HomePublicNAK

Comments

NAK — 10 Comments

  1. I’ve been seeing a lot of those emails from Casey Research regarding what appears to be Pretium. Something like “tiny company with massive gold deposit near the Alaskan border” with “big news coming in April.” Well, Pretium is commissioning the mill or something like that in April, but I wouldn’t say the market cap for them is tiny at this point. If that’s tiny, our holdings are subatomic.

  2. Thanks Spock, this morning I was thinking when I saw NAK, that you have positioned us well. We could get a pounding on one also but we have spread out risk and you continue to do great research regarding our investments.Thanks!

  3. Glad to hear that Spock- “If permitted, the Pebble Mine would be the largest open pit mine in North America and perhaps the world, sited in the headwaters of the world’s greatest wild salmon fishery in Bristol Bay, Alaska, which produces up to 50 million wild salmon each year. The mega-mine would create a hole nearly as deep as the Grand Canyon; generate an estimated 10 billion tons of waste (enough to fill a major football stadium up to 3,900 times); and cover an area larger than Manhattan.” “Polluted water from the mine site could enter streams, causing widespread damage in a region that produces nearly 50 percent of the world’s wild sockeye salmon, the EPA said.”

  4. Pretium is located in northwestern British Columbia, NAK in Western Alaska. I do find even northern BC too beautiful to start big mines, but if you look at SA and all the companies in BC’s Golden Triangle looking for the next Porphyry deposit then I guess it is normal business to explorer over there.

    • As you probably are noting, “Otto” at IKN has paired NAK and NG in the past (tonight he cites his prior note on his blog) for heavy disparagement as overpromoted big projects that are in the end no-go’s if nothing else because of their economics.

      Rightly or wrongly I have seen NAK as a really nasty thing that lots of locals truly hated, one that could cause lots of damage–good mainly for promoters etc or for the promoters of corporate-type “environmentalist” NGOs to pump up their donations while playing up how horrible it is. NG I had thought was not blatantly risky to the environment; also not as heavily promoted. I even owned it transiently long, long ago (and lost money on it–sold because of the chart and because of the taste of promotion). In any case, I don’t know the economics well enough but was interested in Otto’s concept that even if everyone signed on to both they’d be no-go’s because of the Au and Cu grades. Don’t know enough myself.

  5. Good one, Mr Spock.

    I don’t know the area well, and I sense that some of the alleged environmentalist groups opposing the project are the environmental 2nd cousins to pump-and-dumps in their own way (just using the project to raise funds for their nice offices and salaries), but in looking into the matter in the past I felt that there were just too many locals who were too unhappy about the project. Also that the Au and Cu grades etc made the economics questionable. All the heavy publicity for and against, local unhappiness, pretty scenery, concerns about diffusion of toxicity, the name floated Giustra (whether correctly or not) -> bad combo.

    Pretium, mentioned by phfoze, I have held for years, going way up, going way down, now up. I was antsy about the environmental aspects of it and cross-examined investor relations years ago, and among other things elicited a comment along the lines of, ‘Yes it IS beautiful up here.’ Perhaps they fed me just what I wanted to hear, but at least I got the sense that nothing toxic was likely to drain widely, it was not going to be anyone’s major eyesore, and few if any locals were much against it. However, about a year ago, if I recall correctly, Mr Spock might have questioned the elegance with which they did a financing. Last year The Angry Geologist wrote a piece suggesting that they were taking one shortcut too many for his conservative tastes before advancing the project (I forget what–infill sampling? metallurgy??? combination of the two or other????) It is more for Spock’s comments and TAG’s than the environmental stuff that I will probably sell if I hear anything more I don’t like although I am rather environmentally orientated.

  6. Glad to know your position on this one, Spock. I always considered NAK to be an evil stock – literally. Would not put money in it regardless of technicals. Whoever is capable of trying to force such a deal through has a serious issue with their moral fibre.

Leave a Reply

error: Alert: Content is protected !!