SLR - Silver Lake Resources
- Thread starter Uncle Festivus
- Start date
-
- Tags
- silver lake resources slr
- Joined
- 28 March 2006
- Posts
- 3,554
- Reactions
- 1,283
Just curious, but why would you people want to buy into a downtrend? Just because insiders made that mistake last week doesn't improve the odds this week! Personally, I'd wait for a reversal of the trend before jumping in.
Its a gambler "I know better than the market" mentality. Scary eh !
Attachments
- Joined
- 5 October 2008
- Posts
- 87
- Reactions
- 8
Some people just like catching falling knives, personally I'm hopeless at it, I've accumulated enough scares to sit on the sidelines until the tide has shown it has turned.
G Gekko
Formerly known as 'Murdoch'
- Joined
- 29 December 2012
- Posts
- 38
- Reactions
- 0
Just curious, but why would you people want to buy into a downtrend? Just because insiders made that mistake last week doesn't improve the odds this week! Personally, I'd wait for a reversal of the trend before jumping in.
Interesting perspective. I personally bought because I perceive the stock as being generally undervalued. I don't rely on any insider's perspective to tell me this, I've done enough research into the company to suggest to me that in the longer term that it is a fairly good investment despite any trend going on at the moment.
But for sure... to watch your holdings drop day after day in value is nerve wrecking. Maybe in future I will pay more attention to trends and try to work them to my favor.
- Joined
- 16 April 2013
- Posts
- 21
- Reactions
- 0
SLR down another 8.22% today - following the release of the Hollandaire Drilling Results.
Wondering when or if this stock can turn around...
Wondering when or if this stock can turn around...
G Gekko
Formerly known as 'Murdoch'
- Joined
- 29 December 2012
- Posts
- 38
- Reactions
- 0
Wondering when or if this stock can turn around...
Yeah, the price of the stock doesn't even correlate with the price of gold. I'm amazed at how 'over-reactive' the market is, although I know it's often explained that the SP usually reflects where people think the POG will be tomorrow.
Bernanke's giving a speech tonight/tomorrow about the future QE, personally I think there's been way too much speculation that the US Fed will be cutting it in the near term, but if I were the US Fed I'd probably continue buying bonds at approximately the same rate due to domestic & international uncertainty. The US has been posting some good employment data in recent months but a lot of people expect inflation to fall well short of their target of 2%.
Would be nice to see gold not abandoned so quickly over speculation and rumor.
Just curious, but why would you people want to buy into a downtrend? Just because insiders made that mistake last week doesn't improve the odds this week! Personally, I'd wait for a reversal of the trend before jumping in.
Here's my logic, convoluted as it may be. I picked up 10300 shares in the last 2weeks at an average price of $0.75. I figure even if it went to zero. I'd loose less that the folks that road it down from $3 (or even $2) to today's price. On the other hand, if it returns to $3, I'll quadruple my investment while some just break even. In any case, SLR is worth more than $0.75 dead or alive.
As far as I can tell, if it goes to zero you all lose the same. The lot - ie 100%.
Wow what a valuable contribution. He made a perfectly reasoned comment about his own reasons for investing and your wise crack is the best you can do?
Would you swap 100% of your equity for 100% of the equity of a homeless person?? of course not! not all '100%' are equivalent.
pixel
DIY Trader
- Joined
- 3 February 2010
- Posts
- 5,359
- Reactions
- 344
Mate, your logic is far from being "convoluted". It's the old story of "Buy low. Sell high." Or if it won't go higher, stop the loss early. It also highlights the need to keep your position size in perspective as a reasonable percentage of your overall account.
If $8,000 is a small part - say, 2% - of your account balance, the maximum you can possibly lose is 2% of your account balance, or $8,000. But here's the rub: Assume SLR does indeed move back up to $3. If you play "set and forget", you'll risk losing about 8% of your then account balance. Which makes it IMHO mandatory to keep an eye on all your holdings and apply a reasonable trailing stop that ensures you don't give back more of your money than necessary.
If you lose 100% in the share market, you lose 100% in the share market. It doesn't matter if it goes from $3 to nil or $0.70 to nil. You lose the same amount of money. It's not a wise crack - it's simple maths that has nothing to do with the equity of a homeless person.
- Joined
- 13 June 2007
- Posts
- 1,203
- Reactions
- 2
the OP's reasoning is that 10k odd shares going from $3->$0.75 is more of a loss than $0.75->$0. So by implication his 100% is less than another individual who purchased (the same number) at a much higher price and is holding. Yet despite his 100% being less in monetary terms he stands to gain much more in Return on Investment sense, and the same in a $$ sense.
My mention of a homeless person is an analogy to illustrate that not all 100%'s are equal - it's simple maths (apparently not simple enough).
LOL. That's not the first time I made that mistake but it will be the last. Thank you.
I should have juxtaposed, "SLR is worth more than $0.75..." with blah, blah, blah. I was hoping to stimulate some conversation on SLR's intrinsic value. Of course that depends on the price of gold and the way it's going, none of the miners will be worth a nickel. I do believe SLR's all in cost per oz. is better than most.
- Joined
- 30 November 2010
- Posts
- 337
- Reactions
- 0
I was thinking of selling SLR on the back of a nice rise over the last few weeks and lo and behold I see they are in a trading halt on a big moving day for gold stocks.
Capital raising I think which is rarely ever a good thing
Capital raising I think which is rarely ever a good thing
G Gekko
Formerly known as 'Murdoch'
- Joined
- 29 December 2012
- Posts
- 38
- Reactions
- 0
I feel your pain Intrinsic Value, I was watching for SLR when I was at work today on the opening as I am contemplating exiting and was wondering why all my other stocks were getting data. Until I realised it was frozen.
Yeah just time it around a surge in Gold SLR board!
Yeah just time it around a surge in Gold SLR board!
- Joined
- 30 November 2010
- Posts
- 337
- Reactions
- 0
I feel your pain Intrinsic Value, I was watching for SLR when I was at work today on the opening as I am contemplating exiting and was wondering why all my other stocks were getting data. Until I realised it was frozen.
Yeah just time it around a surge in Gold SLR board!
SLR directors are a joke.
Their debt was very manageable, gold prices have increased in AUD significantly since their lows awhile back so really there was no need for this capital raising which almost forces existing investors to buy more if they want to retain value due to extra shares on the market yet the directors themselves are not prepared to share the pain in any equivalent proportion.
Very bad timing and a smack in the face I reckon for existing investors.
Also very risky as todays share price is 95c and the offer is for 85c. If the gold price drops in the next few days then they are dead in the water which is what they deserve.
- Joined
- 1 October 2008
- Posts
- 3,733
- Reactions
- 391
The US is about to start bombing Syria. Gold we be OK for a while.
tinhat
Pocket Calculator Operator
- Joined
- 1 May 2009
- Posts
- 1,756
- Reactions
- 768
Unbelievable. Balance sheet is strong as Intrinsic Value says.
Why capital raise now when the price is so low and the price of gold is on a recovery and the stock price is also in a turn-around? Why now - is it because the management believe that the shares are only worth 86 cents each. A cynical person might wonder if the instos were being allowed to grab some cheap shares while letting the directors pick up $1.2 million of cheap shares too.
I only bought into SLR a few days ago because I wanted to go longer into gold miners and didn't want to have all my eggs in once basket (MML). Was tossing up between SLR and NST and thought SLR has more upside potential in the share price.
I'm always disappointed to see management that doesn't treat its non-insto shareholders with any respect. Even when I "speculate" on a stock I always only pick stocks where I think the underlying business is sound.
I have a small holding - I might just sell it and chose another gold miner.
Why capital raise now when the price is so low and the price of gold is on a recovery and the stock price is also in a turn-around? Why now - is it because the management believe that the shares are only worth 86 cents each. A cynical person might wonder if the instos were being allowed to grab some cheap shares while letting the directors pick up $1.2 million of cheap shares too.
I only bought into SLR a few days ago because I wanted to go longer into gold miners and didn't want to have all my eggs in once basket (MML). Was tossing up between SLR and NST and thought SLR has more upside potential in the share price.
I'm always disappointed to see management that doesn't treat its non-insto shareholders with any respect. Even when I "speculate" on a stock I always only pick stocks where I think the underlying business is sound.
I have a small holding - I might just sell it and chose another gold miner.
Hi, tinhat.
It sounds like you're more annoyed with yourself for your recent investment decision than with the directors of SLR!
Do we know how comfortable the lenders are with their SLR advances? Or have they pressured the company to repay the $45m? There's nothing unusual about the way the company is raising the new capital - placement to instos followed by a modest SPP to shareholders at the same price. That's the way it's done these days, particularly when a company has an urgent need and it's not a BHP or a WOW. OK, the small placement to directors is a bit off but you do see that too, especially at the more volatile end of the market - miners, oilies etc.
I hold a few and will be looking to add via the SPP. The threat of conflict in the Middle East just might ignite another run in the PoG!
It sounds like you're more annoyed with yourself for your recent investment decision than with the directors of SLR!
Do we know how comfortable the lenders are with their SLR advances? Or have they pressured the company to repay the $45m? There's nothing unusual about the way the company is raising the new capital - placement to instos followed by a modest SPP to shareholders at the same price. That's the way it's done these days, particularly when a company has an urgent need and it's not a BHP or a WOW. OK, the small placement to directors is a bit off but you do see that too, especially at the more volatile end of the market - miners, oilies etc.
I hold a few and will be looking to add via the SPP. The threat of conflict in the Middle East just might ignite another run in the PoG!
