Having a succesful Joint-Venture partner should be considered a valuable asset, which I do not see back in the company's valuation, which now stands at a lousy CAD 8 mln. This valuation is beyond ridiculous IMO, but anyhow.

Read the following article reffering to Rubicon (by the way, I do not own Rubicon). It has a lot of success in the Red lake's Gold district, as indicated by the article below. Some quotes.

Start Quote

It's tied to the fact that I think people are starting to see beyond the credit crisis," said David Adamson, Rubicon's chief executive.

"And there were a small group of us that cashed up in that period. I think for those juniors that have good assets and have cash, there is a growing audience."

However, it remains a very small group -- cash is still incredibly hard to come by for junior companies, and investors have almost zero interest in early-stage projects (Ventana being one notable exception). But for the juniors that have projects that are well-financed and are either in production or likely to be in the future, the enthusiasm is back.

While funds are putting cash back into the junior gold sector, they are also being selective about where it goes. Details like resource potential and political risk actually matter again, which was not always the case in the heady days of 2004 to 2007.

"There are frankly very few quality stories that have the potential to be mines. Because there's been a Darwinian culling of companies," Mr. Adamson said.

Rubicon is one of the names that has received the most interest in recent weeks, as the company's Phoenix gold project in Ontario's Red Lake gold district gets more promising each time the company releases drill data.

"With $66-million in the till right now, it allows us to move forward aggressively. And I think that helps investors get over the risk, because they know their company can deliver it to the next step," Mr. Adamson said."

End Quote

http://www.financialpost.com/most-po...