simple logical deduction posits 2 origins for the language they use
'do not anticipate earning revenue' is obviously wrong because already have revenue
so somebody at SNEY who is not an accountant writes that as part of their management analysis- then the accountant -due to the small accounting staff of these co's- does not correct the thought by converting to proper accounting language of 'no net income'
they ARE officially in the exploration stage still-and such companies often do have revenue but not often net income(revenue exceeding costs)
since they dont have their official commercial production license yet somebody-not in the accounting dept-wrote that language- as if they were approaching the govt permitting agency-
careful not to claim a commercial license they didnt have and thus careful about claiming revenue-thinking of 'net income'
-because if they had net income they would no longer be exploration and would need a commercial license- some non-accountant wrote that language for the benefit of govt licensing and perhaps because of past confusion noted by previous PR's - but again the language should've been converted by an accountant to accounting language
We currently are seeking ways to initiate cash producing mining activities but do not anticipate earning revenues until such time as we have entered into commercial production on the Nyinahin or Pampana River concessions. We have not concluded the exploration stage of our business...''
the following is 10q/10k required boilerplate:
''They are still in the exploration stage. They can provide no assurance they will find anything or that they will enter into commercial production.''
Imo. Do your dd before investing. I'm not a financial adviser nor compensated for my posts. They don't believe what they say, so why should you?
