Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
It doesn't matter who is on their BOD, this is a SCAM. I just perused their assay reports, their "geological reports", and their proprietary plasma technology. It is all garbage, about on a fifth grade level. If you are investing in EVXA as anything but a simple momo stock play, and you think they will ever mine an ounce of gold, you need to have your head examined.
Their geologist, Craig Parkinson, is infamous in Arizona and California for working on "multi-billion dollar" deposits that turn out to be a 2-inch quartz vein, or nothing. Wish they had posted his report, they are always a hoot to read.
Also interesting about the Silver Cord Mine - at various times, WSRA, GEAR and now EVXA all claimed to have the rights to that mine (a ready-to-mine gold and silver deposit). I wonder who really owns the claim?
Awesome, incredible news! And GDSM trades sideways (again). They better come up with some more awesome, incredible news, or this stock will be triple zeroes very soon.
Maybe some news of the Azurite? Oh, I forgot, the JV with WSRA appears to be off as WSRA searches for a more reliable source of funding.
Yes, a good read. Here is a particularly relevant excerpt:
Commodity Type
A degree of skepticism should also be reserved for ores said to contain uncommon metals or minerals. Because of their rarity, these substances may command a very high price and are therefore extremely attractive to the investor.
They'll find some gold. But doubt they will find much, or make a profit. Sorry, but placer mines in Arizona are plentiful, with almost none of them producing much. Many are hobbyist level, and the rest are outright scams.
Another couple days, and those dozen Robo calls a day will be finished! Then, it will just be the salesmen for insulated windows and fake veteran's charities. Guess I should get renewed on that no-call list.
Why do you suppose SRCH took a tumble last week? Their 8K was just to extend the deadline on some warrants - did that have something to do with it?
So they must feel they have something and we will know soon.
What makes you think the BONZ "team" has any experience mining gold? None of the directors has any experience in mining.
Even Madan Singh, their "advisor", does not have any placer experience, and if he is smart and wants to maintain his reputation, he should stay at arms-length from BONZ.
The "GEO" report recommends bulk sampling for the placer. I don't see any evidence that they have done the bulk sampling. Did they do it, and now they're keeping that information secret?
You'd think that if they had done bulk sampling and the results warranted purchase of equipment and mining, they would plaster the sample results all over a PR and their website.
I know that waiting for sampling to be completed is frustrating, but mining without sampling is foolish and a waste of investor's money.
Yes, fake, just like their supposed volcanic placer deposit!
they have an independent assay report that has reflected .324 ounces of gold per ton of earth for their volcanic placer deposit at their WOW claims.
Probably about time for some new glossy brochures or maybe a paid pump somewhere. Gotta keep that board of directors fat and happy.
See other message but you were mostly right about the Conversion part (although there is a 135% penalty for prepayment of each tranche). Looks like the Conversion rate at $0.05 is separate from the Market Price. The Market Price (the 65% thing) is how the price is determined for stock purchased through the Warrant issued to Tonaquint. Together, the Conversion and the Warrant make for a sweet deal for Tonaquint, and up to 75 million shares hitting the market.
To answer my own question, and after wading through the loan agreement some more, it appears that maybe the 135% penalty for prepayment would make up for the not-so-good $0.05 stock price that Tonaquint would get the stock for. That means they would get closer to 4 million shares, not 3 million shares, for the first tranche of the Loan.
Also, the Warrant for stock purchase that Tonaquint has received sweetens the deal as well. That's where the "Market Price" comes into play - they get stock at 65% of the average of the three lowest daily closes for the previous 20 days. Tonaquint could buy up to the remaining amount on the Note, so if they have already exercised that Warrant option, that means somewhere around 70 million shares have been (or could be) bought directly from the company's Share Reserve at 0.020.
Am I getting closer?
If Tonaquint were to do this, they'd lose about $70K on the first tranche:
the first $150K is redeemable immediately into 3 million conversion shares using the conversion rate below, and then can be sold at 65% of the avg of the (volume weighted avg. price) for lowest 3 days of past 20 trading days.
Yep, do the exploration by doing the mining and hope for the best. That's the way to do it......
They are completely off-base, and I give them zero points for use of the term "Truckee Formation"! That USGS paper you found is about a rock unit named the Truckee Unit mapped in west central Nevada, maybe 400 miles from the BONZ claims. Absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the geology at the Tarantula Project. What is just as ridiculous is claiming to have found bedrock, garnets, and gem blue quartz. It's as though they opened up an Intro to Geology textbook and picked some words to use.
I agree that they seem to be putting out information that is "beneficial in the moment". Almost every penny stock works this way. The mining-related penny stocks are pretty predictable - throw in some reference to rare earths (which are in the news these days), and you grab people's attention. What most people do not realize is that rare earths are not that rare, and an assay lab will find many of the rare earths in any average rock sample. But, at levels a thousand times less than would be of interest for exploration or mining. Doesn't matter, still sounds good in a PR!
I understand it is probably a waste of time to argue facts about any penny stock, not just BONZ. PR's, financial filings, and reports written by stockholders? None of it is reliable, and some of it is downright comical. It is all about hype, promotion, and momo. Whether they actually mine gold or not is probably not important to many of the investors in BONZ and it is certainly not important to their lender who profits whether gold is produced or not.
There are some, however, who seem to have serious hopes that BONZ will be producing a 1,000 oz of gold a month. To those folks, I wish them the best.
I remember quickly skimming those old BONZ PR's and having a good chuckle. Here is an example of the mumbo jumbo they put in that Jan. 2011 PR:
Recent discoveries from the past ten days include Bedrock, a truckee formation, Garnets, gem grade Blue Quartz.
Somewhere in that agreement, I thought I saw that they could immediately redeem the amount of the first tranche ($150K) in exchange for stock at the market price defined as follows:
“Market Price” means 65% of the arithmetic average of the three (3) lowest VWAPs of the shares of Common Stock during the twenty (20) consecutive Trading Day period immediately preceding the date of such determination (the “Measuring Period”). All such determinations are to be appropriately adjusted for any stock split, stock dividend, stock combination or other similar transaction during such Measuring Period.
The focus should be on the grade and tonnage of ore. And how the loan from Tonaquint is affecting the share price (dilution).
I think some of the limited information that EXTO has provided has indicated the "mine" is a placer mine, so that is what I assume it is supposed to be. Very hard to figure out though, with no real reports and no real assays.
That bogus technical report discusses whole-rock analytical results done by a researcher for a very broad area which EXTO's claims happen to be in. What a screwy way to convince investors that they have a mineral deposit - take a researcher's report for a huge area, present what are some very ordinary background levels of various elements (including rare earths), and make a big deal out of it.
Also, the single gold assay they reported in the recent PR is about 20 times higher than what a reasonably good placer would be. Either they have an absolutely fabulous placer mine, or it is a sham. I vote for the latter......
If the first tranche was for $150K, at what share price will Tonaquint receive shares for this part of the loan? Do they get shares at the cost on Oct. 1st (which was around $0.030)? I am trying to wade through the lending agreement and it is clear as mud.
baomike - I don't think they are claiming that they have a lode (bedrock) mine anywhere close to mining. The mining is focused exclusively on the placer deposit right now, and the equipment is the correct kind of equipment. Whether they have enough placer gold to make any money, that remains to be seen.
They have a whole lot more work to do on the lode end of things - lots of samples to take, maybe some geophysics, and ultimately some drilling if they think it is warranted. It is a real long shot, but if done right and they don't keep talking about foolish things like rare earths, it is worth pursuing.
They will figure out the water situation, whether it be from an on-site well or trucking it in. The discussions about the well(s) are mostly to fact check what BONZ is saying on their website and PR's and is a bit of a side issue.
The real issue with BONZ is whether there is enough gold there to sustain any kind of real mining effort. They have not released any testing data on the placer, so that is indeed questionable.
Another real issue is the way BONZ obtained funding. Borrowing money from a lender like Tonaquint has some drawbacks. Did you know that a Share Reserve of 75 million shares was specifically created to pay for the loan? Tonaquint will be paid in shares at a discount price, and then they will immediately dump them into the market. Not sure if the dumping has started, but maybe that's why the share price is struggling, even with the supposed start up of mining? Just a thought.......
Other than not being up to date, what is "horsechit" about that post? Isn't it kind of interesting that so many of the same names pop up, over and over, on what appears to be a network of scammy "mining" companies?
And why do bother saying GDS* as though it is off-topic and you can't spell it out? I thought that GDSM was WSRA's JV partner, and therefore completely on-topic on this board?
For once we agree. EVXA is a joke of a company with their 50 billion shares, but did you see all the connections between WSRA, GDSM, GEAR, EVXA, and few other shady companies? I know you have seen this post before:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=80899735
Granted, some of this information is dated, and should be made current, but you get the idea.
If she gets back to you, ask if the new well has been installed. It very well may have been, but the on-line database may not reflect it.
I'd be curious to know how much water the new well makes. Bedrock wells are really hit and miss - one well can give 3 gpm, and a 100 feet away, another well can be 50 gpm. Just depends on whether you hit a good fracture or two.
That summary of the corporate tangled web has been posted on this board before, and I think it may have been nodummy who originally did the research (if not, I apologize to whoever did it). It does need a little more updating, as it does not take into account this year's shenanigans.
As Actuate pointed out, these are two completely different Gold Star Mines (one in Arizona, one in Nevada). And two different companies involved - Western Sierra Mining, and Western Gold. The common link, however, is Chaffee who is involved in both WSRA and EVXA.
Very confusing, but both are desert dirt scams, and both have unreasonable and unsupported estimates of gold reserves. The one in Nevada is particularly laughable - 728 billion dollars in inferred gold reserves????
I am very confident that the 285-foot well is not on the Hull claim. The paperwork is very, very specific about whose land it is on and it is half a mile east of the Hull claim.
The only thing I am still puzzled over is whether the 605 foot well was actually installed on the Hull claim or not. Maybe I'll call ADWR and see if they can tell me.
Luckymydog posted this on the GDSM board last week, and has some relevance to your question about EVXA:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=80899735
There are indeed two Gold Star Mines - one is the placer "mine" being peddled by WSRA and GDSM in Skull Valley, Arizona, and now there is apparently a new Gold Star Mine in Nevada being peddled by EVXA. Coincidence? Maybe not considering that EVXA and WSRA share a common board member (Chaffee).
As for 728 billion in gold, if you are going to lie, you might as well make it a whopper!
Believing everything on a penny stock website or PR over unbiased public information is not a good idea. If the BONZ propaganda says there is a 285-foot well on the Hull claim, they are wrong.
The "handwritten documents" are on-line for the 285-foot well, and it is most certainly installed half a mile east of the Hull claim. Very clear, with quarter/quarter/quarter section coordinates, and an assessor's parcel number. No doubt about the location of this well. Not on the Hull claim!
However, the 605-foot well has only a permit on file, and no followup paperwork. It could very well have been installed in July as Badgerbob says, and the records may have been filed and not yet uploaded. Or the driller dropped the ball and didn't file the paperwork. Drillers may be sneaky, but that is not a way to keep your ADWR drilling license (by failing to file paperwork).
According to ADWR records, the 285-foot well was installed last year half a mile east of the Hull claim, not on the claim.
The records also show a well permit for a new well, and it is permitted to be on the Hull claim. But, no sign that it has yet been installed.
I would be very surprised to see two wells on the Hull claim - if so, the driller has some explaining to do with ADWR.
At 350 gpm, 168,000 gallons per 8-hr. day is what that plant will use. They will re-use much of that, but will lose a lot to evaporation. With one well that only produces 3 gpm, and another well whose existence is uncertain, water could be an issue.
Something doesn't make sense here. The 285-foot well that you talked about earlier was actually drilled over half a mile to the east of the Hull claim. It is not on the Hull claim! It is ADWR permit #55-913275, was drilled in May 2011 on property owned by Woodrow Smith (APN 201-22-0031). I see from the Berridge report that Woodrow Smith was contracted by BONZ to provide a custom made wash plant to conduct testing of placer gravels.
As for the well that was permitted in July 2012 on the Hull claim, maybe that is the 600-foot well that reportedly had rock chip samples collected from for potential assay? If it was drilled in July, they are way overdue for filing their paperwork with ADWR. This paperwork is supposed to be filed within 30 days of completing the well. Granted, the paperwork may have been filed, but the database has not been updated.
Not surprised that the well only produces 3 gpm - it is probably mostly in bedrock, and without significant fracturing, getting a productive water well is not easy out there. I think this is the same well that was drilled to 600', but they probably only cased the top 285 feet.
No, I think there is probably just one well. At least, there is only one well permit on file at ADWR and if there is a second well, it is not permitted properly. It is possible that the ADWR on-line records are lagging behind, particularly the imaged records (which would include the well log, etc. that the driller should have filed by now).
You have brought up some interesting points. You mention a bulk sampling program which is the first I have heard of this (at least the website and their PRs do not mention the bulk sampling program, unless I missed it). If they are doing a bulk sampling program, that's great - it needs to be done. From the PR and all the chatter on this board, you'd think they were plunging into full-scale production. Maybe we'll see some grade and tonnage estimates after all.
You also mention assaying of the rock chips from the well drilling. What is the holdup on that? It only costs about $30/assay for fire assay gold and silver, so it isn't much of an investment.
Yes, there is a well permit application on file at ADWR, filed by the driller (on behalf of Bonanza Goldfields) on 7/19/12. It is permit no. 55-914517. You can access it through their imaged records database on-line.
Once they install the well, the driller is obligated to submit the drill log, the well specifications, depth water was encountered, and the capacity of the pump they installed, etc. to the ADWR. There is nothing submitted yet.
There is currently no permitted well within half a mile of the BONZ property (Hull Claim). What two wells are you referring to in your other post? And where is this 1.3 million gallon reservoir? That's a pretty big pond - about 180 feet by 180 feet by 5 1/2 feet deep.
No merger - where have you been? The merger is off, pending the "uplisting". Which isn't going to happen either.
You're right, figuring out how a "lender" like Tonaquint operates is pretty tough - their loan agreement with BONZ would take a team of accountants to decipher. However, Tonaquint seems to do quite well lending to failed penny stocks.
As for the well you mention, there is a well permitted to Bonanza Goldfields, application date was 7/19/12. According to ADWR records, the well has not been installed yet, so it does not appear that they will be operating November 1st on water from their own well. Not sure where they will be getting their water but the nearest well (according to ADWR records) is over half a mile away.
1.3 million gallon reservoir? Not sure what they mean by that, but they will have to preserve as much water as possible on-site, through capturing of the process water and re-using it after the mud settles. Water is a precious commodity in the desert, especially since they have to truck it in.
As for discharge, there is no permit problem as far as I know for discharge from a placer operation. As long as they don't add chemicals, or let it flow off-site, they should be good.