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 would be nice to get a PR on this with some more information. I am interested to see that Berman is keeping ownership of these claims with AUMN.
Does anyone have a link that shows the federal law stating that the maximum number of mining claims an individual can own is 310 as seen in the TRSI PR?
July 25, 2007 - 8:45 AM EST
Trophy Resources Proceeds With Acquisition of Uranium Claims
Trophy Resources, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: TRSI) announced today that they have completed the due diligence and are proceeding with the acquisition process of an initial block of 65 uranium claims. This is the first phase of our uranium claim acquisition program to acquire the maximum of 310 claims allowed under federal guidelines.
-faz
It would be nice to get a PR on this with some more information. I am interested to see that Berman is keeping ownership of these claims with AUMN.
Does anyone have a link that shows the federal law stating that the maximum number of mining claims an individual can own is 310 as seen in the TRSI PR?
July 25, 2007 - 8:45 AM EST
Trophy Resources Proceeds With Acquisition of Uranium Claims
Trophy Resources, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: TRSI) announced today that they have completed the due diligence and are proceeding with the acquisition process of an initial block of 65 uranium claims. This is the first phase of our uranium claim acquisition program to acquire the maximum of 310 claims allowed under federal guidelines.
-faz
AUMN Mining Claims DD: the 68 have been found
Was cruising around the BLM website and found the claims that are for American Uranium Mining Company:
AMERICAN URANIUM MINING CO INT-REL: CO-OWNER
9595 SIX TIMES DR STE 8210
THE WOODLANDS, TX 77380
Serial No Claim Name/Number County D Claim Type Last A Yr Mc Loc Dt Mr Twn Rng Sec Subdiv
UMC395215 MESA # 1 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 SE
UMC395216 MESA # 2 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395217 MESA # 3 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 SE
UMC395218 MESA # 4 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395219 MESA # 5 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 SE
UMC395220 MESA # 6 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395221 MESA # 7 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395222 MESA # 8 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395223 MESA # 9 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395224 MESA # 10 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395225 MESA # 11 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395226 MESA # 12 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395227 MESA # 13 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395228 MESA # 14 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395229 MESA # 15 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW SE
UMC395230 MESA # 16 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW SE
UMC395231 MESA # 17 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395232 MESA # 18 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395233 MESA # 19 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395234 MESA # 20 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395235 MESA # 21 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395236 MESA # 22 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395237 MESA # 23 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395237 MESA # 23 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 SW
UMC395238 MESA # 24 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395238 MESA # 24 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395239 MESA # 25 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395240 MESA # 26 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395241 MESA # 27 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395242 MESA # 28 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395243 MESA # 29 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395244 MESA # 30 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395245 MESA # 31 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395246 MESA # 32 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395247 MESA # 33 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395247 MESA # 33 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 SE
UMC395248 MESA # 34 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NE SE
UMC395249 MESA # 35 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 SE
UMC395250 MESA # 36 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NE SE
UMC395251 MESA # 37 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE
UMC395252 MESA # 38 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE SE
UMC395253 MESA # 39 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE
UMC395254 MESA # 40 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE SE
UMC395255 MESA # 41 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE
UMC395256 MESA # 42 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE SE
UMC395257 MESA # 43 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395258 MESA # 44 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395259 MESA # 45 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395260 MESA # 46 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395261 MESA # 47 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395262 MESA # 48 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395263 MESA # 49 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395264 MESA # 50 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395265 MESA # 51 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE NW
UMC395266 MESA # 52 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE NW SW SE
UMC395267 MESA # 53 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395268 MESA # 54 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE SE
UMC395269 MESA # 55 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395270 MESA # 56 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE SE
UMC395271 MESA # 57 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395272 MESA # 58 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NE
UMC395272 MESA # 58 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 SE
UMC395273 MESA # 59 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395273 MESA # 59 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395274 MESA # 60 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE SE
UMC395275 MESA # 61 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395276 MESA # 62 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
UMC395277 MESA # 63 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395278 MESA # 64 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
UMC395279 MESA # 65 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395280 MESA # 66 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
UMC395281 MESA # 67 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395282 MESA # 68 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
AUMN Mining Claims DD:
Was cruising around the BLM website and found the claims that are for American Uranium Mining Company:
AMERICAN URANIUM MINING CO INT-REL: CO-OWNER
9595 SIX TIMES DR STE 8210
THE WOODLANDS, TX 77380
Serial No Claim Name/Number County D Claim Type Last A Yr Mc Loc Dt Mr Twn Rng Sec Subdiv
UMC395215 MESA # 1 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 SE
UMC395216 MESA # 2 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395217 MESA # 3 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 SE
UMC395218 MESA # 4 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395219 MESA # 5 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 SE
UMC395220 MESA # 6 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395221 MESA # 7 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395222 MESA # 8 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395223 MESA # 9 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395224 MESA # 10 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395225 MESA # 11 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395226 MESA # 12 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395227 MESA # 13 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395228 MESA # 14 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 NW SW
UMC395229 MESA # 15 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW SE
UMC395230 MESA # 16 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW SE
UMC395231 MESA # 17 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395232 MESA # 18 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395233 MESA # 19 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395234 MESA # 20 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395235 MESA # 21 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395236 MESA # 22 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395237 MESA # 23 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SE
UMC395237 MESA # 23 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 SW
UMC395238 MESA # 24 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 021 NE SE
UMC395238 MESA # 24 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/3/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395239 MESA # 25 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395240 MESA # 26 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395241 MESA # 27 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395242 MESA # 28 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395243 MESA # 29 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395244 MESA # 30 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395245 MESA # 31 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395246 MESA # 32 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NW SW
UMC395247 MESA # 33 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 022 SW
UMC395247 MESA # 33 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 SE
UMC395248 MESA # 34 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NE SE
UMC395249 MESA # 35 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 SE
UMC395250 MESA # 36 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NE SE
UMC395251 MESA # 37 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE
UMC395252 MESA # 38 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE SE
UMC395253 MESA # 39 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE
UMC395254 MESA # 40 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE SE
UMC395255 MESA # 41 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE
UMC395256 MESA # 42 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 028 NE SE
UMC395257 MESA # 43 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395258 MESA # 44 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/4/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395259 MESA # 45 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395260 MESA # 46 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395261 MESA # 47 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395262 MESA # 48 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395263 MESA # 49 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW
UMC395264 MESA # 50 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NW SW
UMC395265 MESA # 51 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE NW
UMC395266 MESA # 52 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE NW SW SE
UMC395267 MESA # 53 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395268 MESA # 54 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE SE
UMC395269 MESA # 55 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395270 MESA # 56 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/5/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE SE
UMC395271 MESA # 57 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395272 MESA # 58 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 023 NE
UMC395272 MESA # 58 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 SE
UMC395273 MESA # 59 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395273 MESA # 59 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE
UMC395274 MESA # 60 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 027 NE SE
UMC395275 MESA # 61 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395276 MESA # 62 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
UMC395277 MESA # 63 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395278 MESA # 64 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
UMC395279 MESA # 65 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395280 MESA # 66 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
UMC395281 MESA # 67 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW
UMC395282 MESA # 68 SAN JUAN A LODE CLAIM 2007 6/6/2007 26 0310S 0210E 026 NW SW
Spot uranium ticking lower
Leonard Zehr, today at 10:42 AM EDT
Prices for uranium in the spot market have dropped yet again because of excess supply and anemic demand, drawing ever closer to quotes on long-term contracts.
Ux Consulting Co. has cut the spot price by $10 (U.S.) a pound to $110, while the spot price at the other industry bible, TradeTech, fell $3 to $120.
Ux contends that a correction is taking place in the spot market, with “motivated sellers aggressively liquidating supplies.”
The upcoming U.S. Department of Energy auction of up to 200 million tonnes of uranium hexafluoride, containing about 520,000 pounds of uranium oxide, in eight lots may be a catalyst for the spot weakness. “Sellers may be trying to place material prior to offers due in mid-September,” Ux suggests.
Looking forward, Ux Consulting sees “fewer sellers willing to sell at lower prices, but believes prices could retreat in the near-term and rebound once determined sellers have sold out and-or spot demand picks up.”
The long-term market remains active with 11 buyers looking for a total of 27 million pounds of uranium, with prices unchanged at $95 a pound.
Spot uranium ticking lower
Leonard Zehr, today at 10:42 AM EDT
Prices for uranium in the spot market have dropped yet again because of excess supply and anemic demand, drawing ever closer to quotes on long-term contracts.
Ux Consulting Co. has cut the spot price by $10 (U.S.) a pound to $110, while the spot price at the other industry bible, TradeTech, fell $3 to $120.
Ux contends that a correction is taking place in the spot market, with “motivated sellers aggressively liquidating supplies.”
The upcoming U.S. Department of Energy auction of up to 200 million tonnes of uranium hexafluoride, containing about 520,000 pounds of uranium oxide, in eight lots may be a catalyst for the spot weakness. “Sellers may be trying to place material prior to offers due in mid-September,” Ux suggests.
Looking forward, Ux Consulting sees “fewer sellers willing to sell at lower prices, but believes prices could retreat in the near-term and rebound once determined sellers have sold out and-or spot demand picks up.”
The long-term market remains active with 11 buyers looking for a total of 27 million pounds of uranium, with prices unchanged at $95 a pound.
Good movement on SLB today. Looks like it filled the gap from last week. I love this stock and I love this company even more!
-faz
I am eagerly awaiting the PR that indicates there efforts to clean up the 3 wells has gone smoothly and that they will be a positive source for cash flow.
I am definitely holding out for .001 and figure to let loose most of mine at .002 unless there is very encouraging news or another acquisition of an artist.
Bri,
Glad to hear that. I am looking at getting more in the next week or so once my funds have cleared. I don't think it will be more that a couple of million shares, but hey, every bit at the "ask" helps.
-faz
Nice post makes.
Found some instances of John Rud and Floyd Bleak:
UNIVERSAL URANIUM LTD. ("UUL")
BULLETIN TYPE: Property-Asset Acquisition
BULLETIN DATE: March 1, 2006
TSX Venture Tier 2 Company
TSX Venture Exchange has accepted for Expedited filing documentation
of an Option Agreement dated February 10, 2006 between the Issuer and
Artillery Peak Uranium Corp. (E. Clive Ashworth, the 'Optionor')
whereby the Issuer may acquire a 100% right, title and interest in and
to 36 unpatented lode mining claims located in Mohave County, Arizona
(the 'Property'). The Issuer assumes the Optionors obligations under a
Purchase and Royalty Agreement dated January 18, 2006 between the
Optionor and Floyd Bleak and John Rud (the 'Underlying Vendors').
Consideration payable to the Optionor consists of cash payments
totaling US$300,000 (US$150,000 in the first year); work commitments
on the Property totaling US$3,000,000 (US$250,000 in the first year)
and share issuances totaling 3,000,000 common shares (1,100,000 in the
first year) over a three-year period. The Issuer will pay the
Underlying Vendors a total of US$1,000,000 (US$300,000 in the first
year) over a three-year period and issue a total of 1,000,000 warrants
(exercisable at $0.88 per share for a period of two years).
The Optionor will retain a 3% yellow cake royalty, which can be
reduced upon agreed payments to the Optionor.
I have sent emails to IR today. I still have yet to get a response from any email I have sent, but I will continue my efforts.
-faz
Update: I just received a response and it was not scripted, however, it pretty much answered nothing. They said a couple of times that news was on the way so be patient.
-faz
gold,
I agree with a lot of what you say. We are far off from digging ore out of the ground. Heck, we don't even know how much could possibly be there. I believe that this stock will move when the NI 43-101 reports are released and we can begin to see what kind of reserves we are looking at. End of Q4 if all goes well, that is when we move.
-faz
Sorry to disappoint...here ya go.
Nuclear Power: The Future
Print This Post Print This Post | Email This Page: Topic: Other — August 1st, 2007
Last Year, the IEA (International Energy Agency) voiced their support for nuclear power as a viable way of meeting carbon emission targets and increasing energy security.
This is something the IEA had not done before and they are not alone as the founder of Greenpeace Sir Patrick Moore, Sir David King, the UK Government’s chief scientist and James Lovelock, inventor of the Gaia theory have also voiced their support for nuclear power.
And of course one must add ourselves to that list of pro nuclear figures along with any readers of our Uranium Stocks Newsletter that support nuclear power.
Nuclear power is the overwhelming obvious option to combat climate change and carbon emissions. The Torness nuclear power plant here in the UK emits about five g/kWh of carbon dioxide. Now a regular combined-cycle gas turbine gives out around 400 g/kWh whereas a UK coal plant emits 900 g/kWh. So nuclear power is 80 times better than gas and 180 times better than gas, simply on carbon dioxide emissions, this doesn’t take into account any other factors like energy security and the fact that fossil fuels are running out.
The French have been the smartest country on the energy playing field, as they have been building nuclear plants since oil boomed roughly 30 years ago, they saw how unstable the oil price was. France gets 80% of its electricity from nuclear plants, and 12% from hyrdo-electricty, so there is no need for young French soldiers to die protecting energy resources in unstable areas of the world. The French power company, EDF, estimates that if the UK replaced all its nuclear power plants with gas power stations, carbon emissions would rise by 7.95 million tonnes a year. This is equivalent to increasing the number of cars of Britain’s roads by 40%, that’s another 10-12 million cars.
Despite the nuclear power shining through as the obvious way to go there are still sceptics. The chief executive of Greenstone Carbon Management, Belinda Howell, thinks that there are several reasons why nuclear power is not environmentally friendly. “Uranium is a non-renewable resource and nuclear fission creates long-lasting radioactive waste. Also, scientists have shown that climate change appears to be moving faster than previously predicted. We need to cut energy demand and emissions within ten years, while nuclear power will only start to come on stream a decade from now.”
Let us take a closer look at that statement. At the moment, we do not know how much uranium there is in the world, so if there is enough to last humans for the next thousand years, is nuclear power not worth a shot? Breeder reactors are getting a lot better and we think there will be a major breakthrough soon, probably when the governments of the world designate a decent proportion of their budget to nuclear research. We cannot argue with the fact that nuclear energy produces dangerous waste, but this waste can be stored for many years and in time science will have found a way to deal with the radioactive waste. If climate change is moving faster than previously predicted then we should be moving fast to build nuclear power plants that we need yesterday. There is no way you are going to cut, curb or even slow down the worlds increasing energy demand. China, India and other up and coming countries are going for a full-scale industrial revolution. Nobody can tell them to turn their lights out or stop the assembly lines, especially western countries as we have had our industrial revolution and we are still living of the benefits. We cannot turn around and tell them to stop theirs. Cutting energy demand is not an option. Cutting emissions is possible with a switch to nuclear power and even if it takes ten years we should start now instead of taking the attitude that it’s too late now so we might as well give up. When nuclear power was discovered, the world should have begun building nuclear power plants in earnest, all over the world. It might take 10 years for newly constructed nuclear power plants to come on stream and start cutting carbon emissions, but the fact is that if we don’t start building nuclear plants now, carbon emissions will not be cut at all. Also, like the majority of nuclear power critics, Belinda Howell has offered no alternative to nuclear power. Why? Because there isn’t one.
People also tend to bring up the terrorist threat, which is a genuine concern, but nuclear power plants are protected against possible attacks. You can fly a jet aeroplane into the wall of a nuclear power plant and the plane will explode but the wall will not be breached in the slightest. It is true that the failed London bombers had plans of Sizewell B, a nuclear plant in Britain, but that does not mean that they were anywhere near being able to launch an attack. The fact that they choose to attack the underground trains may say something about the daunting nuclear power plant security.
There appears to be a bit of a fuss over the recent energy bill passed in the US senate, where a one sentence provision could make builders of new nuclear plants eligible for tens of billions of dollars in government loan guarantees. Why is this so shockingly bad? Let us hope that the US Government does give its nuclear industry the $50 billion loan it needs to carry out a large expansion program. This makes a lot more sense to us than subsidising cotton farmers so they can sell their products to third world countries, where people are starving as they can’t sell their cotton as the American cotton is cheaper due to the subsidies. It also makes more sense than paying farmers to grow crops for bio-fuels, burning food is quite possibly the most ludicrous idea we have ever heard of, and the bio-fuels scandal will be cover in depth in a future article.
We do not understand why some people can still be anti-nuclear with the wall of evidence in its favour and the rapidly growing threat of energy security and climate change. We will try and convince the sceptics that nuclear power is a good idea because the only way we will get governments to move on this issue is to sway public opinion. This isn’t about making boatloads of cash in uranium stocks; this is about stopping a global crisis.
Thoughts on the PR today.
Trophy Resources' JV Partnership Receives Exploratory Mining Permit for Uranium Property
Wednesday August 1, 9:45 am ET
CLEVELAND, OH--(MARKET WIRE)--Aug 1, 2007 -- Trophy Resources (Other OTC:TRSI.PK - News) is excited to announce that their joint venture partnership with Russell Industries, Inc. (Other OTC:RSDS.PK - News) and American Uranium Mining Company has received an exploratory mining permit for the initial uranium holdings in San Juan County, Utah.
This permit, (Claims UMC 391224 - 391273 / Permit E/037/125), will allow the companies to begin the process necessary to establish the true potential of this property in ore reserves, as well as its grade, with the objective of establishing a full scale mining operation in the near future.
The companies have elected to engage two independent geologists to issue (NI) 43-101 compliant reports to establish economic valuation of the underlying assets. The companies also plan to explore the possibility of oil, natural gas and coal bed methane on the group's independent holdings in San Juan Basin, Utah.
Eric Leonetti, President/CEO (Trophy Resources) and Rick Berman, President/CEO (Russell Industries, Inc) said in a joint statement, "We simply cannot be more pleased with the progress we have made, as well as the manner in which this process has been completed, with the BLM. We have begun pursuing the acquisition of the equipment necessary to complete this exploratory work. We are now in position to make rapid progress on these initial holdings and look forward to what we feel will be very positive results."
The Joint Venture between Russell Industries, American Uranium Mining Company, and Trophy Resources was announced on June 28, 2007, as a means of exploiting the companies' potential commercial holdings in uranium, oil, and natural gas.
I think that the language used in this PR is very telling. I noticed that most of the references made were using the word "we" which almost made it feel that the companies are working very, very closely rather than one of them just being a silent partner. I think that this is very encouraging.
I also noticed that there was definite language stating that the end game was going to be "establishing a full scale mining operation in the near future." Guess we know that Berman is not just going to sit back and simply be a holding company unless this was more for a potential buyer to take note in.
-faz
what makes you say that?
I take it your sentiment is a strong sell?
aw hellz yea. I can't believe that anyone can really type like that and think that it is alright. Come on, the public education system hasn't gone that far down the toilet since I was there has it?
- faz
Thoughts on the PR today.
Trophy Resources' JV Partnership Receives Exploratory Mining Permit for Uranium Property
Wednesday August 1, 9:45 am ET
CLEVELAND, OH--(MARKET WIRE)--Aug 1, 2007 -- Trophy Resources (Other OTC:TRSI.PK - News) is excited to announce that their joint venture partnership with Russell Industries, Inc. (Other OTC:RSDS.PK - News) and American Uranium Mining Company has received an exploratory mining permit for the initial uranium holdings in San Juan County, Utah.
This permit, (Claims UMC 391224 - 391273 / Permit E/037/125), will allow the companies to begin the process necessary to establish the true potential of this property in ore reserves, as well as its grade, with the objective of establishing a full scale mining operation in the near future.
The companies have elected to engage two independent geologists to issue (NI) 43-101 compliant reports to establish economic valuation of the underlying assets. The companies also plan to explore the possibility of oil, natural gas and coal bed methane on the group's independent holdings in San Juan Basin, Utah.
Eric Leonetti, President/CEO (Trophy Resources) and Rick Berman, President/CEO (Russell Industries, Inc) said in a joint statement, "We simply cannot be more pleased with the progress we have made, as well as the manner in which this process has been completed, with the BLM. We have begun pursuing the acquisition of the equipment necessary to complete this exploratory work. We are now in position to make rapid progress on these initial holdings and look forward to what we feel will be very positive results."
The Joint Venture between Russell Industries, American Uranium Mining Company, and Trophy Resources was announced on June 28, 2007, as a means of exploiting the companies' potential commercial holdings in uranium, oil, and natural gas.
I think that the language used in this PR is very telling. I noticed that most of the references made were using the word "we" which almost made it feel that the companies are working very, very closely rather than one of them just being a silent partner. I think that this is very encouraging.
I also noticed that there was definite language stating that the end game was going to be "establishing a full scale mining operation in the near future." Guess we know that Berman is not just going to sit back and simply be a holding company unless this was more for a potential buyer to take note in.
Also, what is with AUMN not getting any love with no mention of the ticker they trade under?
-faz
Thoughts on the PR today.
Trophy Resources' JV Partnership Receives Exploratory Mining Permit for Uranium Property
Wednesday August 1, 9:45 am ET
CLEVELAND, OH--(MARKET WIRE)--Aug 1, 2007 -- Trophy Resources (Other OTC:TRSI.PK - News) is excited to announce that their joint venture partnership with Russell Industries, Inc. (Other OTC:RSDS.PK - News) and American Uranium Mining Company has received an exploratory mining permit for the initial uranium holdings in San Juan County, Utah.
This permit, (Claims UMC 391224 - 391273 / Permit E/037/125), will allow the companies to begin the process necessary to establish the true potential of this property in ore reserves, as well as its grade, with the objective of establishing a full scale mining operation in the near future.
The companies have elected to engage two independent geologists to issue (NI) 43-101 compliant reports to establish economic valuation of the underlying assets. The companies also plan to explore the possibility of oil, natural gas and coal bed methane on the group's independent holdings in San Juan Basin, Utah.
Eric Leonetti, President/CEO (Trophy Resources) and Rick Berman, President/CEO (Russell Industries, Inc) said in a joint statement, "We simply cannot be more pleased with the progress we have made, as well as the manner in which this process has been completed, with the BLM. We have begun pursuing the acquisition of the equipment necessary to complete this exploratory work. We are now in position to make rapid progress on these initial holdings and look forward to what we feel will be very positive results."
The Joint Venture between Russell Industries, American Uranium Mining Company, and Trophy Resources was announced on June 28, 2007, as a means of exploiting the companies' potential commercial holdings in uranium, oil, and natural gas.
I think that the language used in this PR is very telling. I noticed that most of the references made were using the word "we" which almost made it feel that the companies are working very, very closely rather than one of them just being a silent partner. I think that this is very encouraging.
I also noticed that there was definite language stating that the end game was going to be "establishing a full scale mining operation in the near future." Guess we know that Berman is not just going to sit back and simply be a holding company unless this was more for a potential buyer to take note in.
-faz
Yep and two more on the way for August 13th! I think that the tide will be turning here very soon.
-faz
Fenian,
I agree, we need to start generating interest in this stock so that when approval comes through on the other claims and we get the NI 43-101 reports, we will be off to the races.
-faz
Utah Uranium Announces Additional Property Acquisition
Aug 01, 2007 03:00 ET
MOAB, UT--(Marketwire - August 1, 2007) - Utah Uranium Corp. (the "Company") (OTCBB: UTUC) is pleased to announce the acquisition of a 100% interest in 33 mineral claims, consisting of 660 acres in the Lavender Canyon, Monticelo Mining District, San Juan County, Utah, herein known as the "Whale Property" property (the "Property").
The property hosts an ore hauling portal driven to approximately 300 feet in length from previous mine development activities. The portal was constructed by Plateau Resources, a division of Michigan Light and Power, several decades ago, but was terminated shortly before reaching the drill indicated ore body. The bench structure above the portal was recently explored by management and potential contract miners; in excess of 100 previous drill-hole locations were identified. The historical drill hole data exists in a private library and is expected to be made available for technical review by UTUC.
Management believes that Plateau Resources was in the advanced stages of mine planning and development having already completed the drilling of the ore body and having spent significant amounts of capital driving a development portal. The activities at the "Whale" mine site appear to have stopped when market pricing for Uranium, combined with unrelated corporate events, caused Plateau Resources to cease development activities at this and several other uranium mining sites.
Utah Uranium Corporation management has elected to pursue the project generator model and is in discussion with several potential joint venture partners with the intent to option an interest in the "Whale" mine and UTUC's other uranium projects. The company believes it can retain a 50% interest in these projects while off loading 100% of the costs associated with the acquisition and development allowing the company to participate in several additional projects at a minimum cost to the company, minimizing share dilution.
The company's plans to advance the project involve radiometric logging of the existing drill holes as well as drilling several additional holes from surface to define the extent of the known mineralized ore body. The delineation program may also consist of underground long hole drilling into the face to determine additional information concerning direction and depth of the ore bearing channel system.
Consideration for the acquisition of the Property consists of the payment in stages of a total of $280,000 and the issuance in stages of a total of 400,000 common shares of the Company. The property vendors will also retain a net proceeds royalty of 4.5% payable upon commencement of commercial uranium production from the Property.
On behalf of the Board,
Peter Dickie, President
Can we infer that this means the panel has decided to vote in favor of NXG? Since this is a political battle, I almost think that they are going to delay as much as possible to save face and preserve the political capital they have left.
I have not been following this ongoing approval process as closely as you have, but I am very familiar with politics and that is what this seems like to me. I would think that if they were going to deny them, they would have hit them with that news sooner rather than later to make a point.
Just my thoughts.
-faz
Just got an update from Big Lou's blog:
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
DOWNLOAD THE CRACKHEAD TRACK!
Category: Music
The "CrackHead" Track is creating a crazy buzz out there. Originally we were not going to promote this track as a single. We just leaked it because Big Lou wrote it from a personal standpoint. We new it was special but didn't expect it to touch so many people. We're giving you a chance to download it for free. Click below and follow the instructions.
http://mp3postcards.com/listen?1878\
-faz
Utah Uranium Announces Additional Property Acquisition
Aug 01, 2007 03:00 ET
MOAB, UT--(Marketwire - August 1, 2007) - Utah Uranium Corp. (the "Company") (OTCBB: UTUC) is pleased to announce the acquisition of a 100% interest in 33 mineral claims, consisting of 660 acres in the Lavender Canyon, Monticelo Mining District, San Juan County, Utah, herein known as the "Whale Property" property (the "Property").
The property hosts an ore hauling portal driven to approximately 300 feet in length from previous mine development activities. The portal was constructed by Plateau Resources, a division of Michigan Light and Power, several decades ago, but was terminated shortly before reaching the drill indicated ore body. The bench structure above the portal was recently explored by management and potential contract miners; in excess of 100 previous drill-hole locations were identified. The historical drill hole data exists in a private library and is expected to be made available for technical review by UTUC.
Management believes that Plateau Resources was in the advanced stages of mine planning and development having already completed the drilling of the ore body and having spent significant amounts of capital driving a development portal. The activities at the "Whale" mine site appear to have stopped when market pricing for Uranium, combined with unrelated corporate events, caused Plateau Resources to cease development activities at this and several other uranium mining sites.
Utah Uranium Corporation management has elected to pursue the project generator model and is in discussion with several potential joint venture partners with the intent to option an interest in the "Whale" mine and UTUC's other uranium projects. The company believes it can retain a 50% interest in these projects while off loading 100% of the costs associated with the acquisition and development allowing the company to participate in several additional projects at a minimum cost to the company, minimizing share dilution.
The company's plans to advance the project involve radiometric logging of the existing drill holes as well as drilling several additional holes from surface to define the extent of the known mineralized ore body. The delineation program may also consist of underground long hole drilling into the face to determine additional information concerning direction and depth of the ore bearing channel system.
Consideration for the acquisition of the Property consists of the payment in stages of a total of $280,000 and the issuance in stages of a total of 400,000 common shares of the Company. The property vendors will also retain a net proceeds royalty of 4.5% payable upon commencement of commercial uranium production from the Property.
On behalf of the Board,
Peter Dickie, President
Utah,
I think that Berman has indeed told us quite a bit about the ongoing efforts. I think that some of your points are valid, but some of them have been answered to a degree. My thoughts oun your points:
1. This is what really want to know. What wxactly does this mean for RSDS investors as well as AUMN.
2. On teh JV: From todays' TRSI PR: This permit, (Claims UMC 391224 - 391273 / Permit E/037/125), will allow the companies to begin the process necessary to establish the true potential of this property in ore reserves, as well as its grade, with the objective of establishing a full scale mining operation in the near future.
I think that this is some indication of what these companies are going to be doing together. I think the wording speaks volumes.
3. Couldn't agree more. However, I think that today's release is an indication that more national exposure is on the way. This PR is essentially the one Berman released but this hit the national wires. I like that, but would prefer to see it come from Berman instead of TRSI.
4. Yep, but I am becoming less concerned about this than ever. I think that the big draw to this stock will come from the NI 43-101 reports and not anytime sooner. I do not think that a new website will do anything t the PPS, however, I think it is vital to have one up and running as it is the face of the company, our company, to new investors.
Good post! I think patience is what is needed now more than anything. Best of Luck!!
-faz
Some interesting stuff from the DOGM website:
http://ogm.utah.gov/minerals/BondFAQ.htm
How do you determine the number of acres that need to be covered by surety at any given time? Are maps required?
One difficulty that we encounter is trying to determine the actual acreage disturbed (or proposed for disturbance) at any given mine site. All too often we have inspected a small mine site only to find that it has been expanded to the point of becoming a large mine without having the appropriate approvals. In order to avoid this situation, we are also requiring in accordance with UCA 40-8-13 1(b)(iv) that you provide accurate area maps of existing and proposed operations so that it is clear what area you are responsible for reclaiming and what area the surety covers.
I would expect that RSDS has already done some initial mapping of the claims and have submitted this as part of the permitting process.
-faz
Loof,
I agree...demonstrating value through the exploration and evaluation of the claims will be the factor that pushes this stock to higher levels. I think that this will come with the NI 43-101 reports. When that happens watch out, cause it is going to be a sweet ride!!
-faz
True that!
I know I am fired up about RSDS today!!!
"What I am saying is this, if we keep asking ourselves these questions in this type forum things ultimately get out of control......you have seen the illustration on communication in school, telling the first student one message, asking that student to pass on exact message until it gets to the last student....by then the entire message has changed."
Love that description as it is so true. Speculation just breeds more speculation and this board provides the fuel to keep it going. While I think that is a bad thing, I also think it is a good thing because it gives the investors here the desire to seek out the answers and when they find them, they reaffirm their investment.
Good to have you back bro!
-faz
Righty,
yeppers. This very well could be a phase 1 of many for this claim set. Maybe this is the areas that the geologist has recommended in order to expedite the NI 43-101 reports so they can ensure delivery by the end of Q4.
As for the PR, maybe TRSI already has a subscription to national PR machine and Berman decided to tap into that and Trophy agreed because it would be beneficial to their company by shedding more light on the JV.
Lots of information to come and it gets exciting every week! I am doing a lot of digging on how companies go about exploring. I hope to get inside the heads of these companies to see if RSDS is falling in line with the industry or being a cowboy and trying to reinvent the wheel so to speak!
-faz
Righty,
I believe that it is a valid point and I thin that there are strategic reasons for this. The total acreage may not be all together, but rather a summation of all the small drill sites that they intend to use in order to properly explore.
Also, I do not believe that all 900 acres of those claims will have the "good stuff" on them and that probably only 10% are going to be worth looking at. If all 900 acres were good and they had to permit them, that would cost millions of dollars and would not be the worth the cost. I have had a look at some other companies and how they permit and I have always come back with the listing of "disturbed" acreage as being very low as to minimize the reclamation costs at the end of the campaign.
Unfortunately I am the eternal optimist and I have to think that there is a strategic reason for this and that maybe they got some advice from their JV partner when permitting.
-faz
gte,
sure is, but this one has gone national and the following statement is pretty enlightening:
Eric Leonetti, President/CEO (Trophy Resources) and Rick Berman, President/CEO (Russell Industries, Inc) said in a joint statement, "We simply cannot be more pleased with the progress we have made, as well as the manner in which this process has been completed, with the BLM. We have begun pursuing the acquisition of the equipment necessary to complete this exploratory work. We are now in position to make rapid progress on these initial holdings and look forward to what we feel will be very positive results."
-faz
Bri,
The question Righty asked I feel is a very valid one for this forum. It is something that crossed my mind when the initial permit was released. We have 6000 acres and Berman only ways to drill on 3.2" What is that all about? Well, I think that there are answers and it is something that can be legitimately discussed and explained in this forum.
After the news that is out today from TRSI. I had a look under the BLM website and found the following:
UMC391224 is the claim number for Cache Claim #1. That is very interesting that TRSI is releasing a PR for something Berman already told us a week ago.
Eric Leonetti, President/CEO (Trophy Resources) and Rick Berman, President/CEO (Russell Industries, Inc) said in a joint statement, "We simply cannot be more pleased with the progress we have made, as well as the manner in which this process has been completed, with the BLM. We have begun pursuing the acquisition of the equipment necessary to complete this exploratory work. We are now in position to make rapid progress on these initial holdings and look forward to what we feel will be very positive results."
This I think is a key statement from the PR. Maybe TRSI could use its pull within the O&G industry to accelerate the equipment acquisition process. This is also a national PR which should do us some good!
Just a thought
-faz
Righty,
I have thought about that as well, however, i thin that 3.2 acres is the number of acres that need to be "disturbed" in order to drill. I have had a look at a couple of websites and found that even though some companies have hundreds of acres, they only permit out a small number because the acreage set aside for drilling is classified as "disturbed" and must be reclaimed when things are done. Also, the fees for the disturbed acreage is pretty steep.
For o&G drilling in Utah:
"Among other things, companies must employ horizontal drilling and multiple wells per drilling pad to minimize the amount of disturbed acres."
pdf for the permit fees:
https://fs.ogm.utah.gov/pub/mines/minerals_related/forms/MR-EXP.pdf
I actually think that since the company has set aside only 3.2 acres to be disturbed by drilling shows that Berman has given great thought about where to drill so as to disturb the least amount of land so as to reduce the costs associated with reclamation.
Bro,
Do you ever get any sleep? You are up all the time doing wicked analysis on all kinds of charts. You must be a machine!
-faz
If I were a betting man, and my interest in RSDS would confirm that I am, I think sometime around the end of September/beginning of October and carry through to December. I do not think that we will get them all at once but rather the Cache claims NI 43-101 first followed by the Rage and PayDay and Rockie claims. Remember the Rage claims set is 100 claims and will take a geologist a while to get through, so I think 1 geologist is working on it now and it will be done towards the end of Q4. I think that once we get approval for the other claims sets Berman will announce 2 things:
1. We will begin exploration drilling
2. AUMN will start a 504 to finance the drilling operations.
From what I can tell for the NI 43-101, there is a lot that goes into it. First there is a lot of background and research not only on the area (site access, history, etc) but on the geology as well as any previous mineral analysis that has been done for our claims. Now if Berman was on his game (I think he is) the 2 independent geologists would already be performing this background work. The next part of the NI 43-101 is the exploration schedule as well as the estimated reserves/tonnage of ore that we can get. There has already been details released concerning the number of wells that will be drilled for at least the Cache claims, so the next step is figuring out where and when they will drill each hole. There is definitely a strategy that needs to be devised for the placement of each hole.
So long story short, I believe we will get a steady trickle of both NI 43-101 and drilling updates. That should keep the share price up and interest (volume)so that he can execute the 504 on AUMN with less of an impact on the 504.
Just my thoughts and I am very new to the mining industry, so I could be completely wrong.
-faz
Good evening mason!!
I hope that you will get your fill of RSDS, TRSI and AUMN here!
-faz
Scratch that...just had a look at the News section and the latest PR listed is July 10, 2007. I know that is new as I check the websites of these companies regularly.
Apologies for being a bit too trigger happy on TRSI. They seem to be updating things in cyberspace.
-faz
DDdollars,
I think we have hit the bottom and we will continue to trade at these level until mid-August when the approval for 2 additional claims sets is announced. I would think once that is in the bag there will be several PRS i=on the way announcing mining operations. We also have NI 43-101 reports due for a majority of our claims which should finally give us some estimated value of the holdings. That is when we will get out of the rut we are in.
Love the picture bro...that would make for a good Mastercard commercial with the priceless tagline!
-faz