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.
In regards to the disclosure issues raised by 1mandband ( who has put in a lot of time presenting concrete support for his view) I believe even those on the "supporter" side of the company should be concerned.
The company faces several challenges ranging from permits to financing.I believe also the way they promote themselves doesnt help them build credibility in the market place. Some can believe management has the ability to navigate through the permitting and financing challenges. However the disclosure issues are clear, and once this company on radar sceen of SEC engineering office, there will be no way to avoid them.
Perhaps it is not appeciated what happens when SEC issues a comment letter. When they do a company has usually a fairly fixed deadline to respond. Companies retain legal counsel to help draft response, and usually unless they can convince SEC their filing was correct, they end up having to issue retractions and re-satements. The alternative if they refuse to agree with SEC can be enforcement action etc. The comment letters are often posted by the SEC with the company's filings ( previously this wasnt this common). 1mandband's quotes from several comment letters were typical of comments a junior mining company can receive. The issuance of a comment leter, response, response to response , etc can go on for months , hence can get quite expensive.
I have re-read the posts and there is nothing I have seen posted by anyone that indicates that the thrust of 1mandband's comments is not correct.I have no idea whether SEC is or isnt investigating the compay. If they were they would probably start with the 144 filings. However in my opinion there is no doubt the SEC engineering office would require a whole series of rather comprehensive retractions and re-statements of their 10k reports at a minimum.Better for company to do this pro-actively before that happens , or contact the SEC themselves and claim ignorance and inexperience as an excuse.
I consider myself open-minded, but reviewing 1mandbands comments, and responses to his comments, I seen nothing that indicates this company is following general SEC gudelines in regarsd to its mining activities. Maybe it is time for supporters to let CFO know the same and he will be responsible for this situation.
Situation is not looking good, so what can be done.
What can be done ?
1. CEO stops promoting fake degrees
2. CEO stops claiming to be doing business in areas that dont exist.
3. CEO pays bookeeper $150 per month to prepare minimum basic financial statements.
4. Company does massive reverse split.
5. CEO concentrates on 1 single thing however small ( maybe installing cable systems or VCR hook up for individuals)that can generate a few hundred dollars per month as a start.
6. At a minimum CEO finds anyone with common sense, maybe a para legal or MBA student, to review filings as the current ones areillogical and often dont make sense.
The company has (a) a symbol and apparently DTC eligible (b)CEO who knows how to send filings to pink sheets and evidently can pay for lawyer letters when needed (c)has some experience in cable business.
What is happening is a travesty of inane proportions for company to be running around claiming all the deals they have claimed- and simply after years of this, doesnt work. A change of direction and common sense would be welcome.
It is also morally questionable for anyone promoting this stock to unsuspecting investors in my opinion.
GO CEO WITH FAKE MBA, is just as useful as GO BTDG.
Where is revenue or status of all the businesses BTDG claims to have ?
Mining
Mortgage lead generation
HIP HOP
Recent 100+ million deal
Real estate
There is no evidence from filings or financial statements that there is any activty generating revenue or even expenses. All that has occurred is misleading filings made over and over claiming business activity.
What possible indication is there that this company's stock will do well ? I could post over and over GO FAKE MBA, but what purpsoe would that serve ?
I am open minded, but can anyone who is positive on this stock give one single tangible reason why this stock should perform well? Or explain why it is acceptable for CEO to not remove reference to his fake MBA and fake other degrees ?Is there a moral aspect to promoting a stock that has incorrect financial statements over and over ?
Guess somehwere on internet there must be the old sterling powerpoints showing the high grades in the deeper Chester areas. There is the Sterling NI43-101 report on sedar.com. Many maps there.
The west chance ore body still had some fully developed stopes when mine shut down. Sterling drilled a few holes outside even the area of the inferred resources, and immediately hit ore-grade material. De Motte authorized Mclean to immediately to develop those areas,mining as they went, which Mclean was doing when management changed in May 2008. Sterling was only a few stopes away from positive cash flow from underground, and already cash flow positive from upper areas, when management abruptly changed.
Chester area very very very key to the mine, De Motte and Cambell both realized that and established good working relationship from what people say. ( De Motte also had very close relationship with Bob Hopper of the Bunker Hill, and Harry Magnuson).New management though in May 2008 (Voorhees and Meek) disrupted these relationships leading to Sterling losing major influence on Chester.
Looking at the ILDM example CHMN doesnt need to do anything except make noise at the right time for Sunshine Silver to wake up and come running.CHMN has certainly a lower float than ILDM had.
Yet everyone looks and no one can find one positive thing done by this company.
One that was mentioned was CEO having an MBA, since proven to be a fake. Yet CEO wont take down that from website etc. It is one thing to quote an MBA to build credibility, another when found out to keep on claiming an MBA . Some states this is illegal.
The filings are beyond absurd, using SEC forms for filing on the pink sheets, negative assets. And now the new one, claiming to have entered into a humanitarian agreement, which BTDG hasnt the CEPO has, then within body of that agreement reference to the business arrangment.
It is fascinating to review BTDG filings, never seen anything like them ! And worse they dont do any good, price and volume keep going down, to point where sometiems not even a market bid for the stock.
Should be no matter what an interesting year for this company !
I agree but I continue to try to give the benefit of the doubt to those who consitently pump BTDG by asking direct objective questions.I admit I find it fascinating how anyone looking at this company run by someone who claims a fake MBA, cant pepare anywhere near normal financial statements, puts out a press release if the mailman says he has a $100 million deal, can then be positive about the stocks prospects.
The fact that for well over two years the people who pump BTDG can never provide one single positive achievment is very tellling.
The negative assets on the balance sheet is beyond the pale- I have never seen that in any company anywhere.
Thanks for information.
Yes the 7% royalty quite clear;y applies only to claims Sunshine Mining owned. I cant imagine that none of the reserves are on Chester ground and even less even if just APEX rights the Chester vein resources are not related to Chester ground.
However the main investment thesis remains- Chester owns a key part of what is necessary for the Sunshine to become a long term producer. At some point Chester receives cash from production, or is bought out. With only 5 million shares outstanding, and I assume a very very low public float ( I think under 600,000 shares), this is a medium to long term winner. Probably the best speculation in the industry if one has patience, IMO.
Please identify one single factor that indicates BTDG actually doing any business ? Revenue is just one consideration- my point simplyis there anything that indicates the company is not a pure shell ?
Sure they do the filings but with incorrect financial statements, and often nonsense in their disclosures.
For example they issued millions of shares for a "mortgage lead generation business" giving impression it was an ongoing business. If it is on going business and has no sales, shouldnt there be some expenses ?
You are right many start ups dont have revenues for a perod of time, but they do have expenses. Neither shows up on BTDG statements.
Even then times are good ( which they are not for the mining sector) there are few banks than lend to the junior mining sector unless company has established reserves and/or solid recurring cash flow. In the case of CGFI a bank certainly would have to consider also not only their negative working capital but that they (a) dont own free and clear the mill (b) here is no identifiable source of mill feed that we are aware of.
Any bank that does lend to this secor will have engineers familiar with disclosure guidelines, and CGFI woudl suffer credibility in this regard.
Every other junior exploration company also would have difficulty getting a bank loan these days- I unaware of a single junior exploration company that has gotten a bank loan under these circumstances.
Answer to 3 questions
Sterling Tunnel was just built by De Motte and Mclean starting from plans developed in 2005, and completed by 2007.Over 5000 feet !
On rolling up ASLM and SBUM that would probably require an s1 registration statement, hard to imagine CHMN paying for that, they keep their expenses down !
Dividends, who knows what plicy of current management would be, but paying a steady dividend would certainly help boost price of stock. Also I have heard, helps to clear shorts out of market for this type of stock , though I doubt many pople would be gutsy enough to try to short this stock
Depends as far as I know on number of shareholders of record, which recent crowd funding legislation I do not know current amount allowed, used to be 500.Many company's I have seen de-register using sharehodlers of recod.
Per OTC markets the number of shareholders of record is 112
The de-registration sometimes a path a company may follow to reduce further scrutiny.
I thimk it is a distinct possibility. You are correct it probably would violate convertible loan covenants, but if they get on th SEC radar sceen they may be sunk anyway as unlikely any more convertible money would come in at that point.
Just my opinion.
Interesting.
1. If counsel is excellent then they are probably expensive , and to respond to SEC comment letters will be an expensive process, including re-stating various 10q's and 10k's.Which is my point, the company will have increasing costs when those comment letters start.
2. Reading their filings there are many areas ( like the preparatoon of disclosure of the risk factors) that seem very well done. However if the legal cousnel is excellent, they appear to be either unfamiliar with SEC Guide 7, or very aggresive in thinking SEC Engineering office will never look at this company.
My point simply because of their press releases and SEC filings the company in continuing on this path is building a mountain of costs at some time in the future.
Already no bid it seems. I dont know how people can state GO BTDG ( as opposed to GO FAKE MBA) an not provide a single shred of probability the company may succeed.
It is the company that has created the potentially costly and difficult disclosure situation. 1manband pointed out in a fair amount of detail the various issues. There is no way a junior exploration stage mining company avoid as a SEC reporting company following SEC Guide 7.
You have for quite some time been posting promotional mesages like this. To be objective pelase advice what evidence there is based on company's track record that (a) they can generate revenue,cash flow or profits(b)that they can implement any business they have announced.
Why subject unsuspecting investors to further losses.
Doesnt in bother that CEO continues to post a fake MBA ?
I was also accused of being absurd that(a) company was headed towards anotehr everse (b) woul dnot be roducing this summer or by September.
However to be productive which answer do you consider absurd ?
The issue of retractions 1manband has dealt well with and pretty convincing case that when SEC engineering office reviews there will be retractions and re-statements.
As far as de-registration I agree I cant quantify this, but I believe they will reach a point where they cant afford professional servcie cost to stay reporting.
as far as having ore to mill there is no identifiable ore at present as far as I can see, nor probability they can rasie $3 million to activate mill.
So yes I am wondering which answer you found absurd ?
Perhaps you could indicate of the filings you list which has resulted in :
Revenue ?
Profits or cash flow ?
Which has actually been completed and implemented ?
I am confused - how can fact of making filings although they never result in anything mean this is a good stock play ?
It is baffling that those who promote this stock on unsuspecting investos can never identify 1 single success of this company the past few years.
I have no idea what is "looking good".
1 assets- they report negative assets
2 revenue- they report ( uncollected) $25 in evenue for most recent quarter
3 expenses- they do not report expesnes so eitehr company is dormant, or doesnt report expenses incurred
4 not 1 single business reported on filings or press releases the past few years has generated revenue, or been completed, or shows any evidence insome cases of ever having existed
5 CEO reports fake degrees
6 they announce humanitarian venture which (a) is not signed for company but by CEO as an individual (b) while not for profit in agreement itself referes to business to be developed
I am waiting for someone to post what exactly is "looking good".
I completely agree that this is the sort of stock, few inthis environment, one can accumulate for the long run and collect a reasonable dividend at the same time. Their strategy and management has stood the test of time.
well i would hazard a guess for a year from now, after insulting shareholders by their mickey mouse press releases that :
1. at some point they will have to put out a series of retractions and re-statements as a result of a comment letter by the SEC.
2. the judgment from the lawsuit by the former officer will be enforced
3. outstanding shares will hit a billion
4. finally stock will be de-registered as a SEC reporting entity
5. permit ( if granted ) will not result in a flood of financing or interest in the stock, but those thinking so will then transfer their hopes to a re-opening of the mill producing cash flow, though forgetting fact there is no ore to mill from nearby mines at present.
dont mean to be negative but after reviewing the press releases this year kind of hard not to be.
Quarterly Report is beyond absurd.
Continues incorrect accounting having negative fixed assets , yet later in filing reports no material change in assets or dispositions.
It purports to contain footnotes but they are definitely not GAAP nor in anyway way complete.
$25 in revenue ? Appears interest on an account receivable.
So no cash, no material assets, no sales, not even expenses associated with business. Clearly this would be classified as a shell, which impacts whether shares acquired can even be sold.
Then later in filing they state clearly no material definitive agreements have been signed, repeat none. Yet their promoting this deal or that, and reporting all these "what if" correspondence, as if these are "real" deals is contrary to that assertion.
One could write pages on almost every paragraph in this filing.
Company needs to do a reverse and find someone without a fake MBA to prepare their filings. To be fair CEO may have some technical expertise that he could use, but running a business certainly not his strong point.
IS there a reason to enjoy a financial report that is incorrect and makes a mockery of any accounting standards in place the last 100 years ? Could someone explain how a company has a negative fixed asset ? And how a company that shows to public accounting statements such as these remain publicly traded ?
Someone may wish to comment but if one files as Magna did to report over 5% ownership, my understanding is when they disposed that interest shouldnt they have filed an amendment ?
Issue I think arises whether they are acting in concert as part of a group in these ventures. At the very least Fearn appears clearly an insider, and as such has reporting requirements on shares received and sold.
This is part of the issue with their press releases, references to NI43-101 and not following SEC Guide 7- not only can SEC Engineering office request some pretty dramatic retractions, but may lead to questions about 144 filings of these firm.
Looking at the inception to date cash flow statement besides the amounts the CD holders have pulled out, millions seem to have been issued in services, without a lot of clarity ( unles someone has reviewed 144 filings) to whom these shares have often been issued.
My guess CFI headed to 10 million shares pretty quickly on any increase in volume.
Chster could pay dividends simply because that was where Sunshine was mining from.Hard to forecast how many ounces would come from production form Chester areas without revised mine plan,but 1.5 million ounces as good a forecast as any.
USA Silver certainly has potential, just with Sunshine's higher grades and very consistent- when exploration continued- conversion of resources to reserves it seems better poetntial for the future.Hecla just hasnt been as agressive as one might have hoped in going after USA Silver.
Also, big change is the Sterling tunnel built by De Motte and Mclean to access upper country areas that hadnt been explored for many decades. Thi sis a wild card to additional potential at the Sunshine.
California not a great place to mine, but very few Cobalt deposits in the world so for long term a reasonable speculation.Inpdendence Resource guys seem very experienced in mien finance, if market turns in 2014 it could do well.
Financial statements are simply incorrect and obviously prepared by someone with no knowledge of accounting let alone US GAAP
They show negative fixed assets, you cant have a negative fixed asset !
While they dont have any revenue they surely have some expenses which even if not paid should be accrued.
So the financial statements are incorrect, and indicate my theory that simply CEO does not have the administrative or financial experience to run a company that is listed on OTC. Should let someone else do and stick to areas he has expertise in.
I don't think a scam, a con man woulh ave moved on to greener pastures because CEO nor company cant be generating any cash from all this in my opinion.
It is a shame some people without a shred of support promote this stock to unsuspecting investors.
The filing also lists press release after press release on deals that havent come through or wont. Most telling is the HIP HOP "deal", it says clearly no deal has been consumated, and no indication how it would benefit BTG it it were.
Look forward to your post.
Sunshine is much higher grade mine than the Galena, and much more room for adding resources.
Length of time of production from the Chester is an unkown due to the very nature of the Sunshine- i.e. it has a consistent history since 1884 of replacing reserves, and shows every indication of additional resources at depth. Of the five key target areas at depth ( see Sterling's former powerpoint) 2 out of the 3 were from Chester ground, and the third could be construed as Chester having APEX rights. The NI43-101 report showed 50 million ounces of resources on the Chester vein.
So how do you value all this ?
1. Market Cap per ounce of resource- not particularly precise but some analysts use, and because they use can determine the market cap value of a resource. ( same applies to reserves).
2 NPV/IRR- this of course more precise valuation, but for that normally you need to know various factors not always completely available to an investor.
The key factor that lead to Sunshines closing in 2000 was that management cut exploration and development, and of course low metal prices.A mine like the Sunshine needs to develop a new ore body every 5 or 10 years. They have the resoources- justneed to convert to reserves in an economic fashion.Therein is why they have to buy out Chester or control it- they cant leave some of the most promising areas of the mine under the terms of the current lease.
Sunshine Mining Company knew this, that is why they owned over 50% of Chester, then gave it away during their closing. De Motte at Sterling knew this, that is why he arranged Sterling to control Chester. Afte de Motte left new management ( mainly Voorhees and Meek) for inexplicable reason gave up that shares Sterling had.Sonew Sunshine owners stuck.
3. As you say you can play with the numbers, i Chester ground can produce 1 million ounces, and market values that at X, that is one method. Or try to use cost per ounce etc and arrive at a rough valuation. The 8 million ounce plan current owners have is a massive increase in capacity, so timing a bit of an issue.
I think no matter how you look at it , Chester will want $ 5 or $10 per share and ore to be bought out. If current owners have 51% control, that leaves very little in public float- any buying ( as we see in 2003-2006 period) makes this thing shoot to the moon.Only risk is if current management doesnt hold out, but I think they are savvy and now what they have.
I had responded to your post indication I had written "misinformation". Since I know of no misinformation I posted I reqested that this be indentified. If I posted incorrect information I certainly would to know. If I posted that someone posted misinformation,I would certainly tell them what it was.
Your recent posts mentions talking insted of trading. At this point certainly not enough volume or transparency in my opinion you make this a good trading vehicle unless one has a way to short this sort of stock which I dont.
I hope I have responded to your emails.
This must be the strangest financial statements yet, obviously prepared by someone with no knowledge of accounting.
-They tried to writeoff receivables ( finally) but seem to have posted the wrong entries to asset acconts- i.e. that cant have NEGATIVE assets.
- Huge $800,000+ liability now,no footnotes to explain.
-NO sales and NO expenses, what busienss are they conducting.
-No proper footnotes
- How can they list all these businesses supposedly they are engaged in- and engaged insufficiently they claim they are not a shell- and not have any revenue or any expenses from these businesses ?
SEC Shell definition refers to nominal revenues/assets *BTDG meets this test :
AND
nominal operations * BTDG meets this test
Seems like it is already in shell status. This may explain why they put eberything and the kitchen sink into their filings, to maintain imrpession they are not a shell.
Doesnt seem like a scam, too inept.
If Fearn is classified as an affiliate,insider or has access to inside information, that undoubtedly affects how much he can sell per quarter. If he is receiving shares then removing restirctions, as an affiliate he woudl be limited on what he could sell per quarter,also if he had over 10% owership.
Would he be classified as an affiliate ?
I am unsure why the mill getting a permit would generate " millions" ? Is the idea that the market will suddenly diregard the numerous real challenges in funding ore and financing + the dismal track recod for investors in this stock ?
Please do explain what was was misinformation in my post. I am the first to corect myself and I re-read my post which to me was more of a queston than a firm statement.
My question is if Magna held over 5% of shares ad now none, was an amended form filed or should it have been ?
My understanding is once shareholder goes over 5% threshold for public company, they need to file , and with a certain number of days file when they add or reduce their position. 10% put sthem in position where there are restrictions and/or reporting requirements on what can be bought/sold per quarter.
I have never gone to trouble to try to pull their 144 filing spast 2 years, but those filings woudl be quite interesting in regards to shars for services/properties issued, and whether these have any related party issues.
Even if they get the mill permit there is no identifiable ore for the mill. Who would invest $11 million this stock ? Not convertible note holders on this volume, certainly no conventional lender. I am not sure why having a permit and no ore worth $11 million investment.(That is if they even get a permit this year which looks increasingly doubtful).
Note the filing today, says Magna no longer 5% holder ( why didnt they file that), now a new group associated with Magna, and two convertibles identified.(Wonder if CGFI files an 8k after each convertible they receive as they should).
Guess next question for inquiring minds, how fast to get to 100 million shares again ? 300 million shares ? back below a penny ?
Great company, low stock price. Just goes to show as always investors usualy over or under pay. In this case under pay as the Lucky Friday is on upward path, and new acquisition increases gold output.
Hope for more silver acquisitions !
Or simply he is mentally challenged as far as business concerned.A con man would have moved on to greener pastures by now.
Let's look at what we know :
1. No matter how outlandish or ridiculous a hypotehtical deal is, BTDG will accept it and put out a press release or rather file it with otcmarkets.
2. In the last few years nothing BTDG has announced has worked.
3. Paperwork concerning business deals is often non-sensical.
4. All of a sudden BTDG starts disclosing their financial statements are in accordance with GAAP when they are not.(I think all that happened is CEO say that footnote somewhere and thought "Gee whiz, putting that in means our statements are GAAP, so let us put that in ").
5. CEO claims on filings and website to have an MBA and bachelor's degreee, both fake.
6. BTDG keeps disclosing businesses that evidently dont exist. The classic is the mortgage lead generation business - where is it ? Where is revenue or even expenses from his business ?
7. Company cant generate even $1,000 in revenue in years.
I am objective though, I will stand corrected if any of the above 7 points can be shown to be incorrect.
This is an absolutely absurd document filed, and no wonder some people have the opinion this is a scam.
1. The company has a duty to report material events according to otcmarkets continuous disclosure requirements. The company states there is no business intention in this agreement. The agreement states unless required the terms are not to be disclosed.So there is no requirement to file this document and in fact it is against the spirit of the document to be filed.
2. I have made the point that the fake MBA, and probably fake bachelor degree, claimed by CEO , do not prepare him for basic business understanding. Looking at the agreement, as with all BTDG documents, it is confused. The CEO is signing as an individual, not the company. So why is company filing this document ?
3. It is claimed this is not about money, so why does document explicitly refer to the business intentions of the two parties.
This is absolutely absurd ! This is exactly why this company has no credibility from continued filing of documents such as this.There is nothing inherently wrong if the CEO as an individual wishe to support a good cause, but really it is a misleading document and clearly seeks to benefit the company with good PR- but the company didnt sign the document the CEO did as an indvidual.
The company simply has to do a massive reverse, and concentrate on something CEO has expertise in, something small to generate some cash- and last someone else should do the filings who understands basic business law and disclosure requirements.
Sunshine Silver or Hecla will probably eventually buy US silver, but both can afford to wait, especially Sunshine Silver.First just lok at what they have raised and spent to date- if USA silver became cheap enough they could probably find way to make cash offer but I believe Sunshine Silver will prefer to pay with paper , and paper that has a value higher after they start trading. Hecla cango after USA Silver any time, but they need tobe more aggressive to acquire it- would be great marketing plus for Hecla.
I read the posts you referred me too. Not really sure where they are coming from. For example they talk about labor relations. A bit of history- the Galena Mine always had some in the union, and Sunshine was unionized under Sunshine Mining Company.When Sterling took over, De Motte and Mclean had a very worker focused philosophy, and De Motte was very close to the workers.No union during Sterling years, and Sterling had no probem hiring the best workers from most mines.In fact De Motte even went out of his way to hire strong union types- he made famous agreement with one that if ever workers felt company didnt have their best interests at heart, he would personaly invite the union in. At the time ,USA Silver went all over Toronto trying to promote company, and explaining poor results from not being able to hire enough miners. Yet Sterling had almost zero per cent turnover, and had a waiting list of miners wanting to work there, at least until De Motte left in May 2008. Now Sunshine work force managed by your typical mine managers, competent, not sure where idea is that Galena labor-management culture would benefit current Sunshine workforce.
But the only company in Pacific Northwest Sterling couldnt hire best workers from was Hecla, which was and is considered blue chip company to work for.
So a bit odd the post indicating the Galena work force ( especially considering recent layoffs) would strengthen Sunshine Silver due to good labor-management relations.
Dont get me wrong, Galena Mine has some good potential in a rising silver market, and some synergies with the Sunshine.But it is not the easiest mine to generate a profit from or achieve sustained compound growth- something the last 20 years has shown.