more bs ...
first, sec letter specifically is talking about an annual report - 10k filing ... not announcements thru 8k's ... and certainly, not about reports that haven't been written yet.
second, sec said it was okay to use 43-101 compliant, as long as they disclose that it was never filed on sedar (canadian govt).... or simply call it a geological report (FOLLOWING IS FROM SEC LETTER)
We note your disclosure stating that you completed a National Instrument 43-101 (the
“NI 43-101 Compliant Report”) from an independent consultant for your property. Tell
us whether you filed the report on SEDAR for review by the Canadian authorities. If you
have not, you will need to address the potential variance in perception either by replacing
references to “National Instrument 43-101 report” with “geologic report” or by adding
language clarifying that the report has not been filed on SEDAR for review by the
Canadian authorities as is the general practice by Canadian filers.
IT DOES NOT TAKE MUCH IMAGINATION TO FIGURE OUT USPR CAN AVOID ANOTHER LETTER BY DISCLOSING THEY COULD NOT FILE THE 43-101 ON SEDAR BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT A CANADIAN COMPANY. AND ONLY CANADIAN COMPANIES CAN FILE IT ON SEDAR. ----- NO CONFUSION ----- NO MISPERCEPTION ----
third, once again, you are predicting the sec will send a comment letter re: a report that has never been written (yet). don't you think we should see the report, the title of the report, and what disclosure statements are made, before we predict an sec letter will be sent
