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.
Maybe he believes it because it's worked so many times before. ;^)
Oh...wait a minute...did you mean me? LOL.
It is certainly true that New Asia Gold Corporation was the previous incarnation of New World Gold Corporation. How did that work out for NWAG shareholders? I checked the New World Gold site but could not find any mention of those Indonesian properties that presumably got folded in to NWGC.
Does this sound familiar? Lather, rinse...repeat...
Small Cap Voice Featured Client: New Asia Gold Corporation (NWAG.PK)
Tuesday, March 10th, 2009
New Asia Gold Corporation (NWAG) is a gold mining company with leaseholds and tenements in Indonesia on the island of Borneo. New Asia Gold’s East Kalimantan Gold Project (EKGP) has existing proven reserves of 330,000 ounces of gold that have been drill-defined and independently verified. The company hires contractors to help extract the gold and then sells it on the commodities markets.
New Asia Gold’s property rights cover a total of 4,375 hectares, including the main resource area, an area tentatively chosen to host mine infrastructure, and an additional prospect west of the main resource area with similar geology to the mineralized zone that has yet to be drill tested. There remains a significant potential to substantially increase proven reserves by an additional 170,000 ounces through shallow infill drilling. Total gold reserves of 500,000 ounces would value the project at $310 million after mining costs with gold priced at $800 per ounce.
Web site says:
"The capacity of the mill is increasing and is expected to be at 150 tonnes per day by the end of March 2012."
Press release on 3/30 says:
"Our short term goal is to extract and process 100 ounces of gold per day..."
LOL...now that's funny. I did listen to the interview. I listened to it three times and took copious notes. And each time I listened, it only raised more questions. Good thing I stopped after the third go around, don't ya think? What passes for due diligence on this board wouldn't even fill the back of a napkin...but, whatever. Greenpar made a comment regarding audited financial statements so I simply asked for a link to them as everything I was able to find, doing my own DD, indicated that only unaudited statements are available.
Without any supporting documentation, at this point we basically have nothing to go on but the CEO's assertions. There are assertions that there are 300,000 ounces of "proven reserves". Proven - unless that has been redefined beyond recognition - means that there is proof...for all to see...not just the CEO. So I guess it comes down to the character of the CEO as there is nothing else to go on, no independent third party verification of anything, that I can find. Shall we start on that topic now?
Is there anything here on the iHub boards regarding the CEO's history? Now before you get all flustered again thinking that I am asking you to do my work for me, let me state that this is a rhetorical question. That means I already answered it for myself and am not expecting an answer from you. But if you do find anything, I am sure everyone here would love to read it. And if you can't find anything, I will be glad to help.
Can you please provide a link to the audited financial statements? The Annual Report released on 3/30/12 says:
The Issuer prepares its own financial information internally from its bookkeeping data and other
information. No outside accountant provides audit or review services.
One of the most important things to come out of Bre-X, imo, is the introduction of standards, reporting requirements and STANDARD TERMINOLOGY. Instead of using the definition that the industry uses for "proven reserves", for example, the company has made up its own. And even created some new terms. Inferred reserves? What the heck are those?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mineral_resource_classification
LOL...yeah, if you say so! I am not short this stock. I wouldn't have paid any attention to it all except that it caught my interest when they said they were producing in Ecuador. I have been following the situation in Ecuador very closely because I have a large position in dmm.to. The fact that Andes specified the center of their property at the precise geographical coordinates that dmm.to specifies as the center of their property was what made me look further.
I'm sure there is a pony in there somewhere so y'all are welcome to keep shoveling...glta!
Given the fickle nature of mineral deposits, finding one that is a uniform, bonanza-grade of one ounce per ton (or is that tonne, ah who cares!) is really remarkable. Where are the assay results and which lab conducted the tests? Where is the drill map with the correlated assay results so that an independent analysis can be done to confirm what the company is claiming, specifically, 300,000 ounces of gold in "proven reserves" per the company's definition of them, which, have I mentioned, bears no relation to how the term is strictly defined in the industry? If they have really done enough drilling to prove 300,000 ounces, show us the drill holes and the assays. With grades like that, you would want to have your drill results published in the NY Times. So where are they?
Also, if Ecuador is such a great location, then why have companies like Ecuacorriente and Kinross been trying for years to get mining contracts on terms that they can swallow? The government of Ecuador had proudly stated that they are going to take more of the mining profits that are generated there than anywhere else in the world. That's why it's taking so long to get any contracts negotiated. The windfall profits tax has really put the kabosh to the upside for anyone mining there if gold really gets going. Lots of mineral wealth there for sure, but negotiating the political minefield to get contracts signed is an arduous process that has been dragging on for years, literally.
Finally, the company has stated that they intend to double production this year, not once but twice. From 100 to 200 tpd up to 400 tpd by the end of the year. That would be an incredible accomplishment. Really unbelievable. How are they able to do that...exactly? I hear about potential acquisitions and the potential for four more levels in the current mine, but given the targeted production levels and the timeframe we are discussing you would think a very specific plan would be required to accomplish that. Maybe there is one and it hasn't been shared yet, but there was so much vagueness in that interview it was hard to cut through the fog. At the 14:00 mark, Talbot says "We have many, many projects that are very close to coming on production." Okay...name them! Which projects will producing how many tpd at what grade? Will they all be producing at a uniform 1 ounce per tonne? That will sure make the math easier.
You dismiss the outstanding share count as insignificant because they are mostly locked up. Well that's great from a trading perspective, but when people on this board are talking about earnings, then it is extremely relevant. Also, the last sentence in the financial statements just released seems to indicate that the share count could go higher still:
Even with the projected financial performance and profits, if the Company expects to grow it may be necessary to raise additional capital to maintain the anticipated growth.
Finally and perhaps most telling, there are only two Directors of the company and no independent directors. I suppose that makes the board meetings more efficient, but any seasoned investor will tell you that is a red flag the size of Texas.
Well you can perceive it that way all day long...it still doesn't make it true. There is an industry standard definition for "proven reserves". There is no need whatsoever to make up new resource categories all of your own and every reason to NOT do so...for a legitimate enterprise. The reasons why these standards were put into place was to reduce the chance that scams could be perpetrated upon investors. The one reason why you would want to purposefully avoid operating to industry standards is clear but that is the one thing here people apparently do not want to see. Good luck with that.
Here is a sample of what comes out of a real PEA, which is a MINIMUM REQUIREMENT to call any reserves proven:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/extorre-announces-results-cerro-moro-141000200.html
"The company has basically said exactly what proven reserves are to them... regardless of what industry standards are"
If this statement does not send a chill down the spine of anyone holding this stock, I do not know what would. So, in your opinion, it is okay for a company to make up their own definitions for crucial terms like "proven reserves". They have 300,000 ounces of proven reserves because they say they have 300,000 ounces of proven reserves. I could say that my wife is Morgan Fairchild...I could say it all day long...it still wouldn't make it true.
Where are the drill results, where is the resource estimate, who is the Principal Geologist? Where is the Preliminary Economic Assessment? How are they mining without a contract?
Please provide some numbers to back up your contention that the current operations alone justify the PPS to increase substantially. By my estimate, the stock is extremely overvalued. Let's break it down. For 2011, the company had revs of $4.44MM and net profits of $521,294. Let's be generous and just take the net profits and divide by outstanding shares (a billion) and you get...$0.000521/share of earnings.
Let's give it a PE of 20, generous for the mining sector...and you have a share price of $0.010426. The company said they could do 10X in 2012 what they did in 2011. So if we just multiply everything by 10 (assuming the profitability scales proportionately), then you would have a share price of ten cents.
Or you could skip all of that and just keep repeating to yourself that everything checks out fine!
Yes, thanks I had read that. It confirms my point...the company is using its own set of definitions for these absolutely critical terms instead of using the industry standard definitions specified by the CIM. Please read this carefully:
For Andes Gold, we don't consider reserves 'proven' until our mining efforts have reached the gold and we've had an assay study done showing us the concentration of gold, its purity, and the extent of the vein.
And then read the industry standard definition:
Proven Mineral Reserve
A ‘Proven Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This Study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.
The press release you referenced is so comical it is almost not tragic. The company is saying that investors should be really careful because there are a lot of hand-waving hypesters out there claiming all kinds of things. And then they claim to have "proven reserves" of 300,000 ounces, using a crucial industry standard phrase that they have redefined for themselves. Their definition is laughably less rigorous than what is required by the industry which is why I think the use of this phase is particularly dangerous. When anyone experienced in the mining industry hears the phase "proven reserves" that means a very specific set of activities have been conducted and reported and that there has been independent verification. That last part is particularly important. Which assay lab are they using? Where are the press releases with the drill results?
I suppose it is easier to make a mining play more exciting if you can simply bypass all of the tedious, time-consuming, painstaking and expensive work that is required to do it by the book and to industry standard...
There's that phase again...proven reserves. It is important to remember that the reason why the industry and the exchanges are so touchy about how these terms are defined and used is because of a little thing called...Bre-X. Anyone remember that? If not, it might be worth a Google.
Here are the definitions of probable and proven mineral reserves according to the CIM:
Proven Mineral Reserve
A ‘Proven Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This Study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.
Probable Mineral Reserve
A ‘Probable Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of an Indicated and, in some circumstances, a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This Study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.
Here are the definitions according to AGCZ:
Host: How would you explain to them what the difference is between proven reserves versus, say, probable reserves?
Talbot: Alright well proven reserves are reserves that you have found, you have drilled, you have cut your drilling down to 100 foot centers and that you have gone ahead and determined gold is contiguous throughout an area and that if you are going to mine it you know you’re not going to be mining gold one day and find the gold disappeared. And so that you know that you have enough gold there to go into production, develop your mine and make it economically viable. All the analysis have been completed to define the amount of gold that’s available to be mined. Then you set your parameters for the mining and you’re ready to go.
Probable is you have found some outcrops on your property maybe done a little bit of drilling or you’ve done some trenching and found some gold samples. You sent the samples to the lab so that you know somewhere on the property there’s some gold but you don’t know what the grades are, you don’t know how much it is, you don’t know whether it’s continuous or it may be just a pod somewhere and you have no information to be able to develop a mining program because you don’t know whether there’s enough gold there to justify the cost of the mining program.
According to the industry, probable reserves are, in fact, "economically mineable". The definition provided by the company relates to preliminary exploration activities and has nothing to do with resource definitions...as the rest of the world understands them. What about this part: "You sent the samples to the lab...but you don’t know what the grades are...". Why would you send samples to the lab if you are not going to get assays (with grades) back?
No worrries, though right? They are going to be mining so much gold it doesn't matter if they fudge a couple of things here or there. The dividends are going to be flowing like wine at a Roman orgy...although with a billion shares out, the earnings per share are...kinda thin.
Thanks for the info on GPS but I am not sure how it is relevant. The old standard was accurate to 100 feet. Given that the coordinates were identical, and were provided as the CENTER of each project, it is unclear to me how these concessions are NOT overlapping each other, unless they are both tiny which, at least for Dynasty's case, is not the case. Detailed property maps from Andes would help.
Uh...why would the coordinates be any different now than they were in 1956? Because the earth moved in the meantime or that measurements are more accurate now? What other information on the web site is unreliable because it is outdated? It would be good to know. Why does the company need to make up their own resource/reserve categories? The definitions given during the interview with the CEO (although Talbot identified Ruggeri as the CEO during the interview, which was odd) bear NO RELATION to the industry standard definitions. No independent lab testing, no 43-101, no PEA, nothing industry standard about their operation at all. Okey dokey. Talbot said twice during the interview that they have 300 ounces of gold reserves. That much, I definitely believe. <g>
New World Gold owns 70% of Andes Gold, I believe.
While there is no doubt that the Andes mill/operations and Dynasty's are not co-located, it is curious that both companies give identical geographical coordinates as the center of their properties. From what I can gather, that would put them within 100 feet of each other, which seems odd. Another thing that strikes me as odd is the remarkably consistent grade of one ounce/tonne. Presumably DMM is mining a similar if not identical style of deposit, given the proximity. Their deposit has an average grade that is about half of what Andes is claiming. Where is the independent third party verification of any of this? Drill results? Assays? Preliminary Economic Analysis? Independent board directors? There are lots of questions that need answers here, imo...
This is odd...
From the Andes Gold web site:
The Miranda Project is located in the cantons of Zaruma and Portovelo, Province of El Oro, southern Ecuador, about 175 kilometers south and 60 kilometers southeast of the major port cities of Guayaquil and Machala respectively. The centre of the property is located on 654,500 East and 9,594,000 North (UTM PSAD-56, zone 17S) or longitude 79° 36’ 31” West and latitude 3° 41’ 20” South (Provisional South American 1956 projection).
From the Dynasty Metals & Mining web site:
The Zaruma Project is located in the cantons of Zaruma and Portovelo, Province of El Ore, Ecuador and is centred at latitude 03º41´20” south and longitude 79º36´31” west. (See Figures 1 and 2). The project is situated about 175 kilometres south and 60 kilometres southeast of the major port cities of Guayaquil and Machala, respectively (Figure 1).
The centers of both projects are within 100 feet of each other.
VBgood - I agree that there are questions that need to be answered but we are going to be getting quite a few of them relatively soon. The PEA for the Cambridge Process and feasibility for the ThermoPotash will give us a much better handle on costs. Also, when Verde presented in Toronto in September, they indicated that when product registration is complete they will be able to announce the agreements that they have with blenders for offtake of production from the pilot plant. In other words, they will be able to begin producing and selling product before the full-scale production plant is in place. I don't expect that revenue from the pilot plant will be nearly enough to fund construction of the bigger plant but it should help offset ongoing expenses.
If you look at the news releases on the Verde web site, you will see this from 4/7/11:
"Amazon Mining Holding Plc (TSX-V symbol: “AMZ”) ("Amazon” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce that the Minas Gerais State government (“the State”) has signed a memorandum of understanding (“Memorandum”) to provide Amazon with support in terms of potential financing for working capital and fixed investment, with funds administered by the development bank of Minas Gerais (BDMG). The stated objective of the Memorandum is to enable the implementation, by Amazon, of an industrial unit and the installation of a distribution centre located in the State of Minas Gerais destined for the manufacturing and commercialization of ThermoPotash, Potassium Chloride and Potassium Sulfate."
Also the statements from the Brazilian government have repeatedly pointed out their reliance on imported potash and their determination to develop local resources. So it is not a big leap to say that Verde should enjoy very strong support for their efforts and everything we've seen so far indicates that is the case.
Cheers,
tsl
It could help but I think we need more information about the metallurgy. TRER has gotten slammed by some (Mickey Fulp, for example) because of grade. No question that Round Top is low grade. But it's enormous. So the metallurgy is key. Which is why Marc LeVier was brought in to run the company, imo, and why they have acquired additional personnel in that area with deep experience. The guys from Newmont have developed lots of deposits, they tell me this one has its challenges but it is not rocket science. Time will tell...
rbtree - imo the stock got ahead of itself when the company announced that Marc LeVier - a 30 year Newmont veteran - had joined as CEO. There have been a couple of more hires from Newmont since then. I think people need to take a hard look at the resumes of the people running this company and that will tell you if TRER is for real or not. There's a 32 page write up here that addresses your other questions:
http://tinyurl.com/43lwube
That sounds like something I've heard quoted on SI more than a few times.
I've been talking to myself over here:
http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/subject.aspx?subjectid=58099
If you are wondering why the stock is moving, look at the last three additions to the Board of Directors and then look at the CEO named today. 20+ year veteran from Newmont, was head of their metallurgical team. They have applied for a listing on a senior exchange. Web site was just redone. Things are happening...imo.
I can now. ;^)
The company is down to $2.3MM in cash. They are cutting more employees. The guy who stepped in as Chairman is taking $30K/month in pay. Anyone that is interested in the assets of the company would be better off waiting for the company to fold and then pick them up. Not bashing, just calling it like I see it. Not long or short but I have been on the receiving end of this kind of situation before.
"At June 30, 2010, we had approximately $177,000 in cash on the hand..."
Uh oh.
At least they don't have to pay a fine. Looks like they are going after Redekopp personally though.
"The company wasn't fined under the deal. It didn't admit or deny wrongdoing but consented to an injunction against future violations of securities laws."
I wonder if they can use Derma Wand on their own public image. Couple of wrinkles that need smoothing.
Well I am not amused but I guess I can't say that I'm surprised either. Redekopp should have gotten that massive stroke instead of Tim C., would have served him right.
After the revolution, I will nominate him to run the Ministry of Cold Showers. <g>
Yes well I believe you told us that they would never get caught up on their filing either.
Just because you're crazy doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong. I would like to see more signs of progress to instill some confidence. Getting the paperwork straightened out was a necessary step but would like to see some traction on other fronts now. Cheers!
Don't make me schedule an intervention for you. You know I will, if you make me. <g>
I see that and now it has traded a few there. Very nice. The PM juniors are hacking my limbs off with a chainsaw and ICTL gives me a Band-Aid. With Barney on it. <g>
Is there something you would like to post?
Oh...sorry about that, my memory is not what it used to be!
Anyway...seems like they are getting caught up.
Oh...sorry about that, my memory is not what it used to be!
Anyway...seems like they are getting caught up.
Looks like the Q1 and Q2 financials for 2009 have been filed:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=ICTL.PK
Hopefully they will finish getting caught up on the financials soon and we can hear something about what is currently going on. I see the web site is back online.
You can do the next one...
BTW...you know I've been following Chesapeake for seven years now...they finally got a magazine cover...
http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=26633360
Now they just need to sell the thing...
Article on next-gen sequencing...
http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v9/n6/full/nrd3200.html
Yeah, now I am not so sure. Maybe they are still in...
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ir?s=ICTL.OB+Insider+Roster