Replies to post #15654 on US Precious Metals (fka USPR)

[gnolfinvestor]

let me point out that this discussion about getting "slapped" with a letter from the sec is such bs:

1) report hasn't even been written - so how does anyone know what will be wrong with it at this time

2) a disclaimer stating it has not been filed with the canadian govt. makes it okay

3) the slapped part is true bs - sec sent a letter asking uspr to change the wording - uspr did --- NO FINES, NO SANCTIONS --- WHERE IS THE FREAKING "SLAPPED"

4) AND FINALLY --- AND MOST IMPORTANT --- THIS REPORT IS TO HELP ACHIEVE EITHER A JV OR BUYOUT (PREMATURE ON THE BUYOUT, SINCE THE DRILLING COVERS ONLY 113 ACRES OUT OF 39,000 ACRES --- ABOUT .3% --- THAT'S 3/10'S OF A PERCENT) ANYBODY DOING A JV OR BUYOUT WILL SURELY HAVE A GEOLOGIST CHECK THE REPORT --- AND I'M SURE THE GEOLOGIST AND THE MINING COMPANY DOING THE JV OR BUYOUT WILL CERTAINLY NOT BE MISLEAD --- SINCE THEY KNOW USPR IS A U.S. COMPANY - AND CAN'T FILE WITH THE CANADIAN GOVT.

[russo123]

why all this defense over 43-101?? uspr doesn't trade in canada. why mention it at all? just call it a technical report and make sure it meets sec standards. it's not this difficult.

[gitreal]

As long as there is a disclaimer, very clearly saying it has not been filed with SEDAR (and therefore is not compliant), the SEC seems okay with that. The most recent company PRs and SEC filings fail to say that, and are therefore in violation of SEC rules.