.com. Oil over $60 a barrel is ``likely to generate further anti-inflationary hedging,'' he said.

Hedge-fund managers and other large speculators reduced their net-long position in Comex gold futures in the week ended Dec. 12, data from the Washington-based Commodity Futures Trading Commission show.

Speculative long positions, or bets that prices will rise, outnumbered short positions by 81,829 contracts, down 2.2 percent from a week earlier.

To contact the reporter on this story: Choy Leng Yeong in Seattle at clyeong@bloomberg.net .
Last Updated: December 18, 2006 01:06 EST


----------



## ned1 (20 February 2007)

CTO went down to 34c today before the announcement that high grade gold results and that they should be approaching 40000 ounces production in March 07. It is currently at 385c.

Here is the announcement.

_Citigold Corporation Limited page 1
Citigold Corporation Limited
ANNOUNCEMENT
20 February 2007
High Gold Grades Continue at Warrior
Citigold is pleased to announce that diamond-core drill hole CT 693 has
returned the best intersection ever, in terms of width and grade, drilled at
Warrior. The intersection was 2.97 m true width @ 46.1 g/t gold commencing
at 165.05m down-hole. The current drilling program with the U8 rig continues
to extend the high grade zone on the 830 level to the west as well as proving the
ore zone is still open below the 800 Level. This confirms the original grade and
continuity assumptions made in the Warrior twelve month mine plan.
This drill intersection included several very high grade areas including 335.5 g/t
(10.8 oz/tonne) gold over 0.31 metres commencing at 166.94 metres down hole
- the highest drill result to date in the Warrior ore body. Full details of the drill
results are presented at www.citigold.com/exploration.html. The assaying of
drill cores is carried out by an independent laboratory, Australian Laboratory
Services (ALS). These high grade results have been confirmed by two
independent assay results in line with the stringent internal quality control
procedures requiring very high grade drill intersection samples be crossed
checked by re-assaying.
The series of high grade results intersected to date, also see Quarterly Report
released 30 January 2007, shows good continuity of the ore zone that is to be
mined at Warrior. Development driving has intersected the Warrior ore body on
the 850 and 840 Levels, and these levels are being developed ahead of stoping
(mining of ore). The Decline has descended to the 830 Level and a cross-cut is
being driven to access the ore on that level.
Full production stoping is planned for late March 07 when the planned rate of
mining is anticipated to be approaching 40,000 oz per annum and gold pouring
should increase to a weekly basis, from the current monthly gold pours.
Drilling on the separate high grade Sons of Freedom vein, intersected in the
Warrior decline, is being scheduled to commence in March. This drilling plans
to extend the known size of the vein and establish a second underground mining
area at Warrior.

Citigold Corporation Limited page 2
The Warrior mine has initially accessed the eastern side of the Warrior gold
deposit east-west strike line. The deposit has an overall length of 2 kilometres
and has been tested to a depth of 200 metres. The overall Inferred Mineral
Resource for the Warrior deposit is 1.9 million tonnes @ 14 g/t Au containing
840,000 ounces of gold (rounded to 2 significant figures) (see Table 8 on Page
59 of the Report on the Inferred Mineral Resources for the Charters Towers
Gold Project May 2005). Within the overall resource, head grades and widths,
of the specific mining areas are expected to vary.
Chris Towsey
Chief Operating Officer
Citigold Corporation Limited
19 Lang Parade, Milton, Queensland, Australia (ACN 060 397 177)
phone: +61 7 3870 8000 fax: +61 7 3870 8111 email: info@citigold.com
The following statements apply in respect of the information in this report that relates to
Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves:
• The information is based on, and accurately reflects, information compiled by Mr Christopher Alan John
Towsey, who is a Corporate Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and the Australian
Institute of Geoscientists.
• Christopher Alan John Towsey is a geologist and employed by CTO as Chief Operating Officer.
• Christopher Alan John Towsey has relevant experience in relation to the mineralisation being reported on to
qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) Australasian Code for
Reporting of Identified Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves.
• Mr Towsey has consented in writing to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on the information in the
form and context in which it appears._


----------



## Riles (20 February 2007)

just as things were starting to look shakey on the chart, they release a nice little ann....

Citigold is pleased to announce that diamond-core drill hole CT 693 has
returned the best intersection ever, in terms of width and grade, drilled at
Warrior. The intersection was 2.97 m true width @ 46.1 g/t gold commencing
at 165.05m down-hole.


----------



## Riles (22 March 2007)

The news just gets better:




> Citigold Corporation Limited, ASX & DIFX Code 'CTO', (Citigold) is pleased to announce that
> the Warrior ore body currently being developed is continuing to display gold ore grades and
> widths that are better than originally expected in the high grade zone.
> Sampling and analysis of the walls of the 830 level Crosscut tunnel returned assays of 6.4 metres
> ...







> Warrior May Replicate the Large Brilliant Mine
> Data gathered from underground at Warrior gold mine indicates that the gold ore body may be far
> larger than originally planned. This mine was planned as a modest size 40,000 ounce per year
> producer. This was based on the drilling and analysis carried out in previous years. Now that the
> ...


----------



## ned1 (19 April 2007)

Price of Gold currently at $690. Most gold analysts predict that $730 should be challenged and broken this year. 

The company offers "discounted" share purchase of 41c per share. 

Yet CTO seems to be on a downward spiral, .385c at the moment. 

Surely the trend should change soon. This one has been going sideways for a long time.

Any thoughts?

Regards

Ned


----------



## bean (17 July 2007)

Back into its resistence today .50 - .52
Been up there a few times but failed over the past months
However as long as it stays near .50
And Gold is favourable the next couple of days may see this take out resistence then its previous high very quick


----------



## Bushrat (7 September 2007)

*CTO - Citigold*

Citigold looking a bit underpriced in light of increasing gold production and increasing gold price. SP has been relatively flat for past few weeks and seems to have potential for a move toward 50 once 44 is cleared.


----------



## explod (7 September 2007)

*Re: CTO - Citigold*



Bushrat said:


> Citigold looking a bit underpriced in light of increasing gold production and increasing gold price. SP has been relatively flat for past few weeks and seems to have potential for a move toward 50 once 44 is cleared.





Toyed  with this for awhile, but like Bendigo et.al. it is deep and difficult.   There are many better Aussie plays with nearer surface gold.  With labour, fuel and equipment rising in price conserably production costs are a growing issue.   Of course a higher gold price will lift them, but for the time being I prefer the lower cost producers.

But others may know better, I have been wrong before


----------



## champ2003 (7 September 2007)

*Re: CTO - Citigold*



explod said:


> Toyed  with this for awhile, but like Bendigo et.al. it is deep and difficult.   There are many better Aussie plays with nearer surface gold.  With labour, fuel and equipment rising in price conserably production costs are a growing issue.   Of course a higher gold price will lift them, but for the time being I prefer the lower cost producers.
> 
> But others may know better, I have been wrong before




CTO as far as i know would have to be one of the lowest cost gold producers on the ASX.

Time will tell with their share price.


----------



## explod (7 September 2007)

*Re: CTO - Citigold*



champ2003 said:


> CTO as far as i know would have to be one of the lowest cost gold producers on the ASX.
> 
> Time will tell with their share price.




Time will tell, however if it can break resistance at .47 then you will be on your way with a rising gold price.


----------



## Uncle Festivus (6 October 2007)

champ2003 said:


> CTO as far as i know would have to be one of the lowest cost gold producers on the ASX.
> 
> Time will tell with their share price.






explod said:


> Time will tell, however if it can break resistance at .47 then you will be on your way with a rising gold price.




My info has their cash cost's to be estimated at $400, but will change as they mine further -we should know with the Sep qtr report. On an EV basis they are fully priced at 43c, but should they prove up the resources then they are severely underpriced. So looks like they need some good production and drilling figures get the sp bubbling again. Still to be proven?


----------



## So_Cynical (12 October 2007)

Ok i need another goldie and at least this 1 is producing so theres 
POG upside. Nice reserves too.


----------



## golddigger (21 October 2007)

Uncle Festivus said:


> My info has their cash cost's to be estimated at $400, but will change as they mine further -we should know with the Sep qtr report. On an EV basis they are fully priced at 43c, but should they prove up the resources then they are severely underpriced. So looks like they need some good production and drilling figures get the sp bubbling again. Still to be proven?




A new comer to the forum, but have just spend 2 hours reading past comments on CTO , Some interesting stuff . I will be happy to contribute to the debate . My  worth.


----------



## golddigger (21 October 2007)

Uncle Festivus said:


> My info has their cash cost's to be estimated at $400, but will change as they mine further -we should know with the Sep qtr report. On an EV basis they are fully priced at 43c, but should they prove up the resources then they are severely underpriced. So looks like they need some good production and drilling figures get the sp bubbling again. Still to be proven?




You are well informed, as I am,  Let me tell you I have be in & out of this stock from the initial float (20c + 1 free option to be exerised @ 20c , Listed 23/12/1993) CTO sure has had some ups & downs over the years, but it still has the same Chairman John Foley but more importantly the top 20 shareholder are much the same as the beginning except they keep buying more shares. Now the top 20 own 43% & still buying. 

Sure there are plenty of other gold explorers/miners out there but this is almost a family thing. CTO could float of another 2-3 hundred million shares and have a heap of money &  start mining all 5 reefs at once ,bring production up to 500,000 oz/year but it would only dilute the shareholder value ( If you double the no of shares on issue the share value is only half at the same share price.)

This companies board & top shareholders are in for the long haul not the quick bucks-- Old Jim had a great vision and his family is not about to blow it a this stage of the game.

 So take it from someone who knows BUY -ACCUMILATE then BUY somemore we are close, so close. ;


----------



## So_Cynical (24 October 2007)

I brought a couple of weeks ago..and was most underwhelmed
by the annual report, i was expecting a gold miner to be very up 
front about there production numbers.

And why issue more shares to raise money, how about mine more 
gold to raise money


----------



## tradingforwealth (24 October 2007)

So_Cynical said:


> I brought a couple of weeks ago..and was most underwhelmed
> by the annual report, i was expecting a gold miner to be very up
> front about there production numbers.
> 
> ...




:  I understand your frustrations, I was with this stock a year ago - had most of my money into it.  Its funny hey - in the annual report they didn't mention any production results from the last 3 months (don't quote me on this though) and their upcoming plans for the company are extremely vague with no mention of dates.

GL anyway..


----------



## golddigger (24 October 2007)

CTO's gold production for the 1Q FY07/08 will come out in next news letter , but main annoucements will be at the AGM in Nov.


----------



## EasternGrey1 (22 December 2007)

The latest announcement from CTO looks very positive to me.

Everything CTO has said it would do, it has done. There is no reason to believe that won't continue.
They say they will increase production towards 100k oz pa in 2008.
That will give them an operating profit of $43m pa (100k*(900-470)), or more if the cost/oz comes down.
CTO market cap is $281m. That's not very demanding for 100k oz pa, but CTO are still aiming for 250k oz pa in later years.
MSDW have forecast prices for all major metals up to 2009. The only metal forecast to be higher price in 2009 than now is Gold.


----------



## trtkjd1 (28 December 2007)

This stock must be one of the biggest sleeping giants around if only half of what they say they have got is true they would still seem good value in my eyes , They are the priority stock in my portfolio , i just hope they wake soon


----------



## So_Cynical (31 December 2007)

Citigold
Market Cap: $301,907,736 and over 6 billion $ AUD in ground gold reserves.

Just another underrated gold miner, like so many others.


----------



## refined silver (31 December 2007)

trtkjd1 said:


> This stock must be one of the biggest sleeping giants around if only half of what they say they have got is true they would still seem good value in my eyes , They are the priority stock in my portfolio , i just hope they wake soon




I agree. I would rate them the as the best gold miner on the ASX based on resources, revenues, no debt hedging, land position and potential and management. And they are the #1 gold stock in my portfolio also.


----------



## bvbfan (31 December 2007)

Bollocks, management were syaing this would be a large producer since 2001 and yet nothing.

Full of hot air when it comes to actually getting decent production


----------



## explod (31 December 2007)

bvbfan said:


> Bollocks, management were syaing this would be a large producer since 2001 and yet nothing.
> 
> Full of hot air when it comes to actually getting decent production




Yeh, have a cousin who lives up there.  I pleaded thier case to him as I saw it and he said, "they have always had a lot of problems with water, golds there but problems getting it out"  like Bendigo, deep mines are always a problem.   So I watch but got out 18 months ago and nothing has mde me feel inclined to go back in again.


----------



## jeff65 (31 December 2007)

bvbfan said:


> Bollocks, management were syaing this would be a large producer since 2001 and yet nothing.




I would agree with the above, but the latest announcement is encouraging.  Seems they are now willing to take on some debt to get things moving more quickly.


----------



## Real1ty (3 January 2008)

explod said:


> Yeh, have a cousin who lives up there.  I pleaded thier case to him as I saw it and he said, "they have always had a lot of problems with water, golds there but problems getting it out"  like Bendigo, deep mines are always a problem.   So I watch but got out 18 months ago and nothing has mde me feel inclined to go back in again.




explod,
correct me if i'm wrong please.

Isn't the issue with Bendigo in the nuggety nature and the inconsistency that creates.
The grades that were being processed just weren't living up to what they should have been as they took a lot of info from historical readings.

CTO has a very fine grain gold and from what i have researched everything is going to plan, albeit a very slow plan.

They seem to have every confidence in what they believe to be there is there and this is backed up in a couple of different sources.

I bought into this stock Wednesday and have a fair amount of confidence although i can understand the frustrations of the long term holders.


----------



## trtkjd1 (4 January 2008)

Yep it has been very slow for CTO but a possible reason for this is there game plan changed from opening up Warrior at 40 000 ounces and then bringing Sunburst online at 60 000 to make 100 000. Their focus has shifted from what I can see to bringing warrior up to 100 000 by its self, this would require more access drives to be mined so as to allow multiple access to the orebody for consistant output at this level. Hence the go slow on ounces produced. The plus side to this is they get into 100 000 ounce production for a lot lower cost. The other upside I see is they must have confidence in the orebody being a lot larger than originally thought. Hey its just my theory but I've bought quite a few shares on this presumption.


----------



## EasternGrey1 (21 January 2008)

bvbfan said:


> management were saying this would be a large producer since 2001 and yet nothing.




bvbfan - I started buying CTO in 2005, on the basis of their reports at that time which indicated that full production would be achieved in 2009. I added a year, because even the best companies slip, and used 2010 in my calculations. And, of course, made sure there was still a large potential upside before buying.

Since then, CTO have done everything they have said they would do. If they get up around 100k oz pa by the end of this year, as seems likely, then 250k oz pa by 2010 is looking quite feasible.

It has been incredibly frustrating that over the last year or more the share price hasn't moved, but that is how the market treats you sometimes. I keep track of announcements, etc, to check that they are still making good progress, and have kept on buying CTO on dips whenever cash was available, to the point where it is now not far off my largest holding.

John Maynard Keynes once said "The market can stay irrational for longer than you can stay solvent". Well, at least I can stay solvent for a long time yet.


----------



## bvbfan (21 January 2008)

I haven't done any research on CTO since probably 2005/6.

I initially researched them when I became bullish on gold in 2002. I bought CTo around 10c but they took forever to get going and I think I took profits around 14c. They ran to about 30c but they did go back to 10c I recall.

As I don't have faith in management I would not be sticking around holding.

I have had faith in OXR management had have stuck around during the periods of sideways or decreasing shar prices.

Unfortunately the good gold stocks on the ASX are few and far between especially at the junior end of things


----------



## EasternGrey1 (29 January 2008)

Looks like we got our answer today, as to why CTO share price has stayed down - quarterly prodn down to 3,513 oz, costs up to $544/oz.
Hopefully the bad news is out of the way, but they're going to have to deliver on the promise of increasing prodn. That 3,513 needs to turn into at least 10,000 by year end, 25,000 by end 2009.
OTOH, the price of gold is already covering the increased costs.
Patience and strong nerves needed, as always in this game!!


----------



## So_Cynical (30 January 2008)

Still heaps of potential..and high average ore grade.

quote
The average mine grade of the ore trucked in the December
Quarter remains sound at 9.7 g/t Au.


----------



## trtkjd1 (18 February 2008)

Actually spoke to Criss Townsey today on the phone , very aproachable guy who actually returned my phone call promptly . Said every thing shaping up well however did admit 2007 target of 40 000 ounces had been missed . reasons for this were explained in last quaterly report.  Was very bullish on the gold actually being in the ground , i won,t go into  detail for fear of being accused of ramping, but i won,t be selling for the next couple of years . Yes it might be a slow frustating track for a while , but should be worth the wait.


----------



## TheIceMan (21 February 2008)

Yesterday's announcement about the mill resuming operation seems to have given this is a bit of forward momentum. Might even see 40c today which would be very nice.


----------



## So_Cynical (11 April 2008)

Citigold ann out 

http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=249

Ya gota love the optimism of these guys....possible gold source :goodnight:the red text is mine.


----------



## tthurlow2287 (9 June 2008)

Well CTO has been pretty quiet lately. Share price has dropped as low as 27.5cents during May. Looking at the chart now a nice double bottom is clear around the 28cent mark. I think its in for a 10-20% rise over the coming month. 

I just wish they'd hurry up their production though. Seems to me as if they actually *want* to be bought out. If they have a proven 10million oz resource, why are they not focusing on production? Why are they drilling deeper holes to look for a 50million oz resource? And if they have $250million in assets, why are they still raising funds through "placement to international investors"? Shouldn't they have a small income from their current production?

But searching for a larger resource when they have a decent one now definately makes me think they are looking for someone to buy them out..


----------



## explod (9 June 2008)

tthurlow2287 said:


> But searching for a larger resource when they have a decent one now definately makes me think they are looking for someone to buy them out..





A Cousin of mine who lives in Townsville says "this is a very difficult mine".  Like Bendigo, I understand it is deep and the rock very hard.

Having said that, they have it and if the gold price was to go and hold above $1000 you could be rewarded well in the longer term.

The chart looks very similar to most other gold stocks at the moment.


----------



## tthurlow2287 (9 June 2008)

Yeah but I fail to see why they are still exploring when they should be focusing on ramping up production.


----------



## EasternGrey1 (10 June 2008)

The way I read it, they have to open up access to the gold at multiple places in order to ramp up production. ie, it will take time. In the meantime, increasing reserves is a reasonable parallel activity. This seems like a very solid conservative management, who are more interested in the proper long term development of the resource than in quick results. They also seem pretty confident that there is a lot more gold down there somewhere, than they have found to date.

Patient shareholders needed!

Or am I misreading them?


----------



## tthurlow2287 (19 June 2008)

After reading the report earlier this week it is looking promising for the future. They're now planning to ramp up production to 100,000 oz/yr by 2009 and 300,000 oz/yr by 2012. If they find this 'motherload' 50 million oz this stock should really go.


----------



## quarky (1 August 2008)

tthurlow2287 said:


> After reading the report earlier this week it is looking promising for the future. They're now planning to ramp up production to 100,000 oz/yr by 2009 and 300,000 oz/yr by 2012. If they find this 'motherload' 50 million oz this stock should really go.




"planning to" is the operative, as their share price dropped to $0.20
i jumped in about a year ago at $0.40
should have sold it at $0.55 or something like that.

now, i'm losing 1/2 of my money...big money.


----------



## Sean K (4 August 2008)

MC down to $100m and they reckon they are sitting on more than 10m oz au, and potential for 50m, or something crazy. MC to oz au $10. Cheapest in the market. Maybe the market doesn't believe them, or it's juts not going to be economic to get out of the ground.

Disastrous looking chart. Hitting 3 year support. 

Is this a turnaround story, or a basket case?


----------



## So_Cynical (4 August 2008)

kennas said:


> Is this a turnaround story, or a basket case?




Only time will tell, and its gona be along time coming.

CTO is debt free and in production so there not about to fall over, however 
with production at ridiculously low levels the SP aint gona take off either.

The only short term hope for holders (me) is for spectacular success via the 
deep hole or a senior management change or a takeover.


----------



## interested (4 August 2008)

I don't know what's going on with CTO. He has been "expecting" and "planning" and "scaling up" for years, but nothing much happens. There's a stack of gold up there at CT but it's not being mined 

SP closed at 16.5 cents today 

These lines are from tha June 08 quarterly report:

"The focus over the coming quarters is to grow gold production by scaling up of operations . . .
Stoping is still to be completed over this coming quarter . . .
it is expected that the percentage of ore coming from stopes will increase . . .
it is expected that this system will substantially lift productivity. . .
It is expected that the Western decline and associated strategy will become the template used . . .
the plan over the next 6 months is to scale up operations along strike of the reef.
An Atlas Copco M2C fully computerised twin boom jumbo is expected to be delivered . . .
It is expected that the funding will be in place in time to allow the ramp up of operations . . .


----------



## Real1ty (5 August 2008)

I got out of CTO at .40 as i began to realise that they promise the world and deliver very little.

They have the gold, and a very very fine grain also, but it's going to take them a long time to get where they want to be. 

Sorry, where they said they were going to be.


----------



## bvbfan (8 August 2008)

6-7years still promising 10million ounces.

If others thought they had it it would have majors on the register or it would have had a bid or been taken over.


----------



## refined silver (11 September 2008)

A bit of movement yesterday and today, up over 10% today so far on decent volume. Why?

Gold shares are bottoming???

Some good news???

Meaningless spike and will be back down tomorrow???


----------



## EasternGrey1 (12 September 2008)

It's not a general gold thing - here's today's larger gold shares:
Symbol	Trade	Change	% Chg	Volume
*CTO.AX	0.2	Up 0.02	11.11%	1,864,129*
AXM.AX	0.355	Up 0.0200	5.97%	1,343,352
SBM.AX	0.21	Up 0.01	5.00%	10,864,495
CNT.AX	1.04	Up 0.04	4.00%	191,903
NEM.AX	4.72	Up 0.17	3.74%	34,005
LGL.AX	1.78	Up 0.03	1.71%	18,823,393
AGG.AX	5.8	0	0.00%	2,685
DOM.AX	2.3	0	0.00%	316,354
MML.AX	0.91	0	0.00%	58,500
TRY.AX	1.56	0	0.00%	15,444
CRK.AX	0.77	0	0.00%	4,500
CXC.AX	1.9	0	0.00%	174,051
SGX.AX	3.15	Down 0.15	-4.55%	588,257
RSG.AX	1.16	Down 0.06	-5.31%	271,548
MLI.AX	0.17	Down 0.01	-5.56%	32,100
OZL.AX	1.27	Down 0.08	-5.93%	34,120,526
PRU.AX	0.8	Down 0.05	-6.43%	223,212
KCN.AX	4	Down 0.29	-6.76%	425,235
RMS.AX	0.54	Down 0.04	-6.90%	89,191
NCM.AX	18.6	Down 1.42	-7.09%	4,557,290
ALD.AX	0.25	Down 0.02	-7.41%	103,908
BDG.AX	0.145	Down 0.0150	-9.37%	846,392
AVO.AX	1.52	Down 0.17	-9.79%	817,854
AND.AX	0.95	Down 0.12	-11.63%	300,920
OGC.AX	0.47	Down 0.07	-12.96%	113,259

Maybe it's because someone has worked out that the mineralisation intersected by the deep hole at 500m is worth something.

Maybe it's because someone has worked out that CTO is worth more than its current price even if the deep hole doesn't find anything.

Maybe it's because someone has closed a short position.

Who knows? I don't.

All I know is it's about ... time CTO started going up, and today's move was welcome esp. if there are a lot more days like today to follow.


----------



## refined silver (12 September 2008)

EasternGrey1 said:


> It's not a general gold thing - here's today's larger gold shares:
> 
> Maybe it's because someone has closed a short position.
> 
> ...




Yep, agree, you've ruled out the first option. 

That leaves CTO has got some good news: either the deep hole, improved production figures, or something else. 

Or, meaningless spike. It started Tues though, so not just one day.

It'd be nice if it was susstained


----------



## refined silver (12 September 2008)

Moving again this morning, up another 7.5%.

Still no news out.

ANy ideas??????????????????????????????????????????

(Sorry for all the ????????, kept telling me not enough charcters!)


----------



## EasternGrey1 (17 September 2008)

CTO share price going up isn't a surprise, what has been a surprise is how far the market earlier pushed it down.

With gold now likely to go through the roof, I did a scan of a whole heap of gold companies - see my post 12 Sept - with a view to buying some to go with my CTO holding. After eliminating a whole heap of them for various reasons, I was left with a shortlist of 4 plus CTO for comparison. The figures (such as I could find) updated to yesterday :
Avg grade g/t : CTO 14, AND 7, LGL 3, CRK 3, SBM 2.5
Mkt cap $A per resource oz : CTO 16, CRK 21, SBM 27, LGL 85, AND 161
Mkt cap per oz prodn : SBM 1,814, AND 2,357, CTO 3,902, LGL 4,311
f/c prodn cost $A/oz : CTO 350, LGL c.500, SBM 555
e&oe

Of the ones in prodn, CTO surely has the greatest potential to increase production, even if the deep hole finds nothing.

I just bought more CTO.


----------



## EasternGrey1 (18 September 2008)

Gold up 11% last night - and I have to point out that was AFTER I said "with gold now likely to go through the roof".
Gold is $A1,096.50/oz as I type, compared with around $A980 yesterday.


----------



## refined silver (22 September 2008)

Announcement out today, Dubai Group have agreed to buy in 18% of CTO for $35m. That probably explains the movement a week ago.

On one hand its good they have their Warrior expansion virtually underwritten to ramp up from 40k oz/a to 100k oz/a. On the other hand, this is the third compnay I own where this has happened just recently, and I can't help feeling they let these guys in very cheap.


----------



## EasternGrey1 (23 September 2008)

Cash is hard to come by nowadays. At least they've now got some, and "can't" go down the gurgler (unlike a number of other companies at the moment).


----------



## rhen (8 October 2008)

EasternGrey1 said:


> CTO share price going up isn't a surprise, what has been a surprise is how far the market earlier pushed it down.
> 
> With gold now likely to go through the roof, I did a scan of a whole heap of gold companies - see my post 12 Sept - with a view to buying some to go with my CTO holding. After eliminating a whole heap of them for various reasons, I was left with a shortlist of 4 plus CTO for comparison. The figures (such as I could find) updated to yesterday :
> Avg grade g/t : CTO 14, AND 7, LGL 3, CRK 3, SBM 2.5
> ...




I'm not sure why investors have not rated this producing gold miner.
Check out the recent report by Khandwala Securities Limited 1/8/08:

Citigold is currently trading at a P/E of 5x, 2.5x and 1.5x
and EV/EBIDTA of 3x, 1x and 0.1x, for FY09E and FY10E
and FY11E respectively. Assigning a conservative PE of
25 to 2013 EPS of AUD 0.14, we arrive at a target price of
AUD 3.50 representing 1844% potential appreciation.
Major in-production companies command much higher
PE in the range of 35-50.
On DCF model using 12% discounting rate, we arrive at
our base price of AUD 1.28 (2013). The base price on DCF
valuation represents minimum 611% potential upside
from the current level.
Citigold’s enterprise valuation is expected to jump
significantly, by as much as five times, as further
resources are added as per geologists’ estimates taking
the total resources to 50 mn oz. This is yet to be complied
with as per code by the Joint Ores Resources Committee
(JORC) sponsored by Australian mining industry. JORC
code is widely accepted as an international standard and
mandatory as per Australia Stock Exchange (ASX).

And the gold price has gone up and likely to continue to go up.
I own shares in CTO.
DYOR


----------



## So_Cynical (13 October 2008)

So_Cynical said:


> Only time will tell, and its gona be along time coming.
> 
> CTO is debt free and in production so there not about to fall over, however
> with production at ridiculously low levels the SP aint gona take off either.
> ...




As i said a while ago (4th-August-2008)  CTO aint about to fall over,CTO is 
prob the only producing Goldie with genuine (long term) potential...that's why 
i brought in in the first place.


----------



## melons (4 December 2008)

What are people's thoughts on CTO now? Are you still around Kennas....what do the charts look like to you??


----------



## Sean K (4 December 2008)

I'm not too sure about this company. They have an incredible IGV resource, at high grade, but at depth over range, and are ramping it up big time with claims they could have 50m oz au at depth. Not sure how they get away with that. Off the top of my head their cash costs are way above average due to the type of mine and rediculous Australian truck driver wages etc...

Recent funding deal must be a good sign that they will keep ticking along for a bit, but we've seen some good examples of companies being all cheerie one month and into administration the next...

Their last major pres says this:

•Pouring Gold
•Long life
•Major gold plant
•Reserve growth
•10 M/oz Resource 
•Upside to 50 M/oz (LOL )
•Single efficient mine
•Low operating cost
•Good infrastructure

Chart wise looks bottomish to me, 15-20c ish held ok, but not going longer term up till those red lines are gone. Green circle call it sideways.


----------



## Miner (4 December 2008)

I do not know much about CTO  either 

However I understand from MEED news reports which I subscribe  that CTO is doing good work in Saudi.

From memory Refined SIlver (?) did a good research on CTO in recent past.

Regards


----------



## explod (4 December 2008)

explod said:


> A Cousin of mine who lives in Townsville says "this is a very difficult mine".  Like Bendigo, I understand it is deep and the rock very hard.
> 
> Having said that, they have it and if the gold price was to go and hold above $1000 you could be rewarded well in the longer term.
> 
> The chart looks very similar to most other gold stocks at the moment.




Operating costs are the issue, fuel down of late will help, a tough mine and they have been trying, not just this mob, for a long time with not great statisfaction.  

Could be ramping for cash but not privvy to the ballance sheet at this time.

A strong gold price going forward then maybe no problem.   IMVHO


----------



## So_Cynical (4 December 2008)

I hold CTO and have noticed the SP slowly building in the right direction 
over the last month or so...after 3 months of sideways consolidation.

CTO get a mention in this story because they only have 5% of there market 
cap in cash. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,24735840-23634,00.html

And on the plus side CTO have increased gold production in every quarter for 
the last year and a half...and produce at a very low cost.

Quote last quarterly. http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=273

_• $35 million capital raising with Dubai Group
• Independent experts confirm Resources, Reserves and mine plan
• Western decline commenced
• 3 Megawatt electric power upgrade completed
• 24/7 mining operations underway since August
• Gold production 3,960 oz, up 78%
• *Cash operating cost A$371 per ounce*
• *Debt free*
• No hedging
_

On the one hand CTO have genuine issues...and on the other, genuine potential.


----------



## tthurlow2287 (19 December 2008)

I did this a few weeks back..

There is a double bottom formed, and I have been waiting for the price to pass through about 27.5 cents to confirm the change in trend. Yesterday the price hit 28 cents at close. IMO the uptrend is beginning. Plus, if you look @ the potential it has (my grandparents have followed it since 1995, so they know a lot about it) it is a very stable share to invest in. Low chance of failure.


----------



## Tim_54321 (22 January 2009)

Anyone know why citigold has been so weak relative to other gold stocks over the last few days, especially when gold has rallied a bit?


----------



## Sean K (22 January 2009)

Tim_54321 said:


> Anyone know why citigold has been so weak relative to other gold stocks over the last few days, especially when gold has rallied a bit?



I think it's questions regarding their deposit and if they really have the ounces and grades they claim. There's some independant report I read a while ago that says it's confirmed, but they're not digging it up! 4000 oz last quarter I think. Hardly pays the bills. 

And their ramps of 50m oz au potential at the centre of the earth would have them banned from ASF.

This ramp seems especially dodgy since their 'deep hole' hardly hit anything, but again they claimed it supported their assumption that there was a massive pile of gold down there. I can't see how they can still maintain this projection...

Happy for a geo to say its all kosher.


----------



## cwamit (22 January 2009)

this is my first post so i hope i don't break any rules 

i own some cto shares and always keep an eye on the stock price each day, anyhow look at the volume its massive the past few days, simple supply and demand is what pushing the price down, question is why the surge in volume? almost 8 million shares today and yesterday 5 million compared to average share day trade volumes of a 1 to 2 million. 

my theory (hope im not breaking a rule here) is it could be to do with say a financial  advisory company being put into voluntary administration..and lets say they are just down the road so  i am assuming they might have owned some shares in the company and have to offload them. 

opposed to that theory, i hope that there are no announcements over the next few weeks with some major negative news 

oh well they are a long term hold for me anyhow and i am buying some more.


----------



## nick2fish (22 January 2009)

Hi Cwamit,
               Welcome and thanks for your post. As a holder I am too somewhat puzzled and alarmed by the two days of double digit% losses coupled with very high volumes. If a substantial holder has been offloading we will be expecting a notice through axa very soon. There can be a delay in the posting as I have noticed with others on market offloads can take two or more days to complete I am in the dark as well because CTO sp is certainly going against the sector trend at the moment. Something is up and it is a bit frustrating as an investor to be the last to know


----------



## nick2fish (22 January 2009)

PS: I should have read Kennas post first. Agree production might have something to do with it. Doses anyone know when the Quarterly is due?


----------



## So_Cynical (22 January 2009)

Com guys CTO along with other small producers go up and down on a weekly 
basis...i doubt there's anything to it other than a big holder wants out and 
that's forced out a few trend followers. 

Gold producers up today

LGL
OGC
NEM
RSG
TAM

Gold producers down today

NCM
TRY
KCN
NFG
IAU



kennas said:


> This ramp seems especially dodgy since their 'deep hole' hardly hit anything, but again they
> claimed it supported their assumption that there was a massive pile of gold down there.




I seem to remember they hit something, and pretty sure they haven't released the drill 
results yet, so lets wait and see.


----------



## nick2fish (23 January 2009)

IMO somethings going on, 30% drop over 2 days, thats the smoke, now I wanta know is how big is the fire.
Yeah, I read the deep hole results as a positive too

Don't you count SBM as a gold producer these days, So Cynical, up 10% today


----------



## dj_420 (23 January 2009)

kennas said:


> I think it's questions regarding their deposit and if they really have the ounces and grades they claim. There's some independant report I read a while ago that says it's confirmed, but they're not digging it up! 4000 oz last quarter I think. Hardly pays the bills.
> 
> And their ramps of 50m oz au potential at the centre of the earth would have them banned from ASF.
> 
> ...




Hey Kennas

From a geo in the making I would say that it could be a tad ambitious, these claims should be substantiated by the drilling results and they are not as yet. They have intersections of 0.5 metres at 1,778 metres and 0.02 metres at 1,982 metres from the last deep hole they drilled. Those are some very small intersections at a HUGE depth. What is does support though, is that the mineralised structures do continue down to the depth of 1,982 metres so far, we are yet to know what sort of grades it is and whether is could eventually be turned into reserves.

Just from reading over the reports they are basing the 50 million ounces on the assumption that the mineralisation of the gold veins been mined near surface (700 metres) extends down to 3000 metres and increases in mineralisation. There are parallel structures showing gold mineralisation that are assumed to continue to these depths. 

They have 10 million ounces down to depth of 1200 metres, if we roughly extropolate those figures at same amount of mineralisation we get 25 million ounces down to depth of 3000 metres. This is if they can prove up the same amount of gold (14 grams per tonne I think) as in the first 1200 metres.

From all these figures and assumptions I would say CTO are better off concentrating on reducing costs and increasing throughput, these efforts would see an increase in SH value. They have the gold, now they just have to turn it into a significant operation.


----------



## nick2fish (23 January 2009)

Issued with a please explain today. Half year till 31/12/08 still being finalised.
Just have to wait and see I suppose.


----------



## So_Cynical (23 January 2009)

OOooh looky CTO up 14% today...its amazing.

Perhaps everything is ok and a 20% variation up or 
down over a couple of days is NOTHING.


----------



## refined silver (23 January 2009)

My bet is some half-wit leveraged fund, with redemptions or margin calls in other places, causing it to manage to sell out at the lowest possible price.


----------



## So_Cynical (23 January 2009)

refined silver said:


> My bet is some half-wit leveraged fund, with redemption's or margin calls in other places, causing it to manage to sell out at the lowest possible price.




Yep ya always got to keep in mind that the world is full of really really stupid people 
(most with university degrees etc) sell- buying for whatever reason at any given time.

Bank of England selling the bulk of its gold reserves at the bottom of the market, comes 
to mind....Gold touching 875 tonight 

http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/gordon-brown/2007/04/17/


----------



## The Dealer (27 January 2009)

http://www.asx.com.au/data/shortsell.txt

CTO has featured in the gross short sales on the 23rd. Shake out!


----------



## So_Cynical (27 January 2009)

The Dealer said:


> http://www.asx.com.au/data/shortsell.txt
> 
> CTO has featured in the gross short sales on the 23rd. Shake out!




Interesting...CTO went up 14% on the 23th, maybe it was a day thing and it 
opened high and they brought back in late in the day.

Alot of Gold shorts on that list that went the wrong way if held over the weekend.


----------



## jman2007 (27 January 2009)

dj_420 said:


> Hey Kennas
> 
> From a geo in the making I would say that it could be a tad ambitious, these claims should be substantiated by the drilling results and they are not as yet. They have intersections of 0.5 metres at 1,778 metres and 0.02 metres at 1,982 metres from the last deep hole they drilled. Those are some very small intersections at a HUGE depth. What is does support though, is that the mineralised structures do continue down to the depth of 1,982 metres so far, we are yet to know what sort of grades it is and whether is could eventually be turned into reserves.




I don't know much about this outfit but have had a look at the release re their hole to the center of the earth. One thing that strikes me as weird is that they refer to the altered assemblage of rocks as a "formation".. 

Well anyway, particular alteration assemblages can provide indications as to how far away you might be from a potential ore body. "Distal" assemblages are typically within the 'halo' of alteration, but can be considerable distance from your ore body (let's say 2-10m for example) . "Proximal" alteration assemblages can be characterised by a very different assemblage of minerals - but are practically adjacent to the ore body i.e. in the wallrock.

So they seem to be saying that their geological model fits their alteration model - but they haven't backed it up with any grades yet. And believe me, if they had hit some decent gear they would be faxing it off the ASX in about 2 seconds. So is a bit sus to me atm. Are they saying they are in the vcinity of the mother of all down-plunging lodes? - perhaps. 

jman


----------



## purty (15 February 2009)

According to Comsec CTO will make 1 cent per share in 2009.Assumming they have 756,000,000 shares, (only guessing from a number I believe I saw a few days ago) and dividing that by 100, which will then give you a dollar value of $7,560.000, then dividing that again by $1435 ,which is the present price of an ounce of gold,and you end up with 5268 oz of gold mined durring the 2009 financial year.The Comsec site also says for 2010 they will make 2.7 cents per share and 2011,3.4 cents per share. That's along way off 40,000 oz per year . Also anyone know what effect the floods are having on the mines in the Towers area.


----------



## oldblue (15 February 2009)

According to The Age, CTO have a little in excess of 736m shares on issue.

I was interested in CTO a couple of years ago but lost interest when a miner friend of mine told me that the Charters Towers mines had a history of being difficult to work. Water was a problem apparently, and that was without any complication from seasonal flooding.


----------



## bandicoot76 (12 April 2009)

does anyone have any new information on where citigold are up to on their infrastructure upgrade? last i heard they were putting the declines/workings in so they could skip 40k/a and go straight to production at 75k/a in 2010 and are only putting developement  drive ore through the mill at this stage???

a maiden dividend would be nice sometime soon or us 'long termers' might start to look elsewhere!


----------



## So_Cynical (12 April 2009)

CTO released info about a nice intersection the other day.



			
				CTO ann said:
			
		

> Assay results just received showed diamond-core hole CT 4032
> returned *1.5 metres true width at 161 g/t gold* (5 ounces per
> tonne), w hich w ill carry a 2 metre w ide stope w idth at 118 g/t
> gold. This is 41 metres vertically below hole CT 5007 w hich also
> ...




http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=287


----------



## bandicoot76 (1 May 2009)

what the hell is going on with the cto shareprice? an ok quarterly report, gold prices consistently high, increases in both production and developement yet the SP is plumbing the depths! starting to think i backed a donkey in this one despite all my research telling me the opposite!   any thoughts people?


----------



## interested (1 May 2009)

March Quarterly Report is out and there is more "expecting" and "planning" and "scaling up" and "forecasting" again.

I can't work these figures out 

Quotes from March Quarterly Report:
- Gold sold attributable to the quarter was 2,522 ounces.
- Gold production of 25,000 ounces in calendar 2009 is planned.
- This is an annualised rate of 60,000 ounces per year.
- The longer term goal of the Charters Towers gold project is an annual gold
   production of 300,000 ounces of gold per year.

It all seems to be pie in the sky. How can he turn 2,522 ounces in the quarter into 60,000 ounces in the same year? That's an impressive (impossible) scale-up in production. It won't happen and the share price is reflecting that. SP closed at 17.5c today. On the way down I think.


----------



## So_Cynical (2 May 2009)

CTO historically struggle to produce, and fail to deliver...much.

17.5 cents on Friday will turn out to be a good entry...as long as POG 
don't tank...ive been planning to average down at under 18 cents.

To really understand CTO u need to look way back..and u will see the same 
stuff over and over....still there's no denying they have alot of gold.

Buying @ under 18 cents over the last year has been the go...so long as u 
believe in Gold and have patience....also note that CTO is the only producer 
to go back to near the Oct/Nov Gold lows...and the only producer to be less 
than 80% above those lows. :dunno:

Maybe its because there crap!


----------



## J.B.Nimble (2 May 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> CTO historically struggle to produce, and fail to deliver...much.
> 
> 17.5 cents on Friday will turn out to be a good entry...as long as POG
> don't tank...ive been planning to average down at under 18 cents.
> ...




Evidently many out there feel that way. A quick scan of threads around various forums reveals a lot of frustration and disappointment. The common theme is - a great sounding story but where is the promised output? 

Confession time... I took a little loss myself recently after an impulse buy. The opportunity cost of sitting there with sp doing nothing but a gentle downhill slide while the rest of the market was romping away was just too much to bear. I'll continue to watch them for a re-entry based not on price (because I'm crap at TA) but on some meaningful development that could turn sentiment.


----------



## Sean K (2 May 2009)

Yes, hitting support.

But, I am confounded just like you guys on the output. Dismal really. They could be getting more gold panning at Sovereign Hill.

Interesting wordage on cash costs. They state, 'cash cost of production steady at $488.' Why state _production_ and _steady_? What is between the lines?

This quote from the quartery hit me.



> For the past year or more forecasting has been difficult due to constraints outside of the Company’s control limiting capital works and access to new mining areas.




What? 

Maybe it should read, 'we are unable to forecast because we don't know what we're doing'. 

While they have been stating 300K production for some time, this will not happen for some time. Just when is a guess. They have not given a time that I can see. In the quarterly they are going for:



> ANNUAL GOLD PRODUCTION PLAN
> (Calendar Years)
> 2009 2010 2011
> 25,000 ozs 85,000 ozs 160,000 ozs




How and when that ramps up to 300K is just a pluck.

I am no geo, and have not read in depth their previous announcements to be able to understand their resource base but they continue to claim 23m tns @ 14g/t for 10m oz au. 

Where the f*ck is it?

And, how can ASIC allow them to sprewk a 50m oz target? Although I note that this was not mentioned in the quarterly.

This is smelling a little like Bendigo and Ballarat to me.

Maybe I'm being a bit negative...

But the sp supports this view.


----------



## oldblue (2 May 2009)

Perhaps it's time to again air the view of an old Charters Towers' resident who told me, a few years ago, that while the town's gold deposits are particularly rich - said to be the best in Australia - they have a history of being difficult to work. I've forgotten the details now but depth of the deposits and water problems came into the story.
One would have thought that time and modern technology might have solved these problems by now?



Disc: Not holding.


----------



## jman2007 (2 May 2009)

interested said:


> I can't work these figures out
> 
> Quotes from March Quarterly Report:
> - Gold sold attributable to the quarter was 2,522 ounces.
> ...




It's a shrewdly written effort to try and make the production figures sound better than they really are. The key term they use is the "Annualised" 60,000oz forecasted for 2009. That's like me saying for one day of the year, I made $1,000,000 which equates to an "annualised" income of $365,000,000 for the year, even though for every other day of that year I might have only made $50.

I hardly think that the _actual_ forecasted figure of 25,000oz for the year qualifies as a "highlight" for the Quarter.  The 25,000oz is a forward-looking statement, and to use it outside its proper context is misleading. Even to reach this figure for the year, it is going to require an enormous increase in production


----------



## Sean K (2 May 2009)

jman2007 said:


> It's a shrewdly written effort to try and make the production figures sound better than they really are. The key term they use is the "Annualised" 60,000oz forecasted for 2009. That's like me saying for one day of the year, I made $1,000,000 which equates to an "annualised" income of $365,000,000 for the year, even though for every other day of that year I might have only made $50.
> 
> I hardly think that the _actual_ forecasted figure of 25,000oz for the year qualifies as a "highlight" for the Quarter.  The 25,000oz is a forward-looking statement, and to use it outside its proper context is misleading. Even to reach this figure for the year, it is going to require an enormous increase in production



Jman, you think they've being deceptive here?

I have had my suspiscion hairs raised for some time, based on the 50m oz target somewhere down in the core.

After a couple of other well known failures in this sector after high promises, I am skeptic number one.


----------



## jman2007 (2 May 2009)

kennas said:


> Jman, you think they've being deceptive here?
> 
> I have had my suspiscion hairs raised for some time, based on the 50m oz target somewhere down in the core.
> 
> After a couple of other well known failures in this sector after high promises, I am skeptic number one.




Hard to say if they're being _deliberately_ deceptive kennas, but clearly they are attempting to pump up the upside from what was a rather paltry production result for the Quarter. A major risk I can see is the cash burn rate for the underground development they're doing, clearly they've been running very close to the wire as is indicated from the very small cash-on-hand figures from the Half Yearly and latest Quarterly, although the latter seemingly does exclude the latest Dubai-backed raising.

After all the previous promises and targets, you have to wonder if they have the necessary capital and corporate structure to successfully mine these deposits - which is clearly being factored into the sp by the maket. It's very difficult to confidently say for sure what is going on with this company, but there are clearly many questions that need to be asked. 

Oldblue's contact in the Charters' Tower area is probably rocking on his rocking chair, gaurding his 3oz nugget and chuckling at all of us.


----------



## Trader Paul (11 May 2009)

Hi folks,

CTO ... while the fundamentals may be somewhat suspect,
technically the CTO chart is looking promising, with 
trading volumes up significantly, over the past 6 months !~!

Our astroanalysis also tells us to expect several time cycles,
to come into play for CTO, over the next 2 weeks ... these should
trigger some upside, especially around 26052009, when 3 time cycles
form a positive cluster, along the TIME axis ..... 

..... and the last 2 days of last week gave a us a harami with
a doji, which tells us to be watchful for a change in trend !~!

have a great day

   paul



=====


----------



## So_Cynical (11 May 2009)

OMG Paul's backing it...what the hell do we make of that?????????

He has a bout a 50% hit ratio!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All i know is CTO is well and truly in the buy zone....im not buying as i have
a great average down opportunity with MDL...as it's already ITM.


----------



## Sean K (11 May 2009)

Trader Paul said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> CTO ... while the fundamentals may be somewhat suspect,
> technically the CTO chart is looking promising, with
> ...



Isn't falling price and high volume a bearish thing Paul?

Agree on _possible_ trend change though, and hitting long term support around 16-17c. 

Could be a turnaround story, but in general, the trend is your friend imo, and this is only going one way atm.


----------



## Sweet Synergy (11 May 2009)

Have to agree with Kennas (writing at the same time ).  

This is looking kinda bearish IMO  (sorry Paul) ... chart appears to have broken a significant support and the volume is increasing on the more recent downward moves. 
Weekly chart below showing break, a clearer downward vol movement is seen on a daily chart


----------



## J.B.Nimble (11 May 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> OMG Paul's backing it...what the hell do we make of that?????????
> 
> He has a bout a 50% hit ratio!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




But isn't it so spooky when he gets it right...
Keep it coming Paul - don't understand it but love your posts...


----------



## Trader Paul (16 May 2009)

Hi folks,

Gann stressed the importance of anniversaries, in our astroanalysis.

For example, CTO ... has pulled back to a significant low in May
each year, since 2004 ..... 

In May 2005 a double bottom was confirmed with the 
May 2004 lows, just before rallying from 10-to-58 cents.

Right now, CTO is also making a double bottom, around
.165 cents, with increased volumes evident, in 2009.

With two significant and positive time cycles expected
to be triggered over the next couple of weeks, CTO
seems to be technically prime for lift-off ... !~!

Updated CTO chart, attached below.

have a great weekend

    paul



=====


----------



## lianeisme (25 June 2009)

Does anyone know why citigold has dropped so fare and why it hasn't moved with the gold prices surging. Have they actually got the gold out of the ground and on the market. what's your thoughts on this stock and where you think its going to go.


----------



## Sean K (25 June 2009)

I don't think anyone believes them, thus is reflected in their sp.

Still a potential bottom in place, down there. 

I'm thankful Yogi's astro analysis told us this was set for takeoff on 16 May. If only we knew it was set for disaster 3 weeks later.


----------



## lianeisme (25 June 2009)

mmmm are they allowed to tell poky pies under than ASX rules. They sent an issue out to share holders to buy more I did at .152 cents now I'm wondering if I have blown my money as I did with Babcock and Brown.


----------



## bandicoot76 (25 June 2009)

hang in there my friend, it'll come good! all shares have taken a caning the last couple of days. CTO will come through ok, they are just burning alot of cash getting their infrastructure ready to increase production (declines, access drives etc) keep the faith!


----------



## Miner (25 June 2009)

bandicoot76 said:


> hang in there my friend, it'll come good! all shares have taken a caning the last couple of days. CTO will come through ok, they are just burning alot of cash getting their infrastructure ready to increase production (declines, access drives etc) keep the faith!




Hi Bandicoot

Are you a faith healer too 
What is the source of your information ? Website published report or your good feelings

Would be interested to know

Cheers


----------



## So_Cynical (26 June 2009)

lianeisme said:


> They sent an issue out to share holders to buy more I did at .152 cents now I'm wondering if I have blown my money as I did with Babcock and Brown.




CTO traded at 18 cents yesterday, so u could of sold for a profit of over 15% after 
holding for just a couple of weeks...and your complaining.


----------



## lianeisme (26 June 2009)

I bought them at .32 cents a few years ago and bought a further parcel of around 6500 at .15 to bring down my average so I would have made a loss if I sold yesterday


----------



## bandicoot76 (26 June 2009)

Miner said:


> Hi Bandicoot
> 
> Are you a faith healer too
> What is the source of your information ? Website published report or your good feelings
> ...





a geologist friend of mine(also a shareholder) did the underground tour of the mine and that was his opinion.


----------



## jman2007 (27 June 2009)

I think the biggest coup CTO ever pulled off was convincing the JORC that their 1800m deep DDH confirmed the continuity of the mineralised structure from 500m to 1800m. That sent their Resource base soaring from about 3.3M oz to about 10Moz!...just from a single hole! For this reason alone, I'm sceptical of their numbers. I'm not sure how many of the reefs would be payable, perhaps 50% or so.


----------



## WRONG'UN (27 June 2009)

Hi Jman2007
I have been keeping a loose cover on CTO for over five years and recall that their "resource base" has been 10M oz for all that time, certainly from well before the DDH was put down. However, I agree with the basic reasoning behind your posting, which is to the effect that if their resource is scattered over a number of reefs, which will require at least some separate access declines etc., there is a questionmark over the economics of the entire operation. Until the Warrior Mine has been confirmed as a viable proposition in its own right, I am reluctant to value CTO on the basis of a much larger inferred resource.


----------



## jman2007 (28 June 2009)

WRONG'UN said:


> Hi Jman2007
> I have been keeping a loose cover on CTO for over five years and recall that their "resource base" has been 10M oz for all that time, certainly from well before the DDH was put down. However, I agree with the basic reasoning behind your posting, which is to the effect that if their resource is scattered over a number of reefs, which will require at least some separate access declines etc., there is a questionmark over the economics of the entire operation. Until the Warrior Mine has been confirmed as a viable proposition in its own right, I am reluctant to value CTO on the basis of a much larger inferred resource.




Fair call Wrong'un

I wasn't sure re the exact timing of when that particular DDH was put down, but it sounds like I might have been a bit off the mark. On a related topic, I recall that CTO had a rig sitting on a DDH for several months towads the end of last year drilling straight down the guts of one of the main structures, it had reached at least 2000m from memory. But I don't recall seeing any assay results being released to the market yet? Happy to be corrected on this point however.


----------



## WRONG'UN (29 June 2009)

I haven't seen any assay results for the deep hole either, just a general statement that the gold mineralisation extends down to at least 1900m.


----------



## bandicoot76 (29 June 2009)

my understanding of the announcement they did make about the deep hole was that it confirmed their projected resource base at shallow depths but was dissapointing at the deeper depths, although it did find low traces to confirm there is some ore there, just not enough to confirm their hopes of a high grade ore body continuing to 2000m+, i'm sure someone will correct me if i'm wrong on that  ...if they meet their production goals for 2009 i have been advised that their shareprice should be .50+ by my broker (who also holds CTO) i hold a substantial amount of cto shares and i'm in no rush to offload them just yet. lets hope that doesnt bite me in the a*se!


----------



## lianeisme (6 July 2009)

Does any one have an expectation of where the price for cto over 2 years for a long term hold will go to. Will they become a stock along the lines of Lgl or more like NCM


----------



## oldblue (6 July 2009)

The CTO shareprice has been in a long term downtrend ever since I started following them almost 3 years ago. In theory Charters Towers has the richest gold deposit in Aust but has a long history of being difficult to mine.
Any guess at a 2 year SP projection for CTO would be just that, IMO, a guess!


----------



## lianeisme (6 July 2009)

Are CTO in a trading holt today they have not traded so fare today there seems to be no anouncments


----------



## Sean K (6 July 2009)

lianeisme said:


> Are CTO in a trading holt today they have not traded so fare today there seems to be no anouncments



If you have internet access (seems you might) you can either go to your online broker and find the announcement, or go to the ASX web site and go to company announcements. It's all there, just a few clicks away!


----------



## TheMainMan (6 July 2009)

lianeisme said:


> Are CTO in a trading holt today they have not traded so fare today there seems to be no anouncments




I've put an order in to sell OK.

Sellers are holding out for .17 and buyers are looking at .165. So it's just sitting there stuck!...


----------



## So_Cynical (6 July 2009)

lianeisme said:


> Does any one have an expectation of where the price for cto over 2 years for a long term hold will go to. Will they become a stock along the lines of Lgl or more like NCM




Any comparison of CTO to LGL and NCM will show that there all gold miners, the later 2 
very successful with a great future,as the months go by i just keep shaking my head at CTO.

What the hell are we to make of this take over bid for Gateway Mining.

http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=298

Shouldn't CTO management be busy with getting the mine going...i mean this has to be the 
100% first priority...and month after month, year after year, the mining seems to get pushed 
to the background while they raise money and issue shares, drill deep holes, make 
pretty presentations, raise more money...and now there taking over an explorer to 
do even more exploration while they sit on 10 million ounces.

:bad:


----------



## Sean K (7 July 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> :bad:



SC, I've been looking back through GML's ann's and I 'm struggling to see why anyone would touch them, let alone a struggling developer/just producing (not much). Really confusing. Maybe they just think the exploration (maybe) potential adds a string to their bow at a very low price. Or, they could just be buying some grazing land for camels. 

GML's highlights of the last qtr:

*HIGHLIGHTS*
• The recent rise in the gold price has enhanced the potential of the Gidgee
Project area in Western Australia
• Following a review of Gidgee exploration data, three areas containing
appreciable gold mineralisation in drillholes have been selected for further
analysis by an independent consultant
• Infill EM surveying at Barrelmaker West has confirmed a bedrock EM
conductor over interpreted komatiitic basalts
• The company plans to carry out an aircore drilling programme in the next
quarter to test a number of gold, copper and nickel targets
• Results from a recently completed VTEM survey over the Cowra Project are
very encouraging, with a number of anomalies outlined
• The company raised $400,000 in working capital through a private share
placement 


And looking at the detail I see one historic drill hole of 22m @ 14.94g/t Au at Montague which was quite good, but geesh. 

The 'positive' Cowra drilling was crap.


----------



## mightau (27 July 2009)

What is it with these guys? CTO is way underperforming the market, and also way underperforming other gold stocks. The board has a lot of explaining to do! Have they simply no credibility left after promising a bonanza for so long? If that was the case, wouldn't they be ripe for a takeover with such a dismal record and a poor share price? Do the board control enough stock that that could never happen? 

I am very frustrated by this company's inability to mine some damn gold.


----------



## Sean K (24 August 2009)

I'm tempted to call a bottom here but I just can not trust the company.

They state they have 10m + ounces but it's about 2k underground and at the rate they are mining, no one will ever see it. 

They reckon they have a 10 million oz gold resource (23 Mt @ 14 g/t Au) in compliance with the JORC Code.

Last quarter production was 1,855 ounces. Yes, there are no zeros missing from that.

2009 production on target for 25k oz au. WOW!

Opex under $500 which looks very good for an underground op.

Net operating cash flows last quarter almost minus $10m. 

While they're losing money, they take over another junior that looks crap. Real crap. 

Output in 2010 targetted at 85K. They are going to more than triple output? 

This could well possibly be the most self - ramped stock on the ASX.

Having said that, I'm calling a potential bottom, until that blue line is breached.


----------



## bandicoot76 (24 August 2009)

lets hope they pull their finger out and start to pour some serious goddamn gold! a geologist mate of mine did the underground tour awhile ago and seemed to think they had a good mining system and decent visible ore zones but dead set i'm getting sick of their bloody p*ss poor performance. ive held CTO for 5yrs and now wish i'd sold them when they hit 55c like i was advised to! short term pain for long term gain? dunno but my patience is wearing thin!!!!!


----------



## So_Cynical (24 August 2009)

CTO remains the only stock i have held for more than a year that i haven't averaged down into....i just have zero confidence in them, and consider my $1800 investment to be a right off.


----------



## lianeisme (25 August 2009)

I hold quite a substantial amount of these shares I have been communicating with the CEO via email. I can't print his reply as he hasn't given me permission however he is very bright in regards to CTO. He seems to think it is a long term hold and will flourish. I have mentioned concerns buy inventors in regards to getting on with the job and the fact that they bought out another Gateway. 

He reiterated that money didn't change hands for this purchase, it is done with share instead. He said that it was extremely cheap company has a good structure. 

The gold location the 10 million ounce gold resource is between 100 m and 1,200 metres depth."

The Gold It is not about 2k underground "this  is wrong and very misleading. The comments on Gateway is baseless and wrong.
If you have questions contact Mark he is a very nice man Mark Lynch mlynch@citigold.com


----------



## Sean K (25 August 2009)

What? They're not going to 2km?  

The CEO is 'very bright' in regard to CTO?

Who would have thought? 



Did you ask him how the 50m ounce target is going?

And Gateway is a turkey. Can you tell me what assets they have they are so good for CTO?

The best of their last quarter highlights was:

• The Montague area review of exploration data at Gidgee has recognized the significance of previous drilling results at Rosie North, including 33m @ 0.67g/t Au and 102m @ 0.42g/t Au in hole WRC012.
• Intersections at Julia’s Fault include 5m @ 3.47g/t Au from a 5 metre composite sample.

lol


----------



## lianeisme (25 August 2009)

kennas said:


> What? They're not going to 2km?
> 
> The CEO is 'very bright' in regard to CTO?
> 
> ...



 why don't you email him and ask these questions he will reply to you he will respond quickly then all your questions will be answered


----------



## Sean K (25 August 2009)

lianeisme said:


> why don't you email him and ask these questions he will reply to you he will respond quickly then all your questions will be answered



I would only do that for a laugh. I'm not sure how the ASX has allowed them to keep sprouting the 50m ounce target from about 2km down. Each time I see the slides from their rampathon presentations I have a chuckle. I mean, who are the kidding?


----------



## quarky (25 August 2009)

bandicoot76 said:


> lets hope they pull their finger out and start to pour some serious goddamn gold! a geologist mate of mine did the underground tour awhile ago and seemed to think they had a good mining system and decent visible ore zones but dead set i'm getting sick of their bloody p*ss poor performance. ive held CTO for 5yrs and now wish i'd sold them when they hit 55c like i was advised to! short term pain for long term gain? dunno but my patience is wearing thin!!!!!



like yourself, i've held this stock for about 3 years now and wanted to sell it at $0.55
but at that time, i was travelling and was high in the Himalayas, so didn't have 'net connection... and the higher i got, the shares decided to take a slide down.
then, thinking of all the "potential" of CTO, i held...but now, i'm severely disappointed with how it's going and i hold at least 4 digits worth (i.e. > $10k)
so,...either i pour a couple of G's now at $0.16 and make enough to break even...or risk being in financial pain...longer


----------



## swm79 (25 August 2009)

go on kennas, write to him.

maybe ask him about why the guys in Dubai pulled the plug??? pretty suspicious. 

i held for a while but got fed up with them NEVER living up to expectations and continually providing ramped up reports and presentations that were NEVER met

glad i got out when i did.


----------



## lianeisme (4 September 2009)

As I mentioned earlier if you write to Mark he will respond.
I wrote to Mark and told home he needs to make share holders more aware of the activities of the company.  I suggested the problems people were having re the belief in the company it would be nice to have a quartley news letter answering questions. Mark said he would take this on board. Well it appears he has, if you have any questions regarding CTO hopefully it will be answered here I have attached the link as there are lots of questions and answers from share holders.
http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=303


----------



## Mogul (4 September 2009)

Being a shareholder with a significant amount invested $100'sK it is certainly dissapointing to see where it is sitting. 

The results for the 2nd half of 09 should be quite pleasing to everyone with a nice rise in share price. AGM will be interesting as results won't be out beforehand, but will definately be sprouted and talked up as usual. There will be significant angst amoungst shareholders which will possibly result in major changes at senior management level.

I know that analysts have issues with senior management and therefore there is no promotion or reccommendations to buy CTO.

I assume time will tell, but an interesting and hopefully very profitable ride ahead.


----------



## oldblue (4 September 2009)

Now *there's* a shareholder with a bit of faith in CTO!

Hundreds of thousands dollars worth!

Do you subscribe to the movement for a change of management for this company?


----------



## Mogul (4 September 2009)

oldblue said:


> Now *there's* a shareholder with a bit of faith in CTO!
> 
> Hundreds of thousands dollars worth!
> 
> Do you subscribe to the movement for a change of management for this company?




Yes, CTO management needs to focus on increasing shareholder value. There is too much spin from the current management and not enough action.


----------



## Mogul (16 October 2009)

What a surprise more spin from the MD on the same day proxy forms are released.

We want to see results.


----------



## Sean K (16 October 2009)

CTO are by far the cheapest producer on my gold stock analysis table. Actually, the second cheapest of ANY I follow including junior explorers. 

I wonder why! 

10m ounces at 11 g/t JORC with 50m upside (chuckle)

I think that they are either the biggest rampers on the planet, or we are missing one of the most significant turn around stories EVER!



Technically, I am VERY interested in seeing some of these resistance lins surpassed.


----------



## ponder (16 October 2009)

Hi,
This is my first post,
I do not seem to be an expert on the art of buying shares. Please keep that in mind.
But I sold out today.
In previous announcements they were talking about 70.000 ounces for the 2009 calendar year.
In today's announcement they refer to 25.000 ounces.
I feel they are shifting the goalposts once again.
The calendar year (i.e. not the financial year) for 2009  ends in December.
I think they have missed the target.


----------



## banska bystrica (16 October 2009)

A few companies have tried to mine this resource at CT. All unsuccessful. It's a complex structure. I would avoid it like the plague.


----------



## mightau (19 October 2009)

ponder said:


> Hi,
> This is my first post,
> I do not seem to be an expert on the art of buying shares. Please keep that in mind.
> But I sold out today.
> ...




In fairness (and I am not one to feel charitable to CTO management), their April announcement on March quarter earnings did predict 25000 oz for the 2009 calendar year (with December quarted mined at an annualised rate of 60000oz), so the announcements last Friday are consistent.

That's not to say they haven't shifted the goal posts a lot in the past. Their record is very poor on matching fact to promise.

On the other hand (!), that does mean CTO has become a pure play on actual gold production - there's no fat in the share price reflecting unproven future earnings at all. Maybe that's a good thing.


----------



## Sean K (28 October 2009)

Still promising a lot and continuing to underdeliver. It doesn't look like they will even meet the 25,000 oz in 2009 at this rate. The Sep quarter was supposed to be 5,000 oz and they've delivered 2600 oz. Half...

Production for the calender year has been:

Mar 2522
Jun 1855
Sep 2600

So they need to produce 18,023 ounces in the Dec quarter to meet the target!  They were originally forecasting 15,000 in Dec. Take your bets. 

Stated aim to scale up to 85,000 oz in 2010. Oh dear....

Maybe they're going to mine someone else deposit to get the target?

Cash costs $542, when they continue to sprewk $300 oz opex target. Half the current rate. (Note: was $491 in June and $488 in March, so it's going UP!) Just how they are going to achieve $350 is anyones guess. 

On another note their attempted takeover of Gateway turned into a farce with them only gaining 45 ish % of the company which will remain listed. Really, what was the point? Quite bizaar at at time when they can't even get their own operation running to plan. 

Dipped under 15c key support yesterday, looking vulnerable with the markets falling a bit, gold correcting with USD oversold and bouncing. Looks in trouble I think.


----------



## Mogul (28 October 2009)

I have just sent Mark an email, will have to wait and see if I get a reply. Not happy with the result at all.


----------



## Putty7 (28 October 2009)

Have held these at one stage (quite a few) just before the Dubai buying and selling craze, sold out during that thankfully, had a mate ring me yesterday and raved on about CTO but honestly even with the new low at .145c I can't bring myself to get back in, my confidence in their mangement is shot, there are better performing gold shares around, FML stands out in my mind at the moment even though I am not holding, I can't understand the takeover bid they threw in earlier when they can't get their own show up and going like they keep saying they are, the figures prove that unfortunately. 

With all that said they are still at the bottom end of their scale with regards to price and if they do actually get their act together it will be a nice ride, best of luck to any still holding and will keep a watch on them regardless just in case.


----------



## jman2007 (28 October 2009)

Putty7 said:


> Have held these at one stage (quite a few) just before the Dubai buying and selling craze, sold out during that thankfully, had a mate ring me yesterday and raved on about CTO but honestly even with the new low at .145c I can't bring myself to get back in, my confidence in their mangement is shot, there are better performing gold shares around, FML stands out in my mind at the moment even though I am not holding, I can't understand the takeover bid they threw in earlier when they can't get their own show up and going like they keep saying they are, the figures prove that unfortunately.
> 
> With all that said they are still at the bottom end of their scale with regards to price and if they do actually get their act together it will be a nice ride, best of luck to any still holding and will keep a watch on them regardless just in case.




Putty I'm with kennas on this one,

I'd be extremely careful with re-entering CTO, starting to look vunerble. I see Towsey has relocated himself to site permanently as the "Site Senior Executive"...lol. You know a company is in trouble when the management start coming up with names like "Associate Grand Poohbah of the 5th Realm" - minesite politics.. ughh! :flush:

This farce has gone on too long, and needs to be wound down.


----------



## Putty7 (28 October 2009)

Thanks JMAN, yes I agree they don't have the bite to back up any of their bark and I won't be getting back in anytime soon, for lack of better terminology they need to put a chainsaw or a brushfire (or both) through the management and get rid of the dead wood, most of my interest is in energy at the moment, particularly oil and gas short term plays so not in any hurry to venture back into gold stocks, even if I change my stance on this I would look at RNG, FML or maybe GOA over committing capital to CTO again.


----------



## riverred (3 November 2009)

Hello all, I'm new to this forum. 

Like most of you, I do wonder about CTO directors' depth of experience in gold production, as distinct from gold exploration. I also wonder about their skills in corporate strategies to maximise value for shareholders. In a perverse sense, I take a bit of assurance from the fact that for every sp drop of 1c, I lose a $couple K, but the Lynch's family fortune loses $860K. Mark will need to get his strategies right if he intends to keep his family fortune intact. He would have lost approx. $34M since the sp dropped from 55c to 14c. And he cannot sell his shares to cut his losses because that would trigger a stampede away from CTO, thereby exacerbating the sp problem.

Mark must have had sleepless nights over the last 12 months; like James Packer over his $multi-billion losses, perhaps? If so, then is the extended loss of sleep affecting his business judgement? Why do the annual capital raisings get cheaper and cheaper in terms of sp, if CTO gets nearer and nearer to significant production? It's all upside down. Would the next capital raising will be at 12c or less if there's still no significant gold show? Reminds me of the unfortunate Goldstar experience which shares were eventually issued at 1c. Also, does Mark realise that if he doesn't come participate in the capital raisings, he loses significant percentage holdings over time?

One part of me says to ditch the shares. The other part says to wait. If matters are so dire, why would a reputable firm such as Rodman & Renshaw place CTO shares to their clients? The fees earned in the $5M or so capital raising is not worth the bad risk to their established international reputation. 

I also bear in mind that there are four factors at play at anytime: the board of directors, the hardworking staffs, the company’s fixed undervalued assets and the elusive but independently confirmed huge gold resources. Only one of four factors has consistently let shareholders down. The other three are doing just fine. So the challenge for me is to place the right weighting for each of these factors in some rationale method to arrive at a satisfactory course of investment action. So far, no solution yet...

But it is important not to lose sight of this fact: CTO is not NCM, LGL or KCN. CTO a highly speculative play. Enter at our own risk. Huge losses are likely, as are huge gains. Easier to take that punt at the Melbourne Cup race, perhaps?


----------



## Sean K (3 November 2009)

riverred said:


> Hello all, I'm new to this forum.
> 
> ....
> 
> Easier to take that punt at the Melbourne Cup race, perhaps?



Some good points there riverred.

If they can turn this around and start hitting targets then it's looking undervalued. The net asset backing is about 24c a share or thereabouts which puts absolutely no value on any gold production. 

In regard to support from Instos, that may be comforting, but there's been a few also that have backed complete turkeys and lost gazillions. I seem to remember BDG doing a well supported capital raising at $1.00 ish before they fell to 10c. So, I'd still be cautious. 

If they don't get close to the 18k ish ounces required this quarter, I think they'll be in a spot of bother.

But agree, at this level, if they can pull a rabbit out of the hat, could be highly profitable also. 

So, 50c each way?


----------



## riverred (3 November 2009)

Hi kennas. 

The unfortunate BDG experience took place under different circumstances. Gullible or inexperienced investment fund managers were blinded by the soaring sp trend then. With CTO, it's just the reverse. R&R would have been alerted to the downtrend over the last 2 years and would have asked some very probing questions of the board. What wouldn't shareholders give to know those Q&As?!

A few years ago I valued CTO at $1.00ps; on the important assumption that the resources were proven to be convertible to reserves. Since then, the price of gold has doubled. But the no. of shares issued has also doubled. So, a quick guestimate is that my valuation has not changed much. Btw, I applied 8% to the igv, as opposed to Fat Prophets' 10% guideline. 

I guess I should disclose that I'm not holding out for dividends and long-term profitable gold production. Takes a bit too long, that. I'm speculating on a takeover by one of the big boys. For this to eventuate, CTO just need to get its reserves in place and the door knocks and phone calls will begin. Dividends and profitable production are merely entree to the main course.

Reading between the lines of one of the recent interviews with Mark Lynch, I get the sense that he has this in mind as well. And why not? Not many shareholders can say no to an $86M offer. Mark can certainly accomplish a few impressive acts with that amount of cash.

Cheers.


----------



## So_Cynical (3 November 2009)

riverred said:


> Like most of you, I do wonder about CTO directors' depth of experience in gold production, as distinct from gold exploration. I also wonder about their skills in corporate strategies to maximise value for shareholders.




I wonder about there skills and experience in being able to tell simple truths, to set realistic goals and to deal honestly with shareholders and the market in general.


----------



## jet328 (3 November 2009)

riverred said:


> the door knocks and phone calls will begin




If anyone actually believed the figures they throw around as reserves this would be gone tomorrow morning. 
Even if you offered double the current SP, its still nothing for 10million ounces

If you go back and look at announcements over the last decade, they are great at talking just not getting any of it out the ground


----------



## riverred (3 November 2009)

But SoCynical, CTO isn't the first, and wouldn't be the last, to market its wares in so shameless a manner.

Recall all the hype that Newcrest had used to promote its Telfer mine development? Analysts were shaking their heads in grim disapproval at the forward`looking statements, frustrating delays, unending problems and the $200M budget blowout. Then there was Lihir, full of its Ballarat promises. It's been about four years now, but have the vindictive fund managers forgiven Bendigo yet? Frankly, they should carry some of the blame. Oh, Zinifex-Oxiana-OZ, how could you spend with such nonchalance $1B from the Nystar sale proceeds in less than 12 months and then almost go broke? Well, Rio Tinto outdid that feat with its dreams of aluminium. How about Central Petroleum, aspiring to be the next hybrid PES-MCC. The list of distinguished players goes on...

Could it be that the realities of high corporate strategies and massive opportunity creation require such nature of skills and aggressive positioning that are totally exotic in the lives of mere mortal shareholders such as us?


----------



## Mogul (16 November 2009)

AGM today, will be interesting to see the outcome regarding what happens with the director's.

Very light trade this morning.


----------



## The Dealer (16 November 2009)

What did you think about the cheer leader letter that all shareholders received? 
Basically a please hang in there for us. It has actual scared me a little that there will be no good news coming at anytime soon.


----------



## So_Cynical (16 November 2009)

The Dealer said:


> What did you think about the cheer leader letter that all shareholders received?
> Basically a please hang in there for us. It has actual scared me a little that there will be no good news coming at anytime soon.




I though the letter was pretty over the top...i went to the CTO website to see if i could find it there but couldn't. :dunno: perhaps there not keen to share with the general public.

Anyway here are a few classic quotes



			
				CTO's desperate letter said:
			
		

> Like all great undertakings we have had our ups and downs, but we have together conquered all and will now continue growing. We have been producing Gold for 2 years with gold output up 41% for the last 3 months, on the previous quarter to 2609 ounces. Our study's show that the mine has the potential to generate substantial free cash flow.





This is my favourite bit.



			
				CTO's desperate letter said:
			
		

> New mine site management is in place from October to drive growth. the desire for prudent management of shareholder funds is coupled with the aim to scale up current production operations to 85000 ounces in 2010 and further.




So there magically going from 2609 ounces in the last quarter to at least 21,000 ounces on average per quarter in 2010...a simple little what 800+% production turn around in 6 or 9 months.

Its laughable.


----------



## beachbum (17 November 2009)

Hi posters, I have not commented on this company before but I would never buy this stock. I worked in the nearby Pajingo mine for several years and the company directors have been talking up production since day dot. I think it was Charters Towers Gold before they renamed into Citigold. Word was not good then and things don't seem to have changed. Somehow they are able to get more investors to invest money when the cupboard looks bare. I notice the directors pull a nice salary from this company. Same two family members on payroll I notice. They still have not put any runs on the board and it's always next year we hope to produce "X" amount of ounces. If the mine is looking so good, how is it that it is taking so long to produce "X" ounces.
Good luck to all that hold. I could be totally wrong or just cynical.


----------



## Sean K (17 November 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> So there magically going from 2609 ounces in the last quarter to at least 21,000 ounces on average per quarter in 2010...a simple little what 800+% production turn around in 6 or 9 months.
> 
> Its laughable.



What they must be relying on is moving into mining a section or block known to contain plenty of contained metal. If they don't hit it for some reason, they'll look mighty silly.

It might behove this company to start underestimating their growth rate. 

If they don't start hitting targets and bringing in economic numbers we may see them have to do a BDG and resort back to exploration drilling to understand the deposits a little better. 

I wonder when they are going to hit that 50m ounce motherload down beyond 2000m?


----------



## propunter (17 November 2009)

I sure hope Mark Twain didn't have Citigold in mind when he said
"A gold mine is a hole in the ground with a liar standing next to it"


----------



## The Dealer (18 November 2009)

I was talking to an old timer a while back who told me that when the gold mine at Mt Morgan was paying off our nation debt, that when things slowed up, the operator would go and throw a couple of nuggets on the ground so the locals who found them would make a big deal about how you can find gold just laying around and then bingo there would be a massive injection of capital. Now we have the asx announcement board I think.


----------



## riverred (16 December 2009)

A mere 5,000 oz for the Dec'09 qtr gold production. So it looks like there'll be another capital raising coming up shortly to pay for the next qtr's expenses. And it also looks like the raising may be made at a further sp discount. My guess is that the price range falls between 10c - 12c. 

Perhaps by now Mark Lynch has finally learned not the keep making unrealistic forward looking statements as these will only come back to haunt him.

There's nothing wrong with being a quiet achiever in the mean time.


----------



## So_Cynical (16 December 2009)

riverred said:


> A mere 5,000 oz for the Dec'09 qtr gold production. So it looks like there'll be another capital raising coming up shortly to pay for the next qtr's expenses. And it also looks like the raising may be made at a further sp discount. My guess is that the price range falls between 10c - 12c.
> 
> Perhaps by now Mark Lynch has finally learned not the keep making unrealistic forward looking statements as these will only come back to haunt him.




5000 ounces is around 6 million bucks, so that would have to go pretty close to paying the bills for last quarter :dunno: also nice to see a little honesty in today's market update.

http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=314



			
				CTO market update said:
			
		

> With the benefit of hindsight the previous aggressive production build up rate was premature.




Also refreshing to see a somewhat more realistic production target going forward.



> the gold production target for calendar 2010 year has been revised to 50,000 ounces. These more modest targets are based on accumulated experience and the more detailed understanding of the gold distribution.




I wonder what they actually need to produce to get to break even.


----------



## riverred (16 December 2009)

My guesstimate on cash cost is also approx. $6M p.q. So, if the last two capital raising net revenue of $6.8M has been applied for meeting the Dec'09 qtr expenses, that leaves the 5K oz gold sale revenue to meet the next qtr's costs. Hopefully that would be enough to buy CTO time to increase its gold production to 12.5K oz p.q. 

Of course, that's on the proviso that Mark Lynch focusses on other corporate matters than more talk and promises; none of which has done much good for each successive capital raising in terms of securing the best value for long term investors.


----------



## bandicoot76 (9 January 2010)

what are peoples thoughts on CTO's response to their ASX 'slap on the wrist'?

 HEY MARK, STOP PUSSYFOOTING AROUND AND POUR SOME DECENT VOLUMES OF BLOODY GOLD ALREADY!!! SHEESH!


----------



## lianeisme (20 January 2010)

OK I own CTO and I'm not happy Jan,   I have no idea why the prices are falling, when there is so much talk about gold prices rising, does anyone have any ideas what's happening with this company at all. 
I have looked on company announcements but can't find anything that would make the prices fall to the current level other than the fact they pulled out of Dubi. Could it be a target for takeover at these prices by bigger Gold mining companies? Any light shed on this would be most appreciated.


----------



## Unnamed User (20 January 2010)

lianeisme said:


> OK I own CTO and I'm not happy Jan,   I have no idea why the prices are falling, when there is so much talk about gold prices rising, does anyone have any ideas what's happening with this company at all.
> I have looked on company announcements but can't find anything that would make the prices fall to the current level other than the fact they pulled out of Dubi. Could it be a target for takeover at these prices by bigger Gold mining companies? Any light shed on this would be most appreciated.




I haven't even looked at the announcements of this dog of a stock for years but i am a former holder.

My best guess would be that the market is sick and tired of the promises and outright lies told by the management and aren't buying their story any more.

Do your own research by all means but this stock is well known in the investment world as a stock that promises the world but doesn't deliver.


----------



## oldblue (20 January 2010)

oldblue said:


> The CTO shareprice has been in a long term downtrend ever since I started following them almost 3 years ago. In theory Charters Towers has the richest gold deposit in Aust but has a long history of being difficult to mine.
> Any guess at a 2 year SP projection for CTO would be just that, IMO, a guess!




I would doubt that a lot has changed since my above post of about six months ago.

Not one for me although I must admit to keeping a weather eye open in case there's a change in the trend.


----------



## Sean K (21 January 2010)

Unnamed User said:


> My best guess would be that the market is sick and tired of the promises and outright lies told by the management and aren't buying their story any more.
> 
> Do your own research by all means but this stock is well known in the investment world as a stock that promises the world but doesn't deliver.



Management need to go I think. 

Their response to the production guidance question in Dec is a joke.



> 1. The Company does not view the information contained in the announcement concerning the Variations to Expected Gold Production as material.



HUH? 

5,000 down from 15,000 just a few weeks before. Really, ASIC should have thrown the book at them for that. Unacceptable.

This comment in the Dec update is even more laughable.



> With the new growth focused management team in place, the Board met in Charters Towers recently to get a first hand opinion on what is achievable going forward.



WOW!!! The board got a 'first hand opinion' on what was achievable! Are they serious? How else do they get their information? From HotCopper by the sounds. And they actually met in Charters Towers!!! Whoohoo!! Sounds like it's the first time they've actually been there to me.


----------



## Wysiwyg (21 January 2010)

bandicoot76 said:


> what are peoples thoughts on CTO's response to their ASX 'slap on the wrist'?
> 
> HEY MARK, STOP PUSSYFOOTING AROUND AND POUR SOME DECENT VOLUMES OF BLOODY GOLD ALREADY!!! SHEESH!




This looks like a strong down trending stock while gold is at over USD 1000 per ounce. Can't say the warning signs aren't in the stock price. One thing that may help technically is the 10 cent base in 2005. I learned from similar situations that placing trust in management is folly.


----------



## Sean K (15 February 2010)

CTO below 10c a share, EV of about $77m, with over 10m ounces in the ground at 11.7 g/t. Current EV to oz au $7.70 ish. Seven dollars seventy an ounce. Yes, below $10 an ounce. That is unbelievable. What a turkey.


----------



## So_Cynical (15 February 2010)

kennas said:


> CTO below 10c a share, EV of about $77m, with over 10m ounces in the ground at 11.7 g/t. Current EV to oz au $7.70 ish. Seven dollars seventy an ounce. Yes, below $10 an ounce. That is unbelievable. What a turkey.




And there in the middle of yet another share purchase plan at the moment, issue price ... 12 cents per share.  what a bunch of clowns  the share price tanked the day of the SPP announcement.


----------



## Sean K (16 February 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> And there in the middle of yet another share purchase plan at the moment, issue price ... 12 cents per share.  what a bunch of clowns  the share price tanked the day of the SPP announcement.



I've said this before, but this will either go the way of a Bendigo and have to go back to exploration to understand the deposit better and mining method, or it could be the ultimate turnaround story. Hard to see takeover with so much doubt about the deposits, but maybe new management could turn it around?


----------



## J.B.Nimble (16 February 2010)

kennas said:


> CTO below 10c a share, EV of about $77m, with over 10m ounces in the ground at 11.7 g/t. Current EV to oz au $7.70 ish. Seven dollars seventy an ounce. Yes, below $10 an ounce. That is unbelievable. What a turkey.




That 10m oz is of no value if it remains in the ground, and on that basis one can only conclude - woof, woof... Sorry to say that I once held this for a few months but managed a dignified exit


----------



## So_Cynical (16 February 2010)

J.B.Nimble said:


> That 10m oz is of no value if it remains in the ground, and on that basis one can only conclude - woof, woof... Sorry to say that I once held this for a few months but managed a dignified exit




If we look on the brite side - glass half full etc...at the rate CTO are producing Gold (about 20000 ounces per year) they have a mine life at warrior of about 250 years....also with the SP currently at about 20% less than the share purchase plan offer...existing holders who wisely choose not to participate wont get diluted.

Lots of time for Gold to see $50000 an ounce. :bonk:


----------



## oldblue (17 February 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> If we look on the brite side - glass half full etc...at the rate CTO are producing Gold (about 20000 ounces per year) they have a mine life at warrior of about 250 years....also with the SP currently at about 20% less than the share purchase plan offer...existing holders who wisely choose not to participate wont get diluted.
> 
> Lots of time for Gold to see $50000 an ounce. :bonk:




But that's just the problem, isn't it?

Shareholders who don't participate - and clearly that seems the best idea - *will* be diluted by those who do. More shares on issue equals smaller chunks of the business.

Disc: Not holding.


----------



## Sean K (17 February 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> If we look on the brite side - glass half full etc...at the rate CTO are producing Gold (about 20000 ounces per year) they have a mine life at warrior of about 250 years



he he, classic SC 

Maybe they should cut production back to 10k p/yr for a 500 yr operation? 

They are still yet to factor in the 50m ounces they predict are below the current resource estimate also, so that will add another 1250 years mining at 20k a year.


----------



## sion (18 February 2010)

This company has crazy management. ON one hand they say with distain "the stock market does it's thing" on the other hand they need to raise capital frequently the purpose of which seems to be to research the perfect method to extract gold from this deposit. 

They are technicians not business men. They are more concerned with playing in the sand pit and drawing a salary then establishing shareholder value. This will very soon come home to roost. The shareholders are going to give them the sack.


----------



## So_Cynical (18 February 2010)

sion said:


> The shareholders are going to give them the sack.




Bring on the meeting...you got my vote  to be honest at this point Humphrey B Bear would get my vote if he was standing against this lot of total incompetents.


----------



## ColB (18 February 2010)

> *Originally posted by So Cynical*
> 
> "Bring on the meeting...you got my vote  to be honest at this point Humphrey B Bear would get my vote if he was standing against this lot of total incompetents."




If it wasn't so serious it'd be funny.  I remember buying this stock at around 44 cents a couple of years ago and bailing out at a loss a short time later and thank me lucky stars I did.  

With the improvement in the price of gold the freefall of this one is astounding and it's chart is looking beautiful for an entry of around 5 cents in 2-3 months as it continues on its merry way.  Only question is, why would you?


----------



## travwj (4 March 2010)

Interesting announcment  by CTO today. MOU with for a JV with a chinese gold mining/exploration/processing company. Price is up and volume is up, lets see if it closes above 10c...could be a buying op.

I don't hold CTO, and dunno why i watch it...but lets see where this may go.

Trav


----------



## So_Cynical (4 March 2010)

travwj said:


> Interesting announcment  by CTO today. MOU with for a JV with a chinese gold mining/exploration/processing company.




Read all about it http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=328

The Chinese mob is called, Henan Jinqu Gold Company Limited...a little googling revealed

http://www.jinqudiamond.com/htm/indexen.asp 

i think this is there site :dunno:  its a little hard to tell....they claim to be the "leading" Synthetic Diamond manufacturer in China.


----------



## Sean K (5 March 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> Read all about it http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=328
> 
> The Chinese mob is called, Henan Jinqu Gold Company Limited...a little googling revealed
> 
> ...



Well, interesting. The City area is just a small part of the overall Charters Towers development, but obviously significant if they thought it was going to be producing 200k oz pa. 

And it's going to be a 'super' mine. lol 

ANNOUNCEMENT

*Citigold signs MOU to develop Charters Towers City mining area*

4 March 2010: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold) (ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) advises that it has signed a non binding Memorandum of Understanding with Henan Jinqu Gold Company Limited (Jinqu), China, to form a joint venture company to develop the City mines of Citigold’s Charters Towers gold project.

Under the terms of the MOU Jinqu may acquire up to a 50% interest in the joint venture company which will own granted mining leases with permits to mine and associated infrastructure, containing a gold Mineral Resource of 1.8 million ounces*.

Henan Jinqu Gold Company Limited’s main industry is the exploration, mining, processing and smeltering of gold. The company is also engaged in research, development, production and sales of synthetic diamonds. The company is a member of the Shanghai Gold Exchange.

Citigold’s Gold Production Plan for the design and development work has been undertaken with the aim of producing 200,000 ounces per annum from the City mines. The City includes the major Sunburst, Brilliant and Day Dawn reefs to be developed together as one ‘super’ mine.

Citigold has internally budgeted that the development of the City operations should take 24 months and cost up to $70 million. The development of the City is to be separate from the 100% owned Warrior mine and the existing 340,000 tonne capacity gold processing plant.


----------



## So_Cynical (10 March 2010)

Citigold up 20% today :alcohol::bier: everyone must be thinking its that Chinese mob buying some goodwill, or even better looking for a board seat.  i dare not say the T word.


----------



## refined silver (10 March 2010)

The only plus with CTO management is that they own a fair few shares. That doesn't guarantee good management for sure, but it's one positive. 

Am about even on CTO with buys and sells.


----------



## ColB (10 March 2010)

What a cracker!  A few posters here including me just spent the last coupla weeks bagging this sideshow and look what happens....up over 25% in the last week.  Good work Refined Silver, you'll be able to buy back in at sub 11 within the week.

Hopefully for those hanging on my cynicism will backfire [again] and see the sp rocket


----------



## So_Cynical (10 March 2010)

I've got a sell order in at 13.5 im probably being over optimistic.  still if tomorrow is a repeat of today then ill be reasonably happy to be out with a 65% (approx) loss.


----------



## greebly24 (15 March 2010)

I am a newbie and would appreciate opinions. Still learning. Read about leverage to rising gold price with mining shares. Liked 20 companies. Picked one to buy - CTO Based purely on resource size

Bought CTO at 0.28. Watched price drop. Learnt about "averaging down". Bought more at 0.25 without question. Watched price drop to 0.18 when I was offered capital raising at 0.16. Never done one before but sounded good to a newbie so I over-participated. It averaged my buy price down to 0.22 but tied up 20% of my total capital.

Since then watched sp get to 0.09, now back to 0.11. Still looking at -50% loss (or -10% of my portfolio)

Opinions greatly appreciated. Wish I'd read this forum before I bought CTO


----------



## Sean K (15 March 2010)

greebly24 said:


> I am a newbie and would appreciate opinions. Still learning. Read about leverage to rising gold price with mining shares. Liked 20 companies. Picked one to buy - CTO Based purely on resource size
> 
> Bought CTO at 0.28. Watched price drop. Learnt about "averaging down". Bought more at 0.25 without question. Watched price drop to 0.18 when I was offered capital raising at 0.16. Never done one before but sounded good to a newbie so I over-participated. It averaged my buy price down to 0.22 but tied up 20% of my total capital.
> 
> ...



Nice capital loss to lock in for this FY maybe? 

On what I can work out I doubt they can turn this around and I think they'll go into administration shortly. 

Some serious questions need to be asked of management and their claims.

I'm still waiting for the 50m ounces down there to be discovered. LOL


----------



## So_Cynical (15 March 2010)

greebly24 said:


> I am a newbie and would appreciate opinions. Still learning. Read about leverage to rising gold price with mining shares. Liked 20 companies. Picked one to buy - CTO Based purely on resource size
> 
> Bought CTO at 0.28. Watched price drop. Learnt about "averaging down". Bought more at 0.25 without question. Watched price drop to 0.18 when I was offered capital raising at 0.16. Never done one before but sounded good to a newbie so I over-participated. It averaged my buy price down to 0.22 but tied up 20% of my total capital.
> 
> ...




Well at least you learned that 4 average downs is about 3 to many....comes a time with all bad decisions when you have to bite the bullet and do what has to be done....lucky for me i have a big winner to counter my biggest loser CTO.

GL greebly


----------



## greebly24 (16 March 2010)

Thanks kennas and So_Cynical for the replies.

Despite the fabled 50m oz resource and a potential 1500 year mine life (bad joke), I think I will have to take a loss on this one.

Still reading and learning every day. Came across an article about not averaging down. It was written by a guy in the US who bought Enron at $100 then it dropped to $90 so he averaged down. The guy averaged down on every $10 drop until it hit zero. D'oh!

Averaging down sounds like the Martingale system in gambling. Double your bet every time you lose. Exponentially bad.

Then I read about "averaging up". The idea was rather than putting your capital into a losers, hoping to get your money back, instead you put more capital into winners. What do you reckon?


----------



## oldblue (16 March 2010)

Also known as "Reinforce success"; "Buy into an uptrend"; Keep your winners and sell your losers"; "The trend is your friend".

I try to follow this method using trailing stops although it's sometimes hard to enforce the sell discipline and the temptation to sell a winner is always strong. Requires close monitoring and adherence to one's own investment rules.


----------



## So_Cynical (16 March 2010)

greebly24 said:


> Still reading and learning every day. Came across an article about not averaging down. It was written by a guy in the US who bought Enron at $100 then it dropped to $90 so he averaged down. The guy averaged down on every $10 drop until it hit zero. D'oh!
> 
> Averaging down sounds like the Martingale system in gambling. Double your bet every time you lose. Exponentially bad.
> 
> Then I read about "averaging up". The idea was rather than putting your capital into a losers, hoping to get your money back, instead you put more capital into winners. What do you reckon?




Successful averaging down can be done, im proof positive of that, now im not 100% sure about whether  that was dumb luck or just great decisions or a combo of both i don't know :dunno: but i do know my averaging down saved my bacon at the bottom of the GFC.

Just want to point out that while i thought about averaging down into CTO i never did...and i certainly never average heavily into rubbish stocks, i decided some time ago that CTO was rubbish.

As for averaging up (pyramiding) i think its completely nuts, but understand how it works, particularly in a runaway stock with a stop in place...as im not a trader i have no interest in averaging up....the trend is also my friend its just that the trend i favour is a down trend.

to each there own.


----------



## Sean K (16 March 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> Successful averaging down can be done, im proof positive of that, now im not 100% sure about whether  that was dumb luck or just great decisions or a combo of both i don't know :dunno: but i do know my averaging down saved my bacon at the bottom of the GFC.
> 
> Just want to point out that while i thought about averaging down into CTO i never did...and i certainly never average heavily into rubbish stocks, i decided some time ago that CTO was rubbish.
> 
> ...



It probably all comes down to your investment philosophy and what works best for you. Some people have time to invest in analysing every stock on the ASX, find the truly undervalued ones, and go overweight in them. Like a YT did. And be smart enough to get it right more times than not. For the rest of us, who are more lay investors, diversifying in some way will eventually pay off. Being overweight in this turkey over the past year or so was not a good idea.


----------



## Jamesdee (21 March 2010)

What people are thinking after the Half Yearly report? (released 16.3.10)

Im still learning and was wondering if someone could help me make sense of this... 
Im struggling to figure out why the market reacted the way it did after the release of the report?
I would have thought with things like...

_"Revenue increased over 30%
Gross profit up 13%
Operating Activities generating positive cash flow"

"Production up 86% on previous 6 months.
New mine site management team producing results."

"the Company considers it appropriate to commence planning to re-activate the Charters Towers “City” mining area."

"Citigold is planning a material increase in gold production for the 2010 calendar year, with current gold production forecast to be 50,000 ounces for the period. This should see the Company become cash flow positive and profitable for calendar 2010."
_
would have caused some kind of positive reaction. I am assuming I have missed something... something BIG. 
Any help you can give would be greatly appreciated by this newbie.


----------



## Sean K (21 March 2010)

Jamesdee said:


> would have caused some kind of positive reaction. I am assuming I have missed something... something BIG.
> Any help you can give would be greatly appreciated by this newbie.



It depends on what was promised before these statements James. If a company says they will be in operation and be producing XX oz au per year and then fail to achieve it then it's not good. CTO have promised and failed. Best thing they could do now is to say they promise nothing.


----------



## So_Cynical (21 March 2010)

Jamesdee said:


> What people are thinking after the Half Yearly report? (released 16.3.10)
> 
> Im still learning and was wondering if someone could help me make sense of this...
> Im struggling to figure out why the market reacted the way it did after the release of the report?
> ...



_

Hi James and welcome to the CTO thread....i think to have a genuine understanding of the last half year report you probably need to go and read the last 6 half yearly reports....after you have read them you will come away with the feeling that CTO management are always upbeat about there production estimates, and consistently fail to deliver.

While the bits from the last half yearly you have quoted sound ok...they really need to be read as part of a whole, like 3 year report..and that report wouldn't read so well. 

Anyway from memory my rough figures calculated that they need to produce at least 6000 ounces for this first quarter 2010 to have a realistic chance of not going bust within the next 12 months....assuming no fresh injections of cash and failed rights issues and cap raisings etc etc.

What the last half yearly showed (from memory..its late and ive been drinking) is that CTO at current (record) production levels are burning 2 million a year, so with a million cash should be in big trouble in 10 or 12 months time if there production don't consistently hit new record highs.

CTO always has been a big punt and now its actually showing that in the SP...seriously if your keen to have a bit of a punt on something GNS would be a far better choice IMO._


----------



## bandicoot76 (21 March 2010)

CTO could go either way but IMO they wont actually go bust and into receivership because they have no or little debt and own outright all their fixed and mobile plant. more likely scenerio would be if things went bad they'd mothball the mine like they have done previously.

they have had some SERIOUS cash burn putting in the infrastructure (declines & access drives etc) which has depleted their cash pool seriously ( about $6mil a quarter i think) which takes care of any gold sales they make.
i have held a substantial holding of CTO for the previous 4yrs after after buying in at an av of 15c/sh on the advice of a geologist mate of mine

kicking myself i stayed in for the long term & didnt sell out fo 55c/sh in 2007, IMO CTO management are being ultra conservative at the expense of their shareholders although this possibly may not be as bad as the current share price indicates.

 i totally agree that to date managements forward estimate statements of 50,000ou+ have been rediculous and quoting a potential 50mil ounce resource when your JORC is only 10mil is thinly disguised ramping....

HOWEVER... i've decided to hang in for another 12m before making a final decision after considering the following things:
1) they have no debt
2) they own all their own plant
3) they do have a 10mil JORC
4) the main infrastructure is in (decline, vent shaft, access drives etc)
5) chinese investment to speed up 'city' reef developement
6) management have been made to look fools, if they dont pick their act up they face a shareholder revolt, plus managent hold large stock parcels themselves so its in their own interest to increase production... THEY BETTER BLOODY START SOON THOUGH!!!!!

i'm hoping thats enough to get the SP back up to a decent price so i can either lock it in as a long term investment or dump my holding without taking a big loss.... time will tell!


----------



## sion (23 March 2010)

@ Bandicoot 76. Thats right. Because they have virtually no bank Debt they can't be forced into receivership. 

I think they are making kind of nieve mistakes. Going for broke on a huge capital raising issue and making that issue dependent on a large number of shear holders purchasing up to a certain maximum number of shares when there was a huge risk that the SP would be lower than the issue price during capital raising was simply dumb. However what they are implying is that they are completely confident that they are now certain to be cash flow positive at Warrior. And that as such the SP is likely to rocket. Perhaps they thought it would do so just by making the announcement. If it had capital raising would have been easy. 

Management seem to be very consistently making the same mistakes. They are asking shareholders to be patient but consistently jump the gun themselves by overestimating production and underestimating time to achieve it. The smart thing to do would have been to wait until after publishing their fist quarter 2010 production results, given that they will be above 5000 ounces, and then announce a possible joint venture and a capital raising. Or better still give it another six months and let some capital build up in the bank watch the SP rise and then raise capital. That would be even fairer to existing share holders. Actually having written it down like that limiting the number of shares existing share holders can purchase during capital raising makes sense if you are sure the SP will rise from an existing low level. It rewards patient long term holders.

So these guys are not strategic in any sense in their communication with shareholders. That in addition to the Dubai thing at least partly explains the share price. However that does not mean they do not know how to mine.

Given the large share holdings that the directors have. Their technical experience in the mining industry and the removal of a certain amount of complacency they probably had due to the existence of a very wealthy sponsor (Dubai) now gone, some of the management mistakes they have made arguably could be overlooked. IMHOP an awful lot hinges on a good result for this quarter.


----------



## sion (31 March 2010)

Well...the March share issue raised only one million so that puts development of the city decline on hold for now. Actually I think it is a good thing. Having just one decent quarter of production is not enough of a record to go to the market for more capital for further expansion. Lets see proved sustainable production growth and profitability from Warrior first. Further the one million raised is from people who paid a 20% premium over the market due to the depth of their faith in the mine and the management. I think it's a fantastic endorsement. Lets use it to keep Warrior going and to improve profitability right there. I just hope that the December 2010 quarter results were not a complete anomaly....
otherwise... :flush:


----------



## So_Cynical (14 April 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> I've got a sell order in at 13.5 im probably being over optimistic.  still if tomorrow is a repeat of today then ill be reasonably happy to be out with a 65% (approx) loss.




Out today :alcohol: at 0.135 for a 65% loss, a little over 2K gone, my biggest ever loss and im quiet happy about it....what a difference it made to the portfolio numbers. 



So_Cynical said:


> Hi James and welcome to the CTO thread....i
> 
> CTO always has been a big punt and now its actually showing that in the SP...seriously if your keen to have a bit of a punt on something GNS would be a far better choice IMO.




Funny cos it turned out that at under 10 cents CTO was actually a great punt, that would of been very profitable in just a month or so.  bye bye CTO thread and good luck to the holders.


----------



## travwj (13 May 2010)

I was just having a quick look at the chart for CTO. Now i am only a beginer when it comes to charting and someone such as kenna's will have a much better opinion. But CTO is in an uptrend from it's lows of feb... I have attached a chart, but it is looking inviting even for CTO. DYOR

Cheers

Trav


----------



## Miner (14 May 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> Out today :alcohol: at 0.135 for a 65% loss, a little over 2K gone, my biggest ever loss and im quiet happy about it....what a difference it made to the portfolio numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny cos it turned out that at under 10 cents CTO was actually a great punt, that would of been very profitable in just a month or so.  bye bye CTO thread and good luck to the holders.




Very sad to learn about your loss on CTO and that too with 65%. I hope you would definitely compensate that few times more in other scrips.
Looking into your previous posts and this one I have a question (disclaimer : this is purely academic and I do not hold CTO) that a punter who invests money for short term.

To get 65% loss while selling at 13.5 cents the purchase price should have been at 22 cents or so. From Commsec it appears in  last 12 months the highest price was 22 cents and lowest was 8 cents. That is very unfortunate to see you actually bought at peak rate. I have made such mistakes more often but I thought me the only one


----------



## WRONG'UN (14 May 2010)

I don't want to rub salt into the wounds, but the buy price is actually about 39 - a 65% loss means 13.5 is 35% of the buy price, so the buy price = 13.5/0.35 = 39c


----------



## oldblue (14 May 2010)

travwj said:


> But CTO is in an uptrend from it's lows of feb... I have attached a chart, but it is looking inviting even for CTO. DYOR




Probably a case of a rising tide (gold price) lifting all boats, even CTO!


----------



## So_Cynical (15 May 2010)

Miner said:


> Very sad to learn about your loss on CTO and that too with 65%. I hope you would definitely compensate that few times more in other scrips.
> 
> To get 65% loss while selling at 13.5 cents the purchase price should have been at 22 cents or so. From Commsec it appears in  last 12 months the highest price was 22 cents and lowest was 8 cents. That is very unfortunate to see you actually bought at peak rate. I have made such mistakes more often but I thought me the only one







WRONG'UN said:


> I don't want to rub salt into the wounds, but the buy price is actually about 39 - a 65% loss means 13.5 is 35% of the buy price, so the buy price = 13.5/0.35 = 39c




WRONG'UN strangely enough got it pretty well right....i first entered CTO around 2 years ago, average price around 0.385 .. strange that a piece of crap Goldie like CTO actually gets alot of attention on the forum. :dunno:


----------



## Sagmiller (25 June 2010)

I can tell you that the Lynch brother's do not have a good reputation around Charters Towers. From what I can gather, a good deal of their mining equipment is being leased from *guess who*?  Also I have heard that some underground headings that were developed didn't return good production but had to be stopped as they just happened to be heading into ground on which Citigold did not have the lease but which *guess who* had. I guess that is called hedging your bets 

As far as the 10 million ounces are concerned, all well and good but the amount of mining development required (especially vertically which is not cheap) brings the price of production right up there.

My investigations continue but I would be careful with this mob.


----------



## tehnoob (25 June 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> strange that a piece of crap Goldie like CTO actually gets alot of attention on the forum. :dunno:




It seems around a third of the posts are yours.... :

In other news CTO has so far been the only loss I've made out of all my investments. I learned a valuable lesson: delve deeper than the headline figures. As Sagmiller says, 10Moz are useless if it's uneconomic getting them to the surface.


----------



## jonnycage (28 June 2010)

long time follower,  ducked back in  at .092  today, token bet really,
will they every produce meaning for gold ? who knows

j c


----------



## Sean K (28 June 2010)

jonnycage said:


> long time follower,  ducked back in  at .092  today, token bet really,
> will they every produce meaning for gold ? who knows
> 
> j c



Good luck! 

The only real risk is if they have to re-do the JORC I think. Should stay a company until we eventually get the downgrade to 100k @ .0001 g/t. 

I do wonder if the old drill results were sprinkled slightly.


----------



## jonnycage (29 June 2010)

cheers for the comments kennas!

thought it was low enough for a punt, so no doubt lower to come yet lol.

watching with interest in a lot of specs at present

j c


----------



## explod (29 June 2010)

explod said:


> Yeh, have a cousin who lives up there.  I pleaded thier case to him as I saw it and he said, "they have always had a lot of problems with water, golds there but problems getting it out"  like Bendigo, deep mines are always a problem.   So I watch but got out 18 months ago and nothing has mde me feel inclined to go back in again.




Going back to 31st December 07 .Post 99 on this thread.

Sometimes it is hard to move on when you fall in love with something.

Am also amazed that when investing in a stock, time is not spent reading all the way through a thread and evaluating the pros and cons.

Just


----------



## tthurlow2287 (5 July 2010)

Talk about rough...just sold my 40,000 holding for 9 cents each....bought at average of 22...-$5,400. At least I'm out of it though..


----------



## sion (7 July 2010)

Who knows why this stock is getting dumped. I have no inside information as to why and my guess is no else does either. At present they are producing 22k ounces a year and are almost able to break even at that production level it seems. This stock was, my guess is, purchased by a significant number of industry insiders and includes a fair bit of family money. After the huge roller coaster emotional ride including a major liquidation by Dubai investors it must be getting pretty tough to stay the course. I'm also finding it difficult. But I will wait and see what the next quarterly report shows. I imagine hardrock mining for gold at depth is not easy. It makes reasonable sense that expensive development work need to be carried out before efficiencies of scale start to tip the balance towards profitability. Since the last quarterly report the price of gold in Aussie dollars has been $1400 plus. Even if there is no increase in production for this quarter income should increase by 15%. In fact they could have a 15% drop in production and still have the same income as the last quarter when they were close to break even and even mentioned that they considered paying a dividend. I may be a mug but I'll wait and see and not base my investment decisions on short term market action. Anyway some one bought about 20 million shares not to long ago and in the process pushed the price up to nearly 15c. Either they knew what they were doing or they are feeling rather sheepish right now. I'll go for the former.


----------



## So_Cynical (7 July 2010)

sion said:


> Who knows why this stock is getting dumped.




I know...its a piece of crap! 



sion said:


> I have no inside information as to why and my guess is no else does either




Seriously dude you really need to read back over the last 3 or 4 pages of this thread to see its abundantly clear why there's an outstanding chance that CTO will end up in the hands of the receivers.



sion said:


> I imagine hardrock mining for gold at depth is not easy. It makes reasonable sense that expensive development work need to be carried out before efficiencies of scale start to tip the balance towards profitability. Since the last quarterly report the price of gold in Aussie dollars has been $1400 plus. Even if there is no increase in production for this quarter income should increase by 15%. In fact they could have a 15% drop in production and still have the same income as the last quarter when they were close to break even and even mentioned that they considered paying a dividend. *I may be a mug* but I'll wait and see and not base my investment decisions on short term market action.




I wont call you a mug ...but will point out that the CTO SP has gone from 51 cents to 8 cents over the last 4 years, while they issued new stock every 6 months or so, while Gold has doubled in price over the same time frame...all the *good* gold producing stocks have at least held there value over that 4 years, CTO hasn't...make of that what you will.


----------



## Sean K (8 July 2010)

CTO were claiming production aim of 40k oz pa back in 2004.

In 2006 they were claiming 50m oz au potential.

Since Adam was a boy their target has been 300k production pa at under $350 an ounce. 

Last quarter 'record' production of about 5k oz at over $480 an oz.

225 of 11,000 shareholders took up the 'discount' SPP to raise $1m.

They're giving away half of 'City' for what we do not know.

Just raised $18m for half debt and equity, with no price mentioned.

It's a bad bad bad joke.


----------



## bandicoot76 (15 July 2010)

wish i'd sold at .50 and not "kept the faith" ...good call miner... my bad! need it to get back to .16 to break even... not holding my breath tho


----------



## jonnycage (28 July 2010)

i enjoy roller coaster rides, so got in at 9 cents.   crash imminent now lol

ah  CTO where of where can your gold be ???

j c


----------



## Quillan (31 July 2010)

The June Quarterly. To Mark Lynch, CEO Citigold.
Dear Mark,
I have several points to make.
You recently reiterated your intention to produce 50,000oz in 2010,
in your submissions to our new Chinese Investor Zaojin.
The details are on their website.
This figure was also published last December, so it is now confirmed.

Bearing in mind that your production in the 1st Half of 2010 was about 7,500oz, I take it that we will see an acceleration to around 42,500oz in the next 5 months? If this turns out not to be the case, your Board, once again will be guilty of misleading its Shareholders and also its new investors.

Now you are really scaring me, with possible proposals to enter a much larger deal with Zaojin. Will you please assure Shareholders that you will also approach one or more Royalty Companies, for whatever finance you are looking in future? Your ability to negotiate appears to be seriously suspect, and at this rate, most of any future prosperity will be transferred into Chinese hands.

Will you also confirm that any proposed terms will be put to Shareholders for their approval, prior to any commitment?

Will you undertake to appoint a prominent respected Finance Director who understands mine finance and has the requisite contacts?

You mention in the Quarterly several interested partners for future developments. Will you therefore confirm:
Your negotiating Terms will be on a par with royalty deals recently concluded by Franco-Nevada,[F-N] and Royal Gold? This is giving away no privileged information. It would merely confirm that Terms are not going to be a "stitch-up" without Shareholders being told the scale thereof, as was the case with the Henan deal, with probably 88,000ozs of gold production pa. needlessly given away, and a dilution of future values of at least A$1 billion in Citigold's assets.

[PDF]
Franco-Nevada to acquire 22% gold stream on Taseko's Prosperity ...
You will see from these figures that F-N receives the gross revenue on 66,000oz pa, assuming Taseko reaches its target of 300,000oz pa.,
for providing C$350m. Pro rata that's 12,000oz pa. on the A$70m Citigold financing, to yield the same15%pa. for F-N at today's gold price.

The risk for F-N appears to be much greater at Taseko. They are advancing $350m on hoped-for production of 300,000oz pa, against the Citigold requirements of only A$70m [or C$65m @C$1 = A$1.07] on 200,000oz production pa. with far higher grades per tonne. and larger gold resources. Pro rata that would be an investment of A$105m for Taseko, not C$350m, [A$375m] when related to the two comparable annual productions in risk terms.

You still refuse to answer my point why surrendering 12,000 oz pa to finance A$70m would not be a better deal than committing100,000 oz pa to Henan?

Your present gross profit of A$867oz would provide a royalty  financier with a return of 15%pa on 12,000oz, assuming the average gold price obtained in the previous Quarter, even allowing for the present high mining costs.

Royalty Companies, as you know, bet their returns on increasing gold prices, and provided the gold is there to be mined, are always interested in new investments.

All the available information suggests that a royalty deal with Citigold would be a safer investment for F-N than the Taseko financing, since Taseko has to find a further C$450m, on top of the F-N contribution, to open the mine, thus escalating the risk.

Your only response to these points was that you had looked at royalty finance "some time ago" and thought it was "too expensive".

Your comments make it clear that you did not pursue royalty deals at the time you were looking for finance for the City mine.
Are you are talking to Royalty Companies now?
If not, why not?
If not I would regard it as a gross dereliction of your duties to your shareholders, and incidentally, to your own personal investment in Citigold.

This is particularly so if you cannot produce evidence of negotiations with Royalty Companies along the lines of the Taseko deal or Royal Gold's average take of A$60 per oz on production finance, showing that no agreement better than 100,000 oz pa could be reached with any of them.

This suggestion simply doesn't hold water.

Your COO Chris Towsey asked me in an email if I would be prepared to enter a deal such as that with Henan?

My answer is that Royalty Companies enter far less generous deals all the time. Deals yielding them about one eighth of the Henan deal. It merely illustrates how little Chris Towsey appears to know about Royalty finance. He should know that these Companies have made huge profits for their shareholders over the years, based onTerms far less generous than the deal with Henan.

But we must bear in mind that Chris Towsey assured me in May that mining analysts would soon realise the Henan deal would value Citigold at around 74 cents, as soon as it was confirmed. I am not holding my breath.

Today's price is 9 cents with a tiny turnover of A$36,000. No evidence there of bargain hunters!!

It was largely on his assurance, and against my better judgement, that I became a shareholder. After all, I concluded, Chris Towsey has all the mining qualifications, and was intimately involved in all aspects of Citigold, so who was I not to accept his analysis?

Negotiations with the likes of F-N could have been entered into when I first pointed out negotiated royalty Terms to you in April, and your dealings with Henan were no more than an MOU. You chose to reject them, at huge cost to Shareholders, in my opinion, assuming a Taseko deal was a feasible possibility.

I refer you again to the contents of my emails of 7 & 22 July, covering most of these points. If you had a rebuttal you would have used it to show me where I was mistaken. As a comparatively large shareholder making what I regarded as important finance suggestions, I would have thought any CEO would have an obligation to respond.You have remained silent, except to say you thought royalty deals were too expensive, but giving no back-up evidence in support.

I am posting this email on the Citigold blog on Aussie Stock Forums.
Sincerely,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I invite CTO Shareholders and interested parties to copy and pass on this email to any contacts, analysts or mine finance persons.


----------



## Quillan (31 July 2010)

Here is the outline of a suggestion I put to Mark Lynch, the CEO recently.
The idea is that shareholders should become Royalty providers, just like Franco-Nevada.They provide the finance on a 15% return, based in the present gold price. The return increases or decreases according to the gold price, but starts at 15%. This is precisely how the Franco-Nevada shareholders have became very rich. I invite you all to put this to your Broker or Financial Adviser for comments.
It may not be limited to shareholders but they should be given first preference.
Here is the gist of what I wrote to Mark Lynch recently. He has not responded.
"You could finance say A$50m, by issuing what I have called Royalty Preference Shares.[RPFs] Modelled on the Taseko deal, they could be floated to shareholders to yield, say 15%***. Maybe with a later conversion Right to the Ordinaries. They would go to a large premium, meaning shareholders could easily finance the purchase, then sell some or all in the Market if necessary.
***The 15% being calculated on the present Gold price with say 8800ozs revenue going to Royalty Preference holders as a dividend pa. @ A$860 an oz. This way all mining earnings are kept amongst the shareholders, if they continue to hold the RPFs, instead of being exported to China or elsewhere."
Comments please.


----------



## noirua (31 July 2010)

Hi Quillan, your letters are very difficult to respond to - then i know only a little about Citigold. 
In my recent emails to directors I've used a more cunning plan, that's to leave some information out, then they can reply, cleverly, and tell me something important  'I already know',  of course. Giving some DEFINITE proof of who you say you are also helps.
Your letter seems as if it's an attack and at best will receive an annoyed reply, or, just, 'Thank you'. A letter from a Bank Manager in 1982, I still have it, agreed with most of what I said but didn't expect anything to change.

Just a thought really, or some thoughts; your needed though Quillan as few people bother to do anything and just grumble and moan, and they're on ASF as well, would you believe it? - noi


----------



## Sean K (1 August 2010)

Just scaned through your letter Quillan, but very interested to see if you have a reply.

This company should be absolutely on the ropes.

Absolutely massively overpromised and under delivered.


----------



## Quillan (2 August 2010)

Hi Noirua,
Wherever I go, there you are !!
[I suspect we may meet on the WEC blog sometime soon !!]
I have had a running correspondence with CEO Mark Lynch of CTO, over the past 3 months, including some Skype calls.
I told him I intended to put my opinions to this Forum, but invited his response first, in case he thought there were any inaccuracies in my contentions.
He said he would be replying to me within days. That was nearly 2 weeks ago.There was no response. Perhaps his Lawyers have shut him up?

As I have said, if I am talking nonsense, or my comment about the TASEKO deal is not a valid comparison, then Lynch should say so, and shoot me down with facts.

After all, it could be said that my possible ignorance on the Finance matter, is maligning the Directors, harming the Company, and my own considerable shareholding. He should want to stamp on it and put me right immediately,

My purpose is to try to inform more CTO Shareholders of my opinion, and hopefully to get a reaction from someone who understands Mining Finance. You may be able to help there?

The only bright spot about the Henan deal is that an independent 3rd Party, who are experts in mining, has satisfied itself that 200,000oz pa. is viable at the City mine, otherwise it wouldn't have been prepared to invest.That does not make the deal worth 100,000oz pa., which is outrageous.

Let me be clear. My correspondence with  the CEO is in my name, which is only omitted for blogging purposes. I am hiding nothing.


----------



## Quillan (13 September 2010)

Excuse long silence. No, Mark Lynch didn't reply.
But it looks like my criticisms of the deal with Henan have struck home. Lynch, having told me that the proposed Chinese partnership was a good deal for CTO Shareholders, has now ditched them !!
Let's be frank. The record of this Management is abysmal. The only encouraging factor is that there are groups from India, Singapore and China, known to us, who think there is something to be made of the mine. Unless they have been told a pack of lies by our Board, then there seems to be a reasonable chance of production being profitable with the gold price above A$1200.
The question is, will they walk away if the figures don't add up? It would be good to get inside our CEO's head, and his COO. Lynch subscribed fairly heftily to the 10c Rights issue, adding to an already large holding suggesting the breakthrough could be close, or he needs psychiatric counselling.
Not forgetting our highly qualified COO who reckons the price should have been over 70cents had the Henan deal been sealed. 
Since the Board has walked away from that deal, we must presume other more favourable deals are being negotiated, and therefore our COO's estimate is undervaluing the Company.
The alternative is a requirement related to my psychiatric suggestion.


----------



## Maya (14 September 2010)

Quillan said:


> Excuse long silence. No, Mark Lynch didn't reply.
> But it looks like my criticisms of the deal with Henan have struck home. Lynch, having told me that the proposed Chinese partnership was a good deal for CTO Shareholders, has now ditched them !!
> Let's be frank. The record of this Management is abysmal. The only encouraging factor is that there are groups from India, Singapore and China, known to us, who think there is something to be made of the mine. Unless they have been told a pack of lies by our Board, then there seems to be a reasonable chance of production being profitable with the gold price above A$1200.
> The question is, will they walk away if the figures don't add up? It would be good to get inside our CEO's head, and his COO. Lynch subscribed fairly heftily to the 10c Rights issue, adding to an already large holding suggesting the breakthrough could be close, or he needs psychiatric counselling.
> ...





I wish you were right about "other more favourable deals are being negotiated" -but I can not believe, that CTO walked away from the Henan deal, it is ( unfortunately ) more likely, that Henan walked or maybe even RUN away from it.


----------



## Sean K (22 September 2010)

We all thought as much when this was happening.

Really poor darts from the company and being fined $33k is just rediculously lenient.

*Citigold pays A$33 000 fine for disclosure failure *

By: Esmarie Swanepoel
22nd September 2010 

PERTH (miningweekly.com) – The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (Asic) has fined ASX-listed Citigold A$33 000 for an alleged failure to inform the market of a revised production forecast for the Charter Towers gold project, in Queensland.

Asic said on Wednesday that Citigold knew on December 11 already that its gold production for the December quarter would be 10 000 oz less than the the forecasted 15 000 oz, but that it did not revise its production forecast until December 16.

Citigold also knew that its full-year production guidance had been revised to 50 000 oz, as opposed to the forecasted 85 000 oz.


----------



## skc (22 September 2010)

kennas said:


> We all thought as much when this was happening.
> 
> Really poor darts from the company and being fined $33k is just rediculously lenient.
> 
> ...




Read that and had the exact same thought. If the penalty was to fine the directors peronally, say 30% of value destroyed I am sure they would be way more focused on their continuous disclosure obligations.


----------



## sion (9 October 2010)

I've read carefully the full year report for City Gold and I have to accept that they seem to be very close to the edge of failure. The executive summary is very up beat and optimistic including the fact that they made a "maiden profit" in 2010. Of course that can be interpreted as needed to spur interest in the stock to make capital raising easier. That is in the interests of the existing stockholders also.

On the plus side is that they managed to raise 3.5 million in September. That was designated working capital. Looking at their cash flow statement they need it pretty urgently.

What bugs me is that they don't explain why they can't get enough ore to the surface to run the mill continuously. They say there are not enough headings but I don't understand why their are not enough. Why did production suddenly drop after ramping up to two quarters at 5000 ounces per quarter? Why are they diverting their energy to suns of freedom and talking about the Imperial mine instead of the Warrior mine? Is it true that they ran into the edge of their mining lease and had to stop? That seems unbelievable. They talk about constraints not in their control is a lease boundary constraint what they are referring to? 

Looking at the corporate set up on the plus side is that management are incentevised to help the company succeed. Mark lynch holds nearly 90 million shares himself. They are awarded options that are share price or production based and require marked increases to be activated. 

I still think that management have a chance to pull City back from the brink. If they do then the potential upside is enormous. I didn't sell at 8 cents ,twice , maybe I'm a fool but I'm going to wait and see what their next quarterly report is like. I accept that if it is not good the share price will drop to 8c or lower again. Luckily I didn't buy at 30 cents or even 20 cents. Never the less it is hurting somewhat even at 12 cents.


----------



## So_Cynical (9 October 2010)

sion said:


> I've read carefully the full year report for City Gold and I have to accept that they seem to be very close to the edge of failure,
> What bugs me is that they don't explain why they can't get enough ore to the surface to run the mill continuously. They say there are not enough headings but I don't understand why their are not enough. Why did production suddenly drop after ramping up to two quarters at 5000 ounces per quarter? Why are they diverting their energy to suns of freedom and talking about the Imperial mine instead of the Warrior mine?




Ill quote my self from 3 years ago with the same concerns...and point out that they have never even attempted to explain why a mine with so much gold cant actually produce enough to fund its self.



So_Cynical said:


> (24th-October-2007) I brought a couple of weeks ago..and was most underwhelmed by the annual report, i was expecting a gold miner to be very up front about there production numbers.
> 
> And why issue more shares to raise money, how about mine more gold to raise money




Everything that anyone needs to know about CTO is in this thread....lol its a gold mine of valuable information.


----------



## explod (9 October 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> Ill quote my self from 3 years ago with the same concerns...and point out that they have never even attempted to explain why a mine with so much gold cant actually produce enough to fund its self.
> 
> 
> 
> Everything that anyone needs to know about CTO is in this thread....lol its a gold mine of valuable information.




Importantly very well said.   Quote myself from back there too.

This is a dud mob and a dud mine, its deep and the rock is hard so even at these gold prices its all bad.

The big point though is that I cannot come to terms with the fact that people just do not read over threads like this before diving in.  I suppose because we talk a lot of rubbish sometimes they take the words with a grain of salt. (But we have moved the dribble to the other page)

Avagoodweekend


----------



## explod (9 October 2010)

*Re: CTO - Citigold*



explod said:


> Toyed  with this for awhile, but like Bendigo et.al. it is deep and difficult.   There are many better Aussie plays with nearer surface gold.  With labour, fuel and equipment rising in price conserably production costs are a growing issue.   Of course a higher gold price will lift them, but for the time being I prefer the lower cost producers.
> 
> But others may know better, I have been wrong before




Just going back over it all, I posted this up on 7th September 07.  CTO was 47 cents back then.

At that time then I liked AND, LGL and OGC which have (*and will continue to do *though LGL swallowed up by NCM of course.)   increased many 100s of percentage points.  And have a look at my one and only blog entry RXM, 30 cents to $2.70. Having said that I also picked up many duds, but selling on a stop loss line moves one on.  You must not fall in love.

Not blowing my trumpet here just pointing out that you need to do the hard yards in measuring what is really going on, that includes, ballance sheets, management, output, costs and of course overall sentiment in the stock and the price of gold.

Spekkies are great if it comes together but often they fail and if they have not done it in a few years they never seem to.

A great lesson for me a few years back was a company near to where I live (another mistake, trusting the locals) was Gold Star Resources, they promised great wonder over about 4 yeaars but completely folded in the GFC due to funding.  I visited the mine site a year or so back out of curiosity and on physical checking the tailings found the rock to be as hard as high tensile steel.


----------



## Sean K (9 October 2010)

One interesting thing about the CT deposits are they are almost entirely Inferred with only about 300k ounces Reserves. How did they get through BFS/DFS with just an Inferred deposit? 

This mob should go the way of Bendigo, stop mining and go back to exploration to firm up the numbers and understand the deposits better.

Still carrying on about this being potentially a Giant deposit at considerable depth when their only deep hole came up virtually dirt.


----------



## sion (12 October 2010)

My sense from this thread is that CTO as a stock would be hard pushed to become more down trodden and unloved. I guess if one were looking for a contrary indicator you might arguable find one there. If you were looking that is...


----------



## explod (12 October 2010)

sion said:


> My sense from this thread is that CTO as a stock would be hard pushed to become more down trodden and unloved. I guess if one were looking for a contrary indicator you might arguable find one there. If you were looking that is...




How about a look at the price chart for the last four years. If you want them maybe on this next down wave you will get them for 6 cents.  With gold and other gold stocks going the other way you dont' need this thread to tell anything.


----------



## oldblue (12 October 2010)

sion said:


> My sense from this thread is that CTO as a stock would be hard pushed to become more down trodden and unloved. I guess if one were looking for a contrary indicator you might arguable find one there. If you were looking that is...




Fair point, sion, except that CTO has been unloved for longer than I care to remember. Have a look at a three year chart for a sense of this!

I've toyed with the idea occasionally but havn't been prepared to have a punt, so far.


----------



## sion (22 October 2010)

They say they have a self-sustaining operation but they have yet to prove this. They need to produce more gold before they can expect to get further funding for expanding their operation. Possibly they are beginning to get on the right track by reducing dilution at the mill, reducing the size of the ore drives and carrying out development in ore. We shall see. By now it is clear that this deposit, although large, is only marginally commercially viable.


----------



## sion (27 October 2010)

In the 2010 annual report John Foley wrote "It appears that dilution of the stopping ore with zero grade waste ore of between 100% and 200% has been occurring". If City Gold can relatively easily increase the mine processing plant surface grades this would significantly change the outlook for City Gold Corp.


----------



## Maya (28 October 2010)

This stock seriously depressing!
There is never-ever a good news.
What rubbish I have fallen for!


----------



## sion (28 October 2010)

Hey Maya, I'm shaking in my boots along with every other share holder I imagine, over what will be in their quarterly report due out tomorrow. I'm into them to the tune of 10k and I guess that is what I stand to lose. Still they are nothing if not a resilient bunch and they do seem to be very close to having a sustainable gold mining operation. I find a little consolation in the fact that there are over a thousand other share holders with holdings of over 100k shares. So I'm not alone. . Lets hope like those gold miners from Chile there is a rescue operation at work.


----------



## Maya (28 October 2010)

Hi Sion!

Good to see that at least somebody is optimistic !

I used to be once upon a time, but not any more, and just wish I was proven wrong.


----------



## ParleVouFrancois (28 October 2010)

If you're clinging to hope (no managements past achievements, no significant asset base above SP), it's not fundamental investing. If you're not trading via indicators and crosses and patterns, it's not technical trading, so why the hell are you in CTO? (if you're in there from a past mistake my condolences, management can mislead with overly enthusiastic predictions only to under deliever, however there are) MANY better companies out there with proven track records and production beginning soon. 

Why cling to hope when there are companies out there right now that are hitting technical indicators, or are deep value plays with rerating catalysts approaching soon.

Not meant to be personal towards anyone who owns/has bought into CTO, I have no past buying or selling, it just seems to be such an underperformed for so long, stop getting suckered in people. It breaks my heart hearing people getting sucked into buying into companies with little to no future, which all could be avoided by some simple research.


----------



## sion (29 October 2010)

PVF You are in theory quite correct. And of course I am regretting that I got so deeply into CTO. Never The Less CTO remains an interesting prospect. They have not died a natural death yet and they have enough working capital for at perhaps one more quarter assuming they are able to maintain current production levels. As retarded as their production growth has been it is growing. My guess is that just as they say they have not been able to adequately define the high grade areas of their resource. The net result being that the grades achieved are much lower than estimated. The reason they need more working faces is two fold. One is simply to extract more essentially low grade ore and two is that a larger number of faces will reduced the volatility of the production levels achieved. The problem with the ore body is that, just as they say, it is only 30% payable. Only 30% of the reef has grades above 14g/tonne. So if you cant define those bits of the reef you have to mine the whole lot. That gives an average ore grade of between 14*0.3=4.2 grams/tonne or more optimistically 14*0.3 + 7*0.3=6.3 grams/tonne. Their average surface grade for 2010 was a bit over 4 grams per tonne which, according to Chris Townsey, was diluted between 100% and 200%. From what I've been reading 4 grams/tonne is actually not such a terrible number for surface grades.


----------



## sion (29 October 2010)

Well that tears it! Quarterly report filed after closing shows only 2500 mined. So much for 50,000 ounces this year. So much for additional capital raising that'll be pretty hard to accomplish. It must be pretty near the end of the road for CityGold corp. I'm more than a bit sad I have to say.:crap::crap:


----------



## Sean K (30 October 2010)

sion said:


> Well that tears it! Quarterly report filed after closing shows only 2500 mined.



Yep, pretty ordinary, again. 

At this rate they might make 3/4 of last year's production. 

I wonder where the 14 g/t gold is in these deposits?



I'm still not sure how they can get away with saying this type of BS in the June Qtly:



> There is considerable potential for Citigold to expand its Charters Towers gold resources and reserves with an upside potential exploration target of 50 million ounces of gold, based on undrilled repeats of known mineralised reefs.


----------



## ParleVouFrancois (30 October 2010)

Other gold companies don't seem to have the same problem, (GDO being an example) would this be down to the geological uniqueness of every deposit (genuinely don't know and you seem to know more about geology then I do, so I'd like to learn a bit). Is CTO's deposit hard to predict? As in the big payloads of gold are scattered around?

Yes 4 grams a tonne is usually economic, but then again every single mine is unique in regards to infrastructure and structure of resources in the ground, and a host of other things. What I don't understand is the continued production that is so immensely small. I'm not a big fan of over promising and under delivering, and this management seems to be doing this constantly. Predictions of production of 100,000 ounces per year dependent on "ramping up" production and that inevitable just one more capital raising and we'll hit the payloads spring to mind.

Never been associated/bought into/traded CTO, just didn't like the smell of it.


----------



## Sean K (30 October 2010)

ParleVouFrancois said:


> What I don't understand is the continued production that is so immensely small. I'm not a big fan of over promising and under delivering, and this management seems to be doing this constantly. Predictions of production of 100,000 ounces per year dependent on "ramping up" production and that inevitable just one more capital raising and we'll hit the payloads spring to mind.



It's immensely small because they haven't got a clue about the deposit, how to mine it, and I think are deceiving the market with false promises and forecasts.

The 50m ounce potential is just a joke. A blind pluck. 

I genuinley think the 10m ounces at 14 g/t JORC needs to be investigated. 

Supposed to be going to 85,000 oz this year, 160,000 next year. This is just plain out deceptive behaviour or gross incompetence.

From the MDs presentation this time last year:


----------



## sion (1 November 2010)

@ PVF & Kenna.  

I'm an engineer but not a mining engineer or a geologist. I've just been doing the reading I should have done before buying gold mining stocks...
At this point my thinking about CTO is leading me to the conclusion that the problem is likely more with the management than with the deposit. My thinking is that their inability to come up with an effective mining plan is due to the fact that they do not have a competent mining engineer in a leadership role. Mark Lynch is NOT a mining engineer. Nor is John Foley. Chris Towsey is a geologist. Gary Foorde's resume includes roles "as a mining engineer developing and coordinating mining and exploration projects " and in addition "In his current role, he is responsible for the development and management of Citigold's engineering projects, including improving systems to increase output and reduce operating costs". This does not seem to include the development and optimization of large scale narrow vein hard rock underground mining. 

The thing these guys do know how to do is run the mill. Hence the good recovery levels. And I think this could be partly behind the motivation to get into a joint venture with someone who has proven they can mine this type of deposit. 

They won't admit that they do not know how to mine the deposit. They have no plan. Hence the outrageous production predictions that pass by the wayside and are replaced by miniscule production achievements.

My feeling is that Mark Lynch and Chris Towsey are a serious danger to the value of their own and the rest of the share holders share value. They need to hand over developing and running the underground mine to engineers experienced with this type of mining. If they cant find anyone to do it they need to stop wasting time and money with this mine. If they won't do that then they will flush investors 170 million down the toilet. :flush:


----------



## sion (1 November 2010)

Well that's that. One very expensive lesson in minerals investment. Research. Diversify.


----------



## shag (1 November 2010)

sion said:


> @ PVF & Kenna.
> 
> I'm an engineer but not a mining engineer or a geologist. I've just been doing the reading I should have done before buying gold mining stocks...
> At this point my thinking about CTO is leading me to the conclusion that the problem is likely more with the management than with the deposit. My thinking is that their inability to come up with an effective mining plan is due to the fact that they do not have a competent mining engineer in a leadership role. Mark Lynch is NOT a mining engineer. Nor is John Foley. Chris Towsey is a geologist. Gary Foorde's resume includes roles "as a mining engineer developing and coordinating mining and exploration projects " and in addition "In his current role, he is responsible for the development and management of Citigold's engineering projects, including improving systems to increase output and reduce operating costs". This does not seem to include the development and optimization of large scale narrow vein hard rock underground mining.
> ...




how hard can it b to run a mill, u buy one, install with water n power, throw in a mix of ore, and make sure no one walks off with the products.
hell they probably r so flash now u barely need to mix up ore. 
the best option might b someone buy them out and ditch the hangers on.
but then the deposit estimates could b dodgy.
u really need to get to someone onsite or worked on previous drilling.


----------



## Maya (9 November 2010)

Anyone has an idea what might be happening with CTO?
Price is slightly up, volume up, some buyers picking up 1-2 million shares ! ???


----------



## Sean K (9 November 2010)

Maya said:


> Anyone has an idea what might be happening with CTO?
> Price is slightly up, volume up, some buyers picking up 1-2 million shares ! ???



Volume is up a little but nothing outstanding. 1-2m shares probably doesn't mean much when it's trading at 10c ish. Gold running away to record prices on a daily basis and this is still in the toilet. It walks and sounds like a turkey....


----------



## sion (12 November 2010)

Having sold my stake...I'm happy that CTO is not running away on me. I don't think it has any chance of going ballistic until they can report 10,000 + ounces a quarter. As it is they are balanced on a knife edge in terms of working capital and their continued ability to raise additional capital. They have a very evasive style of reporting to share holders. It seems to be designed to reveal very little while maintaining a very up beat tone. IMOP having suffered as a holder for over a year I would be very cautious with this stock. Absolutely no need to fall for the hype when there are, as PVF above so aptly states, plenty of good gold and silver stokes performing very well at current gold prices and looking to perform even better as the price continues to rise. Having said that if there is anything that even stiffs like a coup at the New York Federal Reserve RAISE STOPS.

Cripes I'm glad not to be a holder of CTO!  although i will keep it on my watch list.


----------



## Sean K (12 November 2010)

sion said:


> Cripes I'm glad not to be a holder of CTO!  although i will keep it on my watch list.



Yes, I'll continue to watch. You just can't ignore 10m ounces at 14g/t. Supposedly.

Maybe someone will pick up the scraps and turn them around.


----------



## So_Cynical (12 November 2010)

sion said:


> Having sold my stake...I'm happy that CTO is not running away on me.
> 
> Cripes I'm glad not to be a holder of CTO!  although i will keep it on my watch list.




Rest easy CTO will never run away from you  safe to delete from your watch list and never look back....i sold out back in April for 13.5 a share.



So_Cynical said:


> (14th-April-2010) Out today :alcohol: at 0.135 for a 65% loss, a little over 2K gone, my biggest ever loss and im quiet happy about it....what a difference it made to the portfolio numbers.




Happy to take the loss and be rid of this utter disappointment.

-------------------------------



kennas said:


> Yes, I'll continue to watch. You just can't ignore 10m ounces at 14g/t. Supposedly.
> 
> Maybe someone will pick up the scraps and turn them around.




Your a worry...after reading your ASF blog posts about CTO its clear your spending way to much time thinking about this stock...CTO is really not worth a nano second of anyone's time.


----------



## explod (12 November 2010)

*Re: CTO - Citigold*



explod said:


> Toyed  with this for awhile, but like Bendigo et.al. it is deep and difficult.   There are many better Aussie plays with nearer surface gold.  With labour, fuel and equipment rising in price conserably production costs are a growing issue.   Of course a higher gold price will lift them, but for the time being I prefer the lower cost producers.
> 
> But others may know better, I have been wrong before




Posted this in 2008, have looked in at the thread now and again since and just do not understand how anyone can invest in a stock and not read back through the whole thread and take some care.

But as I said, have been wrong before, but not on this one.


----------



## Sean K (12 November 2010)

So_Cynical said:


> Your a worry...after reading your ASF blog posts about CTO its clear your spending way to much time thinking about this stock...CTO is really not worth a nano second of anyone's time.



No more time than it's worth really. I'm enjoying the amusement value and look forward to seeing how they **** up this years forecast production. Sure to give me a big belly laugh.


----------



## ParleVouFrancois (12 November 2010)

I'll definitely be reading how a 1000 or so oz per annum production is brilliant news, and how I should sent my next paycheck in the mail to them in the inevitable SPP. Some companies just make you laugh.


----------



## So_Cynical (17 January 2011)

ParleVouFrancois said:


> I'll definitely be reading how a 1000 or so oz per annum production is brilliant news, and how I should sent my next paycheck in the mail to them in the inevitable SPP. Some companies just make you laugh.




And the comedy continues with todays ann...ill quote.

"17 January 2011: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold)
(ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) is pleased to announce that it has made several changes to it’s
Board to *assist in the transition to a mid tiered gold producer*."

LOL seems the plan is to by pass actually being a profitable low tier producer and just jump straight in with the big fellas. 

http://www.citigold.com/viewasxrelease.asp?Releasenumber=351


----------



## Sean K (18 January 2011)

So_Cynical said:


> And the comedy continues with todays ann...ill quote.
> 
> "17 January 2011: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold)
> (ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) is pleased to announce that it has made several changes to it’s
> ...



Oh dear, is this how you improve a gold mine's performance.

Appoint additional board members?

One a former Actuarial specialist?

Whoohoo!!

A board member who does aquariums too!! 



> Citigold has previously stated its intention to increase the number of Directors as part of the Company’s overall plan for business growth. The Group’s established process of continually reviewing the mix of skills and competencies of Directors will continue to ensure that the Board is made up of members best able to manage the Company and enhance shareholder interests.
> 
> The restructure of the Board comprises the appointment of two new non-executive Directors bringing the total to five persons, a 66% increase.
> 
> The two new members are Mr Zhanbin Weng, the President of Zhaojin Mining Industry Company Limited (Zhaojin) and Mr Kim Koh, a financial Actuarial specialist.




Now why would someone from Zhaojin be put on the board I wonder?


----------



## kgee (18 January 2011)

I think I'm spending too much time on that other forumn
love those last posts


----------



## jonnycage (28 January 2011)

Kennas, always a please to see your posts on this company.

they got gold, just cant get it out of the ground or be honest lol.  thats a problem
citigold.  have they cried wolf once too many now ?  but like you said,
laughable to watch

jc


----------



## Sean K (30 January 2011)

Towsey sacked from managing the mine. He moving to Charters Towers to oversee operations was supposed to fix it I thought.



> *Citigold Mine Management Restructured*
> 
> 21 January 2011: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold) (ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) announces key changes to its mine site management including the appointment of Mr Terry Fisher as Site Senior Executive to lead the Company in its forthcoming growth phase. In addition, prominent narrow vein production geologist, Nigel Storey has been appointed Head of Geology.
> 
> ...




A 'restructure'? Why not just say 'sacked'? 

The Sep 10 quarter they trucked 23,005 tonnes to the mill at an average grade of 3.5 grams per tonne gold, for 2531 ounces of gold. Isn't the JORC resource 14g/t? I suppose there must be some very very high grades down there and they eventually get to it. One day.

The June 10 Quarterly said 



> This quarter has seen the advancement of funding negotiations for the development capital required to commence serious expansion of gold production towards the goal of 300,000 ounces of gold...




300,000 ounces per year. Last year a total of 15,000 dropped out.

Some random quotes from previous reports:

Dec 07 Quarterly


> Escalate gold production towards a rate of 100,000 ounces per annum.
> 
> gold production is planned to build up to 60,000 ounces per year of gold over an 18 months development period and later to expand up to 150,000 ounces per year.
> 
> *drilling is aimed at expanding gold reserves to 1 million ounces in 2008 and 2 million ounces in 2009.* Gold resources are expected to grow above the current 10 million ounces.




(Note: last year production 15,000 oz and current Reserves still stand at 330,000 oz )

Dec 06


> Start growing the current 10 million mineral resource towards the target of 50 million ounces considered to be within Citigold’s mineral lands.




Dec 05 Quarterly


> The Warrior Gold mine is planned to produce gold at the rate of 40,000 ozs per year from mid year 2006.





The Dec 10 Quarterly should be out any day. Maybe Monday. I'm looking forward to being surprised.


----------



## jonnycage (30 January 2011)

kennas said:


> Towsey sacked from managing the mine. He moving to Charters Towers to oversee operations was supposed to fix it I thought.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Sean K (1 February 2011)

Quarterly out yesterday and they are still struggling.



> Quarterly Activities Report December 2010
> 
> 31 January 2011: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold) (ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) is pleased to report progress for the quarter ended 31 December 2010 on its operations at the Charters Towers Gold Project.
> 
> ...




That should read:

●	$30 million Exploration Joint Venture Agreement to give away 50% of anything the JV partner finds
●	$7 million capital raising at a big discount. We wanted more but this will pay our wages for this year. 
●	Two directors sacked for gross incompetence.  
●	New site management can't do any worse.
●	Geophysics mine planning work advances. We actually don't know what this means but it will sound cool and divert you from the fact we don't know what we're doing. 
●	Development funding discussions continue because we can't did up enough gold to fund it ourselves and no one wants to lend us any more money. 
●	2,553 ounces produced during the quarter which is about 500% under what we need to be producing to be profitable and a bloody long way off the long ramped 300,000 oz pa we claim we can produce.


----------



## ParleVouFrancois (1 February 2011)

Kennas I'd agree with your sentiments, some companys are brilliant and have underperforming share prices, but this isn't one of them, it's a shoddy company at best, and the price reflects that. 

Anyway Kennas one thing I'd have to disagree with is the "500%" lower, you can go 500% lower on gold production figures, that'd be negative! So they are BURYING the gold LOL.


----------



## ParleVouFrancois (1 February 2011)

That's *can't* go lower


----------



## ColB (1 February 2011)

kennas said:


> Quarterly out yesterday and they are still struggling.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Have to admit that I got burnt on this one a couple of years ago.  Have a look at the 3 year chart for CTO and compare it with the upward movement of the price of gold and it shows what a pack of useless underperformers this crowd is.  

Now I know we're not allowed to give financial advice on this forum but my advice based on the companies past performance would be to steer well clear of this lemon


----------



## Sean K (1 February 2011)

ParleVouFrancois said:


> Anyway Kennas one thing I'd have to disagree with is the "500%" lower, you can go 500% lower on gold production figures, that'd be negative! So they are BURYING the gold LOL.



 Just making the point that about 5 years ago they were forecasting 60K next year on to 150K and a goal of 300K per year....I do think they are burying the gold actually, saving for a day when the gold price really goes up..  



ColB said:


> Have to admit that I got burnt on this one a couple of years ago.  Have a look at the 3 year chart for CTO and compare it with the upward movement of the price of gold and it shows what a pack of useless underperformers this crowd is.



It's quite unbelievable isn't it. 

10m oz at 14g/t and they've gone the opposite to POG.

The market is either crazy, or this company needs to be looked at by ASIC.


----------



## Mogul (5 February 2011)

Towsey wasn't sacked he left out of frustration. Why would you sack someone and then keep them on as a consultant.


----------



## oldblue (6 February 2011)

Mogul said:


> Towsey wasn't sacked he left out of frustration. Why would you sack someone and then keep them on as a consultant.




No idea really but perhaps his employment contract made it difficut to dispose of his services and that a negotiated settlement, including a consultancy, was the result?


----------



## Wysiwyg (6 February 2011)

kennas said:


> Quarterly out yesterday and they are still struggling.
> 
> That should read:
> 
> ...



Can be quipped about many many companies but unfortunately there is an element of truth in it.


----------



## Sean K (6 February 2011)

Wysiwyg said:


> Can be quipped about many many companies but unfortunately there is an element of truth in it.



 Yes, easy target, but I have no doubt justified. Why the professionals are backing this turkey is beyond me. Does remind me of institutional support of Bendigo just before they completely folded. I'm sure some heads rolled there as they already have here. More to follow.


----------



## Trader Paul (12 February 2011)

Hi folks,

CTO ..... looking for a positive time cycle to come into play,
around 15-16022011 ..... 

have a great week

paul



=====


----------



## oldblue (13 February 2011)

Sounds like good news for long-suffering CTO shareholders!

This company could certainly do with some cosmic(?) intervention!

Disc: Not holding


----------



## bandicoot76 (18 July 2011)

So_Cynical said:


> i dare not say the T word.




i'll say it... "TOSSERS!" thats the only T-word that comes to mind regarding this bunch of clowns!

 glad i cut my losses & got out @ 12c! now to remove the nuts from that geo 'mate' who reccomended them to me in the first place! 

they looked so promising early on


----------



## oldblue (19 July 2011)

Perhaps the name of one of the newer big holders says it all.

K Sera Sera Holdings!


----------



## Sean K (20 July 2011)

This company is only just breathing.

After raising just enough money to keep paying its overpriced, incompetent management, they are obviously struggling now to raise the sum of their market cap to 'expand'. Expand into what? That mystical 10m ounces that's what. Those 10m ounces that have been sitting there for years and have never ever required $100m to 'develop'. This is just totally dumfoundingly and utterly embarrassing. 

Looking forward to the next quarterly production update where they claim another 2K oz were produced. 

On the way to 300k pa!!! Absolutely criminal. 



> ANNOUNCEMENT
> Citigold Alliance with Euram Bank Asia
> 1 June 2011: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold) (ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) is pleased to advise that it has formally appointed Euram Bank Asia Limited (EBA) as financial advisor in relation to raising up to $100 million for the development of the Charters Towers Gold Project.
> Euram Bank Asia, a global corporate finance and investment bank, is part of the European American Investment Bank AG (Euram Bank) group of Vienna, Austria.
> ...


----------



## thebaron (19 January 2012)

Anyone keeping an eye on the share price over the last few weeks,i know they are the worst gold miners in Australia. Does not mean you cannot make money on them though.


----------



## Sean K (20 January 2012)

thebaron said:


> Anyone keeping an eye on the share price over the last few weeks,i know they are the worst gold miners in Australia. Does not mean you cannot make money on them though.



I keep watching. One of the longest and slowest train smashes on record.

Yes, can make money off anything. Would have done well buying before and selling the spike in Sep 11 as this little one.

Looks like the company may be going back to basics to start again with a proper JORC capable of being used for mine planning. Certainly, starting mine production with an Inferred resource estimate (no matter how big) is fraught with danger. The 10m oz at 14g/t still looks ridiculously overstated. You'd have to question the 330K oz Probable Reserves also. Where's the Measured and Indicated????!! Or maybe they just don't know exactly where those Reserves are. They are STILL saying that they aim to be producing 320K per annum at some stage. This is surely just a running joke they have going with ASIC. 

The strategic plan now looks to be just keep asking the market for money to stay afloat and hope that a strategic partner comes along who takes a majority stake and has some decent mining operators on board. They've been trying to sell themselves for about a year yet are still just hanging out there in the wind.

But you are right, can make money off anything if you're buying low and selling high.


----------



## Sean K (24 January 2012)

kennas said:


> The strategic plan now looks to be just keep asking the market for money to stay afloat and hope that a strategic partner comes along who takes a majority stake and has some decent mining operators on board. They've been trying to sell themselves for about a year yet are still just hanging out there in the wind.



Finally found some money to keep trying to find out where that gold is.



> *$50 million investment in Citigold to fund development of Charters Towers Project*
> 
> 23 January 2012: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold) (ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) is pleased to advise that it has reached agreement with Reignwood International Investment (Group) Company Limited (“Reignwood”) to invest $50 million into Citigold to fund the development of Citigold’s 10 million ounce gold mine at Charters Towers, Queensland.
> 
> ...




19.9% stake and then the next $25m will give them what? 40% of the company? Huh?? 

Reignwood also get to put 2 pers on the board. What mining experience do those two pers come with I wonder. Considering they do not have any major investments in mining that I can see. They're a conglomerate of everything except mining with their biggest investment in Red Bull. 

Business Lines

Building upon its many achievements and successes over the past 20 years, Reignwood Group continues to expand its four core business lines; introducing new products, exciting levels of services and unique brands that not only keep pace with international trends, but also align with the commitment, dedication and vision of Dr, Chanchai to make Reignwood the absolute leader in luxury lifestyles, sports and culture in China.

Red Bull Vitamin Drinks
Red Bull is one of the earliest and most successful energy drink brands in the world. Established in Thailand in 1966, it now boasts a history of 40 years. 

Pine Valley Resort
Pine Valley Golf Resort enjoys top recognition among the domestic and international golfing circles, and is situated in the Changping District, Beijing, covering an area of 6,000 Mu (1,055 acres).

Reignwood Centre
Beijing Reignwood Centre, west of the 'Gold Cross' on Guomao Bridge at the heart of the CBD, is a modern building complex that integrates Reignwood City Club, Theater, Art Exchange, Commercial Offices and the super five-star Beijing Fairmont Hotel.

Beijing Wonderland
Located along the Beijing Badaling Highway leading to the Great Wall of China, Beijing Wonderland Luxury Brand Outlet Mall and Eco-Resort is a large-scale retail entertainment & resort development project that is currently being developed by 
Reignwood Group. 

Reignwood Daye Decoration
Beijing Reignwood Daye Decoration Design Consultation Co., Ltd. is an international specialist design company. It has branches established in Taiwan and Shanghai.

Reignwood World Travel
Beijing Reignwood World Travel International Service Co., Ltd. is a professional travel and hospitality agency covering air ticket sales, hotel bookings, meeting arrangements, tourist receipts and other related services.

Reignwood Wellness
Reignwood Wellness, located within The Pine Valley Resort, is a professional institution aimed at providing international standards for integrated healthcare service to our exclusive members and guests.

Reignwood international Leasing Company
Relying on strong financial strength of Reignwood Group, Reignwood International Leasing provides professional financial support and venture management for the development of Reignwood high-end services, sports and culture industries, so as to improve the value chain and competitive advantages of high-end service industry. 

Reignwood Theatre
Reignwood Theatre is a new 'bright star' on East Chang An Avenue, welcoming diverse audiences to Reignwood Center with its classical ambiance and serving as the Reignwood Group's world-class performing arts palace. 

Reignwood Art Exchange
Beijing Reignwood Artwork Equity Exchange was created to offer a world-class art trading and auction house for the appreciation and exchange of art, antiques and rare artifacts for discriminating buyers and art connoisseurs. 

Reignwood United International Media
Relying on the comprehensive strength of Reignwood Group as a whole, Reignwood Media provides a full range of professional services including branding, market analysis, creative advertising, video production, media agency services, press conferences etc.


----------



## Sean K (29 February 2012)

And the Golden Turkey Award once again goes to CTO management and directors for their non disclosure to the ASX and down right gross incompetence. 

At 0853 they release a price sensitive announcement saying they'd stuffed up the placement. 

Then at 0938 they get a please explain regarding the sp tanking and they say they've got nothing to report.

Bwhahahahahahahaa!!


----------



## Sean K (16 April 2012)

Resignation and appointment of a director.



> Appointment of Director
> 
> 10 April 2012: Brisbane, Australia – Citigold Corporation Limited (Citigold) (ASX:CTO, FSE:CHP) announces the appointment of Ms Gunjan Goel as a Non - Executive Director of the Company effective 10 April 2012.
> 
> ...




Isn't Sanjay Gupta that doctor on CNN? 

Anyway, K Sera Sera recently upped their stake to 8.7% so no surprise K Sera Sera can be just switching their directors willie nillie. Looks like Ms Goel brings much to the table for a gold explorer. She has an MBA! oooooo.

It's now over a month since their financing fell through and no news.


----------



## Sean K (25 May 2012)

The belief in CTO is well proven by the market response to the resource 'upgrade' this week. 

They still have 10m ounces at 14g/t and they are still in the toilet. 

The market is always right. 

YOU DO NOT HAVE THIS IN THE GROUND AND EVEN IF YOU DID YOU CAN NOT FEASIBLY GET IT OUT.


----------



## Sean K (27 June 2012)

Takeover offer pending.



> Dear Ms So,
> 
> Citigold Corporation Limited - Request for trading halt
> 
> ...



Whoever is throwing their money away on this turkey must need a tax break.

I suggest it's the Hong Kong mafia.

I hope for CTO holders it's at a decent premium to get some of their cash back.


----------



## Vader (9 July 2012)

kennas said:


> Takeover offer pending.
> 
> Whoever is throwing their money away on this turkey must need a tax break.
> 
> ...




This just seems to be getting weirder (I have no interest in this company other than I have been keeping an eye on it to see what happens).

First up, it's not really a takeover... they appear to have structured a deal where LionGold will be issued with new stock valued at around 10% of the company, for a cash injection of 10m... at this point they seem to have issued about 10% of their offer, so I assume they've received payment of approx 1m while due dilligence is done.

...now, reading through their last few reports, they seem to have been paying off debt with more debt each quarter (in the last quarterly report they borrowed 1.042m and their net cash position for the quarter was -1.048m with only 424k on hand at the end). In their last annual report, current liabilities were $6m higher than current assets, and they had $2m worth of debt on the books... so far this year they have borrowed a further $2.5m and only repaid 772k - so does an offer such as this mean the banks have finally knocked them back and this is the only option open to them to remain solvent? (yes - speculation, but seems reasonable doesn't it?).

If the deal does go through, then they should have enough money to pay off their debts and keep operating for the next 12 months (maybe)... then what - issue more shares? If the deal doesn't make it through the due dilligence stage, then the way I read it, it's time to call in the administrators...but in the last week, the share price has jumped up considerably - are these buyers banking on a full takeover by LionGold? They seem to be buying at any price too - as the queue for the last week has had both more sellers than buyers and more total shares for sale, yet the price jumped from 5.8c to 6.9c last week and looks set to open today at 7c.

Can anyone see an upside here? are buyers really coming in hoping for an upside of a takeover at around 8c (what the share issue is valued at), but risking a total wipeout if the deal doesn't go through? (that's what it looks like to me)... I guess good luck to them, I do hope I'm wrong... it's an interesting one to watch though.


----------

