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.
Actually I am expecting quite a bit from this 10q :
1, Projection if they are on track for mill opening in September, estimated costs to do so, and risk factors that would preclude them reaching projections.
2. Explanation of claim to have prepared a report by NI43-101 criteria when based on press release it does not.
(a.) plus description of properties owned in accordance with SEC guide 7.
3. Financials showing ( as you have indicated) they are still able to draw on convertibles, and how much "line" is needed.
4. Status of work to rehabilitate the mill.
5 What happened to properties they claim were to be closed on March 6.
6. Subsequent event footnote to financials showing shares issued subsequent to closing date for review.
Honestly I dont think the above is too much to ask for- they claim to be only 5 months or so away from reopening the mill.
Well I already posted exactly OSC recommended guidelines for NI43-101 disclosures, pretty straight forward- not to disclose metal in the ground without disclosing costs to extract etc. OSC specifically says this is a red flag. So how can company claim they are following NI43-101 criteria ?
I do not know the extent of prior work done in terms of assays,drilling etc etc, and will accept there is an historical resource as defined under NI43-101. First they have to close those deals, then raise funds from development work, permitting,etc etc.Like any other mining project. However all this takes time and money, certainly nothing I see indicates there will be ore from those mines in 2013, and if I recall they had a powerpoint that indicated with funding it would take over a year to provide ore form such mines.
I agree , for now guess nothing more can be learnt until the 10q.But I dont think there is anything wrong with asking questions
Yes this is a speculation and no one should ever invest in such a risky investment if they cant afford the loss.
But really management does have a responsibility to be direct and fair to shareholders as a reporting company to release material information,and not be misleading.
I have already posted about their "NI43-101" press release, and the lack of an 8k on what transpired on March 6 in relation to properties they announced with much fanfare.It doesnt seem there is any reasonable explanation. I cant comment on the past years, but this year does seem that management is not being transparent, and that brings up question of why not ? Or worse, they just dont realize the hole they are digging for their credibility.
How can anyone justify that NI43-101 press release not following the criteria they claim to have used ? Is this deliberately misleading or incompetence , or what?
I can understand in this market difficulties in financing, operational delays , but not these silly press releases.
The fact sheet shows "market" value , which according to US GAAP cannot be booked on the balance sheet. Since they have put that value on the fact sheet one can assume ( of course)they will outline in their 10q the claimed market value and what assets it consists of. It will be an interesting 10q !
Completely agree anyone buying this stock should know the risks, just a pity to me that company has adopted this marketing by silence routine.
As far as the NI-43101 I doubt a proper NI43-101 report will be publcished for several reasons. (a) as the press release showed they are not conversant with ni43-101 recommended disclosures,so it may not be a compliant report (b) a Ni43-101 quite comprehensive, doesnt seem in line with the marketing by silence routine (c) i am not sure what assets one would expect to be shown on the report, as far as i can tell company doesnt have reserves nor resources, it has historical resources which will not back a hard asset calculation.(d) SEC engineering office can ask for copy of published report and this could create back and forth and perhaps force company to issue retractions.
I agree though more information is needed to possibly attract larger investors.Not sure if releasing a non compliant NI43-101 report way to do, but certainly would be better than lack of information now available.
I would have expected with continuing dilution the stock to be trending more down, so maybe enough buyers emerging to slow down the pace of decline. The next 10q should be instructive as to the current burn rate and how it is being financed. Since convertible not eholders have to hold not efor six months before they convert, could be an indicator how may more shares to be issued at a minimum for the march-may period.
Some time back I asked what single successful business implementation BTDG had done the last 3 years Your answer if I recall was forget the past, they will do well in the future even there is no basis for this belief.
You and striker have always been supporters of this stock, got to admire your continued optimism after all these years.
How long absent any success whatsoever do you think it is reasonable to still be supporters for this stock ?
Part of my fascination with checking this board periodically is trying to understand how one can support a stock that has consistently performed poorly. What revenue has CEO brought to the table the last three years ?
Do you really believe someone will put up millions of dollars in guarantees, for someone to enter venture and then grant 50% to BTDG ? Do you think from a moral basis the CEO has any responsibility to shareholders ?
I agree prices are down for gold and silver, but on a historical basis- and compared to costs of production- they are at good levels so increasing production from the Lucky Friday should delievr in the upcoming 12 to 18 months increasing earnings, though with acquisition costs a factor.
US debt and increasing money supply event without political shocks bode well for increasing precious metal prices- and if the world's economy recovers faster, silver as an industrial metal should do well.
Equity prices have dropped faster than the metal prices. If Hecla agressive they can also build more more leverage through acquisitions.
You have for quite some time keep pumping this stock with no reason given To be objective , why are so positive on a stock that hasnt generated revenue for several years of any significant amount ? Did you read the recent press releases ? Some third party is supposed to put up millions in liquid assets to support financing for a a project in which 50% will be owned by a sub penny stock with a judgement againt it ?
Over 95% of all mining equities are down on a 6 or 12 months basis. It is incredible with the Lucky friday back on line, and after losing US Silver they now seem poised to make a successful acquisition, excellent long life mines with room for expansion, and exploration properties, this stock now under $4. So high commodity prices, low equity prices, stock with growing producton profile, and under $4.
Whle usually I like lower price stocks for leverage, cant beat Hecla at these prices !!I see a 100 to 300% return over next 1 to 2 1/2 years.
I aree with you it is a complete speculation buying some of these stocks, and after outstanding share count gets to high one has to expect a reverse split.There is no law against bad management or bad luck. I do not think it is unfair to ask reasonable questions, and also to expect for a reporting company to release material information. I am still curious if others find it odd they put out a press release on a NI43-101 report and in same press release go against recommended 43-101 disclosures.I will refrain about my usual March 6 comments !
I do think that the upcoming 10q should be quite instructive eitehr way.
US GAAP will not let them write up assets to what they current estimate the market value to be so most unlikely the existing assets will show $16 million,and sicne they are a reporting company any acquisition of such assets would have to be reported on an 8k.I agree that with continued use of convertibles downward pressure om stock prcie will continue.I geuss how long is the question, I think this wil be all year long but just my opinion.
from company's last 10q :
2. Pay off Jo Grant’s existing note in favor of a Colorado bank, dated March, 6, 2008, assigned to Jo Grant on October 17, 2012, having a present balance of approximately $60,353, as of October 31, 2012 on or before March 6, 2013 which was extended from January 6, 2013.
3. To pay to Jo Grant a sum of $50,000, no later than March 6, 2013, which was extended from January 6, 2013. This note is collateralized by the Silver Wing Mine.
2. Pay $3,000,000 to Jo Grant, only for the purpose of consummating the contract to buy and sell real estate (Land), between Jo Grant Mining, Inc. (as the Buyer), and a Texas limited liability company, (as the Seller), dated October 9, 2012, no later than March 6, 2013, which was extended from January 6, 2013. The contract to buy and sell real estate (land) is for the purchase of the Champion Mine.
3. To pay to Jo Grant a sum of $50,000, no later than March 6, 2013, which was extended from January 6, 2013.
--so where has it been filed these payments made, re-negotiated or delayed ?
Hey I am just trying to be fair in the comment I made. Yes I do believe there are some serious disclosure problems at this company or at the very least inept IR strategy- but I did not accuse the CFO of misleading investors because maybe not deliberate, maybe he honestly believes his approach is correct, how the heck would I know what he thinks. Some people believe it is probable the company will meet their projections regardless.Or some people just seem to hope.
Why not answer simply how their press release on the NI43-101 report meets NI43-101 disclosure guidelines when to me it clearly did not. Was that misleading, inexperience, combination ? I do not see how that press release met the guidelines which I posted and explained reasons why not.
There is nothing wrong in trying to be fair whether one is positive or negative or in between on the stock.
His obligation is to release information on material events,and not to mislead investors. I am not saying necessarily he is, but if people are buying shares believing that mill will re-open at a profit in september per his projections, or because they believe there is a Ni43-101 report that meets NI43-101 requirements,CFO does have disclosure requirements beyond the 10q.
You have a point though ,we are so close to 10q that it will provide some clues what is happening.
Do you really believe with all the qualifiers on top of qualifiers that someone would provide a guarantee for this sort of money, and btdg still hast received any cash.
do you really believe ceo has skills to actually execute this deal ? really ?
Maybe for 10q but we already have heard it seems from TA that they are over 120 million. wonder what TA will show by april 10th ?
I admire your optimism that this company has potential suppliers of ore and that they can start 30 days before production in September to stockpile ore, i.e in August, and of course they wil have solved permitting issues therefore in 4 months .And that CFO's prior forecast gross margin % can be met by this company ?
For me and just my opinion, the mill will not be operational in September with a steady supply of ore.Custom milling requires experienced mill personnel and a working mill with any bugs worked out. I have no idea what $9 million in orders refers tp- forecast ommissions ? forecast gross value of ore before deductions to suppliers ? Heck it isnt even clear what mine this ore will come from in the short turn.I am not searching for exact details, but enough general information to gauge some degree of probability.
Since they put out a press relelease claiming they followed Ni43-101 rules and disclosure guidelines, but the basic thrust of the press release cntrart to the spirit if not the letter of NI43-101 regulations, I admit some doubt about CFO and transparency.
I agree with your fundamental point they have raised some money the past few months though we dont know how much and for what. But without even a recent guess estimate of costs to rehabilitate mill,and current status of such work,I am not sure how one would estimate capital costs unless in milling business-except they do need working capital for supplies, meeting permit conditions, working capital for salaries and financing receivables, etc etc.I would be extremely suthorized that re-opening the mill and processing clients ore that working capital required could be less than $200,000.running CGFI as SEC reporing company must be at leats $50k oer year if not $100k.
Guess I would feel different if I felt company was transparent.The silence is deafening- looking at their prior press releases if they had ANY good news at this pointIMO they would release.
But you are optimistic so I guess only the 10q and an update rorm company will give some inkling of the probability of the company achieving its objectives this year
And I am also critisized for repeating myself as I already wrote several posts on the march 6th date-basically company put out press eleases saying signficant deals closing march 6th It is now Apil, there has been no 8k announcing whether deal closed, is in negotiation, or cancelled
In addition as in my opinion abundantly clear form my prior ppst also, they put out press releases claiming compliance with Ni43-1010 rules which incldued discloures, and as I have shown company disregarded the NI43-101 requirements for disclosure.No one has indictaed why this is acceptable for a public company.
The lack of an 8k on March 6 events, and the press reelease clearly contrary to NI43-101 recommended disclosures , frankly made me question the disclosures of this company more closely. I have a bit of a hard time imagining with probability the company has ore lined up to start processing in September.The more I think about this how could the Silver Wing be considered a near term source of ore.
I hope you ae right the $9 million in orders are firm and there is some ore from somewhere they can process. I agree having a mill once it is permitted , and nearby mines, does provide some significant potential. I just now doubt it will occur in 2013.Just my opinion.
You have convinced me they brought some money in the last few months through convertibles, though I still think hitting 250 to 300 million in shares outstanding is at least what they will reach this year
Hopefully the next 10q will answer some questions.
Fully understand there may be some details to the company's operations that may be covered by NDA, or by some "marketing by silence" strategy.However material events need to be communicated to invesors by a reporting company not only because that is a requirement of an SEC reporting company, but also transparency in my opinion would build confidence in the company- especially after a severe reverse split. I have already stated my observations that this company is not disclosing material events, and from a strategic marketing standpoint does not disclose key items that would answer many questons.A bit surprising to me that those who believe this is a good speculation would not also believe company should be more transparent. It creates in my opinion more doubts by not being transparent.
Thanks and agree with your comments.
This is a public company therefore according to the American system they are to release material information to investors. They may of course have their own opinion what is " material". Maybe just you and I disagree what is material. A $3 million acquisition of a $200 million asset ( per the company) for a company this size I would think is material.
I have cited what I feel is material information they havent disclosed.It is simply my opinion that this company isnt transparent and I have given my reasons for that opinion.
I welcome your comments on whether those reasons are right or not, rather than commenting on people who post different views.
As far as ANY professional in the mining industry I do not believe anyone conversant with NI-43101 regulations would consider the press release issued anything but contrary to that criteria in the spirit and letter of the NI-43101 regulation and practice.
My compliments on your excellent point though, if they pull this off getting into profitable production by September, this has more value with less shares outstanding than more. Sorry, I asked where ore would come from, I would think 5 months before production is supposed to start this is not an off the wall question.
Well in response I guess my first thought is we can all have different opinions and be decent people. Maintaining civility, fairness and decency are certainly beneficial to us all. There is no reason why one cant also be polite on the internet.
Actually I must say you hit the nail on the head, if this company can meet its projections it would have proved a great speculation, and better at under 300 million shares than 1 billion shares.I also agree past is the past as far as reverse split- though it is not unfair that if management led company to a reverse split to try to identify what has changed since then.
None of us knows 100% what will happen, we all make our own judgements of probability. For me I ask questions anout any investment or speculation I may make, especially when so much unanswered, in my opinion.
I ask questions to better gauge probability, which can guide my investment decisions. I am a retail investor so I cant short this stock so no benefit to me if stock price went down.
But sorry I just call it as I see it. If the company issues a press release saying they prepared a report according to NI43-101 criteria which explicitly is contrary to what they disclosed in the press release, I dont think unfair to ask why !
Can you help out with this question- I guess I am confused. If the mill is turned on by September, where will ore for the mill come from ? I know there are old mines in the area, and I recall that there are some operatings mines in the general area. Do we know what will be source of mill feed, or who placed the "orders" with the company ? Thanks.
Am I to assume you are paod to make posts ?
Are you pleased with the way things are going ?
This is absurd to assume that I am paid to make a post just because I ask questions which are in any case prompted by management's lack of dislosure. Why not address the question ?
However I agree ultimately management's job to manage, and shareholders can buy or sell as they see fit.
Would you prefer everyone just express hope and faith and never question management ? Are you happy with progress since the reverse split ?
Yea I guess I do repeat myself. I am just flabbergasted at their recent press releases and disclosure policies. I dont know what could be more "pump and dump" than announcing they will acquire on March 6 an asset ( the valuation alone is very questionable), then March 6 rolls by and no announcement what occurred. This hardly seems conservative in my book, but I guess we have different perceptions of this issue. And I cant believe they didnt even seem to do basic research on what NI43-101 recommended practice and criteria are.
I also agree that the next 10q will be very revealing. Yes I have strong doubts now that they can re-open that mill at a profit by September.
The simple reason I suggested CFO updates the market is to deal with what I perceive as a credibility issue.The last press releases were not credible in my opinion. Whether positive or negative news, I believe a new IR strategy is needed now and in the future. The current approach doesn't seem to be working.
Well,
1.Re Mill :I dont know for sure of course, but I dont think such a leap to say the mill probably wont open in 5 months to profitable operation.Even if granting they had unused "credit" on the prior convertible arrangements they have (a) costs to operate were around $400,000 last year (b) costs to meet permit conditions (c) mill rehabilitation costs (d) working capital to operate mill. (e) that they will not only meet conditions for permit, but surely state will do an inspection.(f) I am not really sure where the mill feed will come from on a steady basis.
2. Re Press Releases- There are 2 issues, one is releasing material information as is required of a public company, second IR strategy. What would you call a company that says there have NI43-101 compliant report, blatantly claim $200 million in value (contrary to NI43-101 guidelines),closing March 6, then by March 28th still havent announced whether deal closes ? Does that build confidence ?
Ok so you are saying CFO is very conservative worried about reputation during a period of heavy fund raising requirements ? Somehow imagining this CFO as worried about such things strikes me as odd compared to their press releases. I admit I never dreamed in a million years anyone would consider after their recent press releases this CFO being considered conservative.
-As far as CFO's shoes, I would think best course for him would be to be upfront and start trying to build credibility.Sooner he tells market they wont re-open at a profit in September the better.Second, get a JV partner to reduce capital requirements.Otherwise even an estimate of 200 to 300 million shares outsanding may be too low.
By the way I always appreciate your posts which ae very well presented, though I often disagree.
That is precisely the point,neither I are any other investors can judge from the company's disclosures and projections whether they have sufficient funds to meet their projections.All I know is that they had $5,000 or so in the bank, and apparently some arrangements ( which you well pointed out)that may have been available for some funding via convertible notes.
Based on their lack of an 8k re March 6 events, and releasing a report stating they met NI43-101 criteria when they did not, I do have doubts as to the credibility of their forecasts.Again if I understand their 10k, they forecast all other requirements necessary without the mill rehabilitation costs, and all these exceed the amout they had available from their convertible note arrangements- so the company itself stated it did not have funds or funding arrangements available to meet their projections.Since they have announced no new funding, I can only assume logically they are in the same position today.
You are correct I dont know costs to rehabilitate the mill and meet permit conditions, nor their other cash requirements. I can only make my own best estimate, which as of now tells me they will not be in operation as of September on a profitable basis.Just my opinion of course based on limited information. Who is responsible for creating such doubts ? It is the company which is supposed to disclosure material events.
How could they need less money this year than last year if they are re-opening a mill and putting it into operation ?
Guess 10q will answer some of these questions.Since they havent announced what happened March 6, I bet they will have to jump through hoops to try to determine what disclosure to make on their 10q.
Well let's look at the facts :
1. Company announces acquisition of an asset to be closed March 6 and it is now March 29 and we know nothing of what happened March 6.
2. Company states they have "preliminary " NI43-101 report, judging from requirements of the NI43-101 per the OSC they dont meet its criteria though company specifically states it was prepared according to that criteria.
At best CFO doesnt have a clue about proper disclosure and fairness to investors,thus acting from ignorance. At worst he is just hyping the stock with no concern for invesors. Either way in my opinion there is something wrong.
Thanks for background. I am mystified how it can be expected this company can meet the conditions of the permit without sufficient funds, and even with the funds to do so in the timeframe they are projecting. Just my opinion .In revising the fact sheet in February they are still projecting they are going into operation this year.
What is wrong with asking questions ? Maybe comes across as negative because of Company's policy on disclosure.
So what DD do you want ? I presented what the NI43-101 criteria is vs was company reported. Is that not DD ?
It is a tough financing environment, tough regulatory environment, no one can blame company for things outside of their control. But company can control its disclosures and provide comfort to investors they are indeed able to meet their own projections- rather than just blind hope or faith.
I have learnt a lot from people on this board and have admitted when I have been wrong. The basic premise of this company ( a mill that can be permitted, and nearby mines, high commodity prices, low equity prices)is excellent. But if they cant execute, isnt that everyone's question, what good is that premise ?
You may be right on the scenario you present, and it is a bit dificult imagining the company and its principals not wanting to get the permit. While a level of detail and experience with Colorado may be required for a definitive judgement, there may be a different scenario.
1. First , almost any mine that has had production before in the current regulatory environment will require clean up from prior operators . ( At the extreme one has the Superfund legislaton).
2. A lot depends on relationship with regulators, and state regulators easier to deal with than federal ones.It would surprise me that the required changes were "out of the blue", though of coruse company would put best spin on the situation.
3. Just glancing at the documents I noticed criticism by the state of lack of baseline studies- this is pretty standard stuff.
4. No way Colorado toughest in the nation, California "deserves" that honor.
5. Dealing with water discharge and tailing issues often requires many projects to look at dry stack tailings. No surprise here. That company may have tried to do without one understands, but it shouldn't have been a surprise the requirements for the permit.
Guess someone like NV Taylor coudl provdie a more solid opinion.
The bigger issue though is to meet conditions what financial wherewithal was necessary, and whether it has available to meet their projections. Guess for that we need the 10q to show us what is actually going on. I admit I cant imagine state requiring a dry stack tailings facility, then allowing then to operate before complete and inspected. All this within next 5 months ? Could be , I dont know. I admit my feeling is mill will not be operational and profitable this year.
Just my opinion.
A correction, we do not have preliminary NI43-101 reports but a selective disclosure from a report claimed to be according to that criteria- and by the criteria of the OSC that disclosure in the press release clearly not compliant, and would frowned on being overly-promotional.
And what on earth is a "prleminary NI43-101 report"? I called a few people in Vancouver, there response was either a report is or isnt compliant, it either is or isnt a NI43-101 report. Perhaps semantics.
Thanks but I do think being negative just for the sake of being negaive, or being so unfairly is not right, or being insulting to people ,hiding behind the internet. Having said that the more I look at this company the more I see unanswered questions, or what I consider a very poorly conceived IR strategy. There are valid questions- and company plays right into the hands of critics by its selective disclosure strategy and overly-promotional press releases that dont seem to work anyway.
I used the word "over-kill" which may sound extreme, but the more I looked at standards for NI43-101 disclosures etc, the more I see at best I expect a full "NI 43-101 report" -if ever released - which I doubt- would not be a compliant report.If this were a Canadian company that press release would have had to be retracted immediately.
I presented "facts" by quoting the actual words from the OSC website, and precisely identifying one area Colorado Goldfields was deficient, and a second area probably so. I honestly fail to see why that should be offensive nor unfair- the company itself made big fanfar about a NI43-101 report, or a report prepared according to that criteria.
I realize no one likes negativity, but also no one likes a stock going down. Maybe the company should wake up and address the various questions. Is this board only for people to post messages of hope ? I would think any stockholder would be concerned at this point.
I have to ask where you got this information. The naked shorting of this stock, illegal for retail clients, and barely legal for market makers, might be one reason.
The mill permit as far as I understand has nothing to do with the DTC chill, they dont put chill's on stock based on how they perceive the merit of the company, otherwise would be a lot more company's with the DTC chill.
Anyway dont claim I know why they put chill on the stock, just curious.