Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Level II  |  Charts  |  Profile  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History

Great Western Minerals Group Ltd V.GWG

Sector: Metals & Mining | Sub-Sector: Industrial Metals & Minerals

Great Western Minerals Group Ltd. is an integrated rare earth processor which manufactures specialty alloys used in the magnet, battery, defense and aerospace industries.
Price: $0.09 | Change: $0.00 | % Change: 0.00%
Volume: 206,281 | Day High/Low: 0.095/0.09 | 52 Week High/Low: 0.175/0.065
View modes: 

GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2.5 stars
April 27, 2013 01:01 pm

Here is the google satellite of their fancy new digs....right across the street from the Global Television News building.  Sounds like a good opportunity for some good PR.

http://maps.google.com/maps?rlz=1T4WQIB_enUS516US516&q=219+Robin+Crescent+Saskatoon,+SK+S7L+6M8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&ei=oQF8UcipL4qy9gTRhIDoDw&ved=0CAsQ_AUoAg

 

 

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2.5 stars
April 28, 2013 08:36 am

Springtrader-- I am not sure those  are new digs. I recall looking at the google streetview some time ago  (last year maybe) and I am pretty sure that was the same building.   I could be wrong .... but it sure does look like the one I saw previously.

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
3.5 stars
April 28, 2013 08:59 am

Ive been there. definetly not new

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2.5 stars
April 28, 2013 10:21 am

gwg & sim:  I lost the ability to highlight and format paragraphs for some reason..............I based my 'new digs' statement on this quote from the 2012 MD&A:  "Due to expansion of the company, occupancy costs rose from $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 to $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2012.  The increase is the result of LCM leasing new facilities ....................as well as the corporate office moving to a larger space after adding personnel."   (page 7)...........................................................I may be wrong, but it reads as if they moved to a new corporate office sometime last year.  Maybe they just leased a larger space in the same building.  The question of the day, though, is, "Is the corporate office worth over $30,000 per month?"  It seems like a lot to me.  Does it seem high to either of you?

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2.5 stars
April 28, 2013 11:01 am

Ok.  This is how I wanted it to look the first time:

.

gwg & sim:  I based my 'new digs' statement on this quote from the 2012 MD&A:  "Due to expansion of the company, occupancy costs rose from $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 to $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2012.  The increase is the result of LCM leasing new facilities as well as the corporate office moving to a larger space after adding personnel."   (page 7).

.

I may be wrong, but it reads as if they moved to a new corporate office sometime last year.  Maybe they just leased a larger space in the same building.  The question of the day, though, is, "Is the corporate office worth over $30,000 per month?"  It seems like a lot to me.  Does it seem high to either of you?

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2 stars
April 28, 2013 01:47 pm

@Spring - The amount paid for leases for a specific location depends on multiple factors, such as price for real state in that location, type of real state, other.  Regardless of the amount, the price will be high if the company pays for something that is not justified.  According to some reports the company has a total of 85 full time employees.  I am assuming that 80% (68 employees) or more of these employees will/should be working directly at locations directly related with production (LCM, Steens and GWTI).  Here I am making an assumption that the company has an overhead of 20% in management which is probably too high or the company has a major problem.  This leaves around 12 employees working in management positions.

From these 12 employees I am assuming that 50% are upper management (most of the upper management is not located in Saskatoon) which will leave around 6 employees in other supporting positions at the head office.  So the question is 30k to support a head office on a monthly basis, is this too much?  In my mind the answer is yes.  I do not see why the company cannot save this money and temporary use of the production locations as head office and/or use a more modest office space until the company's situation changes.

I just do not see the purpose of all this overhead when investors are not even informed on a properly timely and professional manner.

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2 stars
April 28, 2013 01:51 pm

@Spring: The last set of numbers are a little bit off but this still doen't change my concern... the numbers should read ...

This leaves around 17 employees working in management positions.

From these 17 employees I am assuming that 50% are upper management (most of the upper management is not located in Saskatoon) which will leave around 8 employees in other supporting positions at the head office. So the question is 30k to support a head office on a monthly basis, is this too much? In my mind the answer is yes. I do not see why the company cannot save this money and temporary use of the production locations as head office and/or use a more modest office space until the company's situation changes.

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2.5 stars
April 28, 2013 02:52 pm

tierras;  Here is a link to the real estate brochure for the building:  https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/463760/Brochure%2B-%2B219%2BRobin%2BCrescent.pdf

.

It looks like there are 2 floors of 7500 ft each.  Lease cost totals $26 per sqf.  This means that if the company is leasing the full 15,000 sqf, then the costs would be $32,500 per month.  15,000 sqf = 100ft by 150ft.  That is a pretty large area and I can't see them needing that much at this time.  If they are only using 1 floor, the lease cost for 7500 sqft would be $16,250 per month.  That would be much better....but still a lot of area and a lot of cash.

.

Hopefully I'll hear something from IR this week.  I'll be sure to post if I do.

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2 stars
April 28, 2013 04:39 pm

It's the same building they have always been in, that sign for lease has been there for a while. I drive buy there  all the time

 

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2 stars
April 28, 2013 05:06 pm

Spring - It is my understanding that the market for good office space is tight in Saskatoon.  That $26/sq. foot is pretty much the going rate.  But do agree that 15,000 feet seems excessive for the company.  I would not be surprised if they really only were using the lower floor and the company "thinks" it might need the top floor in the future.  Perhaps someone in Saskatoon and a major shareholder, could stop by and ask for a tour of the facility?  If the top floor is virtually empty other than for storage, I think that top floor lease should be dropped at this time and a cheaper, off premises, space be found for storage.  Not a major cost factor but would suggest a more right-sized headquarters aware of the realities, not just the dreams.  Nice sunny day in even Seattle!

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2.5 stars
April 28, 2013 07:15 pm

And , in addition, stop with the option give-aways. >
Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: GWG's new digs

- |
User avatar
2 stars
April 28, 2013 08:18 pm

Stop with the give-away and forever options goes without saying--that seems like PURE arrogance and robbery from shareholders.  There is no evidence that the board even has done its job let alone deserves a bonus.  Their SALARY should be sufficient INDUCEMENT and, if not, they need to be kicked out.  But this money greed seems to infest all levels of most companies--screw the shareholders.  The GWM management needs to be pinned to the wall for this greedy action at the AGM.

Rate this post
0 stars
v
Usefulness

Clarity

Credibility