฿ Donate using Bitcoin! 1LYHyG1WiJsKvxf1p4CA5ApNrniCE26Hns Ξ Donate using Ethereum! 0x6E225E2D29BEB9533Fd36C467981Ea15b8714C24 P Donate using PayPal! paypal.me/mamastinky
Skip to main content
OpenID

News

  • Anyone having problems using the site - please send an email to admin@silverstocker.com with a description of your issue.
  • Please use quoting (or at least make references) in responses so people can understand what comments or charts you are responding to!
  • Newly registered members - If you cannot log in, check your email to activate your account!

Topic: 2Q2019 (Read 85 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
2Q2019
For the second quarter, the production ideal would be to reach the quarterly averages useful to achieve the annual targets confirmed by CDE, ie + - 91500 ounces of gold, 3.6 million silver, 9.5 zinc and 8.1 lead.
This would require a quarterly increase of 17% for gold, which seems possible, and 45% for silver, which is unlikely even if the first quarter had been weak.
For the money, it would require an increase of 0.6M ounces for Palmarejo. Hope!

Re: 2Q2019
Reply #1
For the second quarter, the production ideal would be to reach the quarterly averages useful to achieve the annual targets confirmed by CDE, ie + - 91500 ounces of gold, 3.6 million silver, 9.5 zinc and 8.1 lead.
This would require a quarterly increase of 17% for gold, which seems possible, and 45% for silver, which is unlikely even if the first quarter had been weak.
For the money, it would require an increase of 0.6M ounces for Palmarejo. Hope!
Last year, Q2 production figures were released on July 9th!
Let's hope for tuesday and especially good numbers (but probably well below those of 2Q2018).
I would be happy with 3.5M ounces for silver and 91000 for gold.
What are your forecasts?

  • ken
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Global Moderator
Re: 2Q2019
Reply #2
Don't have a clue. I don't trust CEO's. Hang'em is my attitude.

Re: 2Q2019
Reply #3
Based on the figures that have just been published, I evaluate the Q2 sales at 162M, an increase of 7M compared to Q1, which for me is disappointing!
What do you think ?

Re: 2Q2019
Reply #4
Based on figures released yesterday, I am evaluating the increase in quarterly sales to 7M.
It is in Palmarejo that the increase is the highest and it is good since it is the most profitable mine (Gross margin of 37.6% for Q1).
In Silvertip, there is a problem with the price of zinc increased from 1.19 to 0.49. The price of zinc has decreased by + - 20% since the end of March, but not in the proportion reported at Silvertip!
Note that to meet the production targets, compared to Q2, Silvertip must double its production for Q3 and Q4!
Can we believe it and in addition it must be in profitable conditions!
The 2019 production targets are confirmed, but why is the CEO using the term "Overall" then the production targets are confirmed for each of the 5 mines? This term "Overall"worries me a bit, does it need to to assume a failure for one of the 5 mines?
If the production targets are actually achieved, this should generate for each of the last 2 quarters sales of more than 208M based on current metal prices (1410 and 15.15 for gold and silver)!
It seems a little too beautiful, what do you think?
What is your analysis of published figures?

  • ken
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Global Moderator
Re: 2Q2019
Reply #5
Based on figures released yesterday, I am evaluating the increase in quarterly sales to 7M.
It is in Palmarejo that the increase is the highest and it is good since it is the most profitable mine (Gross margin of 37.6% for Q1).
In Silvertip, there is a problem with the price of zinc increased from 1.19 to 0.49. The price of zinc has decreased by + - 20% since the end of March, but not in the proportion reported at Silvertip!
Note that to meet the production targets, compared to Q2, Silvertip must double its production for Q3 and Q4!
Can we believe it and in addition it must be in profitable conditions!
The 2019 production targets are confirmed, but why is the CEO using the term "Overall" then the production targets are confirmed for each of the 5 mines? This term "Overall"worries me a bit, does it need to to assume a failure for one of the 5 mines?
If the production targets are actually achieved, this should generate for each of the last 2 quarters sales of more than 208M based on current metal prices (1410 and 15.15 for gold and silver)!
It seems a little too beautiful, what do you think?
What is your analysis of published figures?
The term "Overall" in context looks like a projection of averages.