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.
futrcash
If you note there was no mention of PGE (platinum group metals), as NYBob implies in his post, in this PR based upon the report by Dan Proctor.
The Proctor report has:
1) NOT been confirmed by anyone.
2) NOT been confirmed by the Phase I and II drill assays.
Remember real mining companies, Noranda, Phelps Dodge and Goldfields explored the Deet Trail property and walked away.
Also, Dan Proctor had a VERY, VERY significant vested interest in this report.
I suggest that you do a more thorough job at your due dilligence.
NYBob,
You have stated "about 400t/day -
will start out at a lower -
test run size -
to the normal adjustments are made -
to not lose any PM's Gold & Silver -
rare PGM's etc. -"
This is a blatent misrepresentation of the facts concerning Unico. Of all of the drill assays that have ever been done at the Deer Trail, never once has PGM's EVER been mentioned as being present.
NYBob
Again your post is VERY misleading.
You stated that: "about 400t/day -
will start out at a lower -
test run size -
to the normal adjustments are made -
to not lose any PM's Gold & Silver -
rare PGM's etc. -"
To imply that the Deer Trail has PGM's is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts.
Of all the assays of all drill samples ever taken have shown NO PGM's
silver bars
There have probably been many hundreds of millions of new shares hit the market as the many (friendly) lawsuits in Florida against Unico by the convertible debenture holders get settled, with more to come. If it is anything like the last time early this year those settlements are at 14-20% of market price, assuring that these shares can be sold down and still generate a healthy profit for the CD holders.
piranhas
No one is trying to stop Unico, certainly not me. There needs to be an open discussion regarding the facts behind Unico, not just a one sided litany of misleading information on the positive side. Everyone, especially those who may come to this board to gather information about Unico NEED all information available, be it good, bad or ugly, in order to make an intelligent decision whether or not to invest.
NYBob
You imply in your post that Noranda, Phelps Dodge and Goldfields, when looking at the Deer Trail property did not assay for gold and silver because the prices were so low then.
For your information, Noranda, Phelps Dodge and Goldfields looked at the Deer Trail after 1981. Prices for gold and silver were much higler then than your list of prices up to 1970. Your information is very misleading.
From the 10-KSB filed 6/12/01:
"The Deer Trail mining property was developed by the Deer Trail
Development Corporation, now known as Crown Mines, LLC, and is presently owned
by the same company, located in Dallas, Texas. The property has been leased
out several times since production ceased in 1981. There has been little
production since then. Several major mining companies have explored the
property. These include Noranda, Phelps Dodge and Goldfields. One smaller
company drilled and analyzed the mill tailings from the upper Deer Trail Mine
area in 1990. The results of the drilling and other tests were not
conclusive, and at present there are no known proven or probable reserves on
the claims."
piranhas
Please cite reference and date of this 'story.'
docy markett
From the 10-KSB filed 6/12/01
"The Deer Trail mining property was developed by the Deer Trail
Development Corporation, now known as Crown Mines, LLC, and is presently owned
by the same company, located in Dallas, Texas. The property has been leased
out several times since production ceased in 1981. There has been little
production since then. Several major mining companies have explored the
property. These include Noranda, Phelps Dodge and Goldfields. One smaller
company drilled and analyzed the mill tailings from the upper Deer Trail Mine
area in 1990. The results of the drilling and other tests were not
conclusive, and at present there are no known proven or probable reserves on
the claims."
Note that this is the same 'material' that Unico is planning to run through the mill when operational. The lack of grade was also proven out in 2003 when Unico milled some of this 'material' before the mill broke down. No revenues to speak of. And you think this time will be 'different'?? I think not.
GOLDENBOLLOX
Nino,
Try copying that broken up link into word, remove the spaces, then copy to your browser. It worked just fine for me.
Also, http://tinyurl.com/yytjmg
GOLDENBOLLOX
Nino,
As a follow-on to the Proctor issue of him selling his shares, as you and I have pointed out, Proctor sold his interest in the Silver Bell for shares in Unico during the September to December 2000 time frame. Now from the 10-KSB filed 5/29/02:
"Item 11. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.
The following table describes, as of May 21, 2002, certain information
with respect to the beneficial ownership of our common stock by:
o each person known by us to beneficially own more than 5% of our common stock,
o each of our executive officers or directors, and
o all of our executive officers and directors as a group.
Amount and nature Percentage of
of beneficial ownership common stock
------------------------ -------------
Ray C. Brown 9,000,000 12.49%
Gilbert A. Windheim 5,136,000 7.03%
C. Wayne Hartle 2,280,900 3.17%
Kiyoshi Kasai 693,000 0.96%
Kenneth R. Brown -0- 0.00%
David F. Poisson 280,000 0.39%
Notice Proctor's name does not show up in this list of owning shares. You might say that Proctor was not a director of Unico and that is true, however, he was a part of management being Chief Geologist. Therefore, under this part of the 10-KSB, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management, Proctor would have been considered to be a part of Management and would have had to be included in this list if he owned shares.
The only conclusion one can deduce is that Proctor sold his shares prior to this filing.
GOLDENBOLLEX
Nino,
Regarding your request for info regarding Dan Proctor selling his shares, the SEC only keeps the stuff on file for a couple of years and then they go poof. He filed a Form 144 notification to sell 200k shares on the day of or day after Unico released the report. The only other remnant I found is on this cached link but that shows the other transaction later in the year and I believe those were the only two, If you really want to know you can call Dan at home to confirm although I am sure he would not appreicate the call.
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:debEQC_Oro8J:www.guruscorner.com/tools/
quotes/insiders.asp%3Fsymb%3DUNCN%26sid%3D18399%26siteid%
3Dmktw+%22w+dan+proctor%22+%22form+144%22+unico&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1
Take the spaces out of this urland copy it into your browser, ihub will not post it as one solid link
GOLDENBOLLOX
Can you prove that the newly issued shares are being sold short into the market ahead of the issue?? I don't think you can
And by the way, I am NOT Chaz/Schnitzel
Still digging into the past on the Proctor issue when time allows
GOLDENBOLLOX, wrong nino
"Form 8-K for UNICO INC /AZ/
7-Jun-2006
Unregistered Sale of Equity Securities
Item 3.02 Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities.
From September 30, 2004 through March 30, 2005 Unico issued convertible debentures ("Debentures") aggregating approximately $625,000 to Reef Holding, Ltd. and approximately $467,500 to Kentan Limited Corp. that were unpaid, and in default, as of February 9, 2006.
The holders of the convertible debentures had assigned portions of the Debentures to Blue Marble Investments, Outboard Investments, Umbrella Holdings and Yanzu, Inc. Because Unico, Incorporated failed to pay the Debentures when due, a total of ten (10) lawsuits were filed
by these Debenture holders against Unico, Incorporated in the Twelfth Circuit (State) Court in Florida (Case Nos. 2006-CA-003385-NC, 2006-CA-001230-NC, 2006-CA-001825-NC, 2006-CA-003067-NC, 2006-CA-001229-NC, 2006-CA-002111-NC, 2006-CA-002597-NC, 2006-CA-003068-NC, 2006-CA-004264-NC and 2006-CA-003851-NC).
The Debentures provided that the principal amount and accrued interest were convertible, at the option of the holders of the Debentures, into Unico's common stock at a price per share equal to 50% of the closing bid price of Unico's common stock as quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board on the immediately preceding trading day prior to the notice of conversion.
Unico agreed to settle each action by issuing shares of its common stock to the plaintiffs using a valuation of approximately 14% to 20% of the then existing bid
price of Unico, Incorporated common stock. These shares were issued pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, after a hearing with
notice to, and an opportunity to be heard from, interested parties, as to the fairness of each transaction, by a state court in Florida which specifically determined, prior to declaring that the transactions were exempt under Section 3(a)(10), that the transactions were fair to the interested parties.
From February 9, 2006 until May 12, 2006, in connection with the exercise of conversion rights by the holders of the Debentures and pursuant to the litigation settlements, Unico issued an aggregate of 4,400,668,554 shares of its
common stock.
As a result of the foregoing events, shares of Unico's common stock were issued to one or more of the Debenture holders on the following dates and in the
following amounts:
1. February 9, 2006 - 173,835,653 shares
2. March 2, 2006 - 325,804,830 shares
3. March 9, 2006 - 371,875,000 shares
4. March 23, 2006 - 526,704,636 shares
5. April 6, 2006 - 566,195,754 shares
6. April 14, 2006 - 599,041,095 shares
7. April 27, 2006 - 1,209,091,038 shares
8. May 11, 2006 - 628,120,548 shares
There were no underwriters involved in any of the stock issuances described above, and there were no underwriting discounts or commissions paid. The stock in each transaction was issued pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933 as "securities issued in exchange for one or more bona vide outstanding securities, claims or property interests . . . where the terms and conditions of such issuance and exchange are approved, after a hearing upon the fairness of such terms and conditions . . . ."
As of the date of this report, there are now 4,899,096,450 shares of Unico's common stock issued and outstanding."
So Nino, ever darn one of the shares were issued as free trading shares as they were exempt under Section 3(a)10 of the Securities Act of 1933! No restriction!
Who is your friend?
GOLDENBOLLOX
You said that "The convertible debentures are very clear in the wording "Restricted""
That may be true relative to the convertible debentures held by Mark Lopez and Ray Brown, it is NOT true relative to the convertible debentures held by the financing groups. All previous lawsuit settlements in the Florida courts have granted free trading status to the hundreds of millions, and previously billions, of conversion shares. This will continue to be the case with the current lawsuits in those same courts by the same players.
Matt55
All of the hundreds of millions of Unico shares issued as settlements to the convertible debenture holders since the reverse split have been free trading shares -- NO holding period
ALL
Two new lawsuits filed in Florida today against Unico by the convertible debenture financiers. These settlement discounted shares could hit the street as early as tomorrow.
http://clerk.co.sarasota.fl.us/srqapp/civdetail.asp?tb_searchby=Company&tb_searchfor=2006+CA+011...
http://clerk.co.sarasota.fl.us/srqapp/civdetail.asp?tb_searchby=Company&tb_searchfor=2006+CA+011...
bucko
From another board:
"By: DERBENSKI
05 Dec 2006, 08:48 PM EST
Msg. 30534 of 30559
Jump to msg. #
So the bottom line to the whole story is that Unico is an exploration company and will remain an exploration company until it has a proven reserve. A mill on the property or a "development agreement" does not morph it into a development stage company. One must first prove that they have reserves to develop in order to do that.
Unico remains at stage one and yet has been unable to turn in any independantly verified exploration work that presents anything that even smells close to being later turned into a proven reserve. Nore have they turned in something that looks to be economic without spending the money to upgrade it to reserve status.
At this point we stand with a mill and an old tailings pile nearby.
The mill will undoubtably be turning but what will be turning within becomes the question.
In the real world of mining exploration it is find the ore and the money will follow. In the sub penny Unico world it is build the mill and blow out a bunch of PR's.
Derb
bucko
I am NOT short this stock nor am I trying to get anyone to sell his stock. Period, end of discussion.
ROTFLMAO
I signed it a long,long time ago!!!
docy markett
I suppose anything is possible, however, this is really a crap shoot at best, imo. So far the only true winners here are the convertible debenture holders who have been able to convert to free trading shares at ridiculous discounts of 14 - 20%, and in some cases less, to the market price.
docy markett
Years ago Noranda and other real mining companies evaluated the Deer Trail and.........walked away for obvious reasons. Nothing economically worthwhile. And so far, that finding has been borne out by the Phase I and II drill assays...... nothing economic.
piranhas..
You have said - "I agree that negative or bashing posts should be removed."
If you take the time to read the rules for ihub you will find that that this is NOT a reason to delete a post.
If one does proper and thorough due dilligence on any stock you will find good, bad and ugly. All these facts are vaild and proper for posting.
slim to none aon all counts
Resource estimate -
The resource estimate of $2 bil+ periodically posted by GOLDENBOLLOX is nothing more than pure fantasy. It is based upon the old Proctor report which:
1) Has been verified by no one at all
2) Phase I and II drill assays don't even come close to the numbers in the report.
3) If the Proctor report had any credence whatsoeverwhy did Noranda and other real mining companies walk away years ago.
4) Even Unico thru their SEC filings and PR's have backed away from this 'estimate'
One must remember that Proctor had a VERY SIGNIFICANT vested interest in his report and was NOT at arms length from Unico. Do some real due dilligence people.
Who is responsible for the price??
You need only to look at the settlements of the MANY friendly lawsuits against the company by the convertible debenture holders in the Florida courts (where jurisdiction is highly questionable - Unico never challenged jurisdiction). These have and are being settled at absolutely ridiculous terms. Some previous settlements were at 14-20 cents on the dollar in shares, and in some cases even less, thus creating a massive dilution of the outstanding shares. So basically blame Unico for use of these highly questionable financing methods.
Here it is again -
The Proctor report and its 'estimates' has NOT been verified by anyone and certainly not by the Phase I and II drill assays. You must remember that Proctor had a VERY vested interest in his 'estimates.'
Then why did you remove the date from the PR??
piranhas2 - How do you know that I don't own any stock??? I own lots of stock, and I bet a lot more than you do.
I am not here to cause trouble. Do you equate trouble with pointing out a few of the facts about this situation. I think you do. And the posts that I have made are in fact --- FACT. You consider them to be unjustified. I condsider them to be very pertinent to the discussion.
I don't care what company or stock you care to talk about you will find good, bad and ugly when you do THOROUGH DD. Then it is up to the individual whether or not to invest based on the facts at hand.
And by the way, I never "tried to convince people that the Deer Trail Mine didn't have any equipment on site." --- on any board.
swampthing - what it means is that there is an 80 ton pile of rock that Unico is going to run thru the mill and even Unico does NOT know what's in the pile of rock. There never has been any assays or sampling of that pile so who knows what is there, except, that previous miners threw it away. Then comes the matter of the Phase I and Phase II drilling assays. Nothing to write home about. They sure do NOT confirm the Proctor report in any way shape or form or GB's $2 bil+ valuation.
swampthing - in a few PR's they called it material in dumps. That basically means that it is waste rock that other previous miners threw away. So where is the mill feed coming from?????
If you notice the PR says "can begin processing the stockpiles of material" They have about 80 tons of this stockpiled material. No mention of ore at all because it isn't.
LOLOMAI -
So what's all this have to do with Unico????
Stocktrader..
Au contraire. GG needed cash for the Glamis buyout. This company has excellent fundamentals and business plan. I'm holding!!!