Goarmy,I'll repeat myself yet again, its about the value...

Goarmy,

I'll repeat myself yet again, its about the value proposition. People aren't ramping its more that the new investors in the company and posters on this forum are genuinely excited about the upside from the company's current valuation of some $5 million. It's fine to caution people and encourage them to do their own research but you just keep repeating yourself.

If the company was capped at $20 million today prior to commissioning then I would probably agree with your conservatism. My investment in this company is substantial, and I can make comments as to where I see things today, not in the past. I have been a shareholder for years, in fact I was first introduced to it by a broker I used to have dealings with at what was at the time Tolhurst Noall. The first shares I bought I paid over 20 cents for so I'm not some Johnny come lately who has just got on board and have just got set at the bottom, I have averaged down numerous times including recently.

I have seen and witnessed the problems of the past and suffered the losses as a result however I have always liked the assets and persisted with the company. The fact is that I along with many other posters here are excited about the prospects from here because the current valuation has priced in and reflects the problems of the past, hence creating the deep value proposition that now is staring us in the face.

The company has gone through what has effectively been a 2 year restructuring process and I have followed the developments very closely in the light of deteriorating market conditions for both gold stocks and small resources in general.

I speak to the company regularly and it's apparent that the exploration upside that now presents itself through Tumi and the disseminated discovery at Tessie are a direct result of the work of Alex Losada since he joined the company. The board has been changed in its entirety in the past 12 months and finally the business has now been recapitalised.

Alex wasn't at the company in the past you keep referring to, nor was Ryan Welker, nor was Kevin Puil and now Ashley Pattison has delivered on funding.

The old Mundo was Langford and Co and was about Brazil. My investment in the company now is all about the substantial assets that is Peru. Brazil doesn't represent 1 cent of value in the current market cap IMO and to be honest I couldn't care less if it was there or not.

So in the past year we have a new board in place, have had exploration success due to the appointment of Alex Losada and his team and AP has been able to raise $4 million via convertible notes in a very difficult environment.

I repeat these convertible notes were offered to "professional and sophisticated investors". According to the company their was a spread of brokers from a number of firms who have participated in the issues on behalf of themselves and their clients, including a couple of small boutique investment funds.

You make the comment in your post to me :

"let's face it if all was that great APG and other sophisticated investors would have been on this like a shot...but its definitely not the case here is it"

So what do you call the people I have mentioned above who have tipped in the $4 million, idiots? They have been on it like a shot.

As for APG its as I keep saying, just like MIZ is evolving and changing so to do investment groups like APG. APG has ben invested in this company for at least 6 years and in fact they last put money into the company via a small placement that was done in June, 2013 and reflected in the increase in substantial holding dated 3rd July, 2013.

Since then have a look at the APG website and the announcements relating to changes in management :

21st October, 2013 APG announced the appointment of a new CEO and a new Chief Investment Officer.
On 20th Feb this year they appointed a new non-exec to the board and on the 28th March they announced the appointment of a new Non-Exec chairman.

So as of today, the CEO, CIO and chairman are all different from those who invested in Mundo/Minera Gold. They have inherited the Minera position from their predecessors. From their point of view I would imagine they are looking at their multitude of investments, got to Minera and seen that they had been owed $2.5 million since 2008, entered into numerous standstill agreements and hadn't been paid back. And what do you say, why wouldn't they give MIZ more money! If you took a loan from the bank, you're bank manager moved on and you defaulted do you think the new bank manager is going to lend you more money if you ask for it? Come on.

APG have been cooperative and still remain as shareholders, I suspect because they are so far underwater and because they have now been paid back $1.5 million of their loan with the balance not due until October next year. And again that's because of the changing of the guard with a new sophisticated investor, Silver Stream (SS) now coming on board.

They have committed up to US$5 million to buy 10 % of the production having already forked out US$1.6 million. Have a look at Kevin Puil's resume who is now a non-exec who runs SS. 15 years financial market experience and has been an advisor/partner and analyst with substantial brooking firms in Canada and funds management groups. In fact Haywood is one of the biggest players in the resource space in Canada and he is a certified financial analyst. So I think he's probably qualified to be able to due the necessary DD on MIZ and at the end of it he was happy to commit to giving them US$5 mill. Is he a sophisticated investor that you refer to? I don't know him personally but his resume would suggest so.

SS do not get their money back, let alone a return on their investment unless MIZ deliver on production. So the results of their DD must have convinced them that the team that MIZ NOW has in place can deliver.

These are all facts as is the current valuation. For new shareholders, note holders and the SS's of this world who are getting in to MIZ, backing the current team at this advanced point of the company's evolution at this entry price without having had t have gone through the baggage of the past then good luck to them. I hope they all make money as it probably means that having averaged down myself the I will make money also.

I was once in a stock called St Francis mining for years who never delivered on anything and all I did was lose money. I kept following it, they changed the board and picked up some iron ore ground in Cameroon which at that point in time seemed like a smart thing to do. Changed its name to Sundance and what was a losing position for many years turned out to be one of the best results I've had. Went from 1 cent to 82 cents with a mkt cap of $1.5 billion with 2 billion shares on issue.

Company's change and evolve and things can turn around. That's what I believe anyway.

DYOR