If it’s not a long shot then what is it? It appears the reporter solicited opinions from analysts, geology professors, and local politicians; all of which look to have no financial interest in the project. He included a lengthy section promoting the company via comments from the annual meeting.
“Substantial doubt” is not boilerplate language. I’ll let you research it a bit. Every company puts out some sort of disclosure about assumptions of continuing as a going concern, but the substantial doubt statement is very significant as far as accounting goes and is directly tied to the auditors opinion of the company’s ability to continue operations.
Finally, I think the author did an injustice to shareholders and the citizens of Nebraska by only referencing the 10k. The 10q statements are much worse with $43k in cash and roughly $3.2M in accounts payable.
The comment about junior miners incurring losses is accurate, attributable, and newsworthy. The subject of the article is ultimately about a dumb corporate tax incentive provided by the state. As such, readers following the tax advantage program may not be familiar with the mining industry which makes these statements critical to those reading this article from a crony capitalism interest as opposed to a junior mining investment interest.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
