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.
de nada, the red IS Metals Creek (see the legend at upper left)
I took the hash marked band as the DP fault trend, not necessarily the gold mineralization (note the number of mines north of the hash marked area toward the east)
What I would be interesting is discovering is the ownership of the two areas without color coding along the hash marked band to the immediate east and west of the Metals Creek property.
anybody seen the promised pictures ? a PR said Robert had made a video of the unit in operation while being tested (which showed a 50 degree delta in water temp)
anybody else interested in seeing something besides words, which when strung together add up to things that do not come to pass ?
Metals Creek Intersects 49.96 g/t gold (uncut) over 9.0 meters, including 434.77 g/t over 1.0 meter at the Thomas Ogden Zone
04/10/2013 @ 7:44AM
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=57100921&symbol=TSXV:MEK
Metals Creek up 0.01 to 0.05 in Toronto this morning, or 25%
property map in context of EXS, LSG, etc
http://www.metalscreek.com/upload/images/timmins_deposits_everything_sm--2-.jpg
The initial hole (TOG-13-27) intersected four zones of gold mineralization which was highlighted by a middle zone which assayed 434.77 grams per tonne (g/t) gold over 1.0 meter within a broader zone of mineralization consisting of 49.96 g/t (uncut) over 9.0 meters.
This latest intersection from hole TOG-13-027 was a 20m undercut below previously released (MEK NR April 16, 2012) hole TOG-12-04 in an attempt to extend the mineralization in the down dip direction as well as providing a clearer definition of the folded nature of the high grade Zone. This intercept is still open down dip. The Thomas Ogden flexure appears to exhibit an increase in alteration associated with this flexure which has a strong relationship with higher gold grades. The intersection in hole TOG-13-027 is described as an altered felsic porphyry with strong silicification, moderate albitization and associated quartz veins. Mineralization consists of trace to 3 percent disseminated pyrite and finely disseminated visible gold with associated galena within the 1m high grade sample. Visible gold was noted within quartz veins over 6cm at approximately 45 degrees to core axis of the drill hole within the high grade sample thus indicating a possible sub-vertical to steeply southerly dipping zone. More drilling is needed to better determine the orientation of the high grade mineralization.
Results from the remaining seven drill holes will be released as assays are received and compiled. The details of the assay results from hole TOG-13-27 are tabulated . . .
Explor plans on conducting a two phase exploration program. Phase I will consist of studying and
compiling the existing information, followed by soil sampling, prospecting, geological mapping and
geophysical surveys to determine drill targets. Phase II will consist of Diamond Drilling the targets
and resource estimation.
What does the company have to gain by continuing to drag this out when they have nothing?
nice thing about being at the bottom, everyway one turns things are looking up
blackmarket USD at 62% premium over official exchange
85% of volume on exchange was fixed-income instruments
"Merval index of leading shares rose 2% to close at 3379.39 on volume of ARS50.3 million" i.e. $10 million USD at official exchange total volume !
Did you believe in Intertek test results early-mid Q4 2012 ? or in-house test data at the earliest possible time in late Q2 and early Q3 2012 ?
So now we are told testing is scheduled, but not when, and that Intertek test results will be delivered to the company before H2 2013.
Everyone get a warm and fuzzy from this ?
Pretty good even with pessimistic projection assumptions
If production stays level, 26,316 oz per Q
after the stream that is 24,210 oz per Q unhedged.
Using conservative $1.5 k / oz Au and stated ballpark $750 / oz cost of production (not all in cost however), that is a 750 - 500 = $250 / per loss on the stream, or $526.5 k requiring 702 oz Au to cover that cost
So net 23,508 oz production unhedged at $750/oz production cost. That is still 17.6 million quarterly revenue net of production cost at pessimistic $1,500/oz realized in sales. Looks like it covers taxes, other costs, debt service, etc. with room for exploration, debt buy-down, Grey Fox advancement, etc. Oh, that also assumes all production fron the area subject to the stream, which picture is looking to change significantly down the road once Grey Fox starts producing.
a forward P/E ratio of 3.17
Why? I don't get it, why refer to post 9947 ?
We are both just stuck at perhaps until the company communicates and clears things up.
Refer to post 9863
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=86245131
and that brought to criticality imo the visibility of the fact of the failure of this company to be transparent and made obvious it does not comprehend the necessity that the investor community be informed of the activities and of the road ahead
At times I wonder if Robert has anything to let out of his sight, or perhaps not having anything beyond some plastic mock-up in a stainless box is why "the unit" never goes far from his control.
As I recall the offer from Dave Meyers was to take the prototype through beta testing, filed testing, safety testing/certification, on to manufacturing and distribution.
It is not known what we are waiting for, let alone why we wait.
Did that comment in the MD&A mean we are waiting until June for an update that will cover a full year of drilling ?
Perhaps it was Robert's expectation that Wanderport would hire and/or contract in order to accomplish product development.
Do you recall once upon a time, way back, there was wording to the effect that the company may at some point employ Robert, but at that time his role was limited to advisory. If I recall correctly that info was used in some NRs back in the 2009-2010 timeframe.
The agreement, which I do not have the time to reread currently, does not to my memory say Robert is supposed to supply a water heater, but I guess that comes down to how one understands his supplying the grant of use of the "patented" technology. I just always had the take-away that he was licensing the "intellectual property" and was in contract expecting Wanderport to make use of that by developing and marketing a product.
That said, now that you mention it, I can see how one could understand it as meaning he would supply a "near market ready" use of the technology and Wanderport would develop that into a fully market ready product and market it.
I think we are at that point were we acknowledge that the contract is rather vague on expectations of each party, just as it is in defining how the contract would be broken upon a breach by either party (due to non-performance, but expected performance is not clearly delineated).
So, that brings us back to what has either party provided to the other that meets the apparent terms of the contract?
Interesting pronouncement from JS indeed. In my own read of things there must exist an agreement for western sovereigns to hold gold within a range while China positions its holding for an "equitable" future status in a global economy in which hard reserves will play a part. In return China agreed to not shock the sovereign debt/bond markets. That is just a guess at the plausible, but I do see that gold became tied into the range-bound behavior at about the time of Geithner's visit to China Jan 2012, that the peak of gold ended approx at the time that China was granted direct-bidder status to buy US Treasuries from the US gov without intermediary (announced in June 2011). That any such "agreement" would have been roughly term-limited by the known change (China) and potential change (US) in government leadership and policy (China for sure new 10 yr plan, US potential via elections) would make sense. Also, with the political climate relaxed sufficiently that the Fed was able to move into unlimited QE the pressure to keep the Treasury market from becoming illiquid is relieved for now.
etc. etc. etc. Point being I see nothing to contradict what JS is proclaiming in that piece, but there may be some indicators supporting it.
No, no, oh wizard, you have been away in the hinterlands too long, but miracles happened and the company found an Intertek facility with everything needed for the testing. And, even more miracles late last week as the voice of FB said that they have now scheduled testing (at unannounced time) so imagine that, it only took a month or so to schedule a time once they found a facility.
This company is on a roll.
Fill in for sure, versa vice appreciated.
Waiting with an unknown is an odd pain, but I have a confidence in GF having gone through his prior M&A deal, and he is still showing confidence to increase his stake for whatever that is worth.
Cheers
Yes, I noticed the gap up 1.5 cent in the morning, which sent me looking for news also, nothing to be found. It is not like it didn't fill to only a 0.5 cent increase a bit later, midday, nor like the stair step increase into close was doing more than regaining the ground hit end of last week and during the start of this week, with just a bit of further gain at close. Toronto volume yesterday of 200k is enough to move this, at least in the past. At any rate we saw the best weekly volume since the shareprice clobbering in last part of February.
Generally the past week plus has the smell that something may be up. Then again McCoach recently mentioned the company still has $6 MM in treasury and is out shopping (good time for that). So treasury works out to almost 0.14 per share.
In the look for news, I noticed that I don't recall if the website had "coming soon" under a "White Gold District" heading previously as it now does. GF has a grip. IMO he would not have exited the Shaun Ryan options without a better plan in mind.
Point well taken Beers. I understood "technology" as Robert providing to Wanderport the rights to exploit "his patents" related to microwave based means for heating water.
Now, as we know there are no such patents, and the applications are not being kept up-to-date on fee payments and Robert has not yet, in so far as is disclosed at the patent office, requested that the applications for patents be reviewed, it would seem that there is little intent to hurry the process to receive dependable patents along.
So, that brings us back to what has either party provided to the other that meets the apparent terms of the contract?
It is one-sided in the wording. As I have read it Robert provided the technology and agreed to act as a technical advisor. As long as he does (did) that he has not breached. That is even if he took over the development/engineering and then sat on it. The company could have gotten the development/engineering done other than via Robert; that is what they licensed, the rights to develop/market product based on the technology.
On the other side, Robert apparently can expect the company will make use of, make headway on exploiting the licensed technology, else the company would be in breach.
That is my read.
Thanks for pointing insider buying out.
http://www.canadianinsider.com/node/7?menu_tickersearch=BRD+%7C+Brigus+Gold
also, no patents provided to date !
News: Excellon drills 55.60 g/t gold over 5.57 metres on Beschefer Project, Quebec
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=57025404&symbol=TSX:EXN
Perhaps this will start getting some attention to EXN not being a one-trick pony. I recall the street reacted negatively when EXN did the buy-out to get into the Timmins and Abitabi areas, tanking the shares in reaction. But those were also hard times for EXN (water in Mexico).
Now it is looking like EXN is hitting on all cylinders, finally.
Correct. In that post I should have made the context clear by saying "precious metals". Thanks.
I don't use an index, but just track the actual prices, and sometimes watch the futures contract prices.
From what I have seen of the contract language there is some wording about non-performance allowing either side to break the contract without breach.
However, in Robert's case it is not clear what would constitute non-performance, as he is identified as the party licensing the technology to Wanderport and as serving as a technical adviser.
Does a technical adviser sound like a one man engineering, design, built, test, etc. facility ? Per the wording it could be argued that Robert has gone over and above the call and the contract language in order to assist Wanderport in attempting to bring forth a product based on the technology.
Whose says that the recent pps moves are a reaction to the released financials or drill results ?
It seems to me they are more riding the general metals down motion, but there would have likely been a drop of some larger scale without the news.
Thanks for getting those in the archive here. Surprising that in 3 or 4 days they had not been removed.
Just to be clear, "turn this shipwreck around" in my ear means the non-employed leader of the company not just called it a shipwreck, but also indicated it is headed in the wrong direction.
omg that is encouraging
occasionally one needs to be content with a little free association
it seems there has been one or two larger buyers at 2 to 3 tenths of a cent range this week
I believe you are right, all they need to do is call and schedule, at an available time convenient to WDRP.
That this has not happened appears to show that what is convenient to WDRP is whatever can cause the most delay.
Sorry to say, but how else can one interpret the behavior?
Nice and shallow gold !
Good they waited to release today as opposed to Apr 1
The rest will be shares via news release
Ha - meanwhile investors advise company they know how to paint plain, normal lights with green paint that will work
Company advises they are researching western world outlets of the Chinese manufacturer to determine availability of in-stock bulb from last production run.
Investors told to hold on, since the wait is over this delay is not actually a wait.
Wow, 22/oz on silver . . . my own view for some time has been that if they can continue the push to a 60 ratio we may see in the low cents above 23
In my view that depends much on there being no major unanticipated surprises, just events manageable by the intervention (i.e. Isreal does not attack Iran, some major EU bank does not go belly up, etc.) and also depends on the status quo remaining as is between western govs and China (and less so Russia) so the apparent agreement to maintain the price during their accumulation remains in force.
I like the potential of SAND and other stream plays, but your statement of the impact of the 8% BRD stream is not quite correct. If one uses 7,600 oz as the middle of guidance (95k or the 90-100k production) then one still has to account, not just 95-7.6=87.4k but one also has to take into account that the 7.6k stream is being bought by SAMD at 500/oz, so there is an approx $250/oz loss to BRD if its cost is $750/oz roughly in line with their per oz cost of production. It would however be more meaningful to use the all-in per ounce cost, but with the 250/oz one can see that there is (at least) an almost $2 million cost to BRD of the 7.6k oz going to SAND.
Even with that overhead it is looking like a good year for BRD imo, and what the hey, without the stream obligation BRD wouldn't be where it is now.
Nice coverage, thx for posting. It is always enjoyable to see an article that is grounded in fact and lacking in hype. KTN may be a long story, but since recognizing the diatreme structure last year it seems they have been capitalizing on exploration with the new model guiding.
Well summarized 77-11, on both fronts - liquidity/price and mgmt/communication and the unexplained but severely missed guidance.
and Andrew does not get paid and cannot profit from shares;
plus all lights are flashing yellow warning lights, if not red.
This is laughable folks. The little bounce around the time of PDAC, from whatever cause, was short-lived and only around a 1/3 gain (if taken), and it has almost entirely evaporated already.
But what is to me more significant is that the bounce was only about 1/3 of the loss in ssp from the start of February up to the PDAC.
I would like to know the truth as to what is the next NI 43-101 update.
When, and including what. If as indicated in the MD&A then when is there to be an update after the one we expect yesterday, and more importantly, why was the coverage of the update changed (with only 6 months of new drills insufficient change to resource?).