Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

XMFSinchiruna (26.56)

A Must Read - Setting the Record Straight



August 13, 2011 – Comments (93)

If you're going to swing a bat, you'd better be sure it's not made of rubber. Otherwise, it's likely to bounce off the intended target and smack you right in the face.

It was recently brought to my attention that some blogger named Otto has been swinging a bat my way with respect to my coverage of Great Panther Silver. Because I value my time, I will go only so far as I need to in my rebuttal to discredit his careless claims, since the facts speak for themselves. As an undeserved courtesy, I might suggest that this Otto character keep one arm raised in a defensive stance, since the bat he's been swinging is about to backfire very badly.

On April 14, 2011, the blogger in question stated: "Comparing the GPR cash cost metric to the PAAS cash cost metric is stupidity squared, because one of them is a fair representation of what goes on in the mining world and the other one is just laughable. PAAS may have its faults, but it's not trying to [BS] the market via its quarterlies."

Fact: the methods by which Great Panther Silver and Pan American Silver calculated their cash costs, which is the metric I reported for both companies respectively in the article he sought to ridicule, are 100% identical! Page 44 of this document outlines Pan American's method for calculating the non-GAAP metric for 2010, and pages 42-43 of Great Panther's 2010 Annual Report permit a side-by-side analysis revealing identical procedures. For both companies, cash operating costs are subject to adjustments by smelting, refining and transportation charges, by-product credits, and then small incidentals including royalties for PAAS and custom milling for Great Panther. The sole salient difference between the two is that Pan American gave both cash costs and total costs, while Great Panther omitted total costs as it is their right to do. The point is, the two cost metrics discussed for the two companies within my article were 100% comparable metrics. Later in his tirade, he blasts Great Panther for not including depreciation & amortization within its cost of sales, when neither does major miner Pan American! It appears Otto neglected to really compare filings between the two companies before wielding his rubber bat.

On April 14, 2011, the blogger in question stated: "Well the problem is that Christopher Barker has absolutely no idea on what he's talking about when it comes to "cash costs" and is simply taking the [expletive] figures and stats to back up his case. The reality of GPR is that its costs of production (a MUCH better way of measuring efficiency than a non-GAAP metric such as cash cost that is prone to really nasty attacks of scammy company [expletive]) are way higher per ounce than PAAS, or serious mining companies or the kind of [expletive] propaganda that GPR puts out to pull the wool over the eyes of the marketplace."

Fact: No one in the industry looks principally to "cost of sales" (which he presumably intends with "cost of production" given his subsequent look at Great Panther's data) when assessing the profitability or attractiveness of mining operations. And nowhere will you ever encounter any informed person discussing cost of sales per ounce of payable silver. Perhaps someone can show me where anyone, anywhere in a professional and credible setting, discussed Hecla Mining's $59.77 million cost of sales (including DD&A) for the fourth quarter of 2010 in relation to its 2.74m ounces of silver production (amounting to $21.81 per ounce!). That's a meaningless construct for assessing the profitability of mining operations.

On April 14, 2011, the blogger in question stated: "Yes, you read that right. When GPR touts its "cash cost" figure, what it doesn't explain is that it only covers less than half of its real costs."

Fact: Again... there's nothing to see there! The blogger reveals his poor understanding of the nature of the relationship between cash operating costs and cost of sales throughout the mining industry. So he blasts GPL for having a cost of sales that is 2X its cash operating cost, but fails to recognize that Pan American Silver's comparable ratio for the full year 2010 is 2.31X! Massive divides between cost of sales and cash operating costs are the norm for the entire industry, regardless of where DD&A adjustments enter the picture.

On April 14, 2011, the blogger in question asks: "How on earth can 1) A company claim $3.111m in "cash costs" on $13.809m in gross revenues but then only deliver a $782,000 net profit on a quarter? Because that's exactly what GPR did in 4q10, its last reported quarter. Don't ask me that question, ask Christopher Barker of The Motley [Expletive] and when he's failed to explain why, tell him to....[Expletive].

Fact: Well, that's an entirely different question from anything else he previously discussed, but let's have a look. For starters, note that the blogger moves freely between CAD and USD figures without batting an eye! Careless! Furthermore, it's clear the blogger does not understand the nature of by-product credits nor how they are accounted for by the mining industry at large. Byproduct credits reduce the notional cash cost incurred to yield payable silver, yielding a useful metric for evaluating the performance of mine operations in exclusive relation to the targerted product. But revenue is not a product of silver alone, so when bridging the gap between revenue and net earnings, that is when cost of sales does come into play. And here again, there is absolutely nothing here that is unique to Great Panther in any way, shape, or form, rendering the blogger's tirade all the more unfounded. But to answer the inane question anyway, for Great Panther's Q42010 (all figures in CAD): $13.81m revenue - 6.36m cost of sales = 7.45m - 2m exploration expenditure - 2m G&A - 1m forex loss - 0.6m A&D - 0.6m stock-based compensation - 0.2m derivative loss - 0.1m tax expense = close-a-frickin-nuff!

Without even delving into the myriad ways in which the blogger fails to understand Great Panther's broader growth story or the fundamental justification for the stocks long-overdue advance after being frozen in obscurity beneath the $1 mark, I have more-than-adequately shown that his allegations of deceptive cost accounting leveled against Great Panther are 100% unfounded and illustrative of the accuser's profound lack of expertise in the basic principles applied when evalutating mining stocks. Finding one clear fault in his rampage would have been sufficient to discredit the Especially in light of the bloggers nasty personal attack packaged in a barrage of expletives, I also believe the blogger's conduct toward me speaks volumes about the nature of his attack against Great Panther.


Worse yet, Otto is a repeat offender, attacking me yet again in a post that followed GPL's recent Q2 earnings release. I will be happy to discuss GPL's quarterly result with the community, but my present purpose remains the clearing of the record with respect to the baseless allegations leveled against Great Panther by the blogger in question:

On August 12, 2011, the blogger states: "the interesting bit is that GPR seems to have swallowed the honesty pill and is now reporting its cash costs in a more open and transparent way"

Fact: Nothing whatsoever changed in the way Great Panther conducted its cost accounting between Q42010 and Q22011. Nothing! Zilch! Every single aspect of the way in which GPL calculated its cash costs in the release that spawned the blogger's original tirade remained 100% identical to the calculations behind the metric this time around. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can state that fact. Worse yet, the blogger is looking for cash costs to match cost of sales, further underscoring an incredible failure to grasp even the most basic elements of cost accounting within the mining industry. That the two figures nearly match in Q2 is not, as he wrongly presumes, a result of a change in accounting methodology. More likely, the nearly matched figures underscore an unusual quarter of operations during which realized sales significantly lagged mining capacity due to technical issues with a nearby mining smelter. Note the resulting disparity between silver produced and payable silver ... that is primarily what caused the cost of sales and cash costs to converge. Of course, 2011 costs will come in well above plan, but challenges of the sort are rampant throughout the industry.

On August 8, 2011, the blogger posted the following data:

2q11 silver production: 386,210 oz
2q11 cash cost: $11.84

Total of above: $4.57m
Reported cost of sales in 2q11 report: $4.61m 

Fact: Cash cost is based upon payable silver production. The difference between mine production and payable production becomes particularly poignant in a quarter like this one where concentrate deliveries are delayed en masse. GPL's cash cost of $11.84 is based upon payable silver production of 193,914 ounces.

Hmmm ... who was it that had "absolutely no idea on what he's talking about when it comes to "cash costs""?

Needless to say, I also reject out of hand the blogger's wholly unsubstantiated insinuation that GPL's trouble with a third-party smelter had anything to do with the company's concentrates. That's a ludicrous notion, and a spurious insinuation that lacks any manner of merit!

And finally, in what has to be one of the more hilarious self-contradictions I've seen in some time, he actually paired the following two phrases within the same blog post: 1.) "Feeling stupid yet, Christopher Barker of the Motley [Expletive]?", and 2.) "And if Christopher Barker (aka TMFsinchiruna) is resorting to Ad Hom attacks instead of addressing his own obvious failings he so totally fails. Ego = poverty in this game, dumb[expletive]." And with that, his rubber bat just transitioned from recoil mode to self-inflicted blows.

This guy gets $40 a month for a subscription???  

93 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On August 14, 2011 at 12:14 AM, wolfman225 (42.90) wrote:

Why do you let this guy get to you, Chris?  Unless his blogs are in some way actionable, ignore him.  Those of us who have followed you at all in the Foolish Community (and certainly those who know you personally) widely acknowledge your expertise and benefit greatly from you sharing your knowledge and insights.  If "Otto" isn't capable of learning, his subscribers will soon learn that the emperor has no clothes and he'll have to go back to flipping burgers.

Report this comment
#2) On August 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM, whereaminow (< 20) wrote:

You know, Chris, that you didn't really have to do this, but I appreciate that you did.  Nasty tactics are nothing new to me, and I have found myself on both sides, but this guy clearly feels incapable of presenting a coherent argument, hence the need to augment it with the force of foul language.

I am not surprised at the particular Fools that were eager to ride his superficial analysis in an attempt to cast a blemish on your record.  Some of it is clearly jealousy in light of their own personal failings.  

Thank you for the post.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#3) On August 14, 2011 at 12:29 AM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

Some people don't know how to get ahead without stepping on the work and good names of others. Don't let him get to you. Take him to court if he goes to far. Anything short of that needs to be ignored.

One day, when this financial crisis has passed, I hope a large group of us that invested in metals and miners can get together and celebrate you and the work you did to help give us great leads on outstanding companies.


Report this comment
#4) On August 14, 2011 at 12:46 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:


I had several reasons for wanting to set the record straight, none of which I have the energy to express at the moment. I know I didn't have to, but since a lot of Fools are invested in GPL as a result of my positive outlook on the company, I felt it was right to set the record straight.


Thanks! I was angry Friday ... I really was. I'm not sure anyone here knows the full breadth of what I've already beeen through over the years with a certain unrepentent gold short. The posting of such a poor quality attack on GPL, a day after another poor-quality attack on AUQ citing a post by the same external blogger, and referencing another previously debunked post by ... yes ... the very same blogger; it all beckoned appropriate action to ensure the Fool community knows precisely how much credibility to allocate to such repeatedly unsubstantiated drivel.

Report this comment
#5) On August 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Thanks Cato! It would be such a blast to meet the people behind the keyboards. :)

Report this comment
#6) On August 14, 2011 at 12:47 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Thanks Cato! It would be such a blast to meet the people behind the keyboards. :)

Report this comment
#7) On August 14, 2011 at 1:18 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

By the way, and for the record, this is from GMX just yesterday, within a post that I believe warrants removal because of the discredited and unsubstantiated claims made therein:

"I'm a subscriber to Otto's newsletter and think he's a swell guy. His rhetoric is a bit over the top at times, but he is by far the best analyst of latin american miners out there. If you follow the space, cough up the $40/month and get his 30-page weekly newsletter."

Report this comment
#8) On August 14, 2011 at 1:46 AM, EvilEmpire (30.06) wrote:

Ahh good ol' goldmingXpert spewing misinformation again. You would think he would do his own DD before reposting a hit piece by an anonymous person over the internet. 

This is the same guy that went all-in short via puts and blew his account up.

Despite his name the guy has no crediblity and I would take what he says very lightly. Just look at his performance in the mining sector in the last couple years and especially his "favorite" Jaguar Mining.

I think I'm done here.  



Report this comment
#9) On August 14, 2011 at 2:22 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

This is all very funny now. You totally missed the point Otto was making, and he did not even feel like giving you a dignified reply which I guess is understandable. Care to explain why GPLs cash cost suddenly went up from eight to twelve? Poor performance, with fifty percent cost increases just a factor of broader industry struggles? I think not.

You might want to reconsider your stance on GPLs low quality concentrate they cannot sell too. Could be a problem.

It would be hilarious if you manage to get my blog post taken down, given that you failed to refute either Otto or myself, however as a Motley Fool employee, you probably can wield the censorship stick if you wish. Go ahead. 

Report this comment
#10) On August 14, 2011 at 2:23 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Cato: Outstanding mining companies do not hit with you unannounced fifty percent in one quarter mining cost increases after a big round of insider selling. GPL is no outstanding mining company, and its throughly lacklustre stock performance this year backs that point up. 

Report this comment
#11) On August 14, 2011 at 2:30 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Whereaminow: You are smarter than to be saying stupid stuff like that. Get your head straight man. I merely report the fact that Great Panther pulled a fast one on all of us and you start launching personal attacks against me? Stoning the messenger eh? 

Since TMFSinch did not explain why mining costs at GPL went up fifty percent in one quarter, perhaps you would like to? 

Report this comment
#12) On August 14, 2011 at 2:35 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

The key paragraph, by the way was this one:

 This means its "cash cost" total for the quarter added up to U$3.111m (and if you don't believe me, check the company filings on SEDAR, they're all there).

However, its "Cost of Sales" for the quarter was $6.36m! 

That is what TMFSinch, and apparently all of you, missed. TMFsinch, in his ahem, debunking, missed the fact that GPL quoted a cash cost of 3M not 6M. He put the same mistaken 6M in his defense of GPL. That was the point that was missed. 

Report this comment
#13) On August 14, 2011 at 3:31 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Failed to refute? The facts could not be any clearer.

You continue to exhibit a blatant disregard for facts and a strange aversion to the act of providing supporting evidence. You even continue to repeat the obvious affront within your reply.

Great Panther's sequential cost increase is not the topic of discussion here. Nobody take the bait ... he's trying to deflect attention from the core issue. The unsubstantiated allegations leveled against the company by you and the blogger in question, and the above factual record discrediting same are the sole topic of interest to this post.

@12 - I missed nothing. I will not explain my explanation to you, as I bellieve I was clear enough for any Fool to comprehend.

Report this comment
#14) On August 14, 2011 at 4:23 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

So what is the explanation for why cash cost suddenly soared vs. cost of sales? And yes, I am looking for something more substantive than the CEO whining about how they could not sell their silver. In a market like this, why exactly would one be unable to do so?

 I will not explain my explanation to you, as I bellieve I was clear enough for any Fool to comprehend 

This is true, but not in the way you intended. 

Report this comment
#15) On August 14, 2011 at 4:29 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

And the rise in cash cost is kind of the main deal, and not a side topic, since it was the crux of IKNs argument, and also why the stock got nailed Friday:

Close enough! Hey guys, about time you started telling the truth about your costs. Mind you it does make your previous estimates for 2011 costs look pretty freakin rum, no? After all you GPR people did say that you'd produce silver at between $6.50 and $8 per ounce this year. The reality is...2q11 cash cost: $11.84/oz
1h11 cash cost: $10.69/oz

 Did you catch it was in bold, thus meaning Otto thought it was important, and not irrelevant?

Report this comment
#16) On August 14, 2011 at 4:49 AM, HarryCaraysGhost (84.23) wrote:

+1 rec

Report this comment
#17) On August 14, 2011 at 10:12 AM, outoffocus (23.76) wrote:

Isn't Otto the halfbaked bus driver on the Simpsons?

Report this comment
#18) On August 14, 2011 at 11:22 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

GMX ... and I'm actually trying to save you from further embarrassment at this point ... stand down! You can not shift attention from the fully descrecited allegations you and your blogger friend leveled against the company to an entirely separate matter regarding GPL's sequential cost increase, which .. again ... to be absolutely 100% clear ... had NOTHING whatsoever to do with a change in accounting procedure as you both wrongfully claimed. I put that last part in bold because I thought it was important ... did you get that?

Report this comment
#19) On August 14, 2011 at 11:33 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

I will discuss GPL's result with the community, but I certainly have no intention of discussing them with you. You have more than adequately proven over the years, and particularly this past week, that attempting to teach you anything is a complete waste of my time.

Report this comment
#20) On August 14, 2011 at 11:49 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Looks like Otto has adopted the same strategy: failing to admit the falsehoods contained within his prior tirades, and attempting to deflect attention away from those discredited allegations into a sideshow discussion of rising sequential costs. You two make quite a pair.

Check it out ... the guy actually plays the "Ad hom" card in his reaction to my rebuttal. Are there any rational witnesses here who happened to see his original posts? Is that not priceless?

Report this comment
#21) On August 14, 2011 at 11:49 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Looks like Otto has adopted the same strategy: failing to admit the falsehoods contained within his prior tirades, and attempting to deflect attention away from those discredited allegations into a sideshow discussion of rising sequential costs. You two make quite a pair.

Check it out ... the guy actually plays the "Ad hom" card in his reaction to my rebuttal. Are there any rational witnesses here who happened to see his original posts? Is that not priceless?

Report this comment
#22) On August 14, 2011 at 12:14 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

And by the way, since the community's least aptly named member referenced GPL's "lacklustre" performance YTD, I thought it appropriate to share one more fact.

Here is GPL's YTD performance relative to the Global X Silver Miners ETF:

Report this comment
#23) On August 14, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Bays (29.33) wrote:

Is Otto and GMX the same person?  He's defending this guy like he's his brother.

Report this comment
#24) On August 14, 2011 at 1:29 PM, dcgatlanta (35.32) wrote:

TMFSinchiruna's track record speaks for itself.  He's generously shared his spot on macro and micro analysis with this community. He's also shared the tools he uses so that we may conduct independent PM research successfully.  It's a shame that some stranger on the web needs to attack him.  I'll guess it's because $40 monthly subsription fees don't last long when a true expert dispenses vast knowledge for free.

I'd welcome a credible dissenting voice to TMFSinchiruna's opinions.  That would be make for a fantastic debate from which we'd all benefit.  We don't have that with Otto or GMX.


Report this comment
#25) On August 14, 2011 at 1:31 PM, SN3165 (< 20) wrote:

Sinch, don't sweat this guy... we all know who the real "goldminingxpert" is on this site. You've helped and continue to help so many people here, for free, and it's very much appreciated.

Report this comment
#26) On August 14, 2011 at 1:50 PM, TSIF (99.98) wrote:

TMFSinchiruna  ; I also appreciate your time and energy to reply.  Unfortunately, as I know all too well, you can't ignore situations like this, but there is no joy in responding either.  Responding is a distraction, not responding in your situation is not an option either.

While I'm hesitant about junior mining because there are numberous unknows and things that can occur, I do understand the difference between cost basis and cost of sales. And I'm very surprised that anyone looking at miners at any level wouldn't understand that you can't compare them against each other, especially quarter against quarter.  Of course, the arguments in situations such as this do shift around from topic to topic and I commend you for not letting that happen here.

You never win an argument such as this, but you can minimize your loses somewhat.  Otto may have a handle on some of the Latin America/South America political issues, but that doesn't translate into valuation abilities. His approach shows that he's not up for facts, just theories and publicity.

I was not surprised to see fluctuations any GPL on an earnings report.  There are few companies that had to run the guantlet the past week who did not get undue selling pressures unless they turned thier product to gold bars this quarter.  The volitility presents buying opportunities and I appreciate having additional data to conduct indepth DD to determine where to place my limited funds.

I look forward to your separate reply on why Great Silver had other mining difficulties this past quarter. 


Report this comment
#27) On August 14, 2011 at 1:52 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Great attempt to change the subject. Great Panther results stunk, due to the cash cost suddenly soaring fifty percent, your explanation for why cash cost now = cost of goods sold makes no sense. Not discussing their results, when it is your TOP PICK, makes you look a little defensive, if nothing else ;)

Bays: I wish I were as smart as Otto, but I most definitely am not. He is the real gold mining expert, not Chris or myself. I am a Chinese fraud expert *something Motley Fool and Tim Hanson need a little more of around here* but gold is not my speciality. 

To the community: Successfully calling green thumbs on all miners during the greatest bull market in metal history makes you look like a genius for a time. However, touting dogs such as Novagold, ECU Silver, GPL, etc. will end up making you look like a fool when the market finally corrects. Chris has successfully tied his beta to the correct market, but proof of alpha remains to be seen. Remember his abysmal record during the gold mining correction in 08.

Chris: Do you speak Spanish? Do you read local news accounts of what the Latam mining companies are up to? I cannot imagine anyone being bullish on Gammon/Aurico after reading local newspaper coverage of the company, and same goes for ECU.  

Chris is not a bad mining analyst, per se, but he needs to learn to be a little more cynical. He reminds me of all the analysts that Casey Research hired earlier this decade specifically because they had never seen a bear market before. They were hired specifically because they would be more effective promoters of stock. Eventually their wellintentioned gullibility will catch up to them though. After Chris learns the lessons of a real bear market, he could be a special mining analyst, we will see. Not willing to learn from mistakes (and making a low-margin poor management team led companies like GPL top picks) indicate he is still somewhere in the teaching process and that he needs to listen to criticism rather than densely blowing it off. 

Report this comment
#28) On August 14, 2011 at 2:02 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

As a complete aside, not that I have any respect for Tim Hanson, but even he acknowledges that Otto is an expert:

Report this comment
#29) On August 14, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Bkeepr100 (< 20) wrote:

Just a thought to consider.

The argument against GPL might be an attempt to drive down the price of the company and if done on an industry wide scale, the sector as a whole. 

Gold and other PMs are being used more and more as a measuring stick of the country's currency's value. There is a desire by the current political class to break the ties to "true" currency by attempting to print their way out of debt with fiat dollars.  

Thus lower PM prices are to be desired by these people. They are embarassed by the market reaction to their policies. Watch to see if this begins to happen to other companies in all the gold, silver, and other PM sectors as well. Yes there are bad companies out there and one must be careful.

This set of exchanges sounds more like a personal vendetta against you, Sinch, than anything else.

Report this comment
#30) On August 14, 2011 at 2:40 PM, imnotsleeping2 (< 20) wrote:

Sinchiruna I just lurk around here reading your blogs and my guess there are many more lurkers like me. Just want to say I appreciate your work, dont let this guy or others get you down. 

Report this comment
#31) On August 14, 2011 at 3:00 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Bkeepr: I would much rather that someone mount attacks a solid silver miner like Fortuna. I have never bought or shorted in Golden Panther. I would love to buy more Fortuna under $3 though.

Report this comment
#32) On August 14, 2011 at 9:13 PM, TMFMmbop (28.72) wrote:

I'm not in a position to comment on the merits of this debate, but I will say that I enjoy reading both Mark and Chris' work and have enjoyed this debate. As for Ian, you may be a lot of things, such as connoisseur of Mexican cuisine, but reading does not make you a Chinese fraud expert. Though maybe you have picked up Chinese language and forensic accounting skills in the past 6 months. Either way, I'm not really involved here.

Tim Hanson 

Report this comment
#33) On August 14, 2011 at 9:30 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Tim: I give you props for sticking your head in here. That said, you have to quit touting stocks like YONG and CMM. It is embarrasing for the MF as a whole. While you can argue all you want, the fact is that YONG is still way down from when I first wrote about it, CAST is down, and COGO did a nice forty percent one day nosedive after I featured it. There is more pain to come in the China RTO space, and you owe it to your subscribers to get them out of these fraud-ridden stocks.

Report this comment
#34) On August 14, 2011 at 9:51 PM, TMFMmbop (28.72) wrote:

Ian, I don't know when you wanted people to short COGO, but pretty sure it was not before June 4, 2009:

Is YONG down from where you wrote about it? Yes. Is it the perfect company? No. Do I think my thesis will best yours over the long-term? Yes. We shall see -- and cost basis does matter in your assessment of the situation.

Finally, I don't *tout* anything. Both YONG and CMM were first recommended as small positions in diversified baskets of China exposure -- baskets that also included things like YUM and CHL. And every one of our baskets is beating its relevant China index since inception. Further, we are quite frank with Fools about metrics such as AR and CCC that remain worth watching in the case of something like YONG. 

Do with that information what you will. My suspicion is that you'll ignore it and continue your ad hominem attacks in an attempt to build up your own reputation, but this thread is supposed to be about Chris, not me. My pal Otto simply alerted me to it, and I thought it was good reading.

Tim Hanson 

Report this comment
#35) On August 14, 2011 at 10:08 PM, TMFMmbop (28.72) wrote:

And while it's poor form to follow up on my own post, can I also add that it's ironic that you're slamming Chris for being right about gold stocks in a gold bull market, but patting yourself on the back for identifying some Chinese stocks that went down at a time when almost every Chinese stock has gone down? At least apply the same standards to yourself as you do others. To wit:

Successfully calling green thumbs on all miners during the greatest bull market in metal history makes you look like a genius for a time. However, touting dogs such as Novagold, ECU Silver, GPL, etc. will end up making you look like a fool when the market finally corrects. Chris has successfully tied his beta to the correct market, but proof of alpha remains to be seen.  

Proof of alpha remains to be seen indeed. 

Report this comment
#36) On August 14, 2011 at 10:35 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

At comment thiry-four: Nice call on Cogo. I will not comment on YONG, for fear of getting sued, other than to say that it is down forty percent form when I raised questions about it, and that given that their main production facility was recently padlocked, it makes reasonable people wonder how they blew out last quarters reported earnings by such a wide margin. Unless of course they were making up the numbers, as Richard, Kevin and I and others have suggested. (As an aside, given that China is a giant house of cards, beating a China-based index with your recs is no great accomplishment. I would rather invest my money in lottery tickets than the Chinese economy, the losses would be smaller).

The thing you have missed, and are continuing to miss, is that China has a culture of widespread fraud, and that only fraudulent companies have interest in listing via reverse merger. There is precisely no reason why a legit Chinese company, one of the few and proud, would list on an American exchange via reverse merger when they can list on Hong Kong and get 3x the valuation. Why would a likely fraud like Exceed, EDS, list here, and get a 6 PE when its competitors list in HK and get a PE 4x that? A reverser merger is an implicit admission of fraud. The fact that all Chinese RTOs trade at crazy low PEs indicates that most market participants have figured this out. If you want to invest in China, go buy stocks on the Hong Kong exchange.

At comment thirtytwo: Do you speak Mandarin or have a background in forensic accounting? 

I personally have neither, though the fact that I have teams of translators that help me with research, plus people I can get accounting expertise from overcome that shortcoming. Just about all the hedge fund folks I work with are not Mandarin speakers -- or forensic accountants -- and yet we have exposed plenty of fraud throughout the China space. It does not take a knowledge of Mandarin to realize that CCME, CAGC, RINO, LFT, Sinoforest, YONG, COGO, CHBT, etc. are up to something. Just look at the margins and whether their story makes any sense. No Mandarin (or forensic accounting) required.

Report this comment
#37) On August 14, 2011 at 11:11 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

What is this article, if not touting? Definitely a strong promotional push for CMM, which continues its run toward zero with consistent speed. Just as at CHBT, who famously made their fake banking website to trick their auditors, you are likely to end up finding out that the cash does not exist. There are two reasons CMM could have a hugely negative enterprise value; the market is wrong, or the cash does not exist. As China Biotics taught us, when in doubt, the market is not wrong; the cash is simply an illusion.

Report this comment
#38) On August 14, 2011 at 11:36 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

I do agree with you that your basis on Yong, seven bucks a share according to CAPS, puts you in good shape. Your are down less than fifty percent. Compared with China Media Express, YONG is doing great.

Report this comment
#39) On August 15, 2011 at 3:20 AM, AfoolwondersNot (< 20) wrote:

I have nothing to add except that I am one more voice that has the utmost of respect for Sinch. He is a class act. I am a witness to his generosity, which goes beyond the excellent material he provides for all to see here on the Fool.

Report this comment
#40) On August 15, 2011 at 6:28 AM, peruchocanuck (< 20) wrote:

Sinch you know what's the problem? You dont have FVI as a top dont even have it in your watchlist !!

Mark (Otto) has been bashing GPR for close to 3 years, attack after attack, always letting readers know that he doesnt hold any position on the why the attacks, I always asked myself...the reason may be that Otto is under the payroll of the Ganoza family (the guys who own FVI), and he has been promoting it almost the same time that he has been bashing GPR...don't take me wrong, I also like FVI and have been long since .70 cents, and keep acumulating on the downs..but FVI and GPR are competitors, in the sense that they are in the same league, and compete for the same dollars....they ever compete for the same adquisition targets (rumor of GPR interested in a peruvian asset that FVI has also as a target)...see the charts from both companies and see how they move like twins...

A good example would be Q2 reports...Otto bashed both GPR and EDR, saying that they sucked ( ), and even suggested (WITHOUT PROVE) that the quality of concentrates was lower ("A question of lower quality concentrates getting rejected by the market first, perhaps?")

But when FVI results really sucked back in Q1 (Silver production of 437,123 oz, down 9% over Q1 2010), he tried to sugar coat them with this post (, and no mention of the FACT that the quality of ore was lower ("The drop in silver production for the quarter compared to the same period last year is mainly explained by lower head grades and lower metallurgical recoveries. The latter is the result of higher than expected oxidized material coming from level 6 in Animas vein.")

Report this comment
#41) On August 15, 2011 at 7:23 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:


There is a very big difference between encountering lower head grades and the ludicrous notion of low-quality concentrates that smelters won't accept. Mining epithermal veins underground is tricky work, and coming across patches of lower grade material is commonplace and NOT indicative of questionable management.

The insinuation from Otto and GMX that the quality of Great Panther's concentrate is in question is absolutely ludicrous and lacking any corroborating evidence whatsoever. That is the primary issue I have with GMX, is that he runs around leveling allegation after allegation against companies without ever backing-up the claims with any of the following: verifiable facts, links to source data, carefully presented research, ability or willingness to accept facts that run counter to his allegations, etc.

[Of course, I also have a major problem with the fact that he continues to level those allegations with an unreprentent and unwarranted overconfidence that fails to account for the incredible number of instances where his similarly vocal bashing of companies have been proven wrong, wrong, wrong!  Oh, and I also have a major problem with the way in which he presents himself as if he were an expert in the field, while simultaneously and consistently displaying a woeful lack of knowledge of about the mining industry at large.]

Report this comment
#42) On August 15, 2011 at 7:47 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

I've decided I'm done engaging directly with GMX. Attempting to reason with him in discussions of fact have proven to be a complete waste of my time over the past several years. Although it's a simple task for him to level baseless allegations against companies, my wish to ensure that my fellow Fools not fall victim to unsubstantiated claims or misinformation has compelled me to rebut those drive-by attacks as I have here above and throughout the CAPS archives. For the record, I have put in my time in that pursuit, and I am now done.

So let this serve as fair warning to all members of CAPS who may in the future be tempted to permit their opinions of a company to be even remotely impacted or swayed by this individual's posts: you risk walking into a world where facts are not welcome, where research consists of a link to some dude's blog, where prior failures never yield a less authoritative tone, and where shorting stocks against the tide of our generation's most powerful secular bull market is somehow not considered folly. Only you can protect yourself from that world by not walking through that door, because I will no longer carry responsibility for revealing the emptiness or carelessness of his future allegations.

I'll leave a sign hanging on the door: "Danger: do not enter!" But I will not be there to stand guard. Enter at your own risk.

Report this comment
#43) On August 15, 2011 at 10:21 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Because the post is called "setting the record straight", and I understand that not all Fools may be familiar with the historical context here, I offer a few excerpts from the archival record. The following are all quotes from GMX, except that contained between []:

[Note: the "Sectors" tab in CAPS is presently not functioning (not for me, anyway), but when I looked up GMX's overall CAPS score for picks in the metal and miners sector in March 2011, that overalll score was NEGATIVE 610.99! That's a negative score for picks in gold and silver over the past 4 years of the most powerful secular bull market of our time. He retains an open short pick on ANV that he initiated at $2.73, and in March 2011 he continued to call the company "still a big joke", again, without offering any reasonable evidence to back up his deep underwater claim (stating only: "Due to the fact that their stock price is so inflated, they can make my pick stay red just by doing dilutions at nosebleed prices, but I not closing that pick at $30/share no way.) ANV presently trades for $39.55. In May 2011, GMX's metals and mining sector score was NEGATIVE 805.]

December 11, 2008 (SLW at $4.33 per share) [Note that his admitted lack of knowledge about the company did not stop him from recommending that investors take profits (possibly persuading some to miss an ensuing 761% gain).]

"sell half, keep the rest if you like it. I've never bothered to try to figure out SLW's opaque financials, but as a corporate offspring of Goldcorp, I have to assume the worst. With no cash and lots of debt, they are highly leveraged to the silver price cycle... if you are a bull on silver here, you probably like this stock. If like me you are neutral on silver, than the debt risk is just too much, take your profits with at least 50% of your shares as this market is so tough, take the profits when you got 'em."

May 5, 2011 [2.5 years after the above post, it's clear he still has zero understanding of how to value Silver Wheaton]

"The important thing to realize, though, is that the market is not using fundamentals to value SLW. Any attempt to trade it based on fundamentals will only leave you confused. SLW trades as a high-leverage proxy for the price of silver -- as if it were an ultra vehicle. Nothing more and nothing less."

"A large number of SLW supporters no know about the company other than its basic and admittedly interesting business model. Easy money in, easy money out... momo momo just like 1999 all over again. SLW is more of an AMZN (way overvalued, good business, good management, will be a good investment again in the future) rather than a though. ;)"

[The above post also contains another sampling of classics that I compiled from the archival record after another of his consistently unsubstantiated sets of claims]

May 28, 2008

"GG is the most ludicriously valued of all the miners without even a prayer of ever having earnings to justify their market cap"

"I have often blogged about the wonders of Jaguar Mining, otherwise known as the best stock out there right now any sector or style. Want value, want growth, want good management, Jaguar has it all! I just closed my pick as it ran up from $8.80 to $12.30 in days, but I'm already getting my trigger finger ready to outperform (and buy back my real-life shares) if it drops back below $11."

February 12, 2009:

"The gold bugs make money by profiting off the destruction of our economy. I feel no shame at enjoying their suffering."

June 18, 2010

re: Gammon Gold (now AuRico Gold):

"Outlook: Negative. Target 2011: $2. Target 2015: $0.00"

[post also highlights how little he understands of the junior exploration space and what typical transactions lool like within the industry]

June 22, 2010

"There's still some gold companies such as SA, NG, ANV and GRS that you can safely short if you long a good miner and make it a pair trade."

[I have no particular love for SA or NG, but note the confident language portraying short positions in gold explorers and miners as "safe". As I have properly maintained since I began posting here at CAPS, there is nothing safe about any short position in any gold or silver-related instruments in the midst of this secular bull market. Less attractive names are to be avoided, but definitely not shorted. Since he declared those stocks could be "safely shorted", ANV and AUQ have both doubled, NG is up about 40%, and SA is down about 18%.]

March 14, 2011; short pitch for ECU Silver

"Are you all nuts? Collective delusions? This ongoing scam is a specially built vehicle to bilk gringos of their investing capital. Slap the word "silver" on a corporate shell, mine a piddling amount of metal at considerable losses, operate at negative cash flow eternally, and pay yourself fat salaries while constantly diluting shareholders.Anyone thinking this company is worthy of its $300+Million market cap doesn't really know much about mining I'm afraid."

[In the discussion that followed, he posted a link to another hit-piece by the same blogger who ran the hit pieces against Great Panther referenced above. Again, I did my homework and looked into the facts behind that blogger's allegations against ECU Silver, and found they reflected a similar lack of understanding of the mining sector at large and the procedures by which resources are estimated throughout the mining industry. And there again, instead of conceding that the facts did not support the allegations leveled by his favorite source for unsubstantiated allegations, he resorted to share price performance as evidence he was right about the company. That particular stock is presently mired in weakness, and he will undoubtedly claim that is indeed confirmation that his "analysis" was correct, but as with his allegations against Great Panther the factual basis for his claims IS NOT THERE!]

August 11, 2008:

"TMFSinchiruna has a negative score here and a CAPS rating below 50, Dwot and I however have a much better track record. GDX might not be a bad play here if you want to buy something. I put an outperform on it today in hopes of a snapback rally. I also grabbed some calls on Barrick (ABX). However, the long-term picture still isn't real friendly. As I've said before, this is a trader's market."

February 4, 2011 [GMX was not even aware that his beloved Jaguar Mining had discontinued operations at one of its mines without so much as a press release; yet he loves to bash AuRico ad nauseum for its prior temporary closure of El Cubo.]

"Which producing mine disappeared Silverminer? I see that Sabara isn't on the dropdown menu, but it is still on their site."

[addressed to me]: "Help me understand this. The Sabara mine still shows up on google search and leads to that page, which still loads from their website. What's a ghost link?"

Report this comment
#44) On August 15, 2011 at 10:56 AM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Oh, and @#27, as long as we're setting the record straight. I am indeed fluent in Spanish, and gleaned my own intimate knowledge of the political landscape over the course of 6 years when I lived in Central and South America!

Report this comment
#45) On August 15, 2011 at 11:44 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

"I am indeed fluent in Spanish, and gleaned my own intimate knowledge of the political landscape over the course of 6 years when Ilived in Central and South America!"

Gracias por su respuesta. He disfrutado mucho los discusiones aqui. No me arrepiento de nada sino no vamos a debatir en el porvenir. Buena suerte con sus inversiones. Chau.

Hasta Luego,


Report this comment
#46) On August 15, 2011 at 12:28 PM, peruchocanuck (< 20) wrote:

GMX is not Otto for sure, Otto doesn't use Babelfish translator, he speaks ans write spanish as a true arequipeño  ;)

Report this comment
#47) On August 15, 2011 at 12:43 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

I enjoyed Arequipa, and met some terrific people there (despite witnessing a brutal attack of a fellow traveler at knife-point).

Report this comment
#48) On August 15, 2011 at 12:53 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Hehe, yeah Otto lives in Peru, so he has got me beat there. No babelfish from me though -- all errors were produced entirely by myself. ;)

Espanol no es mi lengua materna, y dado que no he vivido en centro o suramerica, hago errores con frecuencia. En general, uso espanol solamente para leer periodicos o estudiar companias. Voy a mudarme a centroamerica, o sea, no se, espero que pueda hablar como un tico fehaciente. Vamo a ver.

Report this comment
#49) On August 15, 2011 at 1:05 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

[bites tongue]

Report this comment
#50) On August 15, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Frankydontfailme (29.38) wrote:

Adios mio.

To be redundant, thanks for clearing the air Sinch. I admit GMX was starting to get me antsy about some of my holdings. With diversification and a reasonable knowledge of the mining sector (and Sinch's help) Fools should be able to make ample profits in the next two years (at least). 

Valid criticisms should not be ignored.... GMX criticisms are not worth noting. 

Report this comment
#51) On August 15, 2011 at 1:38 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

@ comment 46, Babelfish could have helped with comment 50. ;)

Report this comment
#52) On August 15, 2011 at 2:28 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

perucho: Since Sinchy isn't talking to me anymore, please make sure he comments on this insightful post you made on Stockhouse earlier this year:

I also raised this concern but Sinchy ignored it. Hopefully he will address in his GPL earnings writeup. 

Report this comment
#53) On August 15, 2011 at 2:47 PM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

El kazoo amarillo está quebrado.

Report this comment
#54) On August 15, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Frankydontfailme (29.38) wrote:

te conozco bacalao, aunque vengas disfrazado

Report this comment
#55) On August 15, 2011 at 3:00 PM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

¡El mac del papá le hará salto! ¡salto!

Report this comment
#56) On August 15, 2011 at 3:07 PM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

Chris es un hombre hermoso con la respiración de menta y los zapatos brillantes.

Report this comment
#57) On August 15, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Frankydontfailme (29.38) wrote:

@cato hehe

Report this comment
#58) On August 15, 2011 at 3:42 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

lol... this post definitely needed a new type of comedy. Thanks guys!  :)

Report this comment
#59) On August 15, 2011 at 3:43 PM, mtf00l (43.13) wrote:

Kris Kross will make you, ...

Report this comment
#60) On August 15, 2011 at 3:53 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

So much win here.

Report this comment
#61) On August 15, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Tagit (< 20) wrote:

So much win here.

I think it should read a lot of "wind" here. Plus sore fingers and jaws from typing, laughing and saying ARGG to yourselves.

Sinch – back away from the cliff man, don’t let him throw you over, but defend thy honor and knowledge I say...LOL


Report this comment
#62) On August 15, 2011 at 4:49 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Tagit  Frankydontfailme  catoismymotor  AfoolwondersNot  TMFMmbop  MugMugMug  Bkeepr100  EvilEmpire  outoffocus  whereaminow  wolfman225

Just wanted to let you guys know I very much appreciated your collective show of support. Time to move on, and Fool on!

Report this comment
#63) On August 15, 2011 at 4:55 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Oops, I missed: dcgatlanta  SN3165  and TSIF

Thanks guys!

Report this comment
#64) On August 15, 2011 at 5:14 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Darn it all, I just can't resist this. This little tidbit comes from the latest post by the same blogger who presented the fully debunked and discredited allegations against Great Panther referenced in the original post above.

"Seriously dude, if you can't get basic facts right why the devil should we believe any of the opinionated tosh that comes out your [not very family-friendly term]?"

I think that just about says it all, and provides a fitting conclusion.

Fool on!

Report this comment
#65) On August 15, 2011 at 5:24 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

@comment 64: Just to clarify to your readers, that quote was targetted at neither you nor I.

That invective was directed at Joe Mazdumar, who reported that Humala had taken away Bear Creek's permit, when it fact it was the previous Peruvian president, Garcia, who had done so. That is a rather major screwup; more signifcant than the one you made with GPL cash costs, as your error was complex whereas Mazdumar's error could have been avoided by mere simple (i.e. go to Wikipedia) fact-checking.

Report this comment
#66) On August 15, 2011 at 5:31 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

^I am not sure why you quoted that post anyway. Do you discredit analysts because they use harsh language (not that cakehole is really a harsh term)? Is Otto's conclusion (Mazdumar is kind of dumb for not knowing basic facts like that Garcia wasn't a huge oil/mining supporter and that Humala isn't a crazy Chavez buddy) wrong because he used the term cakehole? 

I understand the MF is a family-friendly site, and trading floor language is not desired here, but one should probably refrain from attacking other bloggers due to their choices in diction. 

Report this comment
#67) On August 15, 2011 at 5:32 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

[irony ... ironnnnyyyyyyy!]

Report this comment
#68) On August 15, 2011 at 5:43 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

You got to chill down man. You haven't discredited anything, you are way too emotionally fired up about this, and now you aren't even making sense. Take a deep breath, walk the dog, and relax.

Report this comment
#69) On August 15, 2011 at 6:06 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

[just noting that I've recced this on all three of my pcs. Otto is in for a couple recs too. Help us out and get this 100! Thanks!]

Report this comment
#70) On August 15, 2011 at 7:20 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:


Let's try a visual aid:

Here's a certain blogger's head:

     -   -



Now watch closely, cause here comes the point of comment #64:

----------- whoosh! --------------- > > >

                 -    -



Report this comment
#71) On August 15, 2011 at 7:25 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Hehehe. Okay. But Otto was right then and he's right now. The blog post he picked on was dumb (don't factcheck which president was in power when an executive order was signed. Oops.) Trying to take him out of context to continue your little whiny-fest is rude and uncalled for. You said you were done with this discussion, and believe me, we all wish you had kept to your word. 

You can have a group counseling session with all your fans here without slinging more rocks at Otto.

Report this comment
#72) On August 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Any chance we can get 5 more recs guys and gals? It'd mean a lot of Sinchy. I am out of computers (and MF accounts) to help the cause with.

Report this comment
#73) On August 15, 2011 at 7:28 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

----------- whoosh! --------------- > > >

                 -    -



Report this comment
#74) On August 15, 2011 at 7:36 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Rec it up folks. These are adorable drawings, and you should rec this thread for its art alone even if you don't like the content. Who knew you could do all this stuff with PIXELS? Score!

Look, here's a cat face. But is it one of a Panther?

              .__....._             _.....__,
                 .": o :':         ;': o :".
                 `. `-' .'.       .'. `-' .'   
                   `---'             `---'  

         _...----...      ...   ...      ...----..._
      .-'__..-""'----    `.  `"`  .'    ----'""-..__`-.
     '.-'   _.--"""'       `-._.-'       '"""--._   `-.`
     '  .-"'                  :                  `"-.  `
       '   `.              _.'"'._              .'   `
             `.       ,.-'"       "'-.,       .'
               `.                           .'
                 `-._                   _.-'

Report this comment
#75) On August 15, 2011 at 7:42 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

                     .-'     ;
                 _.-'   , `,-
           _ _.-'     .'  /._
         .' `  _.-.  /  ,'._;)
        (       .  )-| (
         )`,_ ,'_,'  \_;)  
 ('_  _,'.'  (___,))

No. Don't leave! We still need 5 more recs to get to 100! Come on everyone! 

Report this comment
#76) On August 15, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Tagit (< 20) wrote:

Now sinch I have to admit, he may not have you with Great Panther but, w/pixels he's got ya beat man. lol

Report this comment
#77) On August 15, 2011 at 7:50 PM, silverminer (30.17) wrote:



Now I know what he spends his time doing while he's busy ignoring facts.

Report this comment
#78) On August 15, 2011 at 7:59 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Silverminer/Sinchy: You've got to chill with the personal attacks. Total buzz kill just when we were having a good time and I was getting you some recs.

2 more folks. We're so close! 

Report this comment
#79) On August 15, 2011 at 8:10 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

100 Recs! Good work folks in recognizing Sinchy's timeless blog here. This one will go down as one of the great threads of CAPS history. Congrats to everyone who has taken part in this fine affair. It's been a blast! Truely must-read, from the blog to the deeply penetrating but yet side-splittingly hilarious comments, this has been a real work of art. Does CAPS have a hall of fame to put this thread in? Anyway, it's been awesome. Good work CAPS!

Faithfully Yours,


Report this comment
#80) On August 15, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Tagit (< 20) wrote:

The 100th was because of me, called a buddy and he clicked rec then his words were:

Thanks - I was in the middle of dinner, but now I have to read all this sh_t !!!


Report this comment
#81) On August 15, 2011 at 8:44 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Thanks for your support Tagit. We sincerely appreciate it.

Report this comment
#82) On August 15, 2011 at 10:07 PM, richthegeek (< 20) wrote:

GMX & Otto,

You really could do so much better.

There are those of us that lurk here in the background hoping to learn something about the PM space, though we have neither the time nor talent to reach the conclusions that any of you do. That is why we rely on these Blogs.

As interesting as the articles are the comments following them: some in agreement and some not. Some of the best ones, in fact, are those that disagree.

Disputing statements and theories here is great, but not when done with such vitriol that borders on character assasination. At that point any factual assertions get lost. Throwing in expletives further degrades it to something akin to what we left behind in high school. So please clean it up and provide an adult-like debate so that the rest of us could learn a bit more. It would make those debates here


P.S. Chris - Kudos for not lowering to that level.

Report this comment
#83) On August 15, 2011 at 10:27 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:


Sinchy never got the point Otto and I were making in the first place. This made having a debate over theory difficult. Rich, I urge you to reread my posts, ignore Otto if the language really bothers you, and you will see that I did offer comments that disagreed without character assassination or expletives.

Since Sinchy kept dragging this thread out, even after he claimed he would stop, I resorted to adding humour -- look at GMX the gringo making a fool of himself with his shameless use of his crappy Spanish. Hey look, here is a picture of a panther. Etc. 

I never got vitrolic, and I have no hard feelings. Since Sinchy missed my point on GPL, I wrote an article that will clear up my view on GPL and show him the facts he overlooked. I hope he will reasonably consider the situation and offer a thoughtful rebuttal to the community rather than the sort of emotional basket case spewing we saw in this thread.

But whatever man, if two obscure bloggers have a heated discussion in a dark corner of cyberspace, does anyone care? Not really. It is all water under the bridge.


Despite my sarcasm at times, I have actually enjoyed this thread. You learn lots about a person when they get mad, and the community has seen a side of Sinchy it usually never sees. A learning experience for all of us. I may hang around here, or I may just head back over to Seeking Alpha, where readers are a little less uptight. Sinchy may live up to his claim to ignore me, but I doubt he will do that either. The CAPS telenovela will resume with another episode soon I am guessing.

Until then. GATOS

            _             _
           | '-.       .-' |
            \'-.'-"""-'.-'/    _
             |= _:'.':_ =|    /:`)
             \ <6>   <6> /   /  /
             |=   |_|   =|   |:'\
             >\:.  "  .:/<    ) .|
              /'-._^_.-'\    /.:/
             /::.     .::\  /' /
           .| '::.  .::'  |;.:/
          /`\:.         .:/`\(
         |:. | ':.   .:' | .:|
         | ` |:.;     ;.:| ` |
          \:.|  |:. .:|  |.:/
           \ |:.|     |.:| /
           /'|  |\   /|  |`\

            (,,,/     \,,,) 


            )     (
           =\     /=
             )   (
            /     \
            )     (
           /       \
           \       /
            \__ __/


Report this comment
#84) On August 15, 2011 at 10:32 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Que pena. Mi gatito segundo no ha sido presentado aqui correctamente. Ojala que mejore el software de CAPS. Necesita una depuracion. ;)

Report this comment
#85) On August 15, 2011 at 11:20 PM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Off-topic? Has anyone bought from the Great Panther silver store? I am a huge cat fanatic, so I am really tempted to help fight their excess inventory issues and buy some of their panthertastic silver. I think I will get a five ounce bar and five onesies. Anyone else bought from their store? How long do they take to ship?

I want them shiny panthers!

Report this comment
#86) On August 16, 2011 at 12:50 AM, goldminingXpert (28.81) wrote:

Okay, this is seriously too funny. Out of my more than ten thousand song iTunes library song library, the Julieta Venegas song Me Voy just came on randomly. I will take it as some sort of outside message that I should leave this thread in peace.

Me voy. Que lastima pero adios. Me despido de ti y me voy. Que lastima pero adios, me despido de ti. 

Report this comment
#87) On August 16, 2011 at 7:31 PM, GiftOfNewLife (< 20) wrote:

@TMFSinchiruna, I also appreciate your work here. I lurk around here to read your blog posts and I enjoy your thorough analysis. Thanks

Report this comment
#88) On August 17, 2011 at 10:37 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Report this comment
#89) On August 18, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Jbay76 (< 20) wrote:

Wow, this has been an insane thread that I never thought I'd see posted...While I think debate is good, wow ths is insane.  I personally owe a lot to Chris for generously sharing todo su informacion sobre los comapanies que la mia precious metales en el mundo. 

Pues, si puedemos contrarnos un dia a celebrar este generosidad, te prometo que voy a traera cerveza especial, y fruerte, por el occasion... hasta el dia..

Salud, amor y pesetas y tiempo para gastarlos



Report this comment
#90) On August 18, 2011 at 4:28 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Report this comment
#91) On August 18, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Bays (29.33) wrote:

I think you meant to post this link:

Report this comment
#92) On September 07, 2011 at 4:01 PM, XMFSinchiruna (26.56) wrote:

Report this comment
#93) On September 09, 2011 at 11:11 PM, tdonb (33.29) wrote:

Great read, as your posts always are Sinch. Please keep the real information flowing.


Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners