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.
Very optimistic that once this short term pump is over, the crew who will help pump this up, should have an easy time tripling their money by selling to the unsuspecting lemmings.
JMO of course, but if you look at their latest financials, you'll see they have very little cash, and burning more per month than they actually have cash on hand, so they may be looking to raise funds very soon, IMO of course.
And exactly what makes me a basher Talldude?
The fact that I was at the Toronto Conference and posted what Frank Callaghan said?
If you were there, like others who post on Stockhouse, you'll know that I'm telling the truth.
FWIW, I'm a shareholder, but one with realistic expectations and views. atb
NB. First Hand Hearsy Applies:
I was at the Toronto Conference late September.
Apparently first gold pour will be end of October or early November.................................
Skip to the present:
Yes, you're right it's just HEARSAY.
Yeah, sure looks like Frank has taken good care of number one.
Wonder how shareholders will fare?
That's correct jnicholas (3814).
You should actually look back to Reaugh's previous plays and see what great potential they had as well, prior to them going nowhere.
Yes,good luck to all invested. Maybe it's more than just luck they may need in this case. JMO
"I am still amazed how a company with such an amazing opportunity"
So true 3814, so true.
Remember, all companies at first seem to have such an amazing opportunity, but in the end, it's the management which is either able to or not able to bring such an opportunity to successful fruition.
If management does not show or have the experience in doing such, then why would anyone expect that this is the one; that this is the one time that management will actually succeed, when their history proves different?
Why should this time, be any different than before? This management with its history of unsuccessful attempts at bringing a company to commercial production is what IMO will cause the same fate to AMY.
It's similar to the trend in TA statistics. The trend is always your friend. There is a trend with this management IMO, and you can rest assured that the odds are, the trend will not be broken.
That's the way I see it. I truly hope I'm wrong for those invested. atb
"Just means that we are that much more oversold! JMHO GLTA longs!!!!"
3814, I understand the pitch, but I was told that John Roth used the same pitch during a closed door conference with brokers when Northern Telecom dropped from $124 per share to around $80 per share.
And NT actually had sales, albeit they weren't booked properly, but compared to AMY who has what, a dream? JMO
Blairman, you have a way with words as always, but you continue to fail in distinguishing between the real world, and the world of make believe.
When has AMY ever followed through with their targets?
Let's forget about failing miserably with EMM and the previously touted $0.44 per lbs cost which later proved fiction in their PFS.
How's about Reaugh announce a deal. It doesn't have to be with all of the supposed 15 or so interested offtakers.
Just one is needed to turn this around. Why hasn't a deal been reached after over 2 years of touting this supposed interest by industry leaders?
"Cheer Up Sleepy Jean"
I wouldn't necessarily call it fluff news Traderfan, just a little too little, and a lot too late maybe?
The way I see it is, prior to this change in direction, EMM was supposed to be AMY's "bread and butter". I even have an email from IR stating so back when.
Thing is, AMY may just have been better off to focus on the future and the niche market of EMD and LMD.
I'm not sure how they will be able to accomplish anything now especially with the lack of cash on hand, but there is always that hail Mary way of thinking that they sign an offtake deal before going another route.
As for the effectiveness of today's news, it's quite evident that the market has shrugged it off. The volume is deafening. JMO
Well they stated in their March news that months 6 to 12 would be devoted to producing a LiMn battery.
That would be from Oct. 2012 to March 2013. So is another 6 months still in the cards, and does AMY have sufficient funds to stay on their present course for another 6 months?
I would hope their on a frugal spending strategy. JMO
March 7th, 2012 – Vancouver, British Columbia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Larry W. Reaugh, President and Chief Executive Officer of American Manganese Inc. (“American Manganese” or the “Company”), (TSX.V: AMY; Pink Sheets: AMYZF; Frankfurt: 2AM), is pleased to announce the Company has retained Kemetco Research Inc. of Richmond, BC to undertake research in the production of an improved lithium manganese dioxide.
Manganese dioxide is produced electrolytically (EMD, Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide) or chemically (CMD, Chemical Manganese Dioxide). The addition of lithium to manganese dioxide forms material used in high tech rechargeable lithium ion batteries. There are numerous high growth potential applications for advanced lithium ion batteries, including hybrid or full electric vehicles. The challenge is to produce the material that is free from any potential impurities.
While the Company’s main product is electrolytic manganese metal (EMM), the hydrometallurgical process developed by Kemetco provides an opportunity for the production of ultra-high purity manganese dioxide for use in lithium ion batteries. The Kemetco process avoids traditional steps (grinding of the resource followed by roasting) that are known to introduce impurities to battery grade lithium ion battery material.
Successful research will add a secondary source of revenue to the Company, which production can be integrated as an adjunct to the Kemetco hydrometallurgical process.
This project will be initiated March 9, 2012. In the first 3 months, the project will focus on the production of high-purity EMD and CMD from American Manganese’s Artillery Peak resource. Research on lithiated materials will take place in months 3 to 6. Months 6 to 12 will focus on producing test batteries and optimizing the final products.
LMD/CMD testing to last until March 2013, as stated in yesterday's news:
"As announced on March 7 2012, American Manganese Inc. has retained Kemetco Research Inc. of Richmond, B.C., to undertake research in the production of an improved lithium manganese dioxide. This project was initiated on March 9, 2012 and is expected to run for one year, and will focus on producing lithium-manganese products for use in test batteries and optimizing the final product characteristics. The subject of this research will be discussed by Norm Chow, President of Kemetco Research Inc. at the 2012 Battery Power Convention on September 19th in Denver, Colorado. For information visit: www.batterypoweronline.com/conferences/program/conference-sessions/"
I'm not sure I understand where they are in terms of economics with their lab testing. I would think they need to use the pilot plant to run production for EMD/LMD/CMD?
Anyway, if testing goes on to March of 2013, then where does this leave offtake deals that have been suggested as their main concern lately?
Are they actually close to signing one, or is it the same gab that's been touted for the past couple years?
They need a deal asap, because if they keep spending money as they have, it will surely run out sooner than later. JM2cents
I think the only thing that can save AMY now is a real offtake agreement and judging by yesterday's news, it won't be for the EMM side.
They need to sign an offtake for the EMD/CMD potential with a battery producer or a company in the battery business and asap, IMO.
If they don't sign one in the coming weeks, then they are getting very close to cash problems, and they won't be able to do a financing without diluting the company.
Just my opinion, but without an offtake soon, there is a very good chance of a consolidation of shares in the future.
Good luck to those still invested. Not bashing, as I've been in this situation before and I know how it feels. Hope things work out for the best. atb
If the news wasn't enough. Check out what Jay Taylor has to say.
http://www.stockwatch.com/News/Item.aspx?bid=Z-C%3aAMY-1990269&symbol=AMY®ion=C
Taylor says sell American Manganese
2012-08-27 19:09 ET - In the News
Jay Taylor, in the Aug. 15, 2012, edition of Gold, Energy & Tech Stocks, says sell American Manganese Inc., recently nine cents. Mr. Taylor said buy on Feb. 14, 2011, at 68 cents and again on March 16, 2012, at 45 cents. Assuming a $1,000 investment for each buy, selling the $2,000 position at nine cents yields a $1,697 loss. American Manganese has released a prefeasibility study for its Artillery Peak project in Arizona. The PFS estimates a pretax net present value of $641.5-million (U.S.), total production of 2.19 billion pounds of electrolytic manganese and a mine life of 21 years. It also estimates an initial capital cost of $477-million. Mr. Taylor says the capital cost is too high. The editor is also bearish on manganese and other base metals. He says sell the stock, and use the proceeds to increase your cash position. Mr. Taylor's model portfolio allocates 27 per cent to cash. His low-budget, low-maintenance portfolio allocates 25 per cent to it. Alternatively he suggests using the sale proceeds to buy shares in gold producers with positive cash flows. In particular, Mr. Taylor suggests buying shares of prospect generators such as Eurasian Minerals, Renaissance Gold and Riverside Resources.
What else can it be one would think except some form of offtake agreement.
Thing is, why halt the stock Friday 1 hour prior to close, and still have it halted Monday and getting near end of day?
IMO, you don't halt a stock until the contract has actually been inked.
Strange to say the least. Still watching from the outside. This can go either way. atb
I was hoping they would preserve cash on PR and promos until they actually had something solid on the operations side, but it looks like they are continuing the same strategy as prior to the PFS, IMO.
Hopefully Reaugh won't continue his past ways of overpromising and underdelivering.
Will be interesting to hear what he has to say, but I would rather see progress rather than hear about what may happen. JMO
MICKEY FULP, was the guy who implied earlier this year that AMY was the company in Arizona that wouldn't amount to much due its very low Mn grade.
They should've asked him if he has changed his opinion now that their PFS came out.
That's a good article chippy. I don't think that AMY or any other Mn project should worry about demand, as it will most likely be there, higher or lower, but the question with AMY or any other exploration junior, is not so much future demand for EMM, EMD and so on.
The question with AMY is whether they will be able to build a mine, or not, IMO.
"Kemetco is not inventing anything that hasn't already been invented."
Yes, they did. Many, many changes to the original from the 1940's.
chippy, Mesa Minerals has produced high purity EMD for use in the battery industry using their hydrometallurgical process that they also claim can be used for any grade Mn, and they've done so since 2001.
You're talking about a different type of process that was used in the US in the 1940's.
Mesa Minerals is a modern process and very similar to Kemetco's. Hence, Kemetco is not inventing anything new. It will undoubtedly be slightly different, or they wouldn't be able to get a patent, but it's not new.
It is a new story though, IMO. atb
The spin remains the same.
There will be no JV deal after EMD/LMD is produced by Kemetco, just as there was no JV deal after Kemetco produced EMM, IMO.
Lots of apparent interest, but so far no offtakers.
When will you understand that producing EMD/LMD through a hydrometallurgical process is not a new invention or a new process?
Kemetco is not inventing anything that hasn't already been invented.
Take the promo blinders off for a second and realize that what you are spinning is just a web of deception......again. JMO
I'm not going to tell anyone to disregard your posts Blairman, only because I think it's good to have everyone read them so they can see how you are selective with material.
Here's the full PFS section on the grades used in the pilot testing by Kemetco.
Are there any grades less than 3.5% Mn that were used? None that I can see. Average grade at AP is 2.5% I believe. And yes, the McGregor Pit ore was used along with ore from the Chapin Wash mineralogy.
Seems to me that they tested ore as low as 3.5% Mn, and then extrapolated results down to 2% without running the lower grade representative ore from AP. Any comments?
13.3.1 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS
Bulk samples, collected from two locations across the face of CWH in the upstream
part of the Chapin Wash, arrived at the start of 2011 in 25 steel drums, weighing
about 7 t in total (Kemetco 2011). Three randomly selected drums were prepared for
the test program; their contents were very consistent in grade and particle size
assays. Typical blends of materials requiring size reduction contained approximately
50% mudstones and rocks up to 10" in size. Materials were crushed to a top size of
½". Assays are compared in Table 13.2, showing that the three CWH drums
selected for batch testing were homogeneous in makeup. Random samples of
MacGregor pit (MGP) material that were also tested showed higher grades of
manganese, but otherwise very similar feldspar-dominated compositions.
Test charges were subjected to dry milling, yielding pulps finer than 4 mm after very
short grinding times. The Bond rod mill index of 6 kWh/t confirmed the soft nature of
the material, with a negligible abrasion index (<0.09 g) on the more competent
specimens that were used for hardness testing (Kemetco 2011c; Kemetco 2011d;
Hazen 2011). Crushing tests were conducted with different types of equipment to
verify that the materials were soft, non-abrasive and free-flowing (Kemetco 2012b).
Table 13.2 Relevant Feed Assays of Materials Tested for Proof of Concept
by XRF
Sample Name SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO Na2O K2O TlO2 MnO P2O5 BaO LOI Total
CWH Drum A 54.68 13.57 5.34 1.72 1.90 1.02 5.63 0.57 4.50 0.16 0.56 8.47 98.26
CWH Drum B 55.13 13.79 5.46 1.14 1.91 0.93 6.01 0.59 4.60 0.16 0.50 8.25 98.63
CHW Drum C 55.65 12.07 4.34 3.03 1.76 1.36 4.38 0.48 4.07 0.14 0.98 10.00 98.55
MGP Met 4 58.54 13.28 4.51 1.43 1.64 1.75 5.18 0.55 4.78 0.16 0.65 5.63 98.28
MGP Met 2 54.43 11.87 3.81 2.89 1.42 1.42 5.09 0.45 7.38 0.13 0.90 7.99 98.36
MGP Met 1 56.35 10.90 3.14 2.71 1.16 1.69 4.57 0.39 8.83 0.14 1.32 6.95 98.42
In summary, testing since the 1930s has confirmed the remarkable uniformity of
Artillery Peak materials that respond very well to aqueous sulphur dioxide leaching.
Based on the Kemetco tests on Chapin Wash materials ranging from MGP grading
10.5% Mn down to CWH of 3.5% grade, a conservative depletion to 0.2% Mn in the
leach residues is readily achieved. This forms a reliable basis for grade-sensitivity
estimates as illustrated in Figure 13.1 where extractions >85% Mn can be expected
for materials grading as low as 2% Mn under baseline non-optimized conditions.
Not to worry chippy, I'm not the one resorting to name calling or attacks on fellow posters. Sometimes I can get aggravated, but I try not to be the instigator. It's usually the other way around so try not to point the finger where it isn't warranted.
As for delivering on promises, AMY management has come way short of what they promised, big time surprise, no surprises.
Not sure how you can be so supportive of Reaugh and his over promising and underdelivering. It's exactly what he has done, and you are now expecting him to do the opposite?
Sure, 99% of stocks are down near their lows, but AMY is there not because of market conditions, IMO. Just look at the chart and it tells you the story. They delivered on May 17 what the market was not expecting, bad numbers.
Quite different from just bad markets, don't you think?
As for what is said on bullboards, sure they can sway sentiment to some extent, but not to the extent that management can, and that again is relevant with what happened May 17, IMO and it was evident from the time they received the DRAFT PFS to when the actually released it one month later. Again, this is just my opinion.
AMY is where it is today, not because of market conditions, or because the crowd has gone negative. It's here because management just plain didn't deliver on their self promoted promises.
Go back and look at the videos prior to the PFS being released, and see for yourself. atb
Blairman, I remember reading countless of positive posts here, that turned out to be nothing but smoke.
The only one who can have a positive or negative effect on AMY is management.
Tell us, how have they delivered on promises so far?
If you can answer that honestly, then you will realize why AMY is trading where it is today. JMO
What exactly you getting at Blairman?
Did you not read that link at all?
Someone used the moniker Domenic2guys and I responded to him/it, whatever you call people like that.
I reported that poster to SH and they removed his posts. Here's my response to him/it. If you are associated or if you believe manipulators like heavymoney, then you are destined to lose, and I don't feel bad for you, IMO:
http://www.stockhouse.com/Bullboards/MessageDetail.aspx?sv=1&m=23671435&l=0&r=0&s=SL&t=LIST
Blairman, do you think that attacking posters will prove your point? On the contrary, you are only proving that you are desperate about the reality of the negatives associated with the project. Maybe, you are finally realizing that it's not really a "no brainer"? atb
Thanks again gharma. I especially like your analogy of canned ham, lol.
It's easy to assume and speculate on many things, but when it comes down to actually explaining using facts, well nobody seems to want to touch on that.
There seem to be some unexplained factors, but I'm just surprised that Tetra didn't emphasize more about Kemetco's methodology on using the highest grade ore sample from bucket R4 taken from the McGregor Pit. It strikes me as odd, but maybe it's ok with Tetra? It's rather confusing, IMO.
Good to have some constructive conversations. Thanks again gharma atb
gharma, what's your take on the following by heavymonzy on the SH board?
He seems to think that Tetra recommended the aquisition of an XRF analyzer for some reason, but I don't know why or what it is for that matter.
So are we to believe that using the higher grade material from the McGregor Pit is valid when assuming results will be consistent with the entire lower grade ore at AP?
heavymonzey is either making things up as I suspect he does often, or he could be getting info from someone at the company with regards to this issue, I'm not sure.
He hasn't said, and he likes to just move in circles sometimes, IMO. Would appreciate your take on this when you have a chance. tia
heavymonzy said, "Gharma is talking about ore makeup ... well both of you need to reference whole rock analysis and see how remarkably consistant it really is.
Didn't you get why TetraTech recommended the company acquire an XRF analyzer ... you have to get why they put that in there ... don't you?
Do some homework and quit making negative aspersions when none should exist on particular issues ... as is the case here."
Thanks for your opinion on this gharma. It's much appreciated.
What strikes me as odd about the whole Scoping Study and the use of the highest grade ore from bucket R4 taken from the McGregor Pit, is that why didn't Tetra Tech point this out in the PFS?
I don't recall if they did, but they may have mentioned it, yet they didn't make a big deal of the ore not being representative in both grade and average makeup of the AP ore.
I'm not sure why. Again, I'm no expert, but it does seem odd to me at least, unless there's further data that we aren't aware of, IMO.
gharma, I'm not a chemist, but I thought that metallurgy could be extrapolated when using standard processing methods, but using a hydrometallurgical process that hasn't been proven commercially yet, would require scoping studies from a representative grade, and not just dilution of a higher grade to get the desired lower grade mixture.
Does this make any sense? Hope I'm not interpreting the Kemetco work done in 2010 in the wrong way.
I mean, what if the lower grade material mixes differently, or plugs the filtration system, or just can't be separated as well as the higher grade material?
Again, I'm no expert, but as a layman, I would think that using this patent pending hydrometallurgical process should at least be tested using fresh, lower grade material from the representative ore at AP and not higher grade ore from the McGregor Pit which is not representative. JMO
I'm going by the scoping study done by Kemetco back in August 2010 gharma.
If you have it, you can skim down to Section 3.1 pg 29 I believe.
Here is what it states. Bucket R4 had a Mn content of 10.5% if I'm not mistaken. atb
3.1 SAMPLE PREPARATION AND ANALYSIS
The hydrometallurgical work was performed on composite samples from the McGregor Pit
area, American Manganese provided in 5 buckets. Each bucket was riffled and split to
ensure homogeneity and representative samples were collected, pulverized and sent for
whole rock analysis (lithium borate fusion followed by XRF) at ALS Chemex in North
Vancouver, Canada. The manganese content varied between 8% and 10.6%, while the iron
content was constant at 2.3%. A complete analysis of the samples is given in Table 3.
Check assays were performed at ACME (Global Discovery Labs) and Assayers Canada in
Vancouver, Canada, by whole rock analysis and four acid digestion / ICP, respectively (data
provided in Table 4). The whole rock analysis method gave consistent results, with ALS
Chemex yielding slightly higher results. The four acid digestion method reported significantly
lower manganese grades, indicating incomplete digestion.
The ore sample with the highest manganese grade (bucket R4) was chosen for most of the
subsequent hydrometallurgical scoping work.
my69z brought up a good point over at Stockhouse.
He said that Pocock should have retested the scoping study results using fresh material instead of the aged material they had used prior.
Anyone wish to comment on why not use fresh material from a more representative ore at Artillery Peak.
I believe the ore used in the scoping study at mention was from the McGregor Pit which graded 10% Mn and then extrapolated results for a lower grade. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Why not just use fresh ore grading 2.5% Mn which better represents the average ore grade at AP? Wouldn't that be more precise than extrapolating from a higher grade ore? Thanks for any feedback.
"It has been reported by many to those on a higher echelon. Game over."
chippy are you trying to be funny.
Is that your way of trying to intimidate posters from commenting on a balanced forum showing both the positive and the negatives of a play.
Is it ok by you for this forum to become a way of positive, yet unrealistic promo?
Well that is what it had been for a while. You go ahead and post the positives as long as they are relative and realistic.
If they are not, then be prepared to listen to the potential negative side of what you post. JMO
Blairman, shooting off your mouth again without a single ounce of proof or truth to back you up?
Can you tell me where I ever posted under the alias domenic2guys and what or who would fill your little old head with such rubbish?
Seriously, we won't have to wait too much longer to find out, IMO. I can tell by the desperation in your posts. JMO
Here's a little more information on that Reaugh lawsuit so you can further compare the relevance of Western Wind's current pending lawsuit with what you say is relevant to AMY.
You can put your unbiased 2 cents in anytime you wish chippy and/or Blairman. It's easy to shoot the s..t, but it's never easy to back it up is it?
Tell us how the following or the Western Wind news compares to this board. I'm not even concerned about Tooper's claims that AUA's IR guy was posting anonymously.
Heck, I already know that William Pfaffenberger an AUA Director posts at Stockhouse under the alias pfaffgau and has for years, so I'm in no way prejudice whatsoever, lol.
Just tell us which posts here about AMY or even at SH have similar libelous, and defamatory remarks that makes Blairman's post remotely relevant. C'mon chippy/Blairman, prove your point.
http://www.stockhouse.com/Bullboards/MessageDetailThread.aspx?sv=2&p=0&m=7771679&r=0&s=SPQ&t=list
An interesting post found on Oasis Diamond (CSI) board.
A wakeup call to those with more tongue than a mounties boot or more lip than a camel.. Adanac, Reaugh sue Stockgroup over Tooper postings 2004-03-19 14:29 ET - Street Wire Also Street Wire (C-MOR) Molycor Gold Corp Also Street Wire (C-SWB)
Stockgroup Information Systems Inc by Stockwatch Business Reporter
Adanac Gold Corp., Molycor Gold Corp. and Larry Reaugh, who is the president of both companies, are suing Stockgroup Media Inc., a subsidiary of Stockgroup Information Systems Inc., and John Doe over defamatory comments posted on the Stockhouse.ca forums. Mr. Doe has been posting comments about Adanac and Mr. Reaugh on the forums under the username "Tooper." The trio is seeking to have the postings removed, to have Stockgroup to turn over the identity of Tooper, and damages. This lawsuit comes on the heels of a Albertan libel case, in which plaintiff Vaquero Energy Ltd. and its president Robert Waldner won damages totalling $75,000 for defamatory comments posted on the Stockhouse forums by business consultant Nick Weir posting as naop9 and alec6. The Stockhouse.ca Web site is operated by the defendant Stockgroup. On the site, people can post all sorts of comments on the discussion forums, known as Bullboards, under the shield of anonymity. The defamatory comments began appearing on Adanac's Stockhouse forum on Feb. 4, 2004. Much of the statement of claim is devoted to Tooper's badly spelled tirades, which began with three comments that day. The first said: "Watch out, big scam. These guys are BIG scamers, they post their own B.S, they build up the bids to make it look like every one wants the stock, they have nothing but lies, they will run the stock, and will be selling their shares, these guys are pros. Fare warning." The next post, made little over an hour later, said, "I've been watching these scamers from the beginning." The third comment for the day, posted well into the evening, was in response to a post by Stockhouse user CrazyDiamond, who had written about Mr. Reaugh as a "man who has already been behind two mines that were taking into production and in his career has raised over $110-million to finance operations he was been involved in." Tooper replied by writing: "YEA, what's he doing for Molycor, yea that's right, MOR on VAN. He is the big P THERE TO. What the hell is that, running two shows at the same time. He is a PRO in the CON SHOW." (The comments referred to in quotations are reproduced from the statement of claim, representing what appeared on the Bullboards.) Tooper was back at his keyboard the next day, Feb. 5. He posted another rant about Mr. Reaugh: "Re: LARRY R. will suck you in. Who are you kidding, they are all CONS, it's just that he is a bigger one. This guys history stinks, check him out if you dare." The next post, made the same day at 13 minutes to midnight, was in response to a news release posted by Adanac about the potential at Adanac's molybdenum project, in which Tooper blared, "POTENTIAL, THAT WILL MEAN NOTHING IN THE END. JUST WORDS TO PUMP UP THE STOCK." On Feb. 6, Tooper posted only one comment: "SEEN THIS PUMP UP SCAM BEFORE. ONE pump up B.S. story, one after another just to keep you HUNGRY, It will be easy for them to say they tried and failed, When all said and done Larry will go back to pumping Molycor, for more suckers, and boy are there alot here." By Feb. 9, after taking a break over the weekend, Tooper was back at his keyboard. He posted six comments in Adanac's forum, three talking about some sort of pump and dump scam, another alleging that the company was using market makers to move shares between brokerages, and two more casting negative aspersions on Mr. Reaugh. Feb. 11's sole posting was a warning from Tooper: "I don't own this stock in anyway. I know what they're up to. And you will get screwed in the END. This people will suck you dry, the STOCK WILL BE BACK AT 10CENTS, they are far from honest. If you get in and out, lucky for you, but you will have to do it on the way down. you will see." Tooper was back at it with a vengeance on Feb. 12. The nameless knave posted over and over about Adanac's stock being pumped up. The day began with a post at 8:25 a.m., saying: "The truth hurts, and so does losing your money. This stock is going to tank, just like it is now. The big run is over, they pumped up the stock and did most of the selling, they will let it sink to gather more shares then pump it up again to sell on B.S. Don't get trapped." Tooper signed off the day at 7:05 p.m. with more of the same. Feb. 13's post read: "SCAM GONE BAD. Two heavy days of selling, now what do they do, no buying on this hot stock, dead in the water. Looks like they will have to put out another BS NEWSRELEASE, don't be fooled, they are PROS, Why there is no buying now, they will see when the bids start to build." By this time, Adanac and Mr. Reaugh had been alerted to the postings on the Stockhouse forum. On their behalf, Teresa Piorun, Adanac's corporate secretary, made a complaint through the Stockhouse Web site "report a Bullboard violation" function. No action was taken, and on Feb. 16, Ms. Piorun called Stockgroup's Vancouver offices and was told that they had no record of her complaint. She was told that she would have to use the Web site complaint function to request that posts be removed. Ms. Piorun later received a call from Stockgroup, advising her that her initial complaint had been located and that the posting had been removed. Ms. Piorun was also told that she was going to have to make a separate complaint about every comment that she wanted removed from the Stockhouse forum. Ms. Piorun did just that, making a complaint for each allegedly defamatory posting written about Adanac or Mr. Reaugh by Tooper. Stockhouse removed all the complained-of postings by Tooper and suspended Tooper's membership privileges for one week, as was its standard procedure. The lawsuit claims that Stockgroup refused to ban Tooper permanently, unless the plaintiffs could obtain a court order to that effect. One week later, on Feb. 23, with his forum posting privileges restored, Tooper returned, leaning heavily on his caps lock, "AUA, WILL NEVER EVER BE A MINE, NOT ON THIS PLANET, THIS SCAM WILL SOON DIE." Three more posts appeared on Feb. 24, claiming once again that Adanac was a scam, and that shareholders would lose their money if they were to buy the stock. Later on Feb. 24, another individual, identified in the lawsuit as burrowsj, wrote a message in the Adanac forum with the subject, "Tooper may be right! EOM." The plaintiffs state that this posting indicates that others were adopting and endorsing the comments of Tooper. On Feb, 25, Ms. Piorun yet again went through the process of filing complaints about Tooper's latest comments. On March 3, Ms. Piorun contacted Stockgroup and was told that the Stockhouse membership privileges for Tooper had been suspended indefinitely. The lawsuit claims that Mr. Doe/Tooper has threatened and intends to repeat the comments complained of, or to make similar comments. The plaintiffs claim that their characters, credit and reputations have been seriously injured. The lawsuit claims an injunction to force Stockgroup to remove from the Bullboards any defamatory messages from Tooper not already taken down, an injunction preventing Stockgroup from letting Tooper post any more messages, and an injunction compelling Stockgroup to disclose the identify of Mr. Doe/Tooper and his address, as well as any other aliases used by Mr. Doe. The lawsuit also claims damages and costs. Furthermore, say the plaintiffs, "Statements transmitted and published over Stockhouse.ca about particular companies are accessible by millions of individuals including potential investors." The lawsuit was filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on March 14, 2004, by Vancouver lawyer Ravinder R.S. Uppal of Fraser and Company. The allegations in the statement of claim have not yet been addressed or proven before the courts, and no statement of defence has yet been filed. Returning to the judgment in the above-mentioned Vaquero libel case, Madam Justice C.A. Kent stated: "Because an e-mail is anonymous, a reader is not readily able to discount comments that are made. There is a greater risk that the defamatory remarks are believed." (The judge referred to forum postings as E-mails, in her judgment.) This decision seems to fly in the face of the trend on Internet postings, to give the weight of anonymously posted comments, many of which appear as the illiterate rantings of the uninformed, as much weight as one would give to graffiti. Nonetheless, there was a 2001 decision in Britain that Web site operator Motley Fool Ltd. was required to turn over the identity of an individual who was anonymously posting defamatory information on a discussion board. These two cases may influence the decision in the Adanac case, if it ever gets to trial, although B.C. judges are not bound by precedent set in neighbouring provinces or in England. Adanac closed at 29 cents on March 18, down from 41 cents on Feb. 4, when Tooper started his posting spree. Trading had spiked to a high of 50 cents on Feb. 6, a day of relatively heavy trading for the company.
Ok chippy, I see you and your cohort Blairman, the multi-alias poster, like to throw words around with no relevance, so here's something of relevance concerning AMY's Reaugh and a previous lawsuit.
You don't have to comment. It's self explanatory.
http://www.stockwatch.com/swnet/newsit/newsit_newsit.aspx?bid=B-447800-C:AUA&symbol=AUA&news_region=C
Adanac, Molycor too touchy: Pontius
2005-05-12 15:20 ET - Street Wire
Also Street Wire (C-MOR) Molycor Gold Corp
Also Street Wire (C-SWB) Stockgroup Information Systems Inc
by Stockwatch Business Reporter
The defendant has broken his silence in the slow-moving defamation lawsuit brought by Adanac Moly Corp., Molycor Gold Corp. and Larry W. Reaugh. The plaintiffs sued in March, 2004, claiming that the then-anonymous Tooper had been posting defamatory comments posted on Adanac and Molycor's Stockhouse.ca forums. Stockgroup Media Inc. was also named as a defendant in the lawsuit, as Adanac and Molycor tried to unmask the shadowy Tooper.
In August, 2004, Adanac and Molycor obtained a court order to make Stockgroup turn over its records on Tooper. The username was registered to Brian G. Pontius of Montrose, B.C. Mr. Pontius filed his defence to the lawsuit in April, 2005, over a year after the lawsuit began. He claims that any information on the Bullboards cannot be viewed as defamatory, as the comments are only opinion, and need to be viewed as such.
The lawsuit
As reported in Stockwatch on March 19, 2004, the allegedly defamatory comments first started showing up on Adanac's Stockhouse forum on Feb. 4, 2004. Tooper's often misspelled rants appeared 26 times over the course of 20 days, ending on Feb. 24, 2004.
By Feb. 13, Adanac and Mr. Reaugh knew of Tooper's posts, and had Adanac's corporate secretary Teresa Piorun complain to Stockhouse about the comments. Ms. Piorun followed up her complaint on Feb. 16 by telephoning Stockgroup's Vancouver office. After much back and forth, Tooper's comments were yanked, and his posting access suspended for one week. The lawsuit claimed that Stockgroup refused to ban Tooper permanently, unless the plaintiffs could obtain a court order demanding it do just that.
After Tooper's suspension was lifted, he returned to the Adanac boards, continuing to make his allegedly defamatory comments about Adanac and Mr. Reaugh. Ms. Piorun was back on the phone to Stockgroup on Feb. 25, complaining about Tooper's new comments. By March 3, Stockgroup killed Tooper's membership privileges. Nine days later, Adanac and Molycor filed their lawsuit in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.
The lawsuit claimed Tooper seriously injured the characters, credit and reputations of the plaintiffs. The companies claimed damages and costs, for the alleged libels, against Tooper.
Orders and notices
On Aug. 25, 2004, Adanac and Molycor's lawyer, Geeta Bains, went before Mr. Justice S. James Shabbits and obtained an order to make Stockgroup hand over any information it had on Tooper. Stockgroup complied with the order, and on Feb. 8, 2005, Ms. Bains was back in court, this time seeking an order to take Tooper's name off the lawsuit and replace it with the name of Mr. Pontius. Soon afterward, Adanac and Molycor dropped their lawsuit against Stockgroup.
Pontius speaks
Mr. Pontius filed his defence on April 20, 2005. He does not admit he was the mysterious Tooper, or that he made any of the allegedly libellous postings. He also denied that the postings on Stockhouse's forums had done any damage to Mr. Reaugh's reputation, or to the share price of either Adanac or Molycor.
A company's share price can vary on a day-to-day basis, Mr. Pontius points out, noting that Adanac's stock hovered around 60 cents on the date he filed his defence, coming off of a year high of $1.05, and dropping from 88 cents to 60 cents in two months.
Mr. Pontius goes on to state that all of of the comments published on Stockhouse were within the "normal content" of any poster. Stockhouse's Bullboards carry opinions that should not be construed as defamatory comments, Mr. Pontius adds. Such comments are only published to entertain thoughts and opinions.
Mr. Pontius claims that Adanac's investor relations consultant, Michael Alexander, was a registered user of the Stockhouse Bullboards as "CrazyDiamond," and that Mr. Reaugh knew of CrazyDiamond's Bullboard activity. On Jan. 11, 2005, CrazyDiamond posted, "Larry [Reaugh] has said several times to me he would prefer I not post on Stockhouse or other boards because he feels they are a bit of a clown show with a little to (sic) much 'Bull' going on along with the boards."
According to Mr. Pontius, Mr. Alexander made several unpleasant comments about J. Rennie Blair, a director of Sur American Gold Corp., on Sur's Stockhouse Bullboard: "Comparing that pumping little liar to Larry makes my blood boil. You don't have a damned clue what you are talking about. You try and make them both the apple when one is the apple and the other is a serpent. I leave you to figure out who I believe is which." Such comments, Mr. Pontius argues, support his position that comments against other individuals, as made by Adanac's own investor relations person, are acceptable as opinion pieces and do not damage the subjects of such postings.
Mr. Pontius closes his statement of defence by referring to the disclaimer on the Stockhouse website. The disclaimer asks the user to acknowledge that any material posted on the website will not be viewed as inviting, inducing or encouraging any person to make any investment decisions.
CrazyDiamond and Mr. Alexander
CrazyDiamond's Stockhouse profile states that he is "Bullish on metals, currently enjoying an almost 350% return on last 10 picks. Pink Floyd fan and all around good guy." CrazyDiamond frequented the Adanac Stockhouse forums, often posting pro-Adanac messages several times a day, but he has not posted anything since Feb. 15, 2005. On March 3, 2005, Adanac reported that it had extended its investor relations agreement with Mr. Alexander, who was upgraded to Adanac's investor relations manager at the same time.
Adanac closed at 66 cents on May 11, 2005, while Molycor closed at 13.5 cents.
(In an earlier version of this article, Stockwatch erroneously stated that Mr. Pontius had admitted he was Tooper. The article has been amended.)
chippy, seeing that you agree with Blairman as to the slanderous relevance of the Western Wind pending lawsuit, could you show us the exact relevance that both you and Blairman see here with AMY?
Blairman seems lost for words at present, but maybe you can shed some light.
I'm starting to see a lot of smoke again. If there's relevance, show it, otherwise try sticking to the facts regarding AMY. JMO
I'm not sure why you're bringing this up Blairman.
I agree with gharma in that it has nothing to do with AMY, IMO.
Do you see any relevence and is there a reason why you decided that you needed to post that here?
Please feel free to elaborate.
gharma, I'm feeling a little dumbfounded myself. To be honest, with all the talk over at SH, with everyone there making it seem like AMY was invited by the US Government, I hadn't even noticed that the Strategic Minerals Conference isn't a US Government sponsored event.
Thanks for bringing this to light. atb
The US Government is always interested in listening to ideas 3814, but the projects have to make economic and environmental sense.
$500 million may not be a lot for the US government as a whole, but it is a lot of money.
Can it be done and will the environmental factors allow it?
Reaugh is a good talker, and he's talked the talk in the past, but I haven't seen his follow through with the "walk" just yet.
Have you looked at his role with AUA and GOR, and where those companies are today? Very similar promo themes and yet, in the end, all the talk was just that......talk. JMO
Probably doesn't mean much, but news nonetheless:
American Manganese deleted from S&P/TSX-V Select
2012-07-13 20:02 ET - Miscellaneous
S&P Dow Jones Indices' Canadian index operations have made index changes as a result of the quarterly S&P/TSX Preferred Share Index and S&P/TSX Venture Select Index reviews. These changes will be effective at the open on Monday, July 23, 2012.
S&P/TSX VENTURE SELECT INDEX DELETION
Symbol Issue name Cusip
AMY American Manganese Inc. 02735A 10 5
Company additions to and deletions from an S&P equity index do not in any way reflect an opinion on the investment merits of the company.
You make this sound like such an easy and no-brainer investment 3814.
Wish it were that easy, but there are obstacles and milestones that if not overcome or achieved will make this just another story that came and went.
It's one thing for investors to comment that there's 40 years supply of low grade Mn at AP, and that the water issues will be overcome, but until the company comes out and publicly states there are no issues, there most likely won't be a JV deal signed either, IMO.
Some things are easier said than done. atb
Thanks for the input as always gharma.
Maybe I'm being too much of a pessimist, can't blame anyone for accusing me of this, but aside from management not delivering on their suggested goals, the only real concern I have with this play is the water supply.
I can see Kemetco producing EMD/LMD with their process only because it's been done before, so they shouldn't have a problem. Only wish they had higher grades to work with because that would make things better on both margins and CAPEX, IMO.
But the water is a concern because without enough of it, the hydrometallurgical process cannot move forward IMO.
If they can procure adequate water supply, then even with this management, I think they have a much better chance of succeeding. But without water, I don't see a bright future ahead. JMO