Sierragold,
I think you have it right that the people running Dun Glen are not the people to get it done. Whatever the reason is, or whatever obstacles they encountered are, they just have not been able to make it happen. I looked back at URHG Facebook to review what Dana Low, who has been running Dun Glen with Strack, has released to URHG management and the shareholders.
From 9/11/15:
"...over the past 3 months we have now run enough ore to say we have been averaging between .5 and .75 ounces per hour with about a 50% capture rate...This .5 - .75 ounces per hour should only get better with each improvement we make going forward. More water allows it to stay cleaner to process with and results in increasing gold yield. More production results in digging deeper in the pit, toward bedrock which will result in the ore having more gold content to recover..."
From 11/19/15:
"Operational plans call for the running of 100 tons per hour, 8 to 10 hours daily, averaging a 5 day week, subject to weather and breakdowns.
Short term weather forecasts indicate that we should be able to continue operations into the foreseeable future, Indications are that we can expect 15 to 20 ounces of gold per week, which we hope to be a very conservative number.
Dana M. Low
COO and Director
United Resources Holding Group, Inc.
Phone: 844-223-9112
Fax: 702-925-2814"
If you get 15 ounces a week, and run 40 weeks, that is 600 ounces a year. At $1000/oz, that would be $600,000 year. If you get 20 ounces that is $800,000 which is enough to be a break-even gold producer. I believe this ore was assayed at about 0.008.
Low and Strack did not continue to mine in that area. From what I remember from a previous shareholder meeting, I think they had expected to find 0.02 or higher rather than 0.008, so they chose to leave this area.
Now in October, 2016 we were told Dun Glen had everything ready to go to start production in this new pit and that there was gold in the sluice from the test run, We were told the wash plant could run 10 hours a day for 5 days a week, and process 100 tons an hour. However, Dun Glen management had zero production days in October.
Ironically, if this last month had been spent digging at the previous location, where the assay value is only 0.008, then 10 hours a day, 5 days a week, for 4 weeks would be 2000 hours. They said the plant could do 100 tons an hours, so that would be 20,000 tons. 20,000 X 0.008 = 160 ounces for the month, or $160,000 already recovered if sold for $1000/ounce.
If you can do $160,000 for 9 months, that would be $1,440,000 a year. I think the annual URHG break-even point is would be something like $800,000 of $900,000. It seems obvious that if URHG could announce it had recovered 90 ounces or more in a month that the stock price would increase and the company could become a fully-reporting company.
At the October 2016 meeting we were told that the plan was to bring in professional help to run the mine after it got going. Perhaps that is the problem. After all of this time, maybe they need that change now instead of later. If they change Dun Glen management and hire experienced professionals to operate the mine, perhaps they'll finally get it into production and keep it there.
