FAQs (frequently asked questions)     updated February 16, 2009

Who created this website?

This website was by “Benson”.  I am a private investor, living in the United States.  I have been investing in mining stocks for 7 ½ years.  I am not a rich guy, not yet.  I have a full time professional job.  I do this on the side.  I have no relationship to the popular Gold Writer “Richard Benson”.  I don’t even follow his writings (only because of lack of time).

I do not deal with the physical metals, I only buy and sell the mining stocks.  My portfolio is 100% invested in this sector (or in cash).  I do not have the time to follow other sectors, so I don’t.

I post on the Yahoo message boards as “BensonInvestor”.  Many people on the Yahoo board know me from 2001–2003, when I was posting a popular commentary titled “Gold Stocks 101 for New Investors”.  On StockHouse, I have been posting as “BensonLurker”.  On InvestorVillage, I am BensonAnalyst.

I have had some good success with picking Junior mining companies, and sharing my Analysis with investors in this sector.  In 2005, my biggest focus was a small Junior named Southern Star Resources (SSR.V).  SSR provided a 40x (4,000%) gain to investors in the next 2 years.  I recently posted on InvestorVillage, looking back at the gains in SSR.


What is the "Campbell Resources Stakeholders Association"?

We are a group of dedicated Campbell Shareholders.  We have organized, and are in communication.  As a tight group, we hold about 10% of the company’s shares (over 30 million shares).  We have agreed to vote as a single voting block via proxy, at Board Meetings or Special Meetings. We will “feel a need” if there is a significant corporate development that needs to be defeated.

Updated Clarification:  Monday, February 16, 2009 

Two years after the creation of the Campbell Resources Stakeholders Association (CRSA), what has actually happened with the CRSA is very different from what is described above.  The group has evolved into a highly energized, passionate group of Activists that are operating with little central coordination. 

What is called the CRSA is now become more of a center for education and information, NOT an organized group acting with a central agenda.  Our anger and commitment (as individuals) is actually stronger now.  But our internal organization has drifted apart. 

We have absolutely no agreement among ourselves to vote a certain way in any possible upcoming shareholder vote.  And we have absolutely no active plans to petition Campbell's Board of Directors to change the membership of the Board.  I (Benson) have a personal opinion that the Campbell’s entire Board should resign immediately, but that is my personal opinion.

If there is another group of shareholders that wishes to enlist us (team up with us), and get us to agree to a certain voting agenda, the possibility of that exists.  But this outside group will need to help pay for legal assistance for our group, as we would follow SEC 13D registration requirements with absolute respect for the law.  This situation does not exist at the present time.  

I still relish the idea of a leveraged buy-out of Campbell at a price of around $2.00 a share. If that happened, the new owners could kiss the current group of Executives goodbye.  But an initiative like that would have to occur with absolute compliance with Securities Laws in the United States and Canada. 

Hey André:  If you can’t do the job, why not let someone else take over?  You and René and Warren Holmes still own CCH shares, and this new group (whoever that might be) will get all the mines up and running.  Your personal shares will rise in value - you will profit in the end.  

A question for André Fortier:  If there really are no economic ore bodies as described in all of your SEC and Sedar reports, how come you haven’t started to take legal action against all of the Consultants (including Nuinsco?).   Your (André’s) willingness to just lie down and accept so much failure (while the Insttuaoins buy every share they can get their hands on) is very suspicious.  There has been $30 - $50 million invested here in t last 3 years.  If the reports were wrong, then I believe that Campbell’s Management needs to start filing lawsuits against their Advisors (or Management is to blame).

Or why don’t you (André) just liquidate the company and have a final settlement?  The Copper Rand mill is worth about $200 million, the tax loss carry-forward has a value of about $30 million ($120 million in nominal  value), and the mines are worth at 10 – 100 times more than what is on the Balance Sheet. 

A final settlement would be sweet (far more ASSETS than the DEBT), so shareholders would have plenty to divide up among themselves.  My figure of $0.50 (fifty cents) a share in liquidation value would be on the low side.  Why are you guys holding out?  Could it be because there is actually $1 or 2 BILLION in operating profits waiting for the group that can take control of Campbell?  Maybe?

As proof of this clarification, I point to the following:  There was an individual posting under the name "Denaliguide” (Denali).   He disappeared from the scene in late 2008, and does not even participate on Campbell’s message boards anymore.  It was Denali that was compiling the share count numbers (the number of shares held by Activist shareholders).  I (Benson) was never in possession of current or accurate numbers.  As seen on the message boards, we were last trading insults, not cooperating in anything.

As for Denali, he probably stopped counting a long time ago.  And I personally have no idea who owns what right now – we stopped exchanging that information a long time ago.  

As additional proof, let me point out that the CRSA has had “full private message board” (Facts and Figures) for over a year.  In late 2008, after I started arguing with Denali, he locked me out (kicked me off) the full private message board.  Conversations continued on that board for many weeks, without my participation.  This is another example of the fragmentation that has naturally occurred with the CRSA. 

I can’t even get an email reply from “Cv14” these days!   And “TJTHEMAN” has argued with me over what he considers to be a good price target for CCH shares (my price target is a minimum of $2 - $5).

I am emphasizing that we (the CRSA) is as committed as ever to this cause.  My real point here is that we now come together for education and the sharing of information only.  There is no organized group with any intent to vote (with one voice) on anything. 

We might very well own at least 10% of Campbell’s shares – but the “WE” is a highly fragmented group of individuals, all acting with their own personal goals in mind.   We are definitely NOT in coordination, communication, or agreement on the issue of voting or selling our shares.

---- End clarification dated Monday, February 16, 2009 -----------


Why was this website created?

My main motivation is personal investment profit. 

A group of us shareholders have become angry at some things that have happened with Campbell, and we are mildly suspicious of Management.   We have NO definite proof of any improper intent. Wherever you see comments made, they are really just educated guesses at what is going on.

This website is an effort to “shine a light” on Campbell, and communicate the story (the opportunity for profit) to other investors around the world.

Readers can be fairly certain that I own most of the stocks that I write about.  I don’t think there is anything wrong with that, as long as I disclose it, and stay honest in my commentary.   Right now, all of my focus is on Campbell Resources, because I think their situation is so unique (and so ripe for investment gain).


You guys have established that “Campbell doesn’t want to promote themselves”.  If that’s the case, why should I be buying the stock of a company that doesn’t want to promote themselves?

Easy answer:  We think the situation will change soon.  Blue-chip” Institutions like Sprott Asset Management would not be buying CCH shares so aggressively if they didn’t think that Campbell would be able to promote themselves when the time was right.  

(You can Google “Sprott Asset Management” and “John Embry”, if you don’t know who they are.)

We think that Campbell will start their promotion soon, but we want to see it NOW.  There’s no reason for Campbell to be dragging their feet, unless maybe certain groups haven’t finished their buying yet.  We have waited long enough – many of us have been invested in CCH shares for over a year.  

Take note that there are many corporate events coming up soon, all dealing with Operations - like production startups.  The shares won't stay low in the face of positive news.

Nobody should worry about Mr. Fortier's abilities (or lack of abilities) to promote this company.  If he can’t do the job (when they are ready for him to do it), then we may suddenly hear that he decided to retire (he is close to retirement age).  That kind of change happens all the time in corporations.  I would wish him a comfortable retirement.

These Institutions know what they are doing.  They now own 80% of this company (those  numbers have been documented in my StockHouse posts).   

The Institutions have bought over 300 million shares of this company (if you include warrants).  There is no way they could ever get out of those positions (“distribution”) without a radically different price and volume level in CCH.  They know it.


What is your CCH target share price?

My personal target price is between $2 and $5 a share.  I hope to see this share price around the time that the Copper Rand and Corner Bay projects are at “full production”.  I invite everyone to read my Fundamental Analysis – there is a link on the home page.

The biggest variable in determining target price is “what PE multiple will the market pay?”  I believe that the market will value CCH as a gold producer, where the average PE rations are between 20 and 40.  A PE ratio of 60 is not out of the question for a gold producer, if they have something really exciting going on.  

The fact that Campbell has arranged royalties on 3 of their former properties (Pitt Gold is not a pure royalty, but participation) would qualify a something “really exciting”.  Royalty income is considered the “holy grail” in this industry.  Just study the market valuations of Royal Gold (NYSE:RGLD), or study the history of a company named Franco-Nevada (since taken over).


What are your best examples that that the company might be down playing things?

Updated Dec. 12th:
Several more recent examples, for example... in 1995 there was an official company press release that documented a Gold Resource of least 550,000 ounces GOLD at Copper Rand.  I have calculated that this resource would actually represent over 1 million ounces of Gold, because 1) It was in addition to known reserves at the time, and 2) everything gets recalculated upwards with higher gold prices.

But mysteriously, the company doesn’t want to talk about this, and no recent company documents refer to this resource in any meaningful way.  The link to this press release is on the home page.

Link
5 pieces of Evidence (and current news) regarding the 1 million+ ounce Gold Resource at Copper Rand

- The press comments by Mr. Fortier after the rock fall.  It was absolutely ridiculous for a CEO to be saying that, in my opinion.  Read the “Chronicles of the Down Play” on this website.

- The apparent reluctance (not proven) to reveal accurate on-going costs at their mines.

- The apparent reluctance to promote their own product, even after promising shareholders that such promotion would now start.

- The failure to issue a press release on the recent high grade gold discovery at Joe Mann

- The apparent “dragging out” (our opinion only) of the CCAA issue, long past the dates originally given.


Why might they be down playing things?

This is all a guess – we have no solid proof of anything.  It’s all opinion.  

1) The primary reason (guess) would be to give the Institutions time to buy more shares before the price moves up.  Insiders are also probably taking advantage of the low prices (we have seen recent Insider buying reported).

2) There may be a group of Institutions that may be hoping that small retail shareholders get frustrated and sell their CCH shares.  More shares for the “big boys” to scoop up.   People should also remember that we are entering the slow period (summer) for mining stocks.  They may be hoping (praying) that some CCH holders sell now, just as the sector pulls back in general.  

But small shareholders should not be so quick to sell.  My last “home run” Junior stock pick (SSR.V, now GEA.TO) started it’s move in late Spring, and never look back.  When the Fundamentals are right, and the stock is undervalued, it doesn’t matter what time of year it is.

3) There may actually be a “back room” plan to try to takeover Campbell, or do a leveraged buy-out (LBO), while the shares are cheap.  It’s a theory – we have NO evidence of that.  That theory fits nicely with the observation that Campbell has made some moves that would NOT naturally lead to good earnings in the 1st or 2nd quarters.  


What would you guys do if a take-over or Leveraged Buy out plan was suddenly announced?

If the price was right, we might just let it happen.  It’s called capitalism.  Many of us would sell out shares at the determined price, and move on.  If it was a “swap” for shares of the Acquiring company, we would probably evaluate that new company, and maybe hold those shares.

But if we felt that the price was too cheap, we would fight them every step of the way.  

Guaranteed:  “hell hath no fury” greater than this group of Shareholders , if we get phucked out of our expected gains by the Campbell Board of Directors.  

The Shareholders Group has already been making contacts in the media.   We have also been spreading our story by other means.  

We would also invite the TSX Regulators in, and tell them exactly where to look.  The main question we would raise is whether there has been Internal Conflicts of Interest and/or failures to disclose information that should have been disclosed to shareholders.  We would have many things to closely scrutinize.

We might also lend a hand to an outside group that expressed interest in making a counter offer.  Remember that the “Campbell Shareholders Group” now controls at least 10% of the outstanding CCH shares, and that number will grow.   

And as a real long-shot – the Shareholder Group might possibly have an opportunity to participate in a counter offer, with a Financial Backer.  It’s a long-shot, but would anyone here like to be a partner in the LBO of Billion dollar mining company?

[note to Management:  the longer the share price stays low, the longer these ideas germinate in people’s minds.]

As far as raising the issue of Insider Conflicts of Interest, many of these issues have the risk of personal legal liability (for Board Members} associated with them.  The Board of Directors would be best advised to conduct Campbell’s activities in a manner "beyond reproach".  We are watching their every move, and deeply want to see Campbell be successful in their stated corporate mission.  


What if the reason this is all happening is because the company may want to give Campbell employees a chance to buy shares?  Don’t you [Benson] feel empathy and concern for the miners?

I hope the Miners buy lots of shares, and I hope they all prosper.  I have nothing against the Miners at all.  But they have also had plenty of time to make their share purchases – It’s been many months since the financings closed.  And the company can give them options, and add a Share Purchase Plan for all employees (great idea!).  

The biggest issue here is one of “free and fair” markets for all.  It is Management's absolute responsibility to generate value for shareholders (that may even be part of the definition of a "public company").


What other things might Campbell Management be down playing?

1) I think that Corner Bay will turn out to have a much larger copper resource than Campbell Management is willing to talk about.  They have already verified a copper Resource of over 250 million pounds of copper  (Nuinsco- NWI.TO gave some exact numbers in their most recent report).  

But the current resource estimate is only from the shallow depths of the deposit.  People can study the Corner Bay drill results, and see the depths for themselves.  Compare to the depths at Copper Rand.  Then look at the drill hole map in the Prospectus.  I think it's also in the 2006 Annual Report.  The full Geologist Technical Report in available at www.Sedar.com, dated September 2006.

My “blue-sky” model for Corner Bay (after about 2 years) is for 2 – 3 ramps, and annual production of 30 – 40 million pounds.  They have the copper, and it’s shallow depth.  Why limit themselves to production of only 16 million pounds a year?  

In all your analysis, remember that Corner Bay earnings will be split 50/50 with Nuinsco (not the case for the Copper Rand mine – that’s 100% owned by Campbell).  

I think that Mr. Fortier would dismiss this “3 ramps at Corner Bay” scenario as “pure fantasy”.
 

2) I think management is down playing the profit per pound of copper at Corner Bay.  The ore has a grade that is 2x – 3x higher than the grades at other similar projects.  With all other things being equal, that means production costs per pound that are 2x – 3x CHEAPER.  But other things are NOT equal,.  The deposit is also shallow depth, and that also means cheaper costs. 

I think production costs at Corner Bay will be under $1 per pound, on an on-going basis.  It appears that Campbell likes to lump together startup costs and ongoing production costs, and come up with a higher number to give shareholders.  I wonder why?


3) Management also seems to be downplaying costs at Copper Rand (but we have no solid proof of this).  They have released some numbers that show Copper Rand production costs of over $2.00 per pound copper.  But even the Prospectus (released September 2006), available in Sedar, on page 49, shows that production costs will drop by HALF after the first few quarters. 

Why doesn’t management talk about that?  It’s in the Prospectus, and the numbers were “signed off” by various experts and attorneys.


4) Campbell doesn’t talk much about their exploration portfolio.  It is HUGE – hundreds and hundreds of exploration claims (maybe close to 1,000 claims), all in the highly prolific Chibougamau area.  Campbell’s stated corporate mission is to become a “Mining Consolidator in the Chibougamau region”.  Not bad for a 15 cent stock.