Replies to post #1672 on Mining Company research board

[Hurricane_Rick]

Because the claim of NI 43-101 compliance is a complete lie?
NI 43-101 is a Canadian reporting standard (and is not, as MDMN claims, an "international standard") and can ONLY be used by a Canadian reporting company. Why? Because the first rule of NI 43-101 compliance is that any reports prepared under the rule MUST be filed with a Canadian regulator. No exceptions. For a public company, that means it must be filed on SEDAR, which is only available to Canadian reporting companies. MDMN does not report anywhere, and they do not qualify to trade in Canada. Therefore, they can never comply with NI 43-101. Neither does Amarant.

"Compliance" was my word of choice, not the company's, so all of your outrage about it being a lie and illegal is misplaced. When I refer to "moving in the direction of NI 43-101 compliance", I am merely describing the intent to follow NI 43-101 guidelines, standards, best practices, etc. And since the Alto de Lipangue property will be explored and developed by an international consortium (led by Amarant Mining), it would be logical and reasonable that they follow the most widely accepted/applied industry standard, even if the actual report in practice is only applicable to Canadian companies, especially if any companies comprising the ADL consortium currently trade or intend to trade on a Canadian exchange. If there is a Canadian company involved in the project and/or one of the private and/or non-Canadian companies intend on listing on a Canadian exchange, then it would be imprudent to not follow those standards preemptively.

No, the "other" and actual only legal option is to report under Industry Guide 7, which is the legal reguation for all US companies. Every country has their own laws and reporting regulations for mineral exploration and production. They have to use the specific regulation for their country - they cannot pick and choose the reporting regime which fits their promotion.

The property in question is in Chile. I don't believe Chile has specific regulations in that regard, or if they do, I am guessing it only applies to the Chilean corporate entity and not the corresponding foreign entity exploring/mining the property. The companies I've invested in that have mining properties in Chile have never mentioned a Chilean mining standard. I've only seen NI 43-101, JORC and Industry Guide 7.

So many US companies claim "NI 43-101" because investors seem to think it is somehow special and important, which functionally, there is very little difference between NI 43-101 and Industry Guide 7. I guess claiming they are preparing an "Industry Guide 7" report isn't sexy enough for these stock promotions. Both the Canadian regulators and SEC recognize the term NI 43-101 is often being used by US companies for stock promotion and other fraudulent purposes, and have been cracking down on companies illegally making those claims. Hopefully MDMN's use of the term has attracted their attention.

Better notify them. Though I imagine they'd conclude, as any reasonable reader would, that the usage in that update was merely descriptive of the intent of Amarant Mining's drilling and exploration program to follow a widely accepted industry standard and the comment is ultimately innocuous.

Almost 100% of the time a US company claims an NI 43-101 report, it is fraudulent. For every non-SEC reporting Pink Sheet company, the number IS 100%.

Dual listers claim NI 43-101 reports, though usually with the appropriate disclaimer.