Replies to post #65329 on Colorado Goldfields Inc. (fka CGFI)

[sanbrunobaby]

Well this subject has been discused extensively in prior posts, but a few comments
- first question is according to their press releases, and now the 10q , was there a NI43-101 prepared according to the required criteria ? if not, then one could surmise there is a degree of misinformation as to whether such a report prepared
- second, i do not know if there is a specific law against mentioning such a report but i would assume (a) information in such a report that is released contrary to SEC Guide 7 guidelines would be against SEC rules(b) Since company not required to prepare the report, one can assume SEC would be very wary of why such an announcement made. (c) since the report is specifically for Canadian filing, it is curious how it is claimed such a report was prepared according to NI43-101 criteria in the first place.

My own opinion is that the Company's own press releases show a lack of understanding of NI43-101 criteria and that alone makes the whole disclosure very suspect, including the lack of information typically required by SEC Guide 7 of NI43-101 for that matter. I guess CFO thought this would be a good selling point. I would think when SEC engineering offices gets around to reviewing their filings they will specifically address this issue.

[ficose]

Do you have a link to the statute that states it's illegal to mention the 43-101?

On a related note, shareholders should be receiving a report and letter sometime this week. I'll sticky a copy here for everyone else.