| Account | Shares | Price | Value | % of acct | Cost/sh | Gain $ | Gain % | Target |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 401K | 109 | $37.83 | $4,124 | 0.17% | $31.41 | $700 | +20.4% | — |
In short: "Oh, we own Alamos, by the way. Another good company, another good gold miner." All of the miners "have already done well off the lows here and I think they'll continue to do that."
Alamos is a mid-sized gold producer that sits between the giants and the juniors on his ladder. His comment is simply a quality judgment — "another good company, another good gold miner" — rather than a valuation argument.
The important context is the group call around it: every one of these miners has "already done well off the lows here and I think they'll continue to do that." He's not picking a winner; he's owning the whole rung structure and letting a rising gold price do the work.
29:30So we've got a big — oh, we own Alamos, by the way. Another good company, another good gold miner. And all of those have already done well off the lows here and I think they'll continue to do that, but we like the group. As always you can be wrong and you could go back down and make a new low.
In short: The lead gold-miner long, "we timed AGI almost perfectly at the bottom" — the tremor hit one of its smaller mines while the flagship "has actually done relatively well" and is set to ramp production above a million ounces.
Alamos is a mid-sized gold miner whose shares got hammered when an earthquake hit one of its mines. Singh's point is that the market punished the whole company for damage at a small mine while the flagship operation — the one that actually matters — kept running well and is on track to lift production above a million ounces a year.
He bought into that panic and says the timing was "almost perfect." The wider reason he wants gold miners at all: he thinks real interest rates (what you earn on bonds after inflation) have temporarily peaked, and gold does well when they stop rising.
3:48And as a result, we're in this short-term type of Goldilocks environment. And there's several pockets that we've been buying into this rally. For example, in the gold miner space, we've been long AGI, which had a tremor at one of its smaller mines, but its flagship mine has actually done relatively well and it's set to ramp production up to over a million ounces.
In short: Haymaker's own name (not Muir's), carried forward with a mark: "We gave readers a timely AGI, Alamos Gold, Buy alert on July 27th, and it's popped about 15% since then." It appears inside the very sentence that hedges the endorsement — the thesis is broadcast "with the caveat that both bullion and the miners have had a snappy rally of late" — so the function of the AGI line is two-sided: it is the track-record receipt that earns the house the right to publish a gold call, and simultaneously the illustration of why a new buyer is no longer getting the Jul-27 price. That alert bought at ~$29, "cut in half" from the ~$55 February peak, on 10.4× trailing / under 10× 2027's $3.27 consensus, with the Young-Davidson earthquake treated as a fading one-off and a note that "before long we may bump it up to a Strong Buy." Nothing here upgrades it — no new rating, price, target or Buy-list action is stamped — but the surrounding Muir argument supplies the macro case the July alert was leaning on: China "quietly begun buying again" into post-mania pessimism, gold that "refused to break below 4000" while the dollar and real rates rose, a 25-delta call skew at its lowest since before COVID, and miners at "11x" with "all of that gold decline already in the earnings." Read as: position established, thesis corroborated by an outside voice, chase discouraged.
Alamos Gold is a mid-sized Canadian gold miner — it digs gold out of the ground in Canada and Mexico, so its profits rise and fall with the gold price but faster, because its costs stay roughly fixed while its revenue moves.
Haymaker told readers to buy it on July 27th at about $29, after the shares had fallen roughly by half from their February high. In this piece Hay marks the position: it has "popped about 15% since then." That is the only thing new about AGI here — there is no fresh rating, no target and no new instruction.
What the rest of the post supplies is the reason the July call is working, and it comes from a guest: Kevin Muir, who writes the newsletter The Macro Tourist and whose August 8th gold piece Hay is republishing in shortened form because he agrees with it strongly enough to put his name to it. Muir's case is that the people who bought gold during the late-2025 frenzy have given up, China has quietly resumed buying now that it no longer has to bid against them, and — the part he cares about most — gold simply refused to fall below $4,000 all summer even though the dollar and inflation-adjusted interest rates, the two things that normally push gold down, were both rising hard. When a price won't go down on bad news, somebody is buying it. Once gold then broke above its recent trend, traders betting against it had to buy it back, and the price ran $350 higher.
The honest catch, and Hay states it himself: "both bullion and the miners have had a snappy rally of late." Someone buying Alamos today is paying about 15% more than the readers who acted on the July alert. This is a position being confirmed, not a new entry being recommended.
In short: Bought in the same window — "we bought Alamos Gold, which is a great company."
Alamos is a mid-tier gold producer with mines in Canada and Mexico. Oakley describes it simply as "a great company" and one of the names bought during the six-week replenishment of the precious-metals book.
It fits the pattern of what he re-bought: established producers with real output, purchased after a sharp correction rather than chased during the run.
37:30We bought went back into Agnico Eagle, bought a little company well, we bought Alamos Gold, which is a great company. We bought a little company called Equinox selling at five and a half times earnings 27 earnings and it's still a great buy. But I and then we bought added some silver back, just a straight silver.
In short: Still adding: "China's gold-backed ETFs have seen 14 days of inflows… after many weeks of outflows after the spike in Jan — which is interesting, where we've been adding to gold names like AGI, which did very well at the end of last week."
The trigger for adding was a flow signal rather than a company event: Chinese gold-backed exchange-traded funds recorded 14 consecutive days of money coming in, after months of outflows following January's price spike. Chinese retail demand returning, on top of steady central-bank buying, is what he wants to see before adding to miners. Alamos "did very well at the end of last week."
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
In short: Upgraded back: "I had downgraded Alamos from a four to a five based on price appreciation. But the fact that it's back down again and the fact that they have a very very nice pipeline means I've restored it to a four." Disclosure — shareholder, and a 40-year personal friend of CEO John McCluskey.
Alamos is a mid-tier gold producer. The interesting part here is the mechanics of Rick's rankings: he had cut it from 4 to 5 purely because the share price had risen — nothing about the business got worse, it just got more expensive. Price is part of the rating, not separate from it.
Now the stock has come back down while the company has "a very very nice pipeline" of projects to grow into, so the rating goes back to 4. He discloses both that he owns it and that he has been a personal friend of CEO John McCluskey for 40 years — the kind of conflict he routinely puts on the record.
35:17How do you rate it now?" I had downgraded Alamos from a four to a five based on price appreciation. But the fact that it's back down again and the fact that they have a very very nice pipeline means I've restored it to a four from a five. Disclosure: I am an Alamos shareholder. I'm also a personal friend of 40 years standing with John McCluskey, the CEO.
In short: ★ Today's rating change — upgraded to Strong Buy (SB) on the published Buy List, delivering on the July-27 line "before long we may bump it up to a Strong Buy." The lot is dated 07/11/2022 at a $7.06 cost, marked $28.23 (+299.86%). No fresh prose — the change is stated by the blue-highlighted table cell; the July-27 underwrite (10.4× trailing, under 10× 2027 consensus, a fading Young-Davidson earthquake, central-bank bullion buying, contrarian retail negativity) is unchanged.
Alamos is a mid-sized gold miner Haymaker bought back in 2022 and has ridden up nearly 300%. A week ago Hay put it back on his buy list at $29 — half its February peak — and said he might soon raise it to his top rating. This week he did: it is now a Strong Buy, his highest conviction level. Nothing new is argued; the July 27 case still stands (the stock is under 10 times next year's expected earnings, its reserves have nearly tripled in a decade, an earthquake at one mine is treated as a one-off, and central banks keep buying gold while ordinary investors have soured on miners — which he reads as a contrarian positive).
In short: Moved back to the Buy List at $29 — "an attractive buy, or buy up, point" after being "cut in half from its peak at the start of the year" (~$55 in February), with the senior gold-miner ETF −35% since end-February. At 10.4× earnings, under 10× 2027's $3.27 consensus ($2.32 for 2026), reserves "almost tripled… over the last 10 years" and grades +~35%. The Young-Davidson earthquake (a 12% Q2 production cut and lower full-year guidance) is a fading one-off — "natural disasters… tend to fade into insignificance over time." Bullion's drop is "a correction within an ongoing bull market" (central banks "aggressive buyers," rising bond-crisis odds, fiat debasement), and retail's "truly remarkable" negativity is "a bullish factor." "Before long we may bump it up to a Strong Buy." A long-time favorite — on the 2022 buy list "around $8."
Alamos Gold digs gold out of the ground in Canada and Mexico, so its share price is a leveraged bet on the gold price: when bullion rises, a miner's profits rise faster, and when bullion falls the shares fall harder. That is exactly what has happened. Gold miners exploded higher in late 2025, then rolled over — the main fund that holds the big senior miners is down 35% since the end of February — and Alamos has been "cut in half," from about $55 at its February peak to $29 today.
Hay's team sold into the melt-up rather than trying to pick the top: as the group "went vertical" they sold in tranches on the way up (a dollar-cost-average out), which felt too cautious at the time but locked in a good average exit price before the crash. Since then they have deliberately stayed quiet on miners. This post is them stepping back in: at $29 Alamos trades at 10.4 times its trailing earnings and under 10 times what analysts expect it to earn in 2027 ($3.27 a share), while the business itself has improved a lot — it has nearly tripled the amount of gold it has in the ground over ten years and the ore it mines is about 35% richer.
Two other pieces make the case. The recent bad news is a one-off: an earthquake at the Young-Davidson mine in Ontario knocked about 12% off second-quarter production and forced a cut to full-year guidance — the kind of accident that is common in mining and, Hay argues, "fades into insignificance over time." And the backdrop for gold itself still looks supportive: central banks keep buying bullion, government-debt problems are getting worse, and currencies keep losing purchasing power — so the drop in gold is "a correction within an ongoing bull market," not the end of one. Finally, small investors are unusually sour on miners right after a year in which they rose over 150%; because retail money is habitually wrong at these turns, Hay reads that gloom as a buy signal. Alamos goes back on the Haymaker Buy List, with a possible upgrade to Strong Buy ahead.
In short: Added 5 bps to Alamos Gold — a small top-up to the JUN-21 gold special situation (cheap ~$15B mid-cap miner, ~65% upside to $50).
In short: Named as an existing holding in the SSR value-gold bucket that Kinross is being added alongside ("adding to our value gold miners in addition to Alamos and Barrick").
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
In short: Follow-up after calls with RBC/Jefferies/Evercore: a mine-by-mine NAV gets ~$48/sh (US) — Young-Davidson ~$7 (the tremor-hit mine, only ~15% of NAV; 3-5% impaired), Island Gold ~$27 (untouched, 60% of NAV, 10.5 g/t grade ≈ 5× Young, $988/oz cash cost), Lynn Lake + Mulatos + ~$3.60 cash. ~$25M cleanup capex vs a multi-billion selloff. Now ~0.8× P/NAV (a discount to peers) vs a former 1.2× / 30% premium; ~7% FCF but growing ~30%/yr once the mill doubles to 20k tpd. "Not just a trade — an investment" for a long-term allocation.
Last week a small earthquake hit one of Alamos's four gold mines (Young-Davidson), knocking out part of one tunnel. The stock fell by a couple of billion dollars — but the actual repair is tiny (~$25 million, a few months of clearing rock; nobody hurt, no machinery broken), and that mine is only about 15% of the company's worth. The crown-jewel mine, Island Gold, is 60% of the value and was completely fine — its ore is five times richer and far cheaper to dig.
After calling the analysts who cover it (RBC, Jefferies, Evercore), Singh values the whole company mine-by-mine at about $48 a share. It used to trade at a premium to rival miners; now it trades at a discount to them — even cheaper than riskier emerging-market miners. He's treating it as a long-term investment, not a quick trade: it needs two or three clean quarters to recover trust, and a planned doubling of its processing mill should drive ~30%-a-year revenue growth.
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
In short: Buy, $50 target (+37.6% from $36.34) — 0.7× P/NAV, implied gold $3,120 levered; consistent with his JUN-21/28 earthquake-overreaction special situation (~65% upside call).
In short: Down almost 50% from its March highs on a Young Davidson (Ontario) seismic event that forced a guidance cut — but a "top tier management team," a "temporary problem" that will be worked through. Buying a high-quality miner down ~50% is "usually a good opportunity."
Alamos Gold is a mid-tier gold miner. One of its Ontario mines (Young Davidson) had underground seismic activity, so the company cut how much gold it expects to produce this year and the stock fell about 50% from its March high. Rusche treats that as a temporary, fixable operational problem at a well-run company — and buying a quality miner down 50% is usually a good opportunity. His rule: don't make a permanent decision (selling for good) over a temporary problem.
0:52Yeah. So their Young Davidson mine in Ontario had some seismic activity and it caused them to lower guidance for the year as they worked through the issues there. But you have a top tier management team at Alamos. Great great company. And the stock is down almost 50% from its highs earlier this year.
In short: New gold special situation: a cheap ~$15B mid-cap miner whose 19% Toronto plunge (earthquakes at the smaller Young-Davidson mine, ~3 days downtime) wildly overshot the ~4–6% warranted hit — Island Gold (60%+ of NAV) was unaffected and hit record rates. ~$3B of cap wiped for <$100M of real damage. Bought Canadian shares; doubling via US shares (~$30 Monday); ~65% upside to $50 in 1–2 yrs, ~8× FY2 P/E, net cash ~$500M, >20% peer discount.
Alamos is a mid-sized gold miner (~$15 billion). One of its smaller mines (Young-Davidson) was hit by earthquakes that knocked out a few days of production, so the company trimmed its near-term output guidance — and the stock crashed 19% in a single day in Toronto. But its main mine, Island Gold, is more than 60% of the company's value and was completely untouched (it actually hit record production).
Singh's point is that the market wildly overreacted: the selloff erased about $3 billion of value for under $100 million of actual damage — roughly $46–48 million of gold sales merely pushed to later quarters. A fair hit would have been 4–6%, so the drop overshot by ~15%. It's already cheap versus rivals (about 8× earnings, a 20%+ discount), has net cash and no real debt. He's buying — Canadian shares first, then US shares around $30 — for ~65% upside to $50 over one to two years, more if gold rallies as central banks keep buying.
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
Nothing matches this filter.
Verbatim excerpts from the public transcripts (auto-pulled at each mention's timestamp, lightly cleaned). Timestamps link into the video; "source page" opens that commentator's full analysis at this row. Click a mention's header line to expand it (one open at a time). For personal study — not investment advice.