A body bullish on silver might want to take a gander at Aurcana Corporation.
While I have NOT done the required due diligence on operations to form an opinion I am impressed with management and that's half the battle. There are very few, if any, public Cos that have the cajones to stand up to juggernaugt Sprott. AUN did it to avoid a COMPLETE hooping of its shareholders on financial terms and now has a dust-up in Supreme Court against complaining Sprott to show for it.
And their dealings with Sprott, who anted up a huge pile of money in the PP that got Aurcana financed for SHAFTER. I am not sure just how much AUN could have raised on their own, without Sprott's help.
The Shafter project was sold off to AUN from the savvy folks at Silver Standard. Always makes me leary when they tout this as worth billions , but the proven miner didnt feel it was worth keeping.
Aurcana's record so far at La Negra has not been outstanding , but again just my opinion. Still a lot of cheap paper floating about in Aurcana, i prefer to wait and see what the first half year of production shows at Shafter
Everybody knows who and what Sprott are. Sprott helps themselves.
SSRI sold Shafter in early 2008,negotiated in 2007.
2007 saw silver at $11.50 per oz.
AUN have executed two transactions with Industrias Penoles.Surely,Penoles is as 'Mouser savvy' as SSRI?
Could you please inform the board what the basis of your 'AUN's record at LN has n0t been outstanding' statement is based upon?
I was invested in Aurcana in 2007 , and held for a while, ( sold at a higher price than today) ,before moving on. Have watched as they progressed, but in reality i have not seen any big profits come , despite record high silver prices. I think for 09 they recorded .03 a share in earnings, but i havent seen any actual profits since, and silver hit its high here in 2011.
As i say , perhaps they can make it go bigtime, but i am on the sidelines until they show me da money.
Lenic Rodriguez has stated 100 million dollars AUN profits at $30 silver when Shafter is running and La Negra has been upgraded,beginning March,2012.
Profits of near $200 million at $ 40 silver is the President's/C.E.O.'s stated estimate.
La Negra has been extremely profitable since they purchased the SLW stream back in December of 2010 and the AUN team has begun their third production expansion at LN to 2,000 tpd.
$10 million in operating profits last year and $10 million in profits in the first half of 2011 at LN.
Al Korelin allowed Lenic Rodriguez to explain AUN's latest news Oct. 5th:
Aurcana Q1 earnings JUNE 24 ,2011
The Company had an increase in earnings from mining operations to $5.4 million compared to $0.7 million in Q1 2010. Net income of $0.7 million compared to a net loss of $0.5 million in Q1 2010. Earning per share was $0.00 compared to earnings of $0.00 per share Q1 2010.
Same amount in earnings per share in the 2nd Q ending June 30th , reported September.
Aurcana Corporation Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Operations (Unaudited, expressed in United States dollars, unless otherwise stated)
Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30, Notes 2011 2010 2011 2010
Revenues Mining operations $ 12,392,391 $ 4,799,744 $ 23,246,242 $ 9,297,421
Costs of sales Mining operating expenses 5,958,365 3,511,333 10,614,594 6,719,064 Depreciation and amortization 592,459 251,948 926,884 483,205 Depletion of mineral properties 536,578 408,132 1,042,605 771,718 7,087,402 4,171,413 12,584,083 7,973,987 Earnings from mine operations 5,304,988 628,331 10,662,159 1,323,434
Other items Administrative costs 21 2,708,169 848,060 6,226,398 1,632,696 Financing expense and others 22 37,023 282,378 118,776 450,545 Foreign exchange loss 511,669 - 635,039 - Loss from trading activity, net - 823,778 - 1,137,224 Other expenses (income) 300,227 (29,138) 380,942 (50,769) Loss on sale of investments - 97,124 - 97,124 3,557,087 2,022,202 7,361,155 3,266,820
Income (loss) before income taxes 1,747,901 (1,393,871) 3,301,004 (1,943,386) Income tax expense 181,103 - 1,043,513 -
Net income (loss) for the period $ 1,566,798 $ (1,393,871) $ 2,257,491 $ (1,943,386)
Attributable to: Non-controlling interest 161,144 12,676 466,165 47,524 Equity holders of the Company 1,405,655 (1,406,547) 1,791,326 (1,990,910) $ 1,566,798 $ (1,393,871) $ 2,257,491 $ (1,943,386)
Weighted average number of shares – basic 341,697,303 121,019,270 334,361,354 120,829,851
Weighted average number of shares – diluted 419,364,729 N/A 410,944,181 N/A
Net income (loss) per share – basic & diluted
Basic $ 0.00 $ (0.01) $ 0.01 $ (0.02) Diluted $ 0.00 N/A $ 0.00 N/A
See accompanying notes to these condensed interim consolidated financial statements.
Yes,we can see you can copy and paste.
AUN are smack dab in the middle of constructing two mines.
Earnings come after construction.
I have pulled the BCSC file on this matter and examined both the documents and the arguments of each side. Sprott's only strategy is to delay the matter, they have no case. I believe the next appearance may be tomorrow to hear AUN's application to throw the matter out. (3rd full day try ... the courts are jammed stupid)
Sprott are whoores and big uns, but they are a big shareholder off last PP and haven't gone anywhere. View the Sprott video for our boys' silver thoughts ...
The Company had earnings from mining operations of $5.3 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 (2010: $0.6 million); income before taxes of $1.7 million (2010: a loss of $1.4 million); a net income of $1.6 million (2010: a loss of $ 1.4 million). For the six months ended June 30, 2011 the Company had earnings from mining operations to $ 10.7 million (2010: $ 1.3 million); income before taxes to $ 3.3 million (2010: a loss $ 1.9 million); a net income of $ 2.3 million (2010: a loss of $ 1.9 million).
The increase in earnings from operations was mainly related to increased volumes sold and the increase in the selling prices of the metals produced by the Company.
During the quarter ended June 30, 2011, the Company generated revenues from the sale of 1,832 tonnes of copper concentrate (2010: - 2,788 tonnes); 2,667 tonnes of zinc concentrate (2010: -- 1,085 tonnes); 846 tonnes of Lead Concentrate (2010: nil); and 263,357 ounces of silver (2010 -- 172,356 ounces) for total net revenues of $12.4 million (2010 - $4.8 million).
The average price for sales of copper, silver, zinc and lead during the period were Cu - $4.14 (2010: $3.45) per pound; Ag - $36.86 (2010: $18.22) per ounce; Zn $1.02 (2010: $1.15) per pound and Pb $1.16 (2010: $0.88). Metal prices were a significant factor in the increased profitability of the Company.
Just left the BCSC after closing arguments in the Sprott versus AUN dust-up. This was basically a summary trial to have the Sprott litigation tossed.
Decision was reserved until November 4th. My thoughts will be posted later.
The hearing was held on October 19, 2011 as a summary trial with a decision reserved until November 4, 2011.
The Supreme Court Judge was one of the most open and vocal I have ever seen. His directions and questions for counsel revealed the essential "core" issues very clearly, even for a layperson.
The main core issue, of course, was if there was "a deal" or if there was not "a deal". Did the terms sheets form an offer capable of acceptance? In order for there to be a deal both sides must agree and that agreement must be binding on both parties. The term sheets are not a contract because they are not binding. If the AUN board had formally approved the debt financing the matter would then be in Sprott's court to either proceed or not proceed. While AUN may have been bound at that point, Sprott was not and was free to continue to negotiate.
Sprott argued that acceptance of the financing amounted to acceptance of an "umbrella" agreement, where it was explicitly understood that proceeding with the equity portion meant proceeding with the debt portion as well.
Again and again counsel for Sprott stated "They took our money", "they took our $ 12 million". Also somewhat annoying was his argument that this, that, or the other thing "wasn't in the Aurcana NR". Trying to find compelling evidence in what ISN'T said is ridiculous.
In regards to the harm done to Sprott the argument related to unjust enrichment. Again repeatedly, Sprott counsel argued that AUN was unjustly enriched through the association with Sprott's good name. That argument seemed doomed when the judge explained that enrichment must have a corresponding deprivation ... in other words where is the loss?
In regards to good faith the facts showed AUN continued to negotiate after the BoD rejected the debt. Doing this was consistent with AUN's obligation to act in good faith.
Although very dangerous I will relate several factors that may indicate which way the judge is leaning on this. First of all there was a reference to the costs in the agreement that need to be paid by AUN. The judge asked AUN counsel if he was going to "blow that one out of the water too". There were no arguments that those costs are not AUN's.
At the conclusion of the hearing the judge asked for the exact amount in question. This information would not be required if the matter is to proceed.
From a personal perspective I believe AUN counsel scored far more points than Sprott counsel, and based upon what I heard, I feel the odds are very good this matter will be dismissed on November 4, 2011.
We shall see.
Thank you for this hearing summary. Could you point me to where you found the court documents and scheduling.
The file is public and costs $ 8 to view at the Supreme Court in DT Vancouver. All your critical documents and affidavits are there There is an on-line system that allows one to see the disposition of the case and to check on any orders made. That is free.
I should note that whatever the decision turns out to be it will not result in a NR immediately because there is a 30 day appeal period. After that appeal period expires this matter becomes material and a NR is to be expected ... if AUN wins. If the outcome is the opposite it is not material and there will be no NR.
Got all that? Not to worry, having come this far I plan on being present for the decision and will pass it along ... material or not it is public domain.
2400 tpd at Shafter come January 2012.
Plant commissioning in March.
Over 400,000 oz AG per month
5.5 MILLION oz Ag/year
6.5-7 Million oz Ag Eq/year
Surpassing most of our peers.
1.5 million dollars per month cash flow now.
$10 million cashflow per month with both mines in operation.
AUN is now fully self funded.
Aurcana could be on the verge of higher prices.
"And their dealings with Sprott, who anted up a huge pile of money in the PP that got Aurcana financed for SHAFTER. I am not sure just how much AUN could have raised on their own, without Sprott's help."Mouser
Mouser,this is what Sprott advertises in their case to extract 800,000 oz of silver from Aurcana for doing sweet F.A..I see you bought the Sprott schtick and propel it like it was truth.
If it weren't laughable enough ,they then wasted eight months in pursuit of free silver from AUN,punishing AUN and their shareholders in their greedy process.
I hope that after the judge throws the case and Sprott out on their duffs this coming Friday that AUN then turns around and sues Sprott for what damage they have done.
Sprott received 40 million shares of a 7 million oz producer for .31 Canadian.
Additionally, Sprott willingly signed on to take those shares and ante up another $25 million for a credit facility offer-o-f-f-e-r - that AUN's BoD refused.
Yeah,I can just see the banksters telling AUN that they don't want shares of a seven million oz producer for .31.
The problem was that AUN gave away those shares and then the sharks circled,willing to take it all,demanding to take it all.
Truth is ,they will be told what they are in legal ease this Friday.
Could not come sooner or to much nicer financiers than Sprott.
Film here at 11:00.
("Aurcana" or the "Company") is pleased to report that all permits required for the Shafter silver mine to commence production have been received. The final permit was to amend a water discharge permit which allows the Shafter mine to increase operations from 900 tonnes per day to 1500 tonnes per day. Approval for this permit amendment was received on Wednesday, November 2, 2011. The Shafter mine is now fully permitted.
"We are pleased to report that all permits are now 100% approved for the development of the Shafter mine in Texas. With the mine completion date only six months away and the last of the permits received the mine is now fully prepared to begin silver production in the second quarter of 2012," reported Lenic Rodriguez, President and CEO of Aurcana Corporation.
Any word on the result of the hearing friday?
AUN has blown Sprott right outta the frikkin water.
The matter has been dismissed with costs at scale "B" to AUN. (Sprott must pay its legal expenses, court fees, AND Aurcana's legal expenses as well.)
Although there is 30 days to appeal I doubt very highly Sprott will keep attempting the highly impossible. EVERY argument was rejected by the court ... every single one.
Stoxxman was instrumental in relaying the proceedings to AUN shareholders as the case was heard,directly from the court house on occasions.
My thanks goes out to him for giving a chit.
AUN are the only junior(soon to be mid-tier) that has ever slayed Sprott.
To top it off,they are the only junior producer to ever buy back an SLW stream agreement.
Thanks to the Stoxxman and congratulations to all shareholders.