Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Chris Grunewald  

View Chris Grunewald's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Hey Chris,

    Really appreciate your comments, sounds like you are familiar with the sector. However I think a lot of these junior potash miners, especially greenfield ones, are more in "endangered" places.. e.g., places with political trouble (Argentina comes to mind), extremely high CAPEX in the multi-billion dollar range, and/or non-optimal weather conditions (specifically the big 3 of Canada/Russia/Belarus).. Not to mention the fraud companies that throw out arbitrary numbers on how much potash is under their land..

    But when you look at a company like Prospect (maybe Passport too; I've just done more DD on Prospect), you have a junior miner fairly far along in the mining process in a very strategic place (for mining purposes) within a country that is very highly dependent on potash imports. The initial CAPEX is 1.3B, far less than competitors. If the management team of PGRX was a tad more competent (note the dilutions at very depressed prices and odd, if not downright bad, timing), I would feel a lot more comfortable.

    CG
    May 19, 2013. 05:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    KP,

    "The USPTO automatically issues a rejection letter but it is non-final. This is STANDARD.

    Requesting a patent re-exam is like starting the patent application process all over again, so the patent is automatically rejected until the entire examination is completed"

    ->> 1.) These two statements contradict one another. Also, all claims aren't rejected, just the relevant ones that the aggregate IP of Culliss, Bowman, and Lashkari are deemed Prior Art to. Incidentally, the relevant claims of '664 have had SNQ's raised on that same aggregate IP.

    2.) It doesn't matter when the patents expire in this case. Look at Translogic. The patents expired well before the FedCir's affirmation of the USPTO's PTAB invalidity (nonpatentability) ruling. It's retroactive.

    3.) That's a very hopeful timeline for FedCir to wrap up their appeal process. The average time for a USDC patent infringement appeal to the FedCir, from disposition to determination, is approximately 11-12 months, and that's not taking into consideration cross appeals (which is happening in this case). Early summer 2014 is much more likely.

    But please, continue to tell me that I do not know anything and that the "fair value" of VRNG is in the double digits.

    CG
    May 16, 2013. 02:31 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    well said marpha.
    May 16, 2013. 01:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    he didn't really paraphrase me correctly..
    May 15, 2013. 10:44 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Judge Jackson Handle Google's Confirmed Workaround?‎ [View article]
    Hey Markman Advisors, good article. Although I have some criticisms:

    1.) In '664's case, the aggregate IP of Bowman, Culliss, and Lashkari are not yet prior art until proven so. That IP has raised five new Substantial New Questions of Patentability (SNQ's); the IP hasn't been deemed Prior Art yet.
    2.) Vringo has two months from the '420 final rejection date to submit a response to the PTO re: validation. If that doesn't work, then I'd suspect an appeal to PTAB.
    3.) It would help your credibility to give readers some insight about you / your group / etc. I agree with a lot of your work and think it is legitimate; however, your lack of disclosure is concerning and makes your work seem illegitimate by association.

    CG
    May 14, 2013. 09:52 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Long Until Vringo's Verdict Against Google Pays Off? [View article]
    It's not me either.
    May 13, 2013. 10:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Case & point!
    May 10, 2013. 08:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Thanks Brad! You couldn't go wrong with either one. If you want to play it safe I'd go with the ETF, but in all reality I believe there will be a lot of M&A activity with the smaller miners (the ones like PGRX and PPRTF in Holbrook Basin, the miners of Paradox basin in Utah). I think either big potash companies like POT, MOS, etc or the big mining companies like BHP, VALE will acquire these guys in order to capitalize on potash growth. Junior miners are risky (and very much subject to dilution), but I have a hard time envisioning these junior miners not being bought out at some point, even if just for the land rights they own.

    CG
    May 10, 2013. 08:25 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Very true. But that depends on the respective land plots each entity owns
    May 10, 2013. 08:19 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Hi Bruce,

    Thanks for the read. True, this investment is not for the faint of heart, but I believe it is significantly undervalued nonetheless. The 5MM promissory notes that I mentioned in the article are due on 9/9/13. I am most likely holding until that timeframe to see what the new CEO can do. As I referenced in the article, PGRX is fairly far along the greenfield process and already has a 2B contract lined up (25% of output) over 10 years. With an oversupply concern, already having a huge contract lined up is invaluable. POT and MOS are also good plays. I like the entire sector as a whole, and do agree with Goldman that it could be similar to the iron ore boom.

    Let me know if you have any other questions!

    CG
    May 10, 2013. 05:54 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Potash Economics And An Undervalued American Junior Potash Play [View article]
    Hi Daniel, thanks for the read. I will address your points one-by-one.

    1.) Obviously there is a lot of potash in the world, but it will eventually run out. The equivalent would be natural gas. Sure, there is a lot in the US, but however much, it still is finite. A lot depends on how Canpotex and Belarusian see the market. The figures I used were from a UN potash study presumably based on current output and expected output of greenfield/brownfield projects, but Canpotex and Belarusian can manipulate supply as they please.

    2.) There are a couple articles I used. One you will need a WSJ subscription for: (http://on.wsj.com/TTZwYU) and the other is an Economic Times article (http://bit.ly/15VJbM9). As I presume you know, plants thrive on three key nutrients: nitrogen, phosphate (P2O5), and Potash (K2O, can be converted into KCl by multiplying .61). Although the nutrient yields won't be as effective as having potash implementation, farmers who think the potash price is too high are using urea. This does harm the ground, and eventually will need to be corrected, as mineral imbalances are present. Another reason why I believe potash can see great growth, especially out of developing countries such as India.

    3.) You are very correct. But keep in mind potash does have other uses besides being a fertilizer (e.g., table salt, road salt, chemical catalyst, and various metalworking activities). Being simply involved with potash is a very long-term investment process, which was one of the main claims that my statement supported. Similarities could still be drawn to natural gas as well.

    CG
    May 10, 2013. 05:46 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Obama Administration's Natural Gas Policy Is Tragically Misguided [View article]
    Great article. Reminds me of the quote "you don't know what you got 'til it's gone"
    May 10, 2013. 09:44 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Google Cannot Penetrate Vringo's 7th Amendment Armor [View article]
    Good article PP. Worth the read. Although it is true that the patents will be technically valid pending appeal, a final rejection was given (you state non-final in first paragraph); huge difference.

    Also, it would strengthen your article to include the Translogic case I referenced for constructive analysis, as it goes against a good bit of your analysis.

    Looking forward to see how this plays out!

    CG
    May 6, 2013. 09:40 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Stop Gambling On Patent Lawsuits [View article]
    Shouldn't you be throwing around some unrealistic, albeit entertaining, valuation models around, KP?
    May 6, 2013. 11:39 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Stop Gambling On Patent Lawsuits [View article]
    Greg,

    I really enjoyed this article. In Vringo's case, one took all the risk holding through the verdict, and he/she doesn't have anything to show for it. With all the macro-patent reform coming (specifically to NPE's), a patent monetization company HAS to have an underlying business model. Most of these companies don't. It took a while for me to let go of the "Vringo Kool-aid" and realized I should have sold on the hype; I just hope other people can realize the same.

    CG
    May 6, 2013. 11:28 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
122 Comments
54 Likes