|

As SilverStrategies.com editor Sean Rakhimov tells us in this exclusive
interview with The Gold Report, the economic crisis may go on for a
generation but the market is a separate animal that will stir back to
life sooner. He expects physical gold and silver to lead the parade,
with base metals lagging 12-18 months behind, followed by share price
recovery for the majors and on down the line. When picking stocks to buy
now, he says investors have to decide for themselves whether a company
will survive the washout; it may be tough going from here to there, but
sticking with survivors should prove beneficial in the long run.
The Gold Report: Let's start with your take on where are we today, what
has happened, and where we’re going from here.
Sean Rakhimov: Basically we’re in a situation that we’ve long expected.
We all anticipated a big financial crisis, all sorts of problems, an
end-of-the-world type of scenario—not literally, but the world as we
know it. And I think we’re there. This is the big one and it’s for real.
Where we go from here is largely a function of what the powers-that-be
will do. We have some idea of what they will do; they will do all the
things that will make it worse. I go by the theory that they will always
do the right thing, but only after they exhaust all other options.
TGR: When you say the big one, how much further are you expecting both
the markets and the international financials to erode?
SR: The markets are a separate story. Don’t confuse what the markets
will do with the general crisis or economic situation. Markets are a
different animal; they can do all kinds of things that do not fit into
your thinking or should not have happened given the economy or the
political situation, or what-have-you. I want to be clear on that so
that people don’t assume that if I say, “Oh, this is going to last a
while, that automatically means the market is going to not recover for a
long time.” The economic crisis, I think, is going to last for a
generation. I foresee a twofold crisis here, or maybe three stages. The
first one is what we're going through right now - a debt crisis.
At some point down the line we’re going to have a currency crisis, where
the dollar will stop being the reserve currency of the world. I don’t
know how long before that happens. It’s a matter of whoever runs first
to the door, basically. I was just reading some articles. Iran is
converting their foreign exchange reserves into gold. China is trying to
do some of that. It only takes a few of these until there’s a domino
effect and when that happens, things should play out quickly.
TGR: What do you mean “play out quickly”?
SR: This crisis, I think, has been a good example, where within three
months we ended up in a completely different environment. If the dollar
stops being the reserve currency of the world tomorrow, I expect things
to happen quickly. It may take a decade until it gets started, but once
it starts, I expect things to unravel quickly. The reason for that is we
have maybe 20 to 30 major players in the world that can make a
difference. I’m talking about countries and maybe some other entities
such as sovereign funds. And I believe it’s going to be very difficult
to bring everybody to the table and get them to agree on a plan that
everybody would sign on to. Even if they did sign on, I think it’s going
to be very difficult to make sure everybody sticks with it.
As soon as they break ranks, I think within six months the whole thing
is going to break apart. Whatever accord they come up with, if it’s
going to be Russia or China or somebody of that size, things are going
to happen even quicker. If it’s going to be a smaller player like Iran
or Venezuela, that may take a bit longer. The significance of it may be
downplayed for a period of time. But ultimately I think most people
understand the dire straits we’re in. At some point it’s going to be
"everybody for themselves" and that’s when I think the current system is
going to fall apart.
TGR: You’re suggesting the dollar will stop being the world currency and
countries will make some attempt to come together to create the new
world currency. Might that be gold or precious metals?
SR: I don’t think the adoption of gold or a derivative thereof as a
reserve currency is going to come from governments, at least not
voluntarily. Eventually, I think they will be forced to.
TGR: Wasn’t that the original part of the Bretton Woods agreement?
SR: Yes, it was, where the U.S. dollar was as good as gold and was
convertible to gold, but we know how that ended.
TGR: You said this crisis could go on for a generation. That’s a long
time.
SR: I foresee maybe several stages of this crisis unraveling and that’s
why I say it’s going to take about a generation. As I said, the first
one is the big debt crisis we have now. Maybe an extension of it will be
some sort of a currency crisis. It’s not just a dollar that won’t be
worth anything, but most other currencies as well. And then I believe
what’s going to really, really change the environment and exacerbate the
situation will be an oil crisis. I do expect oil to hit a new all-time
high, say, by 2011. So within two to three years I would think that’s
going to happen.
TGR: How low will we see oil go this time around?
SR: I don’t have a number on that because I don’t "buy these prices" on
anything. These prices are largely a function of paper transactions, and
yes, some transactions are taking place at these prices. Look at your
Blackberry; a pound of copper is a brick that size. How much work, how
much effort, how much energy goes into that and you can buy it for $1.50
or something in that range. Think to yourself, what else can you buy for
$1.50? I was in Europe a few weeks ago. You can buy a bottle of water
for €3, which is about $4. A cup of coffee costs that or more. I don’t
know what you can get for $1.50 anymore; whereas you can get a piece of
copper the size of your Blackberry for $1.61 today. The prices today are
completely, absolutely bogus. Companies have to mine and sell their
products at these prices. But if you recall our conversation in the last
go-round, I said at some point I expect a complete reevaluation of most
things, but commodities in particular (see here).
TGR: When you say commodities, are you doing base metals, precious
metals?
SR: Everything. Everything that has an intrinsic value. Here’s the
situation. Suppose three of us represent countries. One has oil, the
other has wheat, and I have copper. If I want to buy your oil, I go back
to my printer and print up as much money as I can and buy your oil.
Well, the one with the wheat will do the same thing, print up as much
money as possible and try to buy your oil. At some point people will
stop accepting these currencies, whatever they are, because there’s no
limit to them. Money is printed like leaflets. There’s no backing to it.
When we get to the stage where there isn’t enough to go around—like you
go to a gas station and you can’t get all the gas you need—the
reevaluation will be forced on the market and will be forced on all the
players. So, unless you have something else to offer, something of
substance other than your paper money, I don’t think you’re going to get
any of whatever it is you’re looking for.
So I do expect some time in the next decade that the oil market will
fall apart. Whenever the deficit between production and consumption
reaches a level where it’s going to start to have severe impact on
availability and price, I think countries will go to direct contracts.
That would be nothing new; such markets exist today, say, in uranium,
where direct contracts are the main market and the futures market is
basically an addendum. It’s more of a financial management tool for
participants, rather than the market that determines anything
significant.
TGR: At what level might the supply deficit trigger direct contract
transactions in oil?
SR: Right now the supply and demand is about 85 million barrels a day
supply against 87 million roughly in consumption. Suppose those numbers
get to 90 and 95 (million barrels a day of consumption). At some point
the shortage will become so severe that it’s going to wreak havoc in the
marketplace. Those who have the oil will start to choose who they sell
it to and in exchange for what. And I don’t think it’s going to be
paper. That’s my longer term outlook.
TGR: What should investors be doing?
SR: It depends on the timeframe. If you’re talking about stocks,
investors should take a hard look at their portfolios and ask themselves
one question. Go through each stock and say, “Is this company going to
be around on the other side of this financial crisis?” It may take six
months; it may take three years for all I know. But if the company
survives this current situation, I believe the benefits are going to be
tremendous. Unfortunately, getting from here to there will be tough. It
is already very, very difficult to get any kind of financing. And as we
know, the mining (exploration) sector lives by it for the most part. A
lot of these projects require large capital expenditure, either for
exploration or development. Otherwise, they can’t do it.
TGR: Have you gone through your grid and come up with a list of
companies that make the grade?
SR: I would be reluctant to discuss specific companies, particularly
because investing is about the investor. If you want a simple version,
stick with the major blue chips—but even then, survival is not a given.
For instance, a company like Teck Cominco Ltd. (NYSE:TCK) is in a
serious situation and the stock has plunged dramatically; it’s been one
of the blue chips for the longest time and they’re a very conservative
company.
TGR: Any other suggestions?
SR: If you need a guideline, the way I expect the market to play out
going forward is for gold and silver to come back first. Base metals
will probably lag behind by about a year to 18 months. When I say “come
back,” I mean this downtrend in their price in the marketplace will
reverse. Within two or three quarters after that, majors such as Newmont
Mining Corp. (NYSE:NEM) and Barrick Gold Corp. (NYSE:ABX) will start
making profits, good profits, large profits. Through that, I think their
share price will come back and then they will turn around and buy
juniors that survive this crisis on the cheap to justify those share
prices. That’s the basic scenario I’m going by.
TGR: So you say first the bullion itself.
SR: First the bullion itself. You can never go wrong with that.
TGR: Despite the pullback we’ve encountered? Both gold and silver
suffered during this asset devaluation.
SR: Well, yes and no. In retrospect in a perfect world it would have
been wise to sell our gold and silver and their stocks and go into cash
and try to buy them later on the cheap. In the real world, it doesn’t
work like that. One thing to remember is gold and silver are the only
markets that are driven by fear. We saw a good manifestation of that a
couple of months ago, when gold shot up $90 in one day. We’ll see more
days like that. In fact, it could be tomorrow for all I know, or the day
after.
TGR: Do you see a specific catalyst for this?
SR: Not specific. It can be anything—war with Iran; some big banks going
under; another country defaulting on its obligations. It can be a major
investor like a sovereign wealth fund going to 50% gold or something. It
can be absolutely anything. Now the trick here is gold and silver
markets are not based on large amounts of buying. Let’s say tomorrow
Warren Buffet says he’s going to buy $10 billion worth of gold.
Immediately the supply is going to dry up. People who have gold will
say, “Wait a minute, we’re not selling. The price is going up.” So the
effect of a single event like that in the gold and silver space can
reach far beyond what it would in any other market.
It is important to remember you don’t want to be in and out of assets of
this type on a whim. Even if it takes a year, even if you have
corrections like this, for my investment strategy I do not believe that
gold and silver are amenable to buying and selling as are assets in
other markets. Better to treat them like insurance, where you have it in
good times and bad times. It won’t take a lot of buying to push these
metals back up. And even though the metal prices have come down, if
anything, demand for gold and silver has increased.
TGR: Evidenced by trying to find some coins.
SR: Absolutely and on any level. A week or two ago I was talking to a
gentleman in London who runs a business that basically allows people to
invest in gold. He told me that the gold he has in storage for his
investors has reached some 11.5 tons in about 2.5 years. This is just
one market participant out of who-knows-how-many and he deals mostly
with retail investors. I believe the demand is there now and is only
going to increase. Our current situation is going to add to that, not
subtract from it.
Today’s metals prices are absolutely bogus, as is the price for oil.
Yes, you can buy it at that price, but that is not what it’s worth.
Right now oil is trading much, much cheaper than water, maybe one-third
of the price of water. It should not be possible. I don’t believe in the
rational market theory. I think the market is always wrong in the short
term.
TGR: If people are looking at rolling money back into investments once
the craziness stops, you say a logical sequence is to put some in
bullion first and wait a little bit, buy some majors and wait a little
bit, and then look at the juniors?
SR: That’s always been the theory. My views have not changed. If you
asked me a year ago, I would have told you the exact same thing, so this
is not trying to adjust my position based on current developments in the
market. But in my opinion, that progression is how the market is going
to move forward.
TGR: Doug Casey’s current philosophy is one-third cash, one-third
bullion, one-third stocks. Would you agree, or are you saying to get it
all in bullion for right now? Let’s say you have a high tolerance for
speculation, risk taking. Where would you be?
SR: If you can get bullion at anything close to spot prices, you should
buy as much as you plan to buy. I don’t endorse investors paying 50%
premium, but I do believe in percentage terms the premiums will shrink
at some point.
TGR: So would you buy Central Fund of Canada (AMEX:CEF)? Maybe half
physical and half stock?
SR: Yes, I would, absolutely. And as far as stocks are concerned, it
goes back to asking yourself that one question: “Is this company going
to be around on the other side of this financial crisis?” If it is, by
all means, buy some. I would recommend—as always, this is nothing new
for me—dollar cost averaging. Whether you want to buy 1,000 shares or
10,000 shares, split it into five or six segments and buy one part every
month or so.
The other thing is to reexamine your outlook or your investment horizon.
You have to be prepared to not make any money for maybe about three
years at least. I’m not saying that’s what’s going to happen, but you
have to be prepared for that. Going in, you have to believe in this. I
often use marriage as an example. You marry for the rest of your life,
even if you end up getting divorced next year.
TGR: Things can change.
SR: Things can change. You can learn things you didn’t know. You may
have other factors to deal with that don’t have to do with your
position. But ultimately you have to believe in the company or the
investment you’re making, and you have to give yourself at least three
years to sit on it and maybe take some severe losses.
TGR: Speaking of severe losses, seeing billions evaporate this year has
been a humbling experience.
SR: It is and it isn’t.
TGR: Tell us about the “isn’t.” We know about the “is.”
SR: The “isn’t” part is we all knew big problems would be coming down
the line. And we knew why. Some of us discussed doomsday scenarios. I
think where we went wrong is we did not prepare accordingly. A couple of
months ago I wrote an article to that effect. It was called The Trouble
with Forecasting. Basically the argument I was making is we knew that
things would get bad, really bad. We should have believed our own
predictions. There would have been no downside if we had been more
conservative, more careful.
TGR: Can you give us any names based on various categories—senior
producers, junior producers, exploration?
SR: I can flip that and tell you which companies I own. I own a good
position in Pan American Silver Corp. (Nasdaq:PAAS). I own a position in
Silver Wheaton Corp. (NYSE:SLW) and Hecla Mining (NYSE:HL). Those three
I am comfortable will survive this crisis. One step down in terms of
size and presence in the market, I own shares of First Majestic, IMPACT
Silver and Minera Andes. Then if you go one step down below from that,
companies with no production, I own shares of Esperanza and Silvercrest.
I’ll leave it at that. Obviously, I own a lot of other different stocks,
but I am trying to protect potential investors so I’m trying to be
conservative here.
TGR: Tell us first about the one you mentioned last. What do you like
about Silvercrest Mines Inc. [TSX.V:SVL]?
SR: The best thing about Silvercrest is management. And they do have a
sizeable deposit, something on the order of 100 million ounces in
Mexico. They have advanced studies, including, I believe, a feasibility
study. They do need to build a mine. I don’t think it’s going to be an
overly expensive mine and they don’t need too much lead time. They
probably can be in production sometime in 2010, or maybe even sooner.
But management is the key. I did buy that stock at well over $1. It’s
probably half that today, maybe lower. But this is the type of company I
believe will survive this crisis, come out on the other side and be one
of the beneficiaries of whatever turnaround we see.
TGR: Esperanza Silver Corp. [TSX.V:EPZ]?
SR: Esperanza is a similar story. I like the management, very
conservative. This is a pure exploration company. They do not plan to be
in production, not that I know of. They have discovered two deposits:
one in Peru and one in Mexico. I think the deposit in Mexico is about a
million ounces of gold. In Peru, which should be roughly three quarters
of a million ounces of gold, they have a JV with Silver Standard. That
one is a higher grade. This is a grassroots exploration company, they
like finding deposits. They found two in the recent past, so I expect
more good things from them.
TGR: Minera Andes Inc. (MNEAF.OB)?
SR: Minera Andes is one of the companies that doesn’t have a high
profile, but one of my favorites. It’s been my favorite for about five
years now. Again, very good management, very low key. They focus on
getting things done and not talking big, not too promotional. They have
a mine in production that’s joint-ventured with Hochschild Mining
[LSE:HOC] (which is a large silver producer) in Argentina. They have
another project that they recently put out a resource calculation for—a
copper project, which is a joint venture with Xstrata. Xstrata is a very
large company, so this is another team that knows how to come up with
good assets. I think they’ll also survive this crisis and will benefit
from whatever upside in the future.
TGR: What about Minera Andes makes it one of your favorites?
SR: The management. Again, the management is very conservative, very low
key, very non-promotional, very down to business. You just get a feeling
for people; you see them so many times, talk to them, see how they go
about their business and how they deliver. If they get where they plan
to get and what they do to get there, it gives you a level of comfort.
Minera Andes is one of those that has been through thick and thin and I
think they’re definitely out of the woods in terms of whether they’re
going to survive.
TGR: IMPACT Silver [TSX.V: IPT]. What’s the story there?
SR: I should mention that I am somewhat biased, in that I am a
consultant to the company. But on the flip side, I like them for reasons
other than that. It’s one of my largest silver holdings. They’re in
production in Mexico, very conservative management. They have a good
cash position, one of the lowest costs of production. It’s a small
producer, at this time. They produce about a million ounces of silver
equivalent. But management is seasoned, been around for quite some time
and they know how to operate a mine. Their motto is: "a business has to
make money, otherwise it’s a hobby". They bought an old mine in Mexico,
and been profitable from day one. They’re still profitable, even in this
environment, and I also believe they are going to be one of the ones
that will come through this.
TGR: I’ve been hearing a lot about First Majestic (FRMSF.PK).
SR: First Majestic, I think, is one that has the highest chances of
surviving this crash or this downturn, however you want to call it. I
also think this is one that will get bigger, either through acquisitions
or organic growth. I know the gentleman who started this company, Keith
Neumeyer, very well, known him for years. Very ambitious and aggressive
in executing his business plan. This company should produce on the order
of about 5 million ounces of silver equivalent this year, maybe just
under that. This has been accomplished in about four years. It’s no
small task to get from zero to 5 million ounces in about four years. I
also like First Majestic’s other principal, Ramon Davila, who is the
most dynamic mining executive I’ve seen by far. He is the one who
oversees the operations in Mexico, and is the one who built up Mexican
operations for Pan American Silver in the past.
TGR: He’s got experience.
SR: Experience, knowledge and contacts; a very, very successful mining
executive. First Majestic is going to be around for quite some time
unless, of course, it’s going to be taken over by a major, which would
be a compliment to get to a point where you are an attractive target to
a major. For juniors that’s often of the ultimate goal. I’m not saying
that’s the goal for First Majestic, but it’s like Rick Rule says, you
build a company to keep and somebody else will want it. So I think First
Majestic is going places.
TGR: And they’ve got the capital to weather the storm.
SR: I believe they have about $26 million in the bank. It’s a well
established company in terms of production and operations. They have
about 300 million ounces in resources. They’ve done their drilling,
they’ve got four mines in production right now. They’re undertaking a
major expansion at one of the projects in Northern Mexico. They’re
basically going about their business according to plan. Maybe they’re
making some minor adjustments to cut costs here and there, but
ultimately this company is going to grow.
TGR: What’s going on with Hecla Mining Company (NYSE:HL)? Is it just
silver and the industrial metal and, therefore, demand is off and prices
are off?
SR: All of the above, but I think one of the reasons that is not well
understood is that Hecla is one of the very few companies in this space
that’s listed on the New York Stock Exchange. So it’s one of the more
visible ones and I think they take it on the chin harder than the rest,
particularly because of that listing. The way mainstream investors work
is, “Everything is going down, so let’s short commodities. What do we
have to play with?” And Hecla inevitably pops up on that list. I think
that’s part of the reason it’s been beaten down so badly. Hecla is one
of the best underground mine operators, so I think they will survive.
The company’s been around for 100 years, so I’m sure they can weather
this one—at least that’s the way I’m betting. If I’m wrong, then so be
it.
This is why I am reluctant to discuss specific companies. If you’re
investing in the mining sector, you have to be prepared to make mistakes
and you will definitely make mistakes in many of them. The question is,
of course, in the grand scheme of things, are you making progress or
not, are you making money or not. So long as your portfolio is growing,
you could do much, much worse than Hecla.
TGR: Wouldn’t you think the darling of the sector would hold up better?
SR: It works both ways. It would have been darling in good times and I
think it will be again. At some point they will benefit from that New
York Stock Exchange listing. But in bad times, they take it on the chin
harder than the rest.
TGR: Another company that’s getting some conversation is Silver
Recycling Company [TSX.V:TSR], which is a different play than mining.
What do you know about them?
SR: Silver Recycling has been another favorite of mine. The businesses
they currently control are profitable and they’re still doing okay. This
has been one of the attractions when we first looked at it.
Unfortunately, they’ve been one of the victims of the current credit
environment. While they do have self-sustaining operations, they need to
raise capital to make acquisitions. If they are successful in that task,
and I have to believe they will be, it’s going to be a very, very
pleasant surprise. It’s beaten down with the rest of the sector right
now, but the business plan is sound. I am still optimistic about this
company. In fact, I’m trying to help them get through this. By the way,
chances are you can buy some silver from them because they’ve responded
to the market demand and produce 100-ounce silver bars and silver
rounds, which they sell to investors.
TGR: Right. At a premium to spot, right?
SR: Yes, at a premium to spot, I bought some myself, so I don’t think
the premiums are outrageous at all or out of line with the market.
Not all of Sean Rakhimov’s dot-com dabblings paid off, with at least one
important exception. He traces his interested in financial markets to
that era, when he joined a software development company in 1996. In the
years that followed, he designed financial systems to support different
areas of the investment banking business. He seized the opportunity to
learn about options trading, securities lending, payments processing,
clearing and settlement, fixed income securities and margin
transactions. He’s not only been putting those learnings to work ever
since, but also sharing them with others, with writings published on
such internet portals as Le Metropole Café, 321Gold.com,
SilverMiners.com and—of course—The Gold Report. Sean, who has been
involved in a number of research projects for renowned silver guru and
newsletter writer David Morgan, now publishes and edits his own website,
SilverStrategies.com.
Disclosure: Mr Rakhimov owns a number of stocks mentioned.
|