Survey Part1Questions
Showing
46 text responses
it appears we have a management team
that is too finance oriented with little regard for development of mines at low
cost or alternatively deciding to hold off on development until better terms
for financing can be worked out. Development of shafter and LaNegra at any cost
and /or further acquisitions or dilution of shares must be stopped at all cost.
Develop what we have . Get a geologist as CEO and not a money guy looking to
build his own wealth at the expense of the common share holder.FR .T should be
a model to follow.
24/2/2013 10:08 PMView Responses
I am scared the rollback's hidden
purpose is to finance another acquisition on the backs of current shareholders.
If it is truly to get a TSX listing then I am okay with it. The company should
have announced a share buy-back and then a reverse split to get the TSX
listing. As of right now the market has zero confidence in current management.
I wish the company would focus on building value for shareholders with their
current projects.
24/2/2013 8:32 PMView Responses
Many of the questions, and the
wording of many questions, leave much to be desired. Did you ask current
shareholders for their inputs as to the questions to ask, and the wording of
those questions? Whatever the results of this survey, it will be meaningless,
but I hope it makes you feel better.
24/2/2013 4:21 PMView Responses
This company has evolved in the last
5 years as a case study for why investors don't put their money in juniors.
Management has fully diluted its loyal shareholders, insiders regularly sell
their shares into the market, the CEO gets a massive salary regardless of
performance....etc, etc, etc. I would never by another share of a public
company represented by any of the Directors of this company...especially the
CEO, who constantly provides guidance that isn't met.
24/2/2013 9:51 AMView Responses
If I was unable to answer
"yes" to the questions beginning with "Do you have confidence in
. . . " I would not be invested in the company. Some of the questions
seemed worded with the intent of obtaining a desired response. For example:
"Do you think retail shareholders are rewarded when confiscating their
shares via rollbacks of a public company?" Likely nobody wants their
shares "confiscated." However, many shareholders likely support the
share consolidation (I suspect the vote at the end of March will show that most
support it). The inclusion of a word such as "confiscating"
effectively confounds the interpretation of the results to an extent that will
make them effectively meaningless. Another problem question: "Were you
satisfied that retail shareholders were not included in any of AUN's
financings?" Had the private placements been unavailable to retail
shareholders such might well have been a concern; however, they were available.
Many retail investors participated in the private placements. The treatment of
a disputable issue as a fact in the wording of the question again makes the
results uninterpretable in a meaningful way.
23/2/2013 2:32 PMView Responses
My answer to 5, 6 and 7 is a
qualified NO. It would change to a YES if they responde to this survey in a
positive manner and started to run the company in a way that showed that they
cared what us retail investors thought.
23/2/2013 12:19 AMView Responses
Lenic is a banker just like the
crooks at the fed. We need a smart operator to give back the value to the
shareholders in a consistent fashion. Lenic should not be the spokesperson for
this company. His accent, combined with the poor audio found a some venues
makes it difficult to hear and presents a poor front. Aurcana please find a
spokesperson.
23/2/2013 8:42 AMView Responses
Over promising, under delivering,
this stock should be represented by someone else than LR. It seems we keep
hearing a broken record on the interview and everything keeps happening later
than sooner.
23/2/2013 8:41 AMView Responses
we are in bad market sentiment and
environment.
22/2/2013 9:23 PMView Responses
If you want to reduce the share
count, buy them back and retire them. Don't do a rollback as this hurts the
small shareholder who doesn't have the same funds as the institutions. I got
into the stock seeing that if I could accumulate a good amount of shares, then
maintaining that large number will leverage my exposure to the upside
potential. With a rollback, my exposure to upside gain is reduced significantly.
This is also do to the fact that there are psychological price resistance
points, meaning it is harder for a stock to go from $5 to $40 than from $1 to
$8. If Lenic does a rollback, I don't the stock will have the same upward
momentum compared to if we just concentrated on mining instead.
22/2/2013 7:28 PMView Responses
Good communication on a regulare
basis would be a trustfull sign towards ALL the stockholders, not only the
privileged ones. A little respect for the bottom would make this company a
stronghold. Good luck with the job!
21/2/2013 8:56 AMView Responses
Thanks for the opportunity to have
some feedback on the share consolidation. But, I think some of the questions
are "loaded", i.e. I believe you are not in favour of the rollback
because of the nature of the questions. For example, #4. Do you think
management has rewarded their retail shareholders? No, I do not believe they
have rewarded shareholders YET, but I believe management should do what is
right for the company in the LONG TERM, and bowing to unhappy SHORT TERM
thinkers is not the solution.
21/2/2013 8:33 AMView Responses
If there is a rollback, will all
stock option contracts and and any other existing plans for payment with stock
be rolled back in the same proportion. If not, holders of these options or
payment plans would be making 8 times more than originally intended. In
particular, would Lenic's options and share payments be reduced by the same
factor of 8? In short, if all holders of stock receive the same percentage
reduction in present and future shares, my confidence in the plan would
improve. Still, reverse splits fail to improve value much more often than they
succeed. Furthermore, 4 to one combined with greater production and a higher
silver price should work as well.
21/2/2013 12:29 AMView Responses
I think that not all of these
questions were yes or no.... I think generally that rollbacks are not good. I
think a share buyback would be better. However with 461MM current shares
outstanding and eventually another 90-100MM, it would take forever to buyback
shares to increase the value of the stock. If the roll back is intended to get
on to the TSX and a US exchange.... then the focus needs to be exactly that,
immediate upon roll back if a roll back were to occur in order to hold value...
no lag time. I really question the depth of the rollback.... I think 1 for 8 is
very deep but if $5+ is the target... then.... the exposure to greater buckets
pf money and larger funds will be very beneficial to building and holding
value.... that will never happen on the venture exchange. Further, I think that
it needs to be very clear that any sort of dilution post rollback(if it occurs)
cannot happen.... focus on getting La Negra and Shafter turning big numbers and
use cash to finace any expansion... drill to prove up current resources with
revenues.. do not increase share count post rollback... or my next opportunity
to vote against the current board and CEO will be the choice I make!!! Burn me
once........
20/2/2013 10:33 PMView Responses
If Aurcana is absolutely determined
to do a consolidation of shares, let it be less onerous to their sharesholders
and do it at a 1:4 ratio (instead of the planned 1:8) ratio which will still
bring it well in line with their peers. I believe Lenic wants to do a 1:8 so
they can can turn around and do another PP on the backs of their current
shareholders!
20/2/2013 8:22 PMView Responses
I have poured much of my life
savings into Aurcana based a lot on my believing in Lenic R and what he was
doing with the fantastic properties that we hold. I have been very disappointed
with the way that decisions have been made, seemingly with out regard for
shareholder interests. I feel my support and trust has been betrayed.
20/2/2013 12:06 AMView Responses
Lenic had stated that growth in
Aurcana could be achieved with a minimum of share dilution. This was not
achieved. Instead of expanding La Negra using profits and thus increasing cash
flow to finance Shafter, mgmt embarked on a massive dilution that has hurt the
retail investor. First Majestic is a good example of a company buying back
shares and rewarding long term investors in that stock. Their is no excuse with
the growth potential of this stock for it to be less than .70. The massive
float of Aurcana is holding back s/p appreciation. A token gesture of buying
back a few million shares would go a long way to building confidence for retail
investors. A very small dividend would reduce the short sellers by forcing them
to cover. I am no longer adding to my position in Aurcana. Currently holding my
position for now.
20/2/2013 12:05 AMView Responses
lost confidence after being told no
more dilution and then a rollback was anounced. Also it was done at a low share
price. Rollback could have been done at $1.15. 8 to 1 is way to much dilution.
4 to 1 could get us on the other boards, so could positive action rather than
lies and dilution. I see no advantage going forward ,to me the share holder,
the to roll back hurts my future profitability.The stock will now have to move
up .08 cents to make me the same as a .o1 cent move up would have. I'm pissed
at that....Seems lenic lied to us and thru a huge negative at our stock , just
when it had started to gather strenght.
20/2/2013 10:35 AMView Responses
I have been a shareholder for more
than 7 years now and have seen one very common thread in the management teams
that AUN has had over that period; a general lack of timely reporting of
results, failure to deliver on quarterly updates of activities and an
overwhelming penchant to dilute shareholders positions. I have sent several
queries to the AUN investor contact email address and have yet to have even one
acknowledged in even the most cursory manner. I've heard many positive
assessments of Lenic Rodriguez but my personal observation of this entire
management team can best be summarized as less than impressive with respect to
the retail investors. It is hard to know what our strength is as investors but
it is clear we have no more voice than the american taxpayer as they watch
their life work being confiscated via inflationary debasement; I see little to
no difference. My past experience with rollbacks has been with Nortel and JDS
Uniphase from many years ago, reverse split only serves to increase the
shorting potential particularly in a market as heavily manipulated as the
silver and gold space at this time. I have to ask - WHAT THE HELL ARE THESE
IDIOTS THINKING ??? THIS ROLLBACK WILL RESULT IN AN INCREASED SHORTING LEVER!!!
I know PE multiples are still viewed as valid but I no longer see this as being
reasonable in the current environment as it simply is not reasonable in any
way. Lenic and the BOD that allow this madness of dilution then reversal have
failed to deliver on so many occasions and the market has taken the attitude of
show me don't tell me......... For me Lenic is Bernake just another tool with a
printing press
20/2/2013 10:14 AMView Responses
If a little more patience was forthcoming
to let Shafter get into proper production and make good the forcasts the share
price would recover and head in the right direction without doing something
rediculous like an 8:1 split!! Who ever thought of that!
20/2/2013 10:06 AMView Responses
I think Rodriquez should be removed
as CEO. I would bet dollars to donuts that once the reverse split is done,
Rodriquez will once again start doing private placements, thus further diluting
the shareholder value. YoPoetman1@yahoo.com Robert B Burnds, CPA - holder of
150,000 shares.
20/2/2013 12:41 AMView Responses
I would just like to reiterate that
now is the time to concentrate on getting La Negra and Shafter running at peak
efficiency. I am tired of being given misleading timelines and broken promises.
I could possibly support a share consolidation in the future if and when the
shares are fully valued however a share buyback would much preferrable. This is
not the right time and long time retail shareholders like myself have seen
liitle or no gains over five years due to punishing financing activities by the
management of the company. Shareholders are very suspicious that the rollback
is being done to facilitate another financing that would punish retail
shareholders once again.I would plead with management to abandon this reckless
plan and work at raising the shareprice by optimizing and increasing production
at the two current mines.
19/2/2013 10:20 PMView Responses
AURCANA should be focusing upon
current properties. Shafter and La Negra are more than able to increase market
cap by over 600%. There is absolutely 0 need to rush into a reverse split just
so AURCANA can give out more shares to buy more property. Some respect needs to
be given to shareholders who have suffered through several dilutions.
Especially those who were shareholders before the crash of 2008. THIS IS NOT A
GAME OF MONOPOLY. IF management desires a U.S. listing ... ok, fine, start
putting out specific news releases like Timmins Gold(see below). Also start
making aggressive moves like announcing the purchase of 10 000 000 shares. Not
a lot of shares, but the message will be clear to the market. How about
directors actually going in and purchasing shares at market price to show their
confidence in AURCANA? With positive Management action and mine production the
share price can make it to $2.50 quite easily. Once the company proves it is
producing 9 million oz eq. the share price will be approaching $5 and the
company can get their coveted U.S. listing. This can all be achieved within the
next 18 months ... well before silver ever hits $75+ per oz. It needs to be
earned... not bought on the back of loyal shareholders who only invested
because of belief in the properties. May God watch over your decision.
http://www.timminsgold.com/s/NewsReleases.asp?ReportID=565163&_Type=News-Releases&_Title=Timmins-Gold-Reports-Record-Production-of-94444-ounces-of-gold-for-2012
19/2/2013 9:41 PMView Responses
A reverse split only works if there
is a strong leadership that makes good decisions. If the market thinks there is
weakness, the shares will plummet after the reverse split.
19/2/2013 8:34 PMView Responses
Current Aurcana management is not
transparent. Management failed to disclose what lies behind the one and a half
year delay in Shafter I am concerned with the slow rump up in Shafter. The lack
of information disclosure by Aurcana management sucks. I kept adding shares
trusting Lenic Rodriguez who is on record that Shafter would be in 1500 tons
per day production by mid-2012.
19/2/2013 8:28 PMView Responses
I am a medium to long term investor,
not a trader
19/2/2013 6:42 PMView Responses
I could live with 4-1 split. 8-1 is
criminal.
19/2/2013 6:33 PMView Responses
i think if we were to have a 3 -1
roll back and then buy back shares so you dont hurt the share holders as much
it.s ok for the front office to talk big as they give them selves shares every
year plus the big salerieseverytime they open there mouths it hurts the small
share holder i,m 72 and was hoping that this was my year,but it looks like
bankrupt for me if this isn,t making money and bring our company to were it
should be at 5.00 a share and don,t tell me that a 8-1 split will help me as
you are taking 80 percent of my shares away, leaves me with nothing
19/2/2013 12:40 AMView Responses
The board should fire Rodriguez!!!!!
19/2/2013 12:06 AMView Responses
This company needs to get the news
releases flowing. I have not seen the results of ONE drilling core, yet they
are drilling......or at least tell us they are. The list could go on and on.
News, transparence, and information are greatly needed.
19/2/2013 9:31 AMView Responses
We need to reduce our share count to
reach the big boards. It is a positive thing if done for the right reasons. Too
many noisy folks are assuming it will done for the wrong reasons.
19/2/2013 9:06 AMView Responses
LR must step down now.
19/2/2013 1:57 AMView Responses
Learn from Keith Neumeyer. He is
doing things right. Just copy his moves, and you strengthen the confidence in
this management and thereby strenghten the share price.
19/2/2013 1:28 AMView Responses
I'm not against the rollback.
However the timing of the announcement was atrocious and should have been made
adter Shafter was running comfortably as many have now assumed that there are
major problems at Shafter and the rollback is designed to facilitate an
additional private placement. I do not think that a share buyback would have
been a wise decision at this point. Management clearly waited far too long to
inform shareholders of the delay at Shafter.
19/2/2013 12:50 AMView Responses
Yes I have been long on AUN for some
years. Your survey is slanted towards your beliefs and then your going to put
that propaganda on the board. Lenic has taken a company from near BK .08 to
1.25. He is not responsible for the recent slide. In case you missed it, the
whole venture exchange is down 50% in the last 24mths, yes 50%. AUN has shined.
The recent slide in price is for 2 reasons overall market, shafter delay/over
promise and the lack of information. With the way people cry on this board, I
would be reluctant to put out neg details as well. Not Lenics job to thwart
shorts other than to creat value that drives price. He is doing that. The
market will take care of itself when more value is created. No I never shorted
a stock in my life but its a free country. Not many mine startups go smooth.
There is a serious lack of labor with the mining companies. AUMN down the road
just PR'ed their labor problem. You cant blame Lenic for everything and its not
his job to supple tissues and hold investors hands. Im upset at the prise as
well but Im not going to blame Lenic for everything. Some of the drival Matt
talks about is flat out wrong and miss leading.
19/2/2013 12:28 AMView Responses
If someone could provide a name of
someone suitable I would vote in a new company president or a cut in Lenics
pay/compensation. Lenics pay/compensation can return to current level once
shareholder value has been created. Shareholders are not a bank account to be
abused. Printing shares and rolling them back is an amateur ,unprofessional way
to operate a company, the market is telling you how shity your decision was to
do a rollback at a time when the company is not fully up and running. Fail on
meeting your time lines might be palatable but a rollback when we aren't at
100% operations you stupid fuck$!! Can wait to come by your booth at a show and
tell you in person how i feel.
18/2/2013 11:57 PMView Responses
Check out T.TOU, that's how I want
management to run this company from A to Z..
18/2/2013 11:16 PMView Responses
Some of the question seemed loaded
to get a desired response rather than to accurately assess the opinions of the
respondent. While I understand the urge to do such, it limits the interpretability
of the results.
18/2/2013 10:41 PMView Responses
Investors who simply "sit and
hold" are bitter because they are not making money. One HAS to make
ongoing DD and see things as they really are. To blame LR or anyone else is
wrong, investors should look to themselves first and take full responsibility
for their lack of DD.
18/2/2013 10:20 PMView Responses
If Lenic R and the Board don't pull
a rabbit out of their hats and reward shareholders in the next 6 months, they
will lose their credibility with institutional investors, as they already have
with most retail investors. They will be unlikely to be able to secure
subscribers to future financings, and may find that they have trouble finding
anyone to purchase their existing shares.
18/2/2013 9:00 PMView Responses
aurcana are saying the 1 for 8 share
consolidation is the best way forward for share price. I strongly disagree.
Management should concentrate on bringing the production up at both mines and
buy back shares rather than taking the easy route in which existing
shareholders are punished for managements personal gain. I do not see anyone in
management taking a hit???
18/2/2013 8:54 PMView Responses
Companies in-arrears with their
creditors do not get equitable financing. AUN is lucky SLW was willing to negotiate
arrears payments versus saying enough is enough and shut them down. Longs would
have lost 100% versus still being around. The failure of management prior to
Lenic in may 2009 made AUN a non-prime client. Non-prime (dilutive) financings
followed as a result. Non prime clients over time can be come prime again but
its not something that happens inside a couple years. It takes time...Many
consecutive profitable quarters have been demonstrated since Lenic's
appointment. On speculation. If postponement of completing TSX listing in 2012
as promised in 2011 was to avoid the embarrassment because of Shafter
Production Problems... Could restructure and re-listing be an attempt to
demonstrate they are ready to prove they are now ready for a second chance to
become prime? Restructure and new listing with an upcoming failure could be
quite damaging. Targets for 2012 were missed and if duplicated in 2013, a
change could be imminent.
18/2/2013 7:49 PMView Responses
I think the majority of shareholders
have lost confidence in the CEO due to his not looking out for the
shareholders. His propsed reverse split will eliminate the reason that a lot of
us got into the stock in the first place for, which is for leverage. I am sure,
that once silver takes off through it's old highs of $50, that AUN will be so
profitable that the share price will easily clear $5.00 and thereby allowing
mutual funds the ability to buy then. Why ignore the little guy who carried
this company when it was expanding to buy Shafter and its silver stream back.
Reward the shareholders who have been in this stock since it went from $2.00
down to 10 cents. Not all of us are profitable in this stock yet. Consider that
in your decisions Lenic. If you bought in at $2.00, you'd have lost money also.
Look after the retail crowd for a change.
18/2/2013 7:34 PMView Responses
when shares are grossly undervalued
some type of buyback or threat of buyback may be in order we don't know what
acquisition opportunities management is contemplating with the market currently
in shambles, dissaray and cash strapped. eventually market cap will be
determined by cash flow and the stock price will move accordingly we could use
more timely updates showing progress in reaching their production goals and
details of their ongoing operations
18/2/2013 6:51 PMView Responses
aun should just carry on with no
rollback until share appreciation has taken place due to increased revenue from
increased production. nobody wins when a rollback occurs except insiders who
get to reload at ridiculously cheap prices via further pp's and granting of
options. loyal longs get screwed by consolidation almost every time.
18/2/2013 6:49 PMView Responses
It has been 28 months that AUN
retailers that hold long and provide capital for AUN to grow have not been
paid. Seventy cents and 576 million shares is a travesty for those of us that
provided the seed capital for Lenic to finance Shafter and buy out SLW. Instead
of perpetually desiring for growth and expansion the company should concentrate
on rewarding the retail shareholders that have suffered without a return on
investment but paid the highest price in terms of time and capital invested
with Lenic.
