Seeking Alpha

Peter Epstein

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Peter Epstein's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • 3 Uranium Producers Worth Watching [View article]
    While I completely get it that the Athabasca area is the world's best, my understanding is that all of these juniors are 10-15 years from first commercial scale production. Does anyone disagree? Maybe Denison is less than 10 years, but what about the rest of the Athabascan juniors like Fission, Lakeland, etc....
    May 26 01:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Graphite One Resources, Massive U.S., Near-Surface, High-Grade Deposit [View article]
    Focus 1-2 years ahead of Graphite One, but Focus has more than twice the market cap. GPHOF has a much larger resource.

    I like aspects of Focus, but I think GPHOF has more stock appreciation potential.
    May 16 12:52 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • In-Depth Interview Of CEO James Anderson, NuLegacy Gold-- Nevada, USA [View article]
    A potential catalyst could be initial results from the drill campaign that started on May 7th. Some results should be out in about 4-6 weeks.
    May 14 12:08 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • In-Depth Interview Of CEO James Anderson, NuLegacy Gold-- Nevada, USA [View article]
    Thanks Jeb, I should have linked directly to your interviews in my article....

    I especially liked this interview of Roger Steininger you did....

    http://bit.ly/1sNx6Rh
    May 14 10:06 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • In-Depth Interview Of CEO James Anderson, NuLegacy Gold-- Nevada, USA [View article]
    Yes, Lisa--

    From Barrick Gold website, quote,

    "The mine produced 1.34 million ounces of gold in 2013 at all-in sustaining costs of $433 per ounce."

    21 million ounces at Pipeline..... At $100/oz, the mine would be worth $2.1 billion. A 30% interest in Iceberg, "carried to commercial production" could be worth in the hundreds of millions of dollars (just my opinion). Still early days though, plenty of risk in delineating a large gold resource on Iceberg like that of Pipeline, Cortez Hills and Goldrush....
    May 14 09:33 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • New Gold Discovery At San Miguel May Make Shorts Cover [View article]
    Great color, thanks Jeb. Hopefully a lot more shorts cover a lot more gold juniors!
    May 14 08:57 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Latest Thoughts From Graphite Guru Simon Moores [View article]
    Some graphite juniors are safer than others. I like GPHOF and BNCIF a lot.

    GPHOF is trading at a market cap of just $19 million, about a third of the average of the other stocks you mentioned. Therefore, I believe (just my opinion) that it has less downside than some of the others.

    BNCIF has a market cap of about $5-$6 million. It's greatest attribute is that it could be in production of flake graphite from a past-producing Mexican mine by 2h 2015. Speed to market is extremely important. Although a smaller project, Big North could command a strong valuation like Flinders Resources (also a small past-producing mine).

    Both GPHOF and BNCIF could triple in the next 12-18 months.
    May 13 07:39 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Graphite One Resources, Massive U.S., Near-Surface, High-Grade Deposit [View article]
    Here's a new interview with Simon Moores on Graphite pricing.

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    May 12 09:30 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pershing Gold Reports 2nd Set Of Strong Drill Results [View article]
    Latest News...
    LAKEWOOD, Colo., May 12, 2014 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pershing Gold Corporation (OTCQB:PGLC) ("Pershing Gold" or the "Company") is pleased to announce the preliminary results of column leach tests on gold-bearing samples from the Relief Canyon Mine property in Pershing County, Nevada. These results show higher gold recoveries than the previous mine operators achieved and also indicate that this mineralized material leaches quickly. A column comprised of a master composite of drill core samples that was designed to simulate the blend of the different mineralized materials to be leached in the future at Relief Canyon yielded 79.2% gold recovery in 71 days of leaching.

    The Company achieved higher recoveries from columns built with limestone breccias and clay-matrix breccias, the two rock types that contain most of the gold mineralization in the Main Zone of the Relief Canyon deposit. A column of the limestone breccia yielded 85.7% gold recovery after 70 days of leaching. Two columns of the clay-matrix breccia produced excellent recoveries, with one column achieving a 91.3% gold recovery and the other reaching 78% recovery after a 70-day leaching period.

    McClelland Laboratories, Inc. ("McClelland Labs") of Sparks, Nevada, one of the foremost metallurgical testing facilities in the gold mining industry, performed the heap leach cyanidation tests. They tested eight columns of drill core samples that were crushed to 80% passing -3/4" mesh sieve size. This crush size matches the capabilities of the crushing equipment in place at Relief Canyon. The crushed samples were agglomerated with cement and loaded into 8-inch diameter by 20 foot-high columns.

    Experts at McClelland and Pershing Gold's technical staff designed the testing program to determine gold and silver recoveries, recovery rates, and reagent requirements as well as to provide information about the leaching characteristics of the various gold-bearing rock types at the Relief Canyon deposit,

    "The results from the column leach tests are a real game changer for the Relief Canyon deposit because these recoveries are so much higher than what has been reported for the two operators that mined the deposit in the 1980s," stated Stephen Alfers, CEO and President of Pershing Gold.

    As discussed in RPA's 2013 NI 43-101 Technical Report for the Relief Canyon Mine [See Press Release dated January 24, 2013], Lacana Mining Inc. reportedly realized just 45% to 48% gold recovery from its run-of-mine heap leach operation. The next operator, Pegasus Gold Corporation, achieved 65% to 70% recoveries from crushed and agglomerated ores during the 1987–1988 timeframe.

    "The high gold recoveries achieved in the McClelland Labs testing program provide evidence that the Relief Canyon gold deposit is highly amenable to heap leach processing. Additionally, the column leach tests yielded another positive result; leaching occurs very quickly – in as little as 71 days, which is great news. Prior to conducting these tests, we did not have much information about leaching rates at Relief Canyon," explained Stephen Alfers.

    The master composite column was constructed using composited samples of each gold-bearing rock type in the Relief Canyon deposit in amounts proportional to the distribution of these rock types in the currently defined deposit. The Company believes the 79.2% gold recovery from the master composite column can be used to estimate the average recovery that future heap leaching may achieve. Similarly, the 71-day leaching period for the master composite column can be used to assess probable leaching cycles for future heaps at Relief Canyon.

    "The very favorable results from the column leach tests will certainly enhance project economics and are an important step in moving the Relief Canyon Mine forward to production," said Stephen Alfers. "We will be using the results from the finalized tests in future economic analyses."

    Leaching is still underway for a column comprised of jasperoid material. The column leach test also included a column dedicated for environmental testing that is still being evaluated and a second composite column that was blended with 10% by weight of materials leached by previous operators. This column yielded 72.7% recovery after 70 days of leaching, indicating that there is minimal recoverable gold in the previously leached materials.

    The eighth column tested materials that did not yield high gold recoveries in previous metallurgical tests and confirmed that this material is not amenable to heap leaching. Pershing Gold anticipates that the column leach test results will be finalized this summer and will be announced in a future news release.

    Scientific and Technical Data

    All scientific and technical information related to the column leach cyanidation tests for the Relief Canyon Mine has been reviewed and approved by Daniel B. Moore, Nevada Registered Professional Engineer and Vice President and General Manager of the Relief Canyon Mine. Mr. Moore is a Qualified Person under the definitions established by Canadian National Instrument 43-101.

    Mr. Earl Shortridge (MS, Metallurgy, Colorado School of Mines), the Company's in-house metallurgical expert, helped design and supervise the column leach metallurgical testing program and has reviewed the tests results. McClelland Laboratories, Inc. crushed and composited the samples using drill core samples provided by Pershing Gold geologists, filled the columns, performed the column leach tests, and supervised subsequent handling and analysis of the leached materials.
    May 12 08:13 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pershing Gold: Strong Drill Results, Insider Buying And New Research Coverage [View article]
    LAKEWOOD, Colo., May 12, 2014 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pershing Gold Corporation (OTCQB:PGLC) ("Pershing Gold" or the "Company") is pleased to announce the preliminary results of column leach tests on gold-bearing samples from the Relief Canyon Mine property in Pershing County, Nevada. These results show higher gold recoveries than the previous mine operators achieved and also indicate that this mineralized material leaches quickly. A column comprised of a master composite of drill core samples that was designed to simulate the blend of the different mineralized materials to be leached in the future at Relief Canyon yielded 79.2% gold recovery in 71 days of leaching.

    The Company achieved higher recoveries from columns built with limestone breccias and clay-matrix breccias, the two rock types that contain most of the gold mineralization in the Main Zone of the Relief Canyon deposit. A column of the limestone breccia yielded 85.7% gold recovery after 70 days of leaching. Two columns of the clay-matrix breccia produced excellent recoveries, with one column achieving a 91.3% gold recovery and the other reaching 78% recovery after a 70-day leaching period.

    McClelland Laboratories, Inc. ("McClelland Labs") of Sparks, Nevada, one of the foremost metallurgical testing facilities in the gold mining industry, performed the heap leach cyanidation tests. They tested eight columns of drill core samples that were crushed to 80% passing -3/4" mesh sieve size. This crush size matches the capabilities of the crushing equipment in place at Relief Canyon. The crushed samples were agglomerated with cement and loaded into 8-inch diameter by 20 foot-high columns.

    Experts at McClelland and Pershing Gold's technical staff designed the testing program to determine gold and silver recoveries, recovery rates, and reagent requirements as well as to provide information about the leaching characteristics of the various gold-bearing rock types at the Relief Canyon deposit,

    "The results from the column leach tests are a real game changer for the Relief Canyon deposit because these recoveries are so much higher than what has been reported for the two operators that mined the deposit in the 1980s," stated Stephen Alfers, CEO and President of Pershing Gold.

    As discussed in RPA's 2013 NI 43-101 Technical Report for the Relief Canyon Mine [See Press Release dated January 24, 2013], Lacana Mining Inc. reportedly realized just 45% to 48% gold recovery from its run-of-mine heap leach operation. The next operator, Pegasus Gold Corporation, achieved 65% to 70% recoveries from crushed and agglomerated ores during the 1987–1988 timeframe.

    "The high gold recoveries achieved in the McClelland Labs testing program provide evidence that the Relief Canyon gold deposit is highly amenable to heap leach processing. Additionally, the column leach tests yielded another positive result; leaching occurs very quickly – in as little as 71 days, which is great news. Prior to conducting these tests, we did not have much information about leaching rates at Relief Canyon," explained Stephen Alfers.

    The master composite column was constructed using composited samples of each gold-bearing rock type in the Relief Canyon deposit in amounts proportional to the distribution of these rock types in the currently defined deposit. The Company believes the 79.2% gold recovery from the master composite column can be used to estimate the average recovery that future heap leaching may achieve. Similarly, the 71-day leaching period for the master composite column can be used to assess probable leaching cycles for future heaps at Relief Canyon.

    "The very favorable results from the column leach tests will certainly enhance project economics and are an important step in moving the Relief Canyon Mine forward to production," said Stephen Alfers. "We will be using the results from the finalized tests in future economic analyses."

    Leaching is still underway for a column comprised of jasperoid material. The column leach test also included a column dedicated for environmental testing that is still being evaluated and a second composite column that was blended with 10% by weight of materials leached by previous operators. This column yielded 72.7% recovery after 70 days of leaching, indicating that there is minimal recoverable gold in the previously leached materials.

    The eighth column tested materials that did not yield high gold recoveries in previous metallurgical tests and confirmed that this material is not amenable to heap leaching. Pershing Gold anticipates that the column leach test results will be finalized this summer and will be announced in a future news release.

    Scientific and Technical Data

    All scientific and technical information related to the column leach cyanidation tests for the Relief Canyon Mine has been reviewed and approved by Daniel B. Moore, Nevada Registered Professional Engineer and Vice President and General Manager of the Relief Canyon Mine. Mr. Moore is a Qualified Person under the definitions established by Canadian National Instrument 43-101.

    Mr. Earl Shortridge (MS, Metallurgy, Colorado School of Mines), the Company's in-house metallurgical expert, helped design and supervise the column leach metallurgical testing program and has reviewed the tests results. McClelland Laboratories, Inc. crushed and composited the samples using drill core samples provided by Pershing Gold geologists, filled the columns, performed the column leach tests, and supervised subsequent handling and analysis of the leached materials.
    May 12 08:12 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Graphite One Resources, Massive U.S., Near-Surface, High-Grade Deposit [View article]
    Top Story on Industrial Minerals website, article by Simon Moores....

    Title: List prices increase significantly despite slack demand; fears that Heilongjiang flake graphite action could spread to cleaner areas

    Suspensions in flake graphite mining in China’s major producing regions is causing some producers to increase list prices on the back of an expected supply squeeze.

    Major government-forced shut downs in Shandong province, and impending closures in Heilongjiang, over unacceptable air and water pollution levels have led some producers to hold back from the market due to expectations of an impending supply squeeze. As a result these suppliers have increased prices by up to $240/tonne.

    A major producer in China explained to IM Data that its prices, across-the-board, have been increased by between RMB 1,000/tonne ($160*) and RMB 1,500/tonne ($240) as a direct result of the potential closures.

    Considering flake graphite prices in China – for 94-97% C, -100 mesh – can vary from $650-750/tonne, this could represent increases of up to 30%.

    The move appears to be geared for an upturn in demand as the Chinese buying season begins.

    Nevertheless, today’s demand is still very weak across all major global markets. This is the first time the industry has seen such a significant demand slump from all markets and all regions of the world at the same time.

    The prices quoted to us are yet to be submitted to IM Data’s price database, as they are not reflective of the wider market. Should even a small amount of demand activity return, however, there is a high risk of panic buying – a major contributing factor to the price spike seen in 2011.

    There is also a secondary risk that demand from refractories could return to significant levels at the same time as increased consumption from the battery sector. As both end-markets compete for the same raw material – medium flake graphite, 94% C (-194) – this could add further upward price pressure.

    Heilongjiang pressures: spread to Luobei?

    Imminent flake graphite closures in the world’s leading producing region, Heilongjiang, have now gained global attention from the story that was broken by IM Data and later picked up by China’s national, English speaking news channel, CCTV.

    There are now fears in China that the government’s focus on the worst offending area, Jixi, could spread to the cleaner producing area of the province, Luobei.

    Jixi and Luobei together accounted for 45% of China’s 220,000 tpa flake output in 2013.

    A recent rumour, which has contributed to these fears, is that China is sending central government representatives to the region to monitor the situation. Any action from the central government – as opposed to the provincial government which tends to be more forgiving – could escalate the situation.

    While sources close to IM Data have corroborated this news, there are yet to be confirmed reports of any meetings with high level representatives.

    The developments have forced buyers to look towards smaller, peripheral graphite producers away from two of China’s major graphite hubs, Heilongjiang and Shandong. This has led to a rise in enquiries within the smaller producing provinces of Hubei, Hebei, and Hunan.

    *Conversions made as of May 2014
    May 9 01:39 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Graphite One Resources, Massive U.S., Near-Surface, High-Grade Deposit [View article]
    lisa mentioned today's graphite stock returns-- GPH outperformed.....

    To be clear, it's nice to see that, but I don't watch natural resource stocks daily or even weekly. Except to buy on dips....one can guess how I've done buying dips over the past few years....graphite, uranium, gold, potash....

    I would look at GPH relative to the handful of peers that are contenders maybe once a month. Again, I hope to see Mason, Focus and a few others up significantly in the next 6-12 months, with GPH up at least twice as much as the average of the others.
    May 8 05:24 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Graphite One Resources, Massive U.S., Near-Surface, High-Grade Deposit [View article]
    Christopher Gonsalves,

    The good thing about having 285 million tonnes on just 27% of the deposit's strike length is that, although an Inferred resource, it's already big enough to ensure a mine....assuming the other pieces of the puzzle fall into place. Several peers that have deposits with smaller resources still have to worry about growing the resource in addition to all the other concerns a junior graphite company has.

    The other nice thing about GPH is that it's recent testing confirms graphite can be enhanced to 99.9%+, meaning they know for sure they will be able to meet the highest demands of existing and new high-tech graphite applications. Not every graphite company can (or will be able to) say that. Two boxes checked off-- size of deposit and suitability for battery market.
    May 8 05:15 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Graphite One Resources, Massive U.S., Near-Surface, High-Grade Deposit [View article]
    523546,

    You bring up a good point about not betting too heavily on the Tesla giga-factory thesis. While I think that Tesla's proposed factory is very important, there's something more important that's happened over just the past few months. I touched upon it in an interview I did of Graphite One's CEO....

    It involves Syrah Resources, which has a billion tonne resource in Mozambique that until just recently has been a huge overhang on the graphite market. The deposit is not just massive, it's also high grade. Therefore, market pundits rightly feared that this supply would flood the graphite market and depress pricing for years to come. Syrah's one deposit alone could support 200k tonnes per year with first production in late 2015 or early 2016. That's a lot of tonnes in a 1.2 million tonne global market.

    What's changed? 2 months ago Syrah announced an off-take agreement with the 4th largest aluminum producer in the world, a Chinese company known as Chinalco. The proposed off-take is for 80k-100k tonnes per year, or roughly half of the feared supply surge coming from Syrah. Not only is half of Syrah's future output now tied up, but it's even better because that supply is disappearing forever into the belly of China. Further, that supply is going into an end market use that wasn't even anticipated as a key driver of demand. It's going to be used in China for anodes used to produce aluminum.

    In other words, half of Syrah's supply is going to be used in a an existing, low-tech, heavy industry market, not for sexy vehicle batteries or other future high-tech applications like consumer electronics. This development is potentially huge, but relatively few people are talking about it. Then, in the past week or ten days, another surprise announcement from Syrah....the other roughly half of its future wave of graphite supply is earmarked for England in yet another non-sexy new market use-- as a recarburiser in primarily foundry applications and high quality steel production, more specifically the cast iron (gray iron the major category) and ductile iron markets.

    Demand for graphite appears to be rising rapidly and in ways not even contemplated by market pundits who have been aggressively promoting the idea that graphite demand for vehicle batteries and solar/wind energy storage will move the market into deficit. Well, those aggressive promoters are being bailed out by Syrah's off-take partners! The bullish thesis in batteries, (Tesla) remains, but there's now substantially more wiggle room if batteries don't dominate the market to the extent that some believe they will or in the timeframe promoted by the most bullish among us.
    May 8 04:36 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Graphite One Resources, Massive U.S., Near-Surface, High-Grade Deposit [View article]
    Thanks Lisa, I'm glad you liked the article.

    I've learned so much since meeting this mgmt team in Toronto 2 months ago at the PDAC conference. I agree with you, I like Focus and Mason graphite as well, but if those two stocks were to double in the next year, I think GPH.V / GPHOF could triple or more. Even then, GPH would be trading at a meaningful valuation discount. One thing to watch out for is money exiting a number of graphite plays that fall by the wayside. Money will migrate into the small handful of players best positioned to dominate the market for decades to come.

    Still a high-risk play, perhaps more risk than Focus and Mason, but the entire sector is medium-high risk. I think the entire sector will rise as Tesla's giga-factory moves forward. The peers have an average market cap around US$ 60 million, Graphite One is around US$ 20 million. If peer market caps were to double to an average of US$ 120 million and GPH's market cap were to triple to US$ 60 million, that would still leave an ample cushion in the relative valuations to account for the fact that GPH is probably 1-2 years behind in reaching production.

    Again, I like both Focus & Mason, but I like GPH more on a risk/reward basis.
    May 8 11:44 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
1,766 Comments
1,565 Likes