EDITOR: | March 16th, 2015 | 52 Comments

Lifton on “Sunset Blvd” and Molycorp: Too Big to Succeed?

| March 16, 2015 | 52 Comments
image_pdfimage_print

Sunset-BlvdLooking back on it, I think that Molycorp’s challenges were predictable from the day it adopted its Project Phoenix as a goal. The goal, as I have always understood — was a plan to become the world’s largest producer of light rare earths. At the big coming out party in New York City hosted by Dahlman-Rose in 2011 at which the Dahlman Rose partners picked $130 a share as their target price for Molycorp shares I asked the then Molycorp CEO from the podium (I was the keynote speaker) if he would verify what I then had heard said by Molycorp’s PR department that the target production of Molycorp would be 50,000 MT/year; the same total as all of Inner Mongolia combined. His public response was “Yes.”

In fact the restructuring now going on in the Chinese rare earth industries is driven by the same market forces that are forcing Molycorp’s hand with that business model unfulfilled: overcapacity with no parallel increase in demand is driving prices for the light rare earths, cerium and lanthanum, too low for Molycorp to succeed. China’s, and the world’s, largest vertically integrated rare earth producer, Baotou, admitted publicly two years ago that it was overproducing both cerium and lanthanum just to keep up with neodymium/praseodymium demand within China itself. I reported on this at the time, and I have been referring to it since then to direct attention to the fact that cerium and lanthanum production are now liabilities that are necessary in order to produce neodymium and lanthanum.

In today’s world with its vast overcapacity in those rare earths most commonly found and most commonly produced, cerium and lanthanum, there is no economic logic in adding to the non Chinese capacity for producing them other than the perceived threat to the security of their supply. But even this is a bogus concern when you realize that as much as 85% of the existing demand for these two rare earths is within China’s domestic rare earth industry, which has substantial excess capacity even at that level of demand.

Molycorp’s failure to reach profitability is, in my opinion, masking a fundamental change in global resource production economics now being spearheaded by China. Like the academic tendency to over specialize and to look at the trees as if they are not part of a forest so also are investors today less and less likely to look at an asset class member as part of a larger economic system.

This trees and forest misidentification is my explanation of Wall Street’s actions in linking  Molycorp’s performance to that of every other rare earth venture (almost entirely consisting of “junior” exploration companies), and making investment decisions about companies that are completely unrelated to Molycorp as if they were subsidiaries of Molycorp. I think that the Molycorp business model deducible from its physical and economic actions is no longer viable. The Chinese government’s current restructuring of its SOEs, state owned firms, supports this thesis, and in fact guarantees it.

I personally last visited Mountain Pass the summer before it went public. At the time of the plan, as it was explained to me, was to re-start the operation by bringing the existing solvent extraction separation plant back on line utilizing as feed stock an existing stockpile of material prepared before the mining operation was shut down in 1998, which material I was shown and which I was told was 20,000 tons of material already “concentrated” to 70% TREOs (total rare earth oxides). The utilization of the system at the conclusion of the re-start would be such that output could be a total of 4000 tons of separated product per annum. This would allow, with the existing stockpile, for at least 3 years of operation before mining needed to be back up to continue and hopefully expand operations. This seemed like a good plan.

Later in the Fall of the same year I was doing some due diligence consulting for a firm in Toronto, one of the clients of which was Resource Capital, which I was told was the lead partner in restarting Molycorp. The Resource Capital executive on the speaker phone from Denver asked me what would be my recommendation of the best time to go public. I answered, “Right now (November, 2009), because the market is heating up.” He told me that their plan was to wait until the system was up and running in 2012. But the very next April Molycorp went into a quiet period, and in June, 2010, the company made its IPO.

Returning to June 2009: After my tour of the mine; the solvent extraction plant; and the R&D laboratory, which was supporting the re-start of the SX system by modeling it and providing analytical services, the then CEO and I sat down for a private conversation. He asked me for my views. I told him that I believed that once up and running the company could make a profit by just selling its installed capacity of the SX system, which I estimated at 6000-7000 tons per year of combined products. I said that the most valuable of these, in my opinion, were didymium and lanthanum and that  if prices kept going up (as they were then) it looked to me as if they could make a profit of several million dollar a year. He responded that the new Molycorp had a much larger “vision” and that it was going to be made into the largest rare earth producer in the world (again) and a billion dollar company. I disagreed, but I wished him luck.

In the 1950 Hollywood Classic, “Sunset Blvd,” the antagonist, a screen writer named Joe Gillis sets the theme of the movie when he meets the silent era former movie star, Norma Desmond. I have inserted into the quoted passage below a revision of the script that might now be called “Mountain Pass.”

“You’re Norma Desmond (Molycorp). You used to be (the world’s largest producer of light rare earths) in silent pictures. You used to be big.”

She answers:

“I *am* big. It’s the (market) *pictures* that got small.”


Jack Lifton

Editor:

Jack Lifton is the CEO for Jack Lifton, LLC and is a consultant, author, and lecturer on the market fundamentals of technology metals. Technology metals ... <Read more about Jack Lifton>


Copyright © 2017 InvestorIntel Corp. All rights reserved. More & Disclaimer »


Comments

  • Fixed

    cerium and lanthanum production are now liabilities that are necessary in order to produce neodymium and lanthanum. – See more at: http://investorintel.wpengine.com/rare-earth-intel/lifton-on-sunset-blvd-and-molycorp-too-big-to-succeed/#sthash.X0cB7lya.dpuf. Is the production of lanthanum really necessary to produce lanthanum?…lol…yes must be a typo or something like that but I do not believe on has to separate in it’s purity cerium or lanthanum the be a producer of neodymium as i think the extraction of lanthanum and cerium carbonate from the concentrate stream can occur on site as part of the hydrometallurgical process and then simply stored.

    March 16, 2015 - 12:11 PM

  • Chris Berry

    Jack,

    I attended the same conference you referenced above and can still remember watching CNBC earlier that morning when they reported the $125 price target on MCP. I wondered what the analysts and insiders knew that I didn’t.

    One of the things that I think could have really sustained and perhaps accelerated a non-Chinese supply chain of REEs would have been MCP actually achieving their stated goals. Much of the skepticism and lack of interest in the REE space stems from MCP’s share price implosion (which, to be fair, is rooted in several issues). Had the company delivered, today it may have been (a little) easier for the remaining aspirants in the REE space.

    MCP’s earnings announcement after the close today should go some way to providing clarity on whether or not we’re one step closer to the edge or if the company has turned the corner.

    Regardless, watching MCP has been an invaluable learning experience.

    March 16, 2015 - 12:31 PM

  • hackenzac

    I hope that they beat the street for a change. They’ve been nothing but a millstone around the necks of all others in the rare earth space. Their forward guidance should be interesting. Maybe they’ll catch some unexpected lift from neodymium and Sorb-X and we’ll see a classic short squeeze. Their demise as predicted is something I’d like to see proven incorrect but they are scraping no doubt.

    March 16, 2015 - 12:45 PM

  • Mike Sander

    Jack and Chris thank you for your insights on the rare earth space. As an investor I have always been intrigued by companies that produce items for new technologies. I believe it is important for people to know that Molycorp operates under the strict rules the are prevalent in the US. China does not have an organization as strong as the EPA and in such has heavily polluted their country. With the illegal mining and pollution cause by China mining rare earths I believe it is important for companies purchasing end products to know whether or not their products have conflict materials composing them. The other issue that hopefully will lead to Molycorp’s success is the adoption of Sorbx as a replacement product for the wastewater treatment industry. Molycorp’s composition of Cerium is roughly 50% of the mine. If Sorbx can do what it is shown for trial results and if a Cerium based magnet can be shown to be closely suitable as a Neodymium replacement (cost has to be considered) then there is great hope. China’s oversupply, cost overruns, and processing interruptions have really hurt Molycorp. I am an investor in the company and definitely looking at the glass half full. I am thankful for this forum and the wonderful commentators with their value added information. As Chris mentioned today is a very big day for Molycorp and more so on their guidance.

    March 16, 2015 - 12:46 PM

  • Jack Lifton

    Fixed,

    As usual you are on to something. I indeed meant to write “praseodymium.” Mea culpa.

    Jack

    March 16, 2015 - 12:49 PM

  • Jack Lifton

    Veritas Bob,

    I distinctly recall the Molycorp CEO saying from the podium-he was a speaker that day-in response to my inquiry that the target was 50,000 mt per year. Whether or not the “official” target was 40,000 he said in front of his industry colleagues and Wall Street that the target was 50,000.

    Jack

    March 16, 2015 - 1:15 PM

  • Mike Sander

    Hi Bob,

    Good points regarding LREC vs. magnetic rare earths. I hope the analysts on the earnings conference call ask for clarity and insight on Sorbx. Univar is the supplier and currently is a private company soon to go public so there is no information on Sorbx sales found on that end. Molycorp has said that they do not need Sorbx sales to be profitable but it would be a big help in my opinion. Would also like to see some questions asked about R&D regarding new technologies Cerium could be used for. I know the Ames Lab and General Motors are collaborating on a Cerium based permanent magnet but that’s it.

    March 16, 2015 - 1:27 PM

  • JOE O

    MCP will be BK within 6 months. The cash burn is ridiculous. My lord to former CEO really did some job with them. Someone shoudve listened to Jack L during that meeting a few years ago
    The reason I wouldn’t invest in NIO no matter how good it may seem

    March 16, 2015 - 7:05 PM

  • Mr. kean

    I’m gonna put on my calendar from 6 months from now that moly will be bankrupt. See if that happens. Too funny. Sheeple

    March 16, 2015 - 7:40 PM

  • Investor

    Great article. I vote for Mt Pass becoming the SX processing facility only. Feedstock to come from juniors, miners to be outside China.

    March 16, 2015 - 7:51 PM

  • Joe o

    Too funny. Really. Mcp has gone to the market for $$$ so many times it’s crazy. Shares are so diluted that realistically the most it can see is $2 a share u if for some reason the reduced costs and really
    Optimized plant. Maybe it happens in 12 months instead 6. Maybe they dilute again and wind up trading like lynas. Common shareholders are toasted
    They should bought ucore years ago when they could go to market when shares were 35
    Half of what they produce is crap. Cerium? Sorbx gonna change all that?
    Smith ruined them. Plain and simple

    March 16, 2015 - 11:02 PM

  • Tim Ainsworth

    Moly, Mt Pass ASP $9.64kg, sales 898mt against “1,328 metric tons (mt) of rare earth oxide (REO) equivalent production”, says it all really.

    March 17, 2015 - 8:56 AM

  • Tim Ainsworth
    March 17, 2015 - 9:00 AM

  • Dean

    Disaster earnings report and conference call. The way Molycorp is currently constructed, I hate to say: it’ll be extremely hard for them to survive.

    March 17, 2015 - 9:37 AM

  • Mr. kean

    3.5 months into 2015 and I still don’t see no REE uprising.ree prices making their way up but stocks still do nothing. Sector is awash and no one wants to touch em

    March 17, 2015 - 10:04 AM

  • Tracy Weslosky

    Mr. Kean. The REE basket of stocks, minus Molycorp and Lynas were up +33% in February, so I am not sure what your source is: but you are incorrect.

    March 17, 2015 - 10:06 AM

  • Jim

    Jack,
    Where does this leave Lynas?

    Short term?

    Long term?

    Thank you,

    Jim

    March 17, 2015 - 12:47 PM

  • Lifton on Molycorp media coverage: Do not believe everything you read. | InvestorIntel

    […] I said yesterday Molycorp, in my opinion, is too big to succeed, because there is little market, and no demand at this time, […]

    March 18, 2015 - 11:06 AM

  • Jack Lifton

    Jim,

    Lynas is struggling with management issues not its capability to produce.

    Unfortunately I think i foresaw this and mentioned its possibility, but no one at Lynas paid any attention.

    Jack

    April 3, 2015 - 4:58 PM

  • Dan

    Jack, you’ve got to be kidding right? You chose lynas as one of your “survivors” and now that they are failing you are going to claim that you told us so? Even for you this is a bit much, no?

    April 3, 2015 - 6:40 PM

  • Jack Lifton

    Bob,

    I don’t know why Noyrez left, but I understand that it was a resignation followed by a period during which he stayed while they chose a new CEO.

    Jack

    April 3, 2015 - 10:10 PM

  • Pennie

    What do you mean by Lynas struggling with ‘management issues’? I take it you’re not still going on about the female CEO thing, so what exactly do you mean?

    April 3, 2015 - 10:34 PM

  • Alex

    I think problem of Lynas and Molicorp that they consider themselfs as independent producer of rare earth. Really only part of supply chain of final producer will survive at this market. Someone of Japanese company producing car and need magnets have to include the producer plant into it supply chain and cover expenses. Otherwise they will died.

    April 3, 2015 - 11:28 PM

  • Jack Lifton

    Pennie,

    The Malaysian workers have walked out.

    Jack

    April 4, 2015 - 12:56 PM

  • Pennie

    When did this occur?

    April 4, 2015 - 7:55 PM

  • Chris

    According to Mr Lifton, the reason behind the LAMPS inability to produce on spec product at design rates consistently is due to “management issues”. More specifically, the Malaysian workers have walked out of good paying jobs because apparently they do not like having a female CEO.

    Is this what your trying to tell us here Mr Lifton?

    I have emailed Lynas regarding Mr Liftons comments. I will post the companies response, with permission, once received.

    April 4, 2015 - 8:43 PM

  • Jack Lifton

    Chris,

    I DO NOT mean to imply a gender issue; I pay NO ATTENTION to such nonsense, but I am particularly intrigued by people such as you who think that gender/race/religion are drivers of good management.

    “management issues” is a euphemism (look up the meaning) I use when a bad decision or bad decisions cascade into reduced performance in the market place.

    While you wait for the company’s response why don’t you email the Whitehouse and ask why there is no transparency from this regime as promised? If you expect an administrator to tell you why he is doing a bad job then you must also be waiting for the tooth fairy to show up.

    The metric is profit and loss. If you have the one the other is unimportant. This has nothing to do with your gender, race, political affiliation or descent it has to do with performance to objective (in this case to PROFIT).

    Jack

    April 5, 2015 - 10:48 AM

  • Jack Lifton

    Pennie,

    This year. Look at The Straits Times (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia’s leading newspaper).

    Jack

    April 5, 2015 - 10:50 AM

  • Pennie

    Jack, instead of speaking in riddles, why don’t you clarify specifically what bad decisions Lynas management has made in this case, in your opinion?

    April 5, 2015 - 8:12 PM

  • Pennie

    Also, couldn’t find your reference in the Straits Times. Can you provides link, or the article’s headline, to back up your statement?

    April 5, 2015 - 8:24 PM

  • Chris

    Mr Lifton
    You have obviously misconstrued my comments but at least you answered my question.

    While you may find people who think that gender/race/religion are drivers of good management intriguing, I can assure you I am not one of those people.

    To quote you from a previous article;
    “I was leaving Kuala Lumpur late last year after attending a meeting of the Rare Earth Task Force sponsored by the Malyasian Academy of Science, and when I stepped up to the check-in counter for KLM, the Dutch owned international airline, I was shown a notice that stated that the senior pilot, the captain, of the airliner I was scheduled to fly that evening from KL to AMS was a woman. I asked the check-in person, a Dutch woman, why this notice was posted, since I had never in my life seen any such notice, and she told me that some Malaysians object to a woman having such a position of authority over them. This was an aspect, I was told, of the Moslem attitude towards women “working in men’s jobs” in general. She pointed out that the airline would offer anyone who objected a seat on another flight captained by a man.”

    Mr. Lifton, if you are going to provide commentary about an issue you THINK you foresaw without going into any specific detail, you leave others absolutely no choice but to speculate.

    So, Mr Lifton, what exactly was this issue you THINK you foresaw that has apparently caused the Malaysian workers to walk out?

    April 5, 2015 - 9:44 PM

  • Chris

    pennie
    According to the Malaysian media, Lynas is also selling LAMP assets such as plant and equipment.
    It has also been reported that A Lynas spokesperson has denied these allegations and also dismissed any rumours that employees had left the company or that Lynas has dismissed any employees.

    The Lynas spokesperson also said the plant currently has 515 workers, 400 of whom are responsible for the day to day plant operations, the remaining 115 workers were responsible for administrative, security, and other areas.

    April 6, 2015 - 7:41 AM

  • Jack Lifton

    Chris,

    I mentioned the incident at the KL airport to illustrate the attitude towards women in authority that I have OBSERVED in Malaysia. I do not judge other cultures by the standards of my own-as clearly, for example, the Apple Corporation does not either, for example (Apple products are sold in THE MOST REPRESSIVE SOCIETIES ON EARTH TOWARDS WOMEN, Yet I am typing this on a MacBook Air. Does this mean that Mr Cook and I are anti-women???). My personal beliefs are my own business not yours or anyone’s else. I have NEVER met in Malaysia a female corporate CEO or government management level bureaucrat. There are female elected members of the Malaysian Parliament. I know that because I have spoken to a committee of that parliament that included a woman.
    I made the suggestion to Lynas in these pages that it was not a good idea to move their administrative center from Australia to Malaysia. One of the reasons was the cultural attitude towards women in positions of executive authority.
    I do not believe the newspaper report that you cite, and I am standing pat on my assertion that employee discord is very high at the LAMP among the Malaysian nationals who (may) still work there.
    Time will tell.

    April 6, 2015 - 12:23 PM

  • Chris

    Mr Lifton
    Not sure why you are taking such a defensive stance on this matter. Just to be clear, I am NOT accusing you of being anti women nor do I advocate the anti women CEO mentality.
    So my original comment was correct.
    “According to Mr Lifton, the reason behind the LAMPS inability to produce on spec product at design rates consistently is due to “management issues”. More specifically, the Malaysian workers have walked out of good paying jobs because apparently they do not like having a female CEO.”

    April 6, 2015 - 5:47 PM

  • Pennie

    Chris, I gave him the opportunity to back up his sensationalist assertions by providing facts and actual references – nothing doing. As usual, he has now backtracked. From the emphatic ‘the Malaysian workers have walked out’, he is now saying that some Malaysian nationals ‘may’still work there. So you have to wonder at the agenda – is it just scaremongering and mischief making in inducing people to believe there are not enough employees left to run the plant? And, actually advising Lynas on something in the capacity of an adviser is one thing. Now it turns out he just wrote some lines ‘in these pages’ and, quite arrogantly in my view, assumes someone at Lynas had read and ignored this ‘sage’ advice.

    April 6, 2015 - 8:57 PM

  • Jack Lifton

    Pennie,

    I have never advised Lynas on business operations nor said that I ever did. I visited the plant as part of a survey team organized by the Malaysian government to advise the parliament on the plant’s safe operation. I, in fact, “advised” the parliamentary committee that I thought that the plant was a first-class operation. No one at Lynas has ever asked for my advice on managing their business operations; the LAMP, or marketing.
    I think I have better contacts in Malaysia than any of my readers do.
    I am amazed at the venom here. Lynas’ problems are not of my making. I have no agenda at all with regard to Lynas.

    Jack

    April 6, 2015 - 10:05 PM

  • Pennie

    Jack your comment above on April 3 at 4.58pm stated you had mentioned the possibility of management issues but Lynas failed to pay attention suggesting you had made Lynas aware of your views and they failed to heed you. When pressed you then on April 6 at 12.23pm stated that you made the suggestion to Lynas ‘in these pages’, therefore assuming Lynas has bothered to read you or was at all aware of your suggestion. You need to be clear in what you state and what you mean and not speak in riddles or, as pointed out above, people will speculate on what you mean and your intentions. Above all, quote your references. Anyone can get sources in Malaysia, including taxi drivers. Too hard I suppose, to go to the relevant source, Lynas, for confirmation before you publish? But then again, fact checking would mean actual, responsible journalism, not simple sensationalism.

    April 6, 2015 - 10:56 PM

  • Jack Lifton

    Pennie,

    Sensationalism is absolutely prohibited on InvestorIntel. I do not speak Malay or Chinese, but fortunately the language of business and the most commonly spoken language in Malaysia is English. My contacts are businessmen and government bureaucrats. Neither group wishes to speak “on the record.” With all humility I can tell you that InvestorIntel is read by Lynas’ management. You can attack me ad hominem all you like, but that doesn’t change the facts nor does it quite frankly concern me.
    If you are so naive as to think that a publicly traded company will discuss negative aspects of its business operations then perhaps you should simply read the company web sites.

    Jack

    April 6, 2015 - 11:26 PM

  • Pennie

    My comments above stand. You have been caught out on those two backflips on 1.Malaysian employees walking out, suggesting a mass exodus of all Malaysian employees, then saying some ‘may’ still be there (meaning you really don’t have a clue) and 2. You ‘mentioned’ the possibility of management issues which Lynas failed to heed has now become you wrote some lines online regarding the issue and assume that Lynas read and ignored them. Like all the other backflips, including the ‘ice to the arctic’ classic.
    And you have yet to provide a link or reference to the Straits Times article as requested. I rest my case.

    April 7, 2015 - 12:26 AM

    • Tracy Weslosky

      Pennie. Please be respectful to the editorial team and treat them as you would like to be treated. Your obviously passionate about issues relating to Malaysia. Are you Malaysian? Please send me 700 words to info@investorintel.com and I am happy to see what you REALLY want to say. And as for accusing Jack of backflips, he is a very intelligent and experienced professional and is rarer than most of the rare earths on the planet for wisdom, experience and knowledge. So again, please understand that your not fighting with God here, your obviously projecting something you need to make a point about: and I am interested. PS. Jack does not work for you and does not need to provide anything you want when you want it. For the record, at this point in Jack’s career — he only works for himself.

      Your welcome for the free content you receive everyday — and I dare you to take me up on my challenge and send me what you really want to say. Even more important, is WHY do you need to say it. Consider.

      April 7, 2015 - 9:22 AM

  • Pennie

    Hi Tracy, won’t be bothered counting out 700 words, but as for the why, here goes. I am very respectful to those who deserve respect. I have the utmost respect and admiration for valuable contributors to your site such as Steve Mackowski, who alone has made my visit to your site worthwhile, so thank you. I am not Malaysian, although how that is relevant is beyond me, and to infer from my comments that I am passionate about Malaysia shows that you have totally missed the point. My interest in Malaysia extends to my interest in Lynas. I’m not fighting with anybody, although I will take exception to someone who abuses their position (the ability to reach masses online) and influence to make claims and assertions not backed by fact. As a long term investor in a company, to suddenly be made aware that your investment was under threat at that very moment from organised industrial action, is very scary indeed, which is why I requested verification of when it occurred and the source of the information, not an unreasonable requesti I would think. As it turned out, there was no immediate threat, despite the sensational one liner: ‘the Malaysian employees have walked out’. Put yourself in that position and see how you feel. Indeed Jack does not work for me, nor would he ever, however, he does, or should have a responsibility to readers to provide accurate information backed by facts, first time round, without the story constantly changing to suit. Unfortunately, this is not the first negative impression of Jack’s contributions, which is why I persisted with my comments above, which eventually coaxed out the ‘truth’. Thankfully there are still the Steve Mackowskis to look forward to, so thanks again.

    April 7, 2015 - 1:05 PM

  • Investor

    Pennie you still did not answered what Tracy asked you to do? It is not clear what you are after. Can you provide us with facts regarding Malaysia and Lynas? What is your take on the Malaysian workforce and their attitude..? Do you have experience working in Malaysia?

    April 7, 2015 - 7:59 PM

  • hackenzac

    Speaking of hanging by a thread, GWMG missed their bond payment ergo the fat lady is biting the dust bucket.

    April 8, 2015 - 2:55 AM

  • JACK LIFTON

    Hackensac,

    You appear to be well informed,so

    Can you tell us the legal status of GWMG? If it has “missed” a bond payment then it must be in default of the preexisting covenants on that bond. Is GWMG insolvent, or has it declared or has it been declared by a credit rater as not a “going concern?”

    Jack

    April 8, 2015 - 8:53 AM

  • hackenzac

    Here’s the news release. They’re not saying that they’re insolvent but it certainly appears so.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/great-western-minerals-provides-regarding-211521591.html

    April 8, 2015 - 10:19 AM

  • alvarita

    Jack,

    Appearances can be very deceiving. I’d seriously doubt that anyone posting on message boards knows the true legal status of GWM and to speculate is irresponsible commentary. Such commentary is to be expected from certain individuals but one would hope that you would set the bar a bit higher.

    April 8, 2015 - 10:34 AM

  • JACK LIFTON

    Alvarita,

    I am asking and I am asking again if anyone here knows the legal status of GWMG as it may have changed due to the nonpayment of the interest or principal due yesterday to the holder of a bond issued by GWMG. The answer sought is not of an opinion by any party but rather of a news report or a company statement on the issue. This information would be a matter of fact not a stAtement of law.
    It is you not I who are reading sensationalism into a simple inquiry.

    Jack

    April 8, 2015 - 10:55 AM

  • alvarita

    Ok…then might I suggest as a “matter of fact” that the answer is no. No sensationalism intended, simply a matter of fact, especially when you ask a known GWM basher if he or she knows anything about GWM’s legal status. Believe it or not, some of us weren’t born yesterday.

    April 8, 2015 - 11:05 AM

  • BattlefieldRareEarths

    To alvarita, hackenzac & Jack,

    According to GWMG’s news release dated April 7, 2015 they didn’t make the interest payment, however according to the trust deed they have 14 calendar days from that date in which to make the interest payment.

    Hope this provides some clarity…

    April 8, 2015 - 11:06 AM

  • Jack Lifton

    All,

    GWMG weighed in on the topic yesterday after the close of business with the following press release:

    “The previously disclosed discussions between the Company and a steering committee of holders (the “Steering Committee”) of the Convertible Bonds regarding a potential restructuring of the Convertible Bonds have yet to result in the Company and the Steering Committee entering into a binding agreement. The Company continues to explore strategic alternatives to a consensual restructuring of the Convertible Bonds, which may include the initiation of a sale of, or investment solicitation process for, the Company’s assets and business and/or the commencement of proceedings under applicable restructuring legislation. There is no assurance that the Company will be able to restructure the Convertible Bonds or find an alternative to such restructuring.”

    Each of you may draw his/her own conclusions

    Jack

    April 8, 2015 - 11:20 AM

  • hackenzac

    Where’s all the flying gwg monkeys? It looks like the Kool Ade kicked in but just in case, have your flying monkey wrench handy. That’s a rabid bunch as we know.

    April 8, 2015 - 12:06 PM

  • Mr. kean

    Do you still have gwg shares at 17 cents Jack ? Think it’s time you let them go

    April 8, 2015 - 3:03 PM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *