InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 3
Posts 1551
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/24/2006

Re: eztradin post# 53726

Friday, 04/14/2006 11:21:52 AM

Friday, April 14, 2006 11:21:52 AM

Post# of 91551
GSPG News. 10KSB: GOLDSPRING INC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edgar Online
06:18 a.m. 04/14/2006


(EDGAR Online via COMTEX) -- Item 6. Managements Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operations

The following discussion provides information that we believe is relevant to an assessment and understanding of the consolidated results of operations and financial condition of our company. It should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes.

The following discussion addresses matters we consider important for an understanding of our financial condition and results of operations as of and for the year ended December 31, 2005, as well as our future results.

Overview

We are a North American precious metals mining company with an operating gold and silver test mine in northern Nevada. Our Company was formed in mid-2003, and we acquired the Plum property in November 2003. In our relatively short history, we secured permits, built an infrastructure and brought the Plum exploration project into test mining production. During 2005, we acquired additional properties around the Plum project in Northern Nevada, expanding our footprint and creating opportunities for exploration. We are an emerging company, looking to build on our success through the acquisition of other mineral properties in North America with reserves and exploration potential that can be efficiently put into near-term production. Our objectives are to increase production; increase reserves through exploration and acquisitions; expand our footprint at the Plum mine; and maximize cash flow and the return for our shareholders.

2005 has been a year filled with challenges for our Company. In addition to trying to bring our Plum Mine operation into profitable production, we have continued to experience the costs and distractions of the litigation between the Company and its founder that has impacted our Company since late 2004. The litigation has been a drain on our scarce capital and human resources. (See Part I, Item 3, Legal Proceedings for a detailed discussion.) We are committed to finding a resolution to our pending legal matters that will allow our management to focus on building a successful, profitable operation. We are actively seeking financing to meet our working capital needs and fuel our growth. If we are unable to secure such financing, we may be unable to continue as a going concern.

In 2005, we continued to look for growth opportunities to expand our footprint at the Plum Mine as well as to add additional properties to our portfolio. During September and October of 2005, we acquired twenty-two mining claims from Comstock Gold, LLC. These claims included the Justice, Woodville and Keystone patented claims, which are adjacent to our operations at the Plum Mine. We also acquired an additional twelve claims in the Comstock Lode, known as the Vindicator claims, in November of 2005. We intend to continue to pursue growth opportunities in 2006.

On October 3, 2005, the SEC declared our SB-2 Registration Statement effective, ceasing the liquidated damages we had incurred since the March 2004 financing. Pursuant to the March 2004 subscription agreement, our Company was obligated to pay damages of two percent per month on the outstanding principal balance. These damages totaled $290,000 per month.

In March 2005, we initiated a program to improve the operational efficiency of our mining operation. As part of this program, we consolidated our corporate office with the Plum Mine office. We also made improvements to our processing plant and took over crushing operations from our third-party contractor, reducing costs and increasing our control over the crushing process. Our improvement program continued throughout the year. In November 2005, we retained licensed mining engineer Jim Golden to conduct a comprehensive review of all aspects of the Plum Mine operation, including the overall mine plan, with the objective of further improving efficiency, increasing production, and reducing costs. Mr. Golden has over twenty years of experience in the mining industry, including ten years with Peter Kiewits mining division, where he was a district manager. Since 1990, Mr. Golden has owned his own consulting firm, where he has provided consulting services throughout the world for over fifty mining companies. We have also assembled a team of professional mining consultants, who are recognized experts in their respective disciplines, to assist in the process of reviewing the operation. The team includes Jeff Butwell, a metallurgist; John Esser, an electrical engineer; Dennis Anderson, a geologic, soils and environmental engineer; and Stephen Russell, a geologist with twenty-five years of comprehensive mining experience. Furthermore we have retained Mine Development and Associates of Reno, Nevada to update our mine plan and model. Recent changes have included revising the mine plan to reflect the current higher gold prices; adding various efficiencies in the processing area; and re-positioning personnel to maximize overall performance. We believe that these improvements will result in increased gold production and reduced production costs. As we move into 2006, we continue to move forward with the operational improvement plan and the implementation of the various process modifications.

Results of Operations and Operational Plan

Our Plum Mine, which is located in Storey County, Nevada, went into test mining production in late third quarter 2004. We have not established reserves on this exploration project. Therefore, all of our activities on this property are considered test mining or exploratory in nature. One of our top priorities in 2005 was to improve efficiencies and increase test mining production at our Plum Mine. In March 2005, we initiated a program to improve the operational efficiency of our mining operation. As part of this program, we consolidated our corporate office with the Plum Mine office. We also made improvements to our processing plant and took over crushing operations from our third-party contractor, reducing costs and increasing our control over the crushing process. Our improvement program continued throughout the year. In November 2005, we retained licensed mining engineer Jim Golden to conduct a comprehensive review of all aspects of the Plum Mine operation, including the overall mine plan, with the objective of further improving efficiency, increasing production, and reducing costs. Mr. Golden has over twenty years of experience in the mining industry, including ten years with Peter Kiewits mining division, where he was a district manager. Since 1990, Mr. Golden has owned his own consulting firm, where he has provided consulting services throughout the world for over fifty mining companies. We have also assembled a team of professional mining consultants, who are recognized experts in their respective disciplines, to assist in the process of reviewing the operation. The team includes Jeff Butwell, a metallurgist; John Esser, an electrical engineer; Dennis Anderson, a geologic, soils and environmental engineer; and Stephen Russell, a geologist with twenty-five years of comprehensive mining experience. Furthermore Mine Development and Associates of Reno, Nevada is expected to complete a detailed mine plan and a reserve report for the Plum Mine by the end of May 2006. Recent changes have included revising the mine plan to reflect the current higher gold prices; adding various efficiencies in the processing area; and re-positioning personnel to maximize overall performance. The mine plan and reserve report are the culmination of a twelve-month undertaking by our Company and Mine Development & Associates. We believe that these improvements, including the updated mine plan, will improve our overall performance at the Plum Mine.

Inclement weather in northern Nevada in late 2005 and early 2006 presented a challenge to our Plum Mine operation. The mine received twelve inches of rain between mid-December and mid-January, filling our leach ponds nearly to capacity. This situation impacted our ability to mine and to process at our normal capacity, thus decreasing production. Our team at the mine did an excellent job, in a challenging situation, to insure the environmental integrity of our operation. The team worked closely with the regulatory authorities throughout this process. In mid-January, we ceased mining operations to allow time for our crew to stabilize the leach ponds and the processing plant. We anticipate our mining operations to resume May 1, 2006. During this interruption from mining, we took steps to implement additional process modifications identified through our operational improvement plan.

We also plan to continue our exploration program in 2006. In March 2006, we retained Larry Martin, a registered geologist, to oversee our exploration program at the Plum Mine and in the Comstock Lode district. Mr. Martin has over twenty-five years of diverse geological and exploration experience in the mining industry. He has worked for several major mining enterprises, including Peter Kiewit, where he served as manager of geological services. We have allocated a budget of $500,000 to explore and develop our claims at the Plum Mine. We expect to begin exploration in late spring or early summer of 2006. We intend to target our exploration toward replenishing and expanding our mineralized material inventory at our existing mine and toward developing new mineral properties. The successful location of additional mineralized material on the existing property would allow us to expand the size and the lifespan of the Plum mining project, exclusive of new property acquisitions. It is our belief that we possess an advantage with our status as likely the only heap leach gold mining permit holder in the area. This permit is relatively difficult to obtain, and it is one that we can expand to include new areas in the event we locate and wish to process new deposits.

We held our Annual Shareholders Meeting on October 26, 2005 in Carson City, Nevada. At that meeting, our shareholders elected the following slate of five independent directors: Christopher L. Aguilar, Todd S. Brown, Stanley A. Hirschman, Bill Nance and Rex L. Outzen. The new Board of Directors elected Mr. Aguilar to serve as Chairman of the Board. The Board also re-elected Robert Faber to serve as our Companys President and Chief Executive Officer and elected Lisa Boksenbaum to serve as our Companys Secretary and Treasurer. Lisa Boksenbaum resigned from her position with our company in February 2006.

In December 2005, we initiated a review of the invoices of our mining contractor. Specifically, we sought to reconcile the volume of material for which we were billed with the volume of material that was actually mined. We used an outside surveyor to conduct a comprehensive analysis of bank cubic yards mined. The results of the survey indicated that we had been over-billed by over $400,000. We met with the mining contractor in early 2006 to discuss this issue and presented our proposed billing adjustment. The mining contractor has contracted an engineering firm to perform an independent analysis of the data generated from our surveys to determine the accuracy of our calculations. We anticipate a resolution of this issue by June of 2006.

Placer Claims, Water Rights, and Mineral Permits

We originally became a mineral company through an acquisition of unpatented placer mineral claims and the Big Mike copper claims in June 2003 from Ecovery, Inc. The transaction had an effectuation date of March 11, 2003. Specifically, that acquisition provided us with a number of Nevada-based placer claims, including the Gold Canyon and Spring Valley claims, and 17 unpatented lode claims called the Big Mike Copper property. This acquisition did not include any real property rights. In November 2003, we acquired the Plum mine facility as well as water rights that are usable at Plum Mine and the Gold Canyon and Spring Valley placer claims. In a separate transaction, we obtained mineral permits in Alberta, Canada in May 2004

The Big Mike Copper property is located in Pershing County, Nevada. It covers a total of 310 acres and consists of 17 unpatented lode claims and one placer claim. We have not established any proven or probable reserves that meet the requirements of SEC Industry Guide 7. We have not completed any exploration activity on the project. The property includes an open pit, mineralized material in a stockpile and waste dumps. We are actively exploring opportunities to bring this project into production. The options being considered include finding a joint venture partner or selling the property and retaining a production royalty.

In May 2004, the Alberta government granted us mineral permits for all non-energy minerals on nearly 800 square miles of Alberta, Canada mineral property. Iron bearing material was discovered in the area covered by our mineral permits in 1953 from oil and gas drilling. From 1995 through 1997, a series of tests were performed that showed the mineralized material present was amenable to treatment to produce iron pellets and pig iron. We have reviewed the existing data and conducted a preliminary pre-feasibility study on the property. We have not established any reserves on this property. In February 2006, we executed a Letter of Intent to sell these mineral rights for CDN$1,135,000. CDN$135,000 of the sales price is to be paid in cash and CDN$1 million is to be paid through a 3% Net Smelter Royalty on Production of Iron Pellets or Ingots.

Comparative Financial Information Twelve Twelve Months Months ended ended December December 31, 31, 2005 2004 Difference Revenue $ 2,632,112 $ 955,380 $ 1,676,732 Reclamation, Exploration and Test Mining Expenses 4,419,353 6,800,011 (2,380,658 ) Consulting & professional 773,390 659,931 113,459 Liquidated Damages 4,619,144 1,627,308 2,991,836 Interest Expense 2,309,479 65,997 2,243,482 Net Loss $ (11,353,026 ) $ (9,569,535 ) $ (1,783,491 )


We sold 6,073 ounces of gold at an average price of $ 433 per ounce during the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2005 compared to gold sales of 2,836 ounces at an average price of $ 351 per ounce during the same period of 2004. We spent the first six months of 2004 completing the required infrastructure to complete our test mine and did not sell any gold until the third quarter of 2004.

Reclamation, Exploration and Test Mining Expenses were $ 2,380,658 less for the year ended December 31, 2005 than for the year ended December 31, 2004. This 2005 expense decrease reflects the transition to full-time test mining in 2005. During the first nine months of 2004, our focus was on building the infrastructure for our mining operation, and the cost of building the infrastructure was included in our test mining expenses for 2004. The third quarter of 2004 was the first quarter in which we conducted full-scale test mining. Our Company is an Exploration Stage enterprise as defined by SEC Industry Guide 7, and, in accordance with SEC Industry Guide 7, infrastructure expenditures such as haul roads, leach pads and start-up costs were expensed.

Quarter Quarter ended ended December December 31, 31, 2005 2004 Difference Revenue $ 476,574 $ 505,128 $ (28,509 ) Reclamation, Exploration and Test Mining Expense 549,037 6,109,155 (5,560,118 ) Liquidated Damages -0- 1,627,308 (1,627,308 ) Interest Expense 703,892 98,743 605,149 Net Loss $ (1,700,313 ) $ (8,217,932 ) $ (6,517,619 )


During the fourth quarter of 2005 we sold 875 ounces of gold at an average price of $ 545 per ounce compared to gold sales of 1,183 ounces at an average price of $ 426 per ounce during the same period of 2004. Our test mine became operational in late third quarter 2004, which was our first quarter of selling gold. The fourth quarter of 2004 was our first full quarter of test mining.

Reclamation, Exploration and Test Mining Expenses in the fourth quarter of 2005 were $ 5,560,118 less than the fourth quarter of 2004. This variance reflects the exploration drilling performed during the fourth quarter of 2005 offset by the shift from infrastructure construction to test mining. As detailed above, our Company is an Exploration Stage enterprise and in accordance with Industry Guide 7 infrastructure expenditures such as haul roads, leach pads and start-up costs were expensed.

The liquidated damages included in the tables above stemmed from Non-Registration Events Provisions in our November 2004 Subscription Agreement (Non-Registration Provisions). The Non-Registration Provisions required us to file a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than December 30, 2004 and to cause the registration statement to be declared effective no later than February 14, 2005. Our former Chief Executive Officer withdrew our pending registration statement and did not submit a new registration statement. His failure to submit the registration statement to the SEC by December 30, 2004 triggered liquidated damages to be incurred at a rate of two percent (2%) of the principal amount of the Debenture for each thirty day period or part thereof for not having an effective Registration Statement. We have the option to pay the liquidated damages in cash or common stock. If we choose to pay in stock, we are required to pay 200% of the liquidated damages amount. Because our Company does not currently have sufficient funds to pay in cash, we intend to meet this obligation by issuing common shares. Thus, the total amount of liquidated damages recorded for the third quarter represents 200% of the cash total. The liquidated damages ceased when our registration statement became effective on October 3, 2005.

At December 31, 2005, our Company had approximately $16,197,000 of outstanding debt bearing an average interest rate of 15% of which $13,462,000 originated from our November 2004 restructuring of the March 2004 private placement. (See Recent Financing Events and Restructuring, above) Prior to November 2004, our Company had no outstanding interest-bearing debt.

Restatement of Financial Statements

Upon review of the standards for reporting mineral reserves as defined by SEC Industry Guide 7 (Guide 7), we have concluded that we did not have sufficient information to establish the existence of reserves as of December 31, 2004 and that certain costs that we had incurred in the development of our mining facility must be expensed as exploration or test mining costs. We have restated our 2004 financial statements to classify all costs previously capitalized (the recovery of which is dependent upon the economical extraction of gold from the mineralized material we are currently processing), as test mining expenses. These costs, which total approximately $4.5 million net of accumulated depreciation, include our asset retirement obligation asset of $453,786. In connection with our restatement of our mineral property assets, we have also restated our asset retirement obligation liability, classifying it as an environmental reclamation liability and not an asset retirement obligation as described by Financial Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 143.

We have also restated our shareholders equity. On December 20, 2004, we received notice from holders of approximately $3.8 million of convertible notes of their intention to convert into shares of our common stock. In connection with the notice we reduced convertible notes payable by $3.8 million and recorded an additional 33,817,594 shares (converted at approximately $0.11 per share) at December 31, 2004. Upon further consideration, we have determined that since the shares had not been physically issued prior to year end, the liability and stockholders equity accounts should not be adjusted until the shares have been issued. Accordingly, we restated our convertible note and stock holder equity accounts by approximately $3.8 million. The restatement has no affect on net loss or cash flows as previously reported.

Pursuant to our decision to make the above-referenced restatements, the financial statements have been restated and are presented, as restated, within this filing.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We recognize that our cash resources are limited. Our continued existence and plans for future growth depend on our ability to obtain the capital necessary to operate, through the generation of revenue or the issuance of additional debt or equity. In 2005, we raised an aggregate of $1,575,000 through five financing transactions. In February 2006, we completed an additional financing transaction, which provided us with $250,000 in funding. While this additional funding may meet our immediate working capital needs, if we are not able to generate sufficient revenues and cash flows or obtain additional or alternative funding, we will be unable to continue as a going concern. We have yet to realize an operating profit at our Plum Mine location. As disclosed in the report of our independent registered public accounting firm in our financial statements included in this Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005, our recurring losses and negative cash flow from operations raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

Furthermore, the litigation in which our Company has been involved since late 2004 has strained the Companys financial resources. (See Part I, Item 3, Legal Proceedings, for a detailed discussion.) If we are unable to resolve the litigation in the near future, the ongoing legal costs may impact our ability to continue as a going concern.

In connection with our acquisition of the Plum Mining Company, LLC, we issued a promissory note to the seller for $1 million (the balance of the purchase price). At September 30, 2005, the outstanding balance on the Note was $400,000. We are in default on this Note.

Under the terms of our November 2004 subscription agreement, we issued 8% convertible notes in the aggregate principal amount of $11.1 million to an investor group. Under the terms of the notes, our first principal and interest repayment was scheduled for April 1, 2005. We are in default on these notes. The default interest rate is 12%.

In March 2005, we issued a secured convertible note in the aggregate amount of $6,885,184 with a 12% interest rate for the 29,573,803 shares and accrued interest due under the mandatory redemption payment provisions of our November 2004 subscription agreement. Payments on this note were scheduled to begin on April 1, 2005. We are in default on this note, causing the interest rate to increase to the default rate of 18%.

On July 15, 2005, we completed a financing transaction, which provided us with $800,000 in funding. In consideration for the financing, we issued promissory notes with a face value of $1.2 million, reflecting an original issue discount of thirty-three and one-third (33.3%) percent. The term of the notes is two years, with an optional extension of one year at the option of the investor. The annual interest rate on the notes is 15% of the face value and is payable monthly. On September 28, 2005, we completed another financing transaction under the same terms and conditions as the July 2005 financing. The September 2005 financing provided us with $200,000 in funding. We have not made the monthly interest payments on these notes, and thus we are in default. The default interest rate on these notes is 22%.

We are working with the above-referenced note holders to cure the defaults. The above referenced notes have a total value of approximately $14,680,000 at December 31, 2005. The total principal and interest arrearage related to these notes was approximately $6,441,000 as of December 31, 2005. While failure to reach a resolution would likely cause us to seek external funding in order to meet our obligations, there can be no assurance that such funding would be available.

During the fourth quarter of 2005, we completed three financing transactions, which provided us with a total of $575,000 in funding. In consideration for the financing, we issued promissory notes with a term of ninety (90) days and an interest rate of sixteen percent (16%) per annum. The default interest rate on the notes is twenty-two percent (22%). These notes had a maturity date of May 15, 2006, at which time all outstanding principal and interest became due.

The aggregate proceeds from 2005 financing transactions totaled $1,575,000.

In the first quarter of 2006, we completed additional financing transactions, which provided us with $400,000 in funding. In consideration for the funding, we issued promissory notes with a term of ninety (90) days and an interest rate of sixteen percent (16%) per annum. The default interest rate on the note is twenty-two percent (22%). The funds were used for working capital and general corporate purposes.

We expect to expand our existing leach pads, which currently number three, to a total of five leach pads during 2006. The cost of this expansion will be approximately $600,000. We intend to finance our leach pad expansion project and any other capital expenditures in 2006 through the issuance of debt or equity instruments to existing shareholders and other parties. There can be no assurance that such financing will be available.

Apr 14, 2006

(c) 1995-2006 Cybernet Data Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved


God Bless America!!!

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.