which is more likely?, page-3

morning stefoid,


"Focus is a more risky proposition than some other gold companies, pure and simple. "

" The market is saying FML is *risky* - and its right - it is!"

Depending on your definition of risk - the first sentence could be correct.

On top of that though you seem to think that a company is risky because the market says it is. (your second statement).

On that basis I assume you think ABC childcare was NOT risky - because the market didn't say so, in fact it loved it - until it imploded.

You would also have thought that Bougainville Copper wasn't a risk because the market said it was ok and too big to fail - until a few shooters on the hill blew away one of the biggest investments of all time.

I believe the market hasn't got a clue how to measure not only risk - but more importantly value.

If indeed the market were good at measuring either of these things then you would and could never get wild swings.

If indeed the market were ever good at measuring both of these things then stocks, unless they were dividend paying stocks would NOT be worth investing in.

If the market were good at this then the price of gold would be NIL along with the price of vacant land.

If the market were good at valuation then the market would be logical and 'not' emotional - as would most market participants.

But, that's just not the case - now, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be.

Just like psychology is more than 90% of the importance in the individual investors game - so to is it for a market -- no logic involved.

The market cannot ever be good at valuation and risk - because it is run by humans - even when the bots work - their job description is given by humans.

fml is no different to the whole market - it is judged in the main by emotional fools - of which at times I have been one also.

I am not sure which companies fml is more risky than - imo there would only be a handful - and many of commonly seen 'less risky' in my book are decidedly - NO risk - (definition of risk being 'unknown outcome') - why? because some of our biggest gold companies are in deep doo doo - some have amazingly risky assets that they have paid way too much for - but the market highly values them.
Not so fml - fair prices, good assets and good decisions.

If people want to value some of the biggies more - even though the slighest research shows they are tottery - but overlook what fml has and mark it down ---- well, so be it - that is a great thing in my book and I use it to as full advantage as I can.

have a great day

Pinto