Replies to post #1207 on United Resource Holdings Group, Inc. (URHG)

[shazamm]

The FB posting is on otcmarkets.com as well. Neither location where this PR is posted, FB & OTC, will help the company. The only people who see these are already stock holders. Plus, I agree with hills...this is very vaguely written. I know several s/h's who have placed calls to Mr. Low where messages have been left for a return call. No one that I'm aware of has received any communication back, which speaks volume!!! He either does not know what he's doing, is unwilling to ask for help OR he is in way over his head. My bet is on the latter. If Mr. Low thinks this worthless PR is going to help URHG or take the pressure off from the shareholder base, he's mistaken.

http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/URHG/news/United-Resource-Holdings-Group--Inc---URHG--Begins-Processing-Ore-at-the-Dun-Glen-Mine-in-Pershing-County--NV?id=144411&b=y

[themtharhills]

I'm not sure what to make of this, if anything.

On November 9th, PR was issued which stated:

"...All testing and repairs, along with the requisite paperwork, was completed November 1, 2016.
MSHA approval was given for the facility to resume operations on November 4, 2016.
Dana M. Low
President
Dun Glen Mining Corp.
Phone: [phone] "

However, on the MSHA website it says:

"Citation number 8989363 Issue Date 10/19/2016 104(b) terminated 11/8/2016"

"...e-CFR data is current as of November 14, 2016..."

So it is good that the citation was terminated on 11/8/2016, but does that mean that the 11/9/2016 PR was incorrect to state that URHG had approval to resume on November 4th?
Should mining have resumed on November 4th, or November 9th?
Or was this just some lag time in getting the MSHA data updated at their end?