In this summary report, you will find most of my commentary and conclusions regarding my due diligence
about San Gold Corporation. To inform yourself about all the details of a specific topic of this
stock investment analysis report, I created the Table of Contents page, which you can use as a convenient index page. You can also click on
each topic link in this summary report, to inform yourself directly about the details of that specific part of
my due diligence.
When I started this investment analysis about San Gold Corporation in late February, I still owned the company's
stock. However, after reading the company's press releases of March 10, 2014 and March 18, 2014, I seriously began to doubt whether or not the company still deserved to be
part of my stock portfolio.
As San Gold Corporation is the first stock I analysed according to my due diligence guidelines, I decided to
finish all the investment research I described in the How to Invest in Shares chapter. After I finished this part of my due diligence and concluded
that the company didn't deserve to be a part of my stock portfolio anymore, I also choose not to elaborate my
stock investment research described in the Mining Companies Analysis chapter.
On the evening I finished my due diligence, the company issued the press release of May 12, 2014 which I read in conjunction with the company's latest investor presentation. As it became clear to me that it still will take a long time
before the company's operations will become profitable, I decided to sell the company's stock entirely. On
May 13, 2014 I sold my complete position in the company for 0.15, which resulted in a loss of
0.015 per share. I immediately reinvested the proceeds of the sale of my SGR shares into another stock of my
stock portfolio. In my opinion, this stock is the most interesting exploration company listed on the Canadian
As I do believe the Rice Lake Gold Belt offers great potential, I included San Gold Corporation to my stock watchlist for future reference. However, as management decided not to respond to
my email in which I announced this stock investment analysis report, I will not invest in SGR
as long as the current management team is in place - or until current management convinces me that their
interests are aligned with those of the common shareholders and their attitude towards them has positively
Tomorrow, I will start my next investment analysis about the Canadian listed exploration company from
my stock portfolio. If you want to be informed when I have finished this investment analysis
report, you can leave your details in the name grab form on the Support page.
San Gold Corporation (TSE: SGR; OTCMKTS: SGRCF) is a junior gold producer in the Rice Lake Greenstone Belt, in
Manitoba, Canada - producing between 75.000 and 85.000 ounces of gold in the past three years. Its current resource
base consits of 555,600 measured and indicated ounces of gold (of which 405,400 oz Au are in the proven and
probable category) and an additional inferred resource of 2.4 million ounces of gold. In addition, the company has
control over a 400 square kilometers land package in this prospective gold belt, which offers a lot of brownfield
exploration potential for expanding the current resource base.
As the outcome of these 3 ratio's is higher than the preset minimum values, the company complies with my
first precondition, i.e. the company is determined - at first glance - as fundamentally undervalued.
The most striking data regards to the ownership of the company's CEO, Mr. Greg Gibson, who doesn't own any
shares in the company, although he does own $140,000 worth of "convertible debentures 2013". Mr. Gibson has
been a director since September 3, 2013. Before he started as a director he must have done his own due diligence
about the company in order to determine whether or not San Gold's future seemed bright enough to accept this
job. Perhaps he concluded that the company's future was interesting enough for him to increase his fixed income
by accepting a nice salary, but until now he doesn't seem to believe that it is interesting enough to invest his
own money in the company's common shares.
I also find it shocking to see that the company's financial experts (Mr. Gestur Kristjansson and Mr. Mandeep
Rai: the company's former and current CFO) own so little shares in the company. They have been involved in the
company for a long time now and during this time the company has been trading at an enormous discount to it's
tangible book value. However, these financial experts still haven't decided to invest more of their own money to
acquire the company's common shares. Don't they believe in the company's future prospects?
In total, the corporate insiders hold only 1,807,864 shares of the company, which equals to 0.5% of the
company's total shares outstanding. As the company has a market cap < 100 million, I would have like to see an
insider ownership percentage of at least 5.0%. Therefore I must conclude that the company failed to comply
with my second precondition. I would consider it a very bullish signal if management buys additional
shares in the company around the current share price, to increase their ownership to at least 5.0% of the company's
total shares outstanding.
UndervaluedEquity.com's Country Risk Ranking System
The weighted average of UndervaluedEquity.com's CRRS code equals to 4.67, categorizing Canada into
the highest Country Risk Ranking possible, i.e. CRRS-1. Thus, based on this country risk assessment, the
company passed my third precondition and operates in a relatively safe jurisdiction.
Based upon the information provided in the company's investor presentation and press releases,
management has not convinced me to buy the company's stock at current prices. I conclude that
I have too many questions left unanswered. I will ask management to respond to my commentary by email,
especially regarding Mr. Ian Berzins sudden replacement.
I especially like the involvement of Mr. Dale Ginn. Next to having extensive experience at the larger gold
producers as Goldcorp and Harmony Gold, he is also a co-founder of the company, which I believe is a very
I am a bit sceptical about the recent appointment of Mr. Gibson as CEO as he has multiple directorships: President and CEO of
Kerr Mines, Chairman of Temex Resources Corp., director of Mag Copper Ltd. and a director of SGX Resources. As
of the date of this evaluation, he has control over the following amount of common shares -
directly or indirectly registered to his name, according to the information found on SEDI.ca:
Total Shares Outstanding2 (in
The data in the table above has not convinced me that Mr. Gibsons interest are aligned with those of the common
shareholders. Perhaps Mr. Gibson is willing to explain why he holds several directorships without investing more
serious amounts of his own money in these companies.
Based on the biography's of the company's key management, I believe key management consists of a team
which complements each other's quality's, which I consider a positive sign.
Ultimately, the company must become a profitable gold producer and I am not sure the current management team
will be able to manage the company through this transition.
In the MD&A of September 30, 2013 the company revised its full year operating cash cost guidance to between
$900 and $950 per ounce of gold sold (instead of $800 to $900 which was communicated in the MD&A of June 30,
2013. I consider this increase in cash costs as a negative sign.
Referring to the MD&A of December 31, 2011 the Company sees good potential to increase production from 2011
levels and at the same time to lower the costs. However, until today management didn't succeed in achieving these
preset goals, which I consider as a negative sign too. Therefore, the questions to management
When does management expects to increase production and further lower the cash cost to the levels which
were suggested in the MD&A of December 31, 2011?
What amount of capital is necessary to execute these plans?
Are there any further restrictions, except the amount of capital needed, before management can execute
Based on the outcome of this management compensation comparison, I must conclude that San Gold
Corporation has a "Reasonable" compensation policy.
However, the company's latest proxy circular refers to the compensation paid in 2012. Perhaps management is
willing to disclose what the current compensation of key management is, so that I can estimate if this
conclusion is still accurate.
The total compensation paid declined by $2,407,184 or 40.6% from 2011 to 2012. Normally, I
consider a decline in management compensation as a bullish signal as the company can now instead invest this money
in upgrading the value of its assets. However, when management has done an outstanding job - supported by an
increase in its share price - I believe they have to be rewarded for such an achievement accordingly.
As you can see in the table above - which includes the historical quotes from Yahoo Finance - the long
term shareholders in San Gold Corporation had a horrible year in 2012, losing as much as 58.2% of the value
invested. However, as management's compensation decreased while the company's share price decreased as well,
I rate management's compensation as 'Reasonable' for 2012.
As all the insiders who have traded in the Company's shares only bought shares recently, I
consider this a bullish signal, as insiders only buy shares if they think the price will rise. Overall,
the insiders increased their ownership in the company by 28.0%.
Thus, based on my findings in the table above, I have rated the instituational ownership as positive, as I found
that the total institutional ownership has increased compared to their ownership in the previous period. However,
you should always interpret the change in institutional ownership in conjunction with their total ownership in a
stock. Therefore I have created the following table too:
Shares Held (Latest Reporting Period)
Total Shares Held by Institutions
Total Shares Held by Mutual Funds
Total Shares Held by 5% Insiders
Total On-The-Radar Ownership
Thus, based on my findings in the table above there is nosubstantialcompany ownership by on-the-radar investors according to the latest reporting period. In general,
it seems that most on-the-radar investors recently closed their positions in the Company, based on the information
found on MSN, Nasdaq and Reuters. Compared to the previous period, most institutional shareholders and mutual funds
seem to have closed their complete positions in the company entirely. Therefore, I conclude my
institutional ownership analysis with a negative rating, as the ownership change is greater than
The most striking data regards to Sprott Asset Management, who apparently initiated a new position in the second
half of 2013 by acquiring almost 45 million shares until October 10, 2013. Then, they sold the entire position
before December 31, 2013. They do still own 16,000,000 warrants with an exercise price of 0.18 per share, but if
Sprott was really confident about the company's future prospects, they probably would not have sold this position,
especially when you consider that they have acquired the majority of their position for just 0.125 per share. For
more information about Sprott's investment in the company, you can read the company's press release of September 12, 2013.
In the following table you see the effect on the total amount of shares outstanding and the insider ownership
percentage, when all the relevant employee stock options and stock warrants are converted into common
Total Shares Outstanding
Shares Held by Corporate Insiders
Insider Ownership %
Situation before Conversion of Options and
Situation after Conversion of Options and Warrants
Thus, based on the stock options and warrants analysis, the company does not comply with my minimum share ownership percentage by corporate insiders - even if all the relevant
in-the-money and near-the-money stocks options and warrants are converted into common shares. I
consider this as a negative sign.
Overall, I do not believe it's likely that a short squeeze will happen anytime soon, as the
outcome of all three indicators for measuring the level of short interest in the company are below the
average short interest range.
If you would like to be the first to be informed when I add new content to
UndervaluedEquity.com, please leave your details in the name grab form on theSupportpage!
You can also support me directly by clicking on the advertisements that appeal to
you,or by making a voluntarily donation with Paypal.
Your support helps me to speed up the process of adding great, free content to
What Type of Content Can You Expect to Find on UndervaluedEquity.com
Today's News Related to the Global Energy and Mining Stocks.On
this page a RSS feed is displayed with stock market news related to the energy and mining sectors.
You can subscribe to this free RSS feed too!
How I Conduct My Stock's Due Diligence Investigation Process.If
you want to know what I learned while I was conducting my due diligence, I recommend you to read
all the chapters of the investigation process.
Are These the Best Stocks to Buy Today.In my stock watchlist you
find stocks who offer great potential, but at the time I analysed these stocks they didn't comply
with all my guidelines from my due diligence chapters.
Are These the Best Shares to Buy Now.As the year 2015 has just started, I
believe it's about time that I share my stock portfolio with you. Therefore, you will find my
updated stock portfolio on this page.
Jeroen Snoeks is the founder of UndervaluedEquity.com, a website for
investors passionate about investing in undervalued stocks. ThroughUndervaluedEquity.com, he shares his
experience and knowledge and will soon reveal his personal stock portfolio.