![]()
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
![]()
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
|
TSX VENTURE SYMBOL: FUU
KELOWNA, BC , Oct. 25, 2018 /CNW/ – Fission 3.0 Corp. (“Fission 3” or the “Company“) announces that it has granted incentive stock options (the “Options“) to Directors, Officers, employees and consultants entitling them to purchase up to 8,100,000 shares in the capital of the Company subject to the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange. The Options are exercisable until October 25, 2023 at a price of $0.19 per share. The Options were granted in accordance with the Company’s Stock Option Plan approved by the shareholders on December 14, 2017 . The Options will vest as follows: 1/3 on the October 25, 2018 and 1/6 will vest every six months thereafter, until all Options have vested.
About Fission 3.0 Corp.
Fission 3.0 Corp. is a Canadian based resource company specializing in the strategic acquisition, exploration and development of uranium properties and is headquartered in Kelowna, British Columbia . That Company’s common shares are listed on the TSX Venture Exchange under the symbol “FUU.”
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD
“Dev Randhawa”
Dev Randhawa, CEO
Fission 3.0 Corp.
Cautionary Statement: Fission 3.0 Corp.
Certain information contained in this press release constitutes “forward-looking information”, within the meaning of Canadian legislation. Generally, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, or “believes”, or variations of such words and phrases or state that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will be taken”, “occur”, “be achieved” or “has the potential to”. Forward looking statements contained in this press release may include statements regarding the future operating or financial performance of Fission 3.0 Corp. which involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties which may not prove to be accurate. Actual results and outcomes may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in these forward-looking statements. Such statements are qualified in their entirety by the inherent risks and uncertainties surrounding future expectations. Among those factors which could cause actual results to differ materially are the following: market conditions and other risk factors listed from time to time in our reports filed with Canadian securities regulators on SEDAR at www.sedar.com. The forward-looking statements included in this press release are made as of the date of this press release and Fission 3.0 Corp. disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as expressly required by applicable securities legislation.
Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
SOURCE Fission 3.0 Corp.
View original content: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/October2018/25/c6982.html
|
TORONTO and VANCOUVER , Oct. 25, 2018 /CNW/ – Minera Alamos Inc. (the “Company” or “Minera Alamos”) (TSX VENTURE:MAI) is pleased to report the discovery of a new broad zone of gold/silver mineralization in its Phase 1 drill program at the Santana gold project, Sonora, Mexico . The discovery drill hole into the new Divisadero zone, was drilled approximately 200m north of the known mineralization limits at the Nicho Main and Nicho Norte zones and returned a wide intercept of disseminated gold, silver and copper mineralization in a previously underexplored part of the Santana Property. The hole is the first drilled deep enough to intersect this new style of polymetallic mineralization that is associated with an andesite porphyry unit related to disseminated pyrite and intrusive breccias. Based on surface exposures and known geology the mineralized system appears to be open to expansion in all directions.
Drilling Highlights:
“This new discovery hole is an extremely exciting development for the Company” stated Darren Koningen , CEO of Minera Alamos . “One of the driving factors behind the merger between Minera Alamos and Corex earlier this year was the significant untapped potential we believed we could unlock once the two Companies’ contiguous land packages were combined. As our knowledge base grows and we continue to better understand the regional geology we should continue to find additional mineralization. The discovery of the Divisadero area provides further evidence that the mineralizing events that occurred in the Nicho area are present at shallow depths elsewhere on our extensive property holdings.”
Hole S18-121 (70-degree inclination) was the Company’s first effort to assess the potential extensions of known mineralization on Corex’s Santana claim group on to the Minera Alamos Los Verdes claim group directly to the north. Rather than exhibiting Nicho style mineralization, S18-121 returned a considerable interval of more porphyry style mineralization with broad, rather evenly distributed gold, silver and copper disseminated throughout much of the hole starting from 32 metres down the hole (see Table 1).
The Company is currently evaluating the significance of this new discovery and its relationship with the mineralized breccia systems that form the predominantly gold rich mineralization at Nicho Norte and Nicho to the southwest. Preliminary surface mapping immediately adjacent to the intercept shows that the mineralized porphyritic unit extends in all directions and appears to be distinct from the Nicho Main and Norte zones to the south. Additional holes are planned to further test the discovery as part of Phase 2 drilling at Santana.
The Phase 1 drilling program has now concluded with the completion of ten holes totalling approximately 1500 m . The remaining holes yet to be reported include further testing of the southwest extensions of the Nicho deposit (see Figure 1). Planning of the Phase 2 drill program will begin once the remaining drilling results have been received and evaluated.
Table 1 – Mineralized intervals from 2018 Santana Project drill program
|
Mineralized Interval 1,2 |
|||||||||
|
Drill Hole |
From (m) |
To |
Width |
Gold (g/t) |
Silver (g/t) |
Copper (%) |
Gold Eq 3 (g/t) |
Area |
|
|
S18-121 |
32.0 |
127.7 |
95.7 |
0.85 |
9.8 |
0.33 |
1.47 |
Divisadero |
|
|
incl |
55.0 |
125.0 |
70.0 |
1.10 |
11.8 |
0.56 |
1.88 |
||
|
Notes: |
|
|
1. |
Grades/widths of mineralized intervals represent complete “from” “to” drill depths as shown. |
|
2. |
The hole was drilled at a 70-degree inclination. The true width of the mineralized zone in this new area is currently unknown. |
|
3. |
Gold Equivalent calculated using the following metal prices – $1250/oz gold, $16/oz silver and $2.85/lb copper. |
Assay results are pending from the remaining three holes; the results, as well as additional geological interpretations, will be released as they are received over the coming weeks. All diamond drill samples were collected by Minera Alamos personnel including the Company’s exploration geologists. Drill core samples were cut in half and divided into 1- 2 m intervals. One half of the sample was bagged for analysis and the remaining half was logged by Minera Alamos personnel and stored for future reference. Blanks, duplicates, and standards were randomly inserted with the samples sent for analysis as part of the normal QA/QC procedures.
All samples were prepared and analyzed for gold using fire assaying with AA/gravimetric finish. All samples were sent for sample preparation at the ALS-Chemex facility in Hermosillo, Mexico .
Guadalupe de los Reyes Option Payment Extension
Minera Alamos and Vista Gold Corp. (“Vista”) have agreed to extend the due date for the second US$1.5 million option payment for the Guadalupe de los Reyes gold / silver project in Sinaloa, Mexico (“the GdR Project”) by six months to April 23, 2019. The extension will better align development plans for the GdR project with those previously announced for the Company’s Santana and Fortuna projects. Minera Alamos continues to advance engineering efforts for the GdR project and community discussions related to the development of a commercial gold mining operation at the site.
As consideration for the deferral, Vista will receive an additional US$150,000 in cash, US$50,000 of which has already been paid and US$100,000 of which will be paid no later than January 23, 2019 . In addition, Vista will receive interest at a rate of 1.5% per month on the deferred amount beginning January 24, 2019 .
Mr. Darren Koningen , P. Eng., Minera Alamos’ CEO, is the Qualified Person responsible for the technical content of this press release under National Instrument 43-101. Mr. Koningen has supervised the preparation of, and has approved the scientific and technical disclosures in this news release.
About Minera Alamos
Minera Alamos is an advanced-stage exploration and development company with a growing portfolio of high-quality Mexican assets, including the La Fortuna open-pit gold project in Durango with positive PEA completed, the Santana open-pit heap-leach development project in Sonora with test mining and processing completed and the Guadalupe de Los Reyes open-pit gold-silver project in Sinaloa with mine planning in progress. The Company is awaiting the pending approval of permit applications related to the commercial production of gold at both the Santana and Fortuna projects.
The Company’s strategy is to develop low capex assets while expanding the project resources and pursue complementary strategic acquisitions.
Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This news release may contain forward-looking information and Minera Alamos cautions readers that forward-looking information is based on certain assumptions and risk factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the expectations of Minera Alamos included in this news release. This news release includes certain “forward-looking statements”, which often, but not always, can be identified by the use of words such as “believes”, “anticipates”, “expects”, “estimates”, “may”, “could”, “would”, “will”, or “plan”. These statements are based on information currently available to Minera Alamos and Minera Alamos provides no assurance that actual results will meet management’s expectations. Forward-looking statements include estimates and statements with respect to Minera Alamos’ future plans with respect to the Projects, objectives or goals, to the effect that Minera Alamos or management expects a stated condition or result to occur and the expected timing for release of a resource and reserve estimate on the Projects. Since forward-looking statements are based on assumptions and address future events and conditions, by their very nature they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Actual results relating to, among other things, results of exploration, the economics of processing methods, project development, reclamation and capital costs of Minera Alamos’ mineral properties, the ability to complete a preliminary economic assessment which supports the technical and economic viability of mineral production could differ materially from those currently anticipated in such statements for many reasons. Minera Alamos’ financial condition and prospects could differ materially from those currently anticipated in such statements for many reasons such as: an inability to finance and/or complete an updated resource and reserve estimate and a preliminary economic assessment which supports the technical and economic viability of mineral production; changes in general economic conditions and conditions in the financial markets; changes in demand and prices for minerals; litigation, legislative, environmental and other judicial, regulatory, political and competitive developments; technological and operational difficulties encountered in connection with Minera Alamos’ activities; and other matters discussed in this news release and in filings made with securities regulators. This list is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect any of Minera Alamos’ forward-looking statements. These and other factors should be considered carefully and readers should not place undue reliance on Minera Alamos’ forward-looking statements. Minera Alamos does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement that may be made from time to time by Minera Alamos or on its behalf, except in accordance with applicable securities laws.
NEITHER TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE NOR ITS REGULATION SERVICES PROVIDER (AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED IN THE POLICIES OF THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE) ACCEPTS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.
SOURCE Minera Alamos Inc.
View original content to download multimedia: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/October2018/25/c5613.html
VANCOUVER , Oct. 24, 2018 /CNW/ – Group Eleven Resources Corp. (TSX.V: ZNG; OTCQB: GRLVF; FRA: 3GE) (“Group Eleven” or the “Company“) announces the commencement of preliminary drilling at the Company’s 76.56% owned Stonepark zinc-lead project (“Stonepark”) in the Republic of Ireland . The primary aim of the program is to advance the Company’s ongoing ‘Big Think’ exploration strategy by providing important 3D geological information ahead of Group Eleven’s ‘Big Drill’ exploration program in 2019. Preliminary drilling is expected to total 1,500-2,000 metres and focus entirely outside the existing Mineral Resource Estimate footprint (see news release dated April 17, 2018 ).
“We are excited to embark on this important next stage of exploration in the Limerick basin. Despite being relatively new and underexplored, this zinc camp is already the most metal-endowed region in Ireland , outside Boliden’s Navan zinc deposit” stated Bart Jaworski , CEO. “Mineralization discovered to date in this area includes Glencore’s Pallas Green deposit1, our neighbouring Stonepark deposit2, our Carrickittle and Oola occurrences3, as well as, our five regional prospects identified by the previous operator. Our Gortdrum4 prospect – an open-pit copper mine from the 1960s – is also in the area and postulated as a feeder system for zinc mineralization in the district.”
“The above deposits and occurrences are located in a roughly concentric pattern around the Limerick Volcanic Complex. Recent academic work suggests these volcanics may play a significant role in the emplacement of zinc mineralization. One of the exciting ideas being developed by Group Eleven as part of the ‘Big Think’ is that known mineralization represents merely the outer edges of the system – with its heart located towards the centre of the volcanics. With that in mind, it will be very interesting to combine geological information from this preliminary drilling with results from the ongoing Tellus airborne survey to produce high-priority drill targets for next year’s ‘Big Drill’ program.”
What is ‘Big Think’? Group Eleven’s ‘Big Think’ exploration is an open-minded and methodical search for tier-one zinc deposits in the Irish Zinc District through comprehensive re-evaluation of over 70 years of exploration data, combined with cutting edge geophysical and geochemical techniques. The Company believes no other zinc-focused junior or major company is currently exploring on such a broad and deep scale in Ireland . Please see our ‘Q&A‘ discussion on the ‘Big Think’ for further information. For more information on the Tellus survey, see news release dated September 27 th, 2018. Maps of the Limerick basin are shown on www.groupelevenresources.com.
|
__________________________ |
|
1 Pallas Green hosts 44.2 million tonnes of 7.2% Zn + 1.2% Pb in the Inferred Category (Glencore; Dec 31, 2017). |
|
2 Stonepark hosts 5.1 million tonnes of 8.7% Zn + 2.6% Pb in the Inferred Category (Group Eleven; June 18, 2018). |
|
3 Carrickittle prospect hosts historic drilling with up to 5.8 metres of 10.7% Zn and 1.7% Pb; Oola prospect hosts extensive medieval silver-lead workings (Group Eleven intersected 0.45m of 107 g/t Ag + 4.9% Pb; Dec 31, 2017). |
|
4 Gortdrum, mined from 1967-1975, contained an historic estimate of 4.2 million tonnes of 1.2% Cu + 23 g/t Ag. |
Qualified Person
EurGeol John Barry MSc., M.B.A., P.Geo, Vice President of Exploration Strategy and Director of Group Eleven’s Irish subsidiary, is the qualified person at Group Eleven Resources, as defined by NI 43-101. Mr. Barry has worked for extended periods on Irish-style zinc deposits over much of the last 30 years and is a professional member of the Institute of Geologists of Ireland and a member of the European Federation of Geologists. Mr. Barry is responsible for the scientific and technical information that forms the basis for this news release.
About Group Eleven Resources
Group Eleven Resources Corp. (TSX.V: ZNG; FRA: 3GE and OTC: GRLVF) is focused on zinc exploration in Ireland . The Company’s large land package (99 prospecting licenses totalling 3,200 square kilometres) allows Group Eleven to leverage new geological thinking and geophysical technology to systematically rethink key aspects of the Irish zinc district. Key projects include Ballinalack (with Joint Venture partner Nonfemet), Stonepark (with Joint Venture partner Connemara Mining), Silvermines (100%) and Tralee (100%). The Company’s team includes accomplished mining professionals with direct experience in finding mines, building companies and exploring Irish zinc deposits.
Additional information about the Company is available at www.groupelevenresources.com.
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Bart Jaworski , P.Geo.
Chief Executive Officer
Cautionary Note Regarding Adjacent Property Information
This press release contains statements regarding the Pallas Green Mineral Resource estimate by Glencore plc. Such statements are obtained from publicly available sources and are provided for informational purposes only. The results within the report referenced are not meant to be indicative of the results and findings of the Company’s Stonepark property.
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. Such statements include, without limitation, statements regarding the future results of operations, performance and achievements of the Company, including the timing, content, cost and results of proposed work programs, the discovery and delineation of mineral deposits/resources/ reserves and geological interpretations. Although the Company believes that such statements are reasonable, it can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by words such as: believe, expect, anticipate, intend, estimate, postulate and similar expressions, or are those, which, by their nature, refer to future events. The Company cautions investors that any forward-looking statements by the Company are not guarantees of future results or performance, and that actual results may differ materially from those in forward looking statements as a result of various factors, including, but not limited to, variations in the nature, quality and quantity of any mineral deposits that may be located. All of the Company’s public disclosure filings may be accessed via www.sedar.com and readers are urged to review these materials, including the technical reports filed with respect to the Company’s mineral properties, and particularly the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 Independent Report on the Zinc-Lead Exploration Project at Stonepark, County Limerick, Ireland ” with an effective date of April 26, 2018 by Paul Gordon , John Kelly and Belinda van Lente (SLR Consulting Ireland) with respect to the Stonepark Project.”
SOURCE Group Eleven Resources Corp.
View original content to download multimedia: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/October2018/24/c5419.html
Vancouver, British Columbia–(Newsfile Corp. – October 24, 2018) – Contact Gold Corp. (TSXV: C) (the “Company” or “Contact Gold”) is pleased to announce that it has filed a final short form base shelf prospectus (the “Shelf Prospectus“), further to its preliminary base shelf prospectus filing announced on September 28, 2018. Both documents have been filed with the securities regulatory authorities in each of the provinces and territories of Canada, except Québec.
The Shelf Prospectus will, subject to securities regulatory requirements, enable Contact Gold to make offerings of up to $30 million of any combination of common shares, debt securities, subscription receipts, units and warrants (all of the foregoing, collectively, the “Securities“) during the 25-month period that the Shelf Prospectus, including any amendments thereto, remains valid. The nature, size and timing of any such financings (if any) will depend, in part, on Contact Gold’s assessment of its requirements for funding and general market conditions. Unless otherwise specified in a prospectus supplement relating to a particular offering of Securities, the net proceeds from any sale of any Securities is expected to be used to advance Contact Gold’s business objectives and for general corporate purposes, including funding ongoing operations and/or working capital requirements, repaying indebtedness outstanding from time to time, discretionary capital programs and potential future acquisitions. The specific terms of any future offering of Securities will be established in a prospectus supplement to the Shelf Prospectus, which supplement will be filed with the applicable Canadian securities regulatory authorities.
A copy of the Shelf Prospectus is available on the Company’s issuer profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and also may be obtained by contacting the Corporate Secretary of the Company at Suite 1050 – 400 Burrard Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6C 3A6, telephone 604 426-1295.
This news release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of Securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to the registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction. The Securities have not been, nor will they be, registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended and may not be offered or sold in the United States or to, or for the account or benefit of, U.S. persons absent registration or an applicable exemption from the registration requirements.
Technical Report
The Company also reports that it has filed a National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101“) technical report entitled “Pony Creek Project, Elko County, Nevada, United States of America” (the “Report“), effective October 16, 2018 and dated October 22, 2018, on SEDAR at http://www.sedar.com. The Report has also been posted on the Company’s website.
About Contact Gold Corp.
Contact Gold is an exploration company focused on producing district scale gold discoveries in Nevada. Contact Gold’s extensive land holdings are on the prolific Carlin, Independence and Northern Nevada Rift gold trends which host numerous gold deposits and mines. Contact Gold’s land position comprises approximately 275 km2 of target rich mineral tenure hosting numerous known gold occurrences, ranging from early- to advanced-exploration and resource definition stage.
Additional information about the Company is available at www.contactgold.com.
For more information, please contact (604) 449-3361 for either:
John Wenger, Chief Financial Officer wenger@contactgold.com
John Glanville Director, Investor Relations glanville@contactgold.com
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information
This news release contains “forward-looking information” and “forward-looking statements” (collectively, “forward-looking statements”) within the meaning of the applicable Canadian securities legislation. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements and are based on expectations, estimates and projections as at the date of this news release. Any statement that involves discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance (often but not always using phrases such as “expects”, or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, “plans”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “forecasts”, “estimates”, “believes” or “intends” or variations of such words and phrases or stating that certain actions, events or results “may” or “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken to occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking statements. In this news release, forward-looking statements relate to, among other things, statements with respect to the Shelf Prospectus, any shelf prospectus supplements, the proposed use of proceeds from any offering using the Shelf Prospectus, and the anticipated exploration activities of the Company at its properties.

Greg Johnson, chairman and CEO of Metallic Minerals, sits down with Maurice Jackson of Proven and Probable to discuss his company’s silver exploration in the Yukon. This is a 3 part series introduction into the value proposition of the Metallic Group of Companies. Important Note: Enclosed is a Financing Opportunity of Accredited Investors.
VIDEO
Original Source:
http://www.theaureport.com/article/2018/10/24/exploring-for-high-grade-silver-in-the-brownfields-of-the-yukon.html
Source: Maurice Jackson for Streetwise Reports (10/24/18)
Greg Johnson, chairman and CEO of Metallic Minerals, sits down with Maurice Jackson of Proven and Probable to discuss his company’s silver exploration in the Yukon.



You’ll notice that the capex for the new mines is quite low at $27 million dollars, with an exceptional IRR, and that’s because these deposits are quite shallow. These deposits are very high grades, and the relatively low tonnage and near surface depths make for a low capital investment to bring these to production.
<











Disclosure:
1) Maurice Jackson: I, or members of my immediate household or family, own shares of the following companies mentioned in this article: None. I personally am, or members of my immediate household or family are, paid by the following companies mentioned in this article: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this article: None. Proven and Probable disclosures are listed below.
2) The following companies mentioned in this article are billboard sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Victoria Gold. Click here for important disclosures about sponsor fees.
3) Statements and opinions expressed are the opinions of the author and not of Streetwise Reports or its officers. The author is wholly responsible for the validity of the statements. The author was not paid by Streetwise Reports for this article. Streetwise Reports was not paid by the author to publish or syndicate this article. The information provided above is for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Streetwise Reports requires contributing authors to disclose any shareholdings in, or economic relationships with, companies that they write about. Streetwise Reports relies upon the authors to accurately provide this information and Streetwise Reports has no means of verifying its accuracy.
4) This article does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer. This article is not a solicitation for investment. Streetwise Reports does not render general or specific investment advice and the information on Streetwise Reports should not be considered a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Streetwise Reports does not endorse or recommend the business, products, services or securities of any company mentioned on Streetwise Reports.
5) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their immediate families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise from the time of the interview or the decision to write an article, until one week after the publication of the interview or article.
Proven and Probable LLC receives financial compensation from its sponsors. The compensation is used is to fund both sponsor-specific activities and general report activities, website, and general and administrative costs. Sponsor-specific activities may include aggregating content and publishing that content on the Proven and Probable website, creating and maintaining company landing pages, interviewing key management, posting a banner/billboard, and/or issuing press releases. The fees also cover the costs for Proven and Probable to publish sector-specific information on our site, and also to create content by interviewing experts in the sector. Monthly sponsorship fees range from $1,000 to $4,000 per month. Proven and Probable LLC does accept stock for payment of sponsorship fees. Sponsor pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1734.
The Information presented in Proven and Probable is provided for educational and informational purposes only, without any express or implied warranty of any kind, including warranties of accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose. The Information contained in or provided from or through this forum is not intended to be and does not constitute financial advice, investment advice, trading advice or any other advice. The Information on this forum and provided from or through this forum is general in nature and is not specific to you the User or anyone else. You should not make any decision, financial, investments, trading or otherwise, based on any of the information presented on this forum without undertaking independent due diligence and consultation with a professional broker or competent financial advisor. You understand that you are using any and all Information available on or through this forum at your own risk.
Images provided by the author.
</p
The Pilbara story has changed quite a bit in 2018 and I thought it might be good to recap some of the biggest changes (so far) and cover my personal view in terms of value proposition and Risk/Reward (mostly from the stand point of Novo Resources).
We have learned that the upper Comet Well/Purdy’s Reward gold bearing conglomerate horizon is much more nuggety than the lower (well organized and thicker) Comet Well horizon(s), and that even tens of 5 tonne bulk samples is probably not enough to give us an accurate number in terms of average grade. An approximate “true grade” number will probably have to wait until we are trial mining this horizon.
It seems Novo has been successful in their previously stated goal in terms of try to locate/track the conglomerate through drilling:
“Hennigh said core-scanning to prove the continuity of the conglomerates was proving “very effective” and the company was encouraged by ore-sorting technology.”
Source
In light of the previous success with the first “ore sorting” machine that SGS used for the upper CW/Purdy’s material, Novo has already contracted ore sorters from Tomra, and Quinton Hennigh made the following remarks recently:
“Hennigh said core-scanning to prove the continuity of the conglomerates was proving “very effective” and the company was encouraged by ore-sorting technology.
“We see ore-sorting as a very, very important means to treat this ore when the time comes,” he said.”
Source
As some may know, Novo signed an MOU (Momerandum Of Understanding) with japanese mining giant Sumitomo to “further develop the Beaton’s Creek project” in July of last year.
This tidbit was included in the News Release:
“Sumitomo will provide certain of its personnel to assist the Company with the preparation of its internal study, including basic engineering design work and other studies, and permitting (the “Study”). The Study is being targeted for completion in late 2017. Once the Company and Sumitomo have completed the Study to both parties’ satisfaction, Sumitomo will have the right to elect to participate directly in the Beatons Creek project and/or make an equity investment in the Company (the “Option”).”
Source
Since then, a lot has happened. Late last year, Novo went back to Beaton’s Creek (late 2017) on the back of their new realization in terms of adequate sampling size after talking to a coarse gold expert, and this time they had the funds. This was a few months after Kirkland cashed up the company big time with $56 M. Keep in mind that the 5 tonne bulk samples they are doing over at Karratha are very very expensive ($40,000 per sample!) and at least similar bulk sampling was probably not economically feasible for Novo before this, given the many years of abysmal market conditions and thus sparse funding options for pretty much all juniors.
Their coarse gold expert suggested that Novo should take at least 2 tonne bulk samples from Beaton’s Creek, which is still much less nuggety than Karratha, and might be a tell that 5 tonne samples for upper CW/Purdy’s might have indeed been a bit “greedy”. Remember, 5 tonnes was the absolute minimum sample size that the expert suggested for Karratha.
Anyway, what Novo seems to have discovered is that the grade estimation based on drilling for Beaton’s Creek might have been severely understated due to the nugget effect. In fact, according to Novo’s preliminary findings, Beaton’s Creek Hardey Formation conglomerates might be up to twice as rich compared to the original resource estimate.
As anyone will know, IF that kind of bump in grade turns out to be close to being true, that completely changes the project and economics big time.
During Novo’s latest presentation from the Denver Gold Forum, the presentation started out with Quinton showing drone footage from Beaton’s Creek and a new cross section with the gold bearing reefs. Quinton also mentioned that the company has an office and currently 12 people stationed in the town of Nullagine (The Beaton’s Creek project is located right next to the town).
Sumitomo MOU —> Kirkland cashes Novo up —> Goes back to Beaton’s Creek late last year with a full treasury and takes large bulk samples —> Discovers that due to the nugget effect, the grade might be up to twice as high —> The Sumitomo/Novo study scheduled to be released around the same time got pushed back… For perhaps obvious reasons? —> Novo continues bulk sampling activities through out the year —> Now we have 12 people stationed at Nullagine —> New Beaton’s Creek resource expected in the coming weeks (HH: We got it but only for the 2017 work!) —> Quinton starts off the Denver presentation with Beaton’s Creek.
… Can anyone see an interesting pattern emerging as to how good, and by some people conveniently “forgotten”, the Beaton’s Creek project might be? And barely anyone even acknowledges its existence judging by the discussion, or rather lack of discussion, in the forums. This inability by the market do focus (and thus put value) on more than one thing is the whole reason why spin offs usually work out so well. Depending on how good the new Beaton’s Creek resource will look, one can then play with the thought in terms of what a Spin Co with the Nullagine assets would be worth, and then subtract that from Novo’s enterprise value of about US$260 M. If the market is pretty much oblivious to the potential value from Beaton’s Creek alone (again, judging by the almost non existent discussions regarding the project), then what part of it is actually reflected in the Enterprise Value of Novo, if at all? Seriously, stop, think and try to recall when the focus wasn’t only on one thing and one thing only (Karratha) by most longs and ESPECIALLY the bears/bashers. Also, do you remember any positive market reaction after Quinton stated that Beaton’s Creek might be twice as rich? I don’t. Did you see any particular reaction when the big land package in Egina was announced and explained? I remember some big bulk buying but no real change to the SP… Food for thought. I rest my case.
In the Novo News Release that was out just two weeks ago (Oct 10), we got an update to the Beaton’s Creek (BC) resource that ONLY included work from 2017. The larger BC bulk samples that might reveal that BC’s real grade is up to 100% higher than has been reported via drilling are still in que. Think about this for a minute. The SGS debacle did NOTHING for the long term value proposition. The gold is still there, and it looks to be twice as rich (4-5 g/t perhaps). We all know that the market (especially when it’s depressed) is extremely impatient, and will often over-discount a short term hurdle, for the benefit of patient investors seeking outsized returns. There is no way that targets of this scale lose lets say 50% of their long term NPV just because a couple of first ever bulk samples got delayed for multiple months.
Furthermore, the News Release included indicative production costs numbers for Beaton’s Creek and they were superb:

… Thus, the preliminary or “indicative” production costs totals around US$20.4 per tonne, and recoveries are simply outstanding!
So lets see what the gold value per tonne might be and what indicative operating margins BC might have:
Well, lets start conservatively and use a grade of 2.3 g/t and 90% recoveries (2.3*0.9=2.1). That comes out to US$81.9 (worth of gold) per tonne based on the current gold price of US$1,231/Oz, and would thus result in an operating margin of 75.1%(!). In other words it would (preliminary) cost 306 USD to produce an ounce of gold worth US$1,231 today (20.4*31.1/(2.3*0.9)). Such an operation would have a lot of room for unexpected costs, and would put BC down as one of the lowest cost operations in the world.
Now, lets imagine the real grade is closer to 4.5 g/t, and remember, the production costs in terms of US$/tonne should be roughly the same:
4.5 g/t and 90% recoveries = 4.1 recovered grams of gold per tonne of rock, which is worth $162.3 USD. In this scenario, the operating margin would be 87.4%(!). In other words in would (preliminary) cost 154.7 USD to produce an ounce of gold (20.4*31.1/(4.5*0.9))… Yes, that’s US$154.7 per ounce, and would possibly be one of the lowest cost operation in the world from an operating costs stand point!

Even if we take the low ball estimate of 2.1 g/t of recoverable gold and almost doubled the operating costs to US$600/Oz, then a 2,000 tpd operation could theoretically spit out US$27.7 M in annual free cash flow. Now consider the fact that ALL of Novo’s projects are TOGETHER valued at US$226 M based on Friday’s close.
If we instead look at the 4.1 g/t of recoverable gold scenario and roound UP the costs to US$200/Oz, then a modest 2,000 tpd operation could theoretically spit out a whooping US$88.3 M in annual cash flow from BC alone! That would put our current EV/Future FCF (excluding dilution) at 2.55 (226/88.3).
Are we really paying anything for the potential ultra district scale upside in all our different other targets if those estimates are even close? What if Novo would put up a 4,000 tpd operation instead? Food for thought.
In the table above you can see the that all scenarios highlighted in GREEN would mean that Novo’s current Enterprise Value (Market Cap – Cash) is more than covered by the theoretical NPV of Beaton’s Creek alone. The scenarios highlighted in RED represents the production profiles for Beaton’s Creek that would partly cover Novo’s Enterprise Value. As you can see, you can downgrade the theoretical scenarios a lot before we would start to actually pay for any of the blue sky upside, for any of our targets outside of BC. Personally I am comfortable with using a conservative scenario of 4.1 g/t and operating costs at US$500, which would still leave a lot of room for downside before I take on ANY exploration risk. In fact, even if you average the 2.1 g/t and 4.1 g/t scenario with the parameters described above, the average still comes out north of our current EV… And few even knows BC exists it seems like(!).
Let me show one more slide just to prove my point. Below are different scenarios but this time using a discount rate of 7% and Uptime at 250 days/year:
In the low balling scenario for BC, and even upping the operating costs to US$500/Oz, the operation would still pretty much make up 50% of our current Enterprise Value. THEN we can start talking about what fraction of potential is priced in from the rest of the basin. In the preliminary “true grade” scenario for BC (which in turn might be low balling it), the costs would have to be over 4.5 times higher than Novo believes in order for BC not to theoretically cover our current Enterprise Value.
This is why I don’t get the sentiment. Some people seem to think that there is some large percentage of blue sky potential already priced in, and specifically the MYTH that is ALL about the Comet Well “patch”. What is priced in outside of the low ball BC scenario is my question? The way I look at it is that when I topped off my holdings last week, I was getting 13,000 km2 of prospective ground with MULTIPLE district scale target potential for FREE(!). Basically, in my view I wasn’t taking much risk (if at all) in terms of how CW, rest of the Mt Roe, rest of the Hardey Formation, Egina and/or the potential source would pan out… This kind of R/R is why I simply love Novo. Market seems to have no clue, and that is what I have been taking advantage of. The hefty decline doesn’t scare me, it just makes it even more obvious that the market, your average retail investor and/or pundit REALLY has no clue. Novo used to be cheap, now I feel like I am literally stealing an entire basin.
How many “bashers” or “pundits” even mentions Beaton’s Creek? And if they do they pull out some ridiculous numbers out of their ass with nothing to back it up (I am looking at you Topend). The results (intentional or not) is that they make retail investors actually believe that Novo is MUCH riskier than it is at face value. They make people believe that a dozen bulk samples out of one potentially basin wide Mt Roe prospect (CW) will dictate Novo’s future, when in reality, nothing could be further from the truth. This is probably why the bashers/bears constantly scratch their heads as to why Kirkland Lake doubled down at $5/share not long ago. No wonder, since most seem to have no concept of Risk/Reward or what Novo’s total value proposition is. I know one entity that does know it very well though… Kirkland Lake.
Most “bashers” for lack of a better word always seem to focus on one thing at a time, and they keep harping on it… Find an obstacle and then press on it and keep pressing on it in order to keep all forum discussion on that subject (hurdle/problem). They always stick to what might go wrong, but never in their life are willing to talk about what it would mean for Novo and the Pilbarians if the insiders are actually correct in being this bullish, and not to mention what amount of “risk” is already priced in (…and then some). Now who has got a better grasp on the prospects and value proposition? And yes, they got serious skin in the game and thus are risking millions to go with their investment thesis…
I include both the risk and REWARD side of the equation. If you include only the risks, then you are either a basher or ignorant and have no business handling your own money. IMHO.
If Novo and the Pilbarians unlock this 600×300 km gold field(s), then the sky incalculable, and if by some chance, every project, every area and every geological target turns out to be completely and utterly worthless by the time they have burned through all their cash and BC is set on fire, then yes, the downside is theoretically 100% as with any investment. Odds of all that happening? Slim to none in my book.
(This section that will cover the district scale “Egina” typ targets is still in the works)
Lastly, keep in mind that the Pilbarians are INTERNALLY DIVERSIFIED in terms of both different types of targets AND areas.
Burn through all cash and every current project and all other prospects must turn to crap, and yes, then you might theoretically have your 100% loss. Not only that, but given the fact that multiple juniors are basically working on different parts of different macro prospects, they must all come up empty for there to be no implied value on any Pilbarian in terms of Mt Roe, Hardey and gold bearing gravels.
Odds of that happening? Food for thought.
And by the way, don’t buy into anyone telling you that they know what lies beneath the surface in Pilbara. I have heard from many different people from down under just how UNDER explored the whole craton is. It is huge, rather remote and often a very hot place. There were not even any conglomerates mapped in Karratha for example, and now with Novo’s lead, the Pilbarians are turning up new conglomerates and finding gold all the time.
So to repeat, just based on what has been announced so far, Novo’s current projects consist of:
… Out of the three projects above, Beaton’s Creek could be considered well advanced since it has an existing resource and will be getting a new one with the help of bulk sampling instead of only drilling. The Karratha Gold Project will (in my opinion) most likely see trial mining 2019 on the back of a mineralization report. Egina already has some existing mining leases and I think it will be in trial mining/production phase in H1 2019.
One ought to remember that these projects are tiny fractions of the overall 10,000 km2+ land package that has been staked by Novo and the other Pilbarians.
The big picture unknowns for the 600×300 km basin are:
Novo is thankfully not alone in terms of proving up the very UNDER EXPLORED Pilbara Craton. We get news almost every week from Pilbara juniors that includes nugget finds, gold confirmed in stream sampling and/or
If things turn out well in the short to mid term, then Novo might see cash flow from two projects sooner rather than later, and hopefully begin to scale up from that point forward. If both these targets are anywhere near as high margin as some have theorized, then we can potentially be seeing some material free cash flow and thus be self funded starting next year already. It is also worth noting that given the sheer potential scale of both systems, if proof of concept is achieved, such operations might be workable for many many years to come. That is why I think that as soon as/if trial mining shows that one or both tiny slices of these “gold fields” are indeed economic, and preferably very high margin, then one can start theorizing at least a range of potential NPV scenarios for [X] km2 of similar strata.
In short, I see Novo and some select Pilbara juniors as (in my opinion) cheap options on one or more gold systems proving to be economic and if one or more prove to be, the potential scale is off the chart. With the Pilbara juniors trading for peanuts and Novo trading at an EV of about US$226, one has to wonder what part of success is priced in for one, two, three or more of the gold systems on top of yet undiscovered systems such as the source(s)? In my personal view, these are crazy cheap valuations given what it would mean if the insiders and their bullishness proves to be correct. With Kirkland buying more Novo at $5 just a couple of months ago, I would assume they are either stupid or the market has no clue how to put value on such a vast and complex case as Pilbara. My view is that the market is suffering from tunnel vision and depressed overall sector sentiment. I really get the sense that many view Novo for example as some kind of super risky “one trick pony”, when in fact it has loads of cash, multiple projects (one advanced), near term cash flow potential, bigger blue sky scenarios than any known gold junior in the world and top quality management/backers with skin in the game.
“Price is what you pay. Value is what you get” – Buffet
Current Pilbara junior favorites are:
There are more Pilbara juniors with prospective ground, but when taking into account the blue sky potential, management and backers, I would say those four comes out on top in my opinion.
When I take into account the multiple project diversification aspect and consider the potential blue sky scenarios I can’t help to feel that the valuations of most of the juniors already have discounted an obscene amount of risk. Are you paying for any “unconventional” upside in De Grey for example? Food for thought.
When you divide Novo’s current EV by three (number of current projects) you get US$75. Then lets play with the thought that the US$75 number represents the current price for 1) The Mt Roe gold system, 2) The Hardey Formation gold system and 3) The Egina gold system…
Is the CW/Purdy’s and the tens of kilometers of nearby strike potential as “confirmed” by Brent Cook and Kirkland Lake only worth US$75 M?
I mean even Cook stated that there are “tens of millions of ounces” in that area alone, and IF Moriarty and Barron are even close to being right, then that figure wouldn’t even reflect 500 Toz of high margin gold.
Is the potential for Egina and all similar “terraces” that covers a huge area (where there used to be conglomerates etc) only worth US$75 M?
I mean this is perhaps the cheapest form of mining that exists. Will all these flats host gold in economic quantities? No, but you only need a fraction of the area to be economic in order to rack up US$88 M in discounted free cash flow. Especially given the probably rock bottom CAPEX.
Is the potential for the Beaton’s Creek system and the already delineated Hardey Formation target to the north of it only worth $US75 M?
I mean Beaton’s Creek was apparently looking good enough for Sumitomo to get involved, and that was before Novo realized that the grade might be significantly higher, and it’s wide open. And as stated above, QH disclosed that they have already delineated considerable Hardey Formation strike in another area to the north of Beaton’s Creek. Also note that Beaton’s Creek ore is free digging, has excellent recoveries, is wide open and they seem to have found at least one additional Hardey Formation system already. How much of all that is priced in?
I would argue that any of these gold systems at least has the potential to overshadow US$265 on a stand alone basis, let alone US$88. The important thing to remember is that we are not talking about a few kilometers of strike potential here, we are talking about tens or hundreds of km squared. They are unconventional in every aspect of the word, and who know, it might end up being the production margins that is the real story and not even the sheer scale. What I mean by that is that lets assume that the average $AISC for gold production in all conventional forms is US1,000 and the average Free Cash Flow is US$200/Oz when gold is at US$1,200. Now lets play with the (very speculatile) thought that Beaton’s Creek can produce gold at US$500/Oz, CW at US$400/oz and Egina at US$300/oz. That in turn would mean that these ounces in the ground should be worth 4 times as much as conventional ounces on average. This is all very speculative, but if we get signs of this panning out in the trial mining, then the valuations above will look ridiculous in hind sight, in my humble opinion.
With all of the above said, this is mining and nothing is easy, but the point I am trying to make is that I consider much of the risk to already be priced in and thus you are not paying for much of the upside potential. For example, if De Grey Mining’s valuation does not reflect much more than their known hard rock gold, you get all conglomerate potential etc for free. If Novo’s Enterprise Value reflects 2-3Moz of AVERAGE margin gold in a tier 1 jurisdiction, then how much are you paying for thousands of km2 of land with potential for multiple (thus different/diversified) gold systems? Any stock can go to zero, but compare the valuation to what the upside potential is and you will be hard pressed to find something similar in my opinion. On the same note, I think it is a stretch to think that Kirkland invested an additional $20 M at $5/share with the expectations of Novo ending up with only 2-3 Moz based on what is known at this early stage even. I’d side with Kirkland Lake in terms of Novo being at LEAST worth $5/share given what I have discussed in this article over the market’s view that the R/R is worth $2.7/share, and that is AFTER the Egina announcement.
Any and every stock has a theoretical downside of 100%, but there are no gold juniors (that I know of) out there with the upside potential that matches some of the Pilbara juniors and their multiple (super) district scale targets. If they unlock 1% of Pilbara, that’s pretty much blue sky already. The unparalleled size potential is one thing, and the other is margin or free cash flow potential. We are already beyond spoiled when it comes to size potential, but if we get proof of concept of this to be as low cost operations as some speculate, then those two factors should be multiplied. For example, if the Pilbarians are able to delineate 10 Moz from a few km2 down the road (to start with), then that is obviously massive in its own right. BUT, if they show that the margins are say three times better than conventional ounces, then I would argue that their deposit(s) is equivalent to 30 Moz of conventional gold (10×3). Do you see the potential upside scenarios? The market is pricing in very little of anything, and we already know Cook and Kirkland have previously stated that there are tens of kilometers of strike from the Mt Roe conglomerates (Egina type included?) alone, and we know Moriarty and Barron believe this will be dirt cheap to process. Given that nothing close to even a few million ounces of high margin gold is priced in for the Pilbarians, you are not even paying for that upside.
And people claiming that “the consensus” is that there are tens of millions of economical ounces are out of their minds. The market IS the consensus and they are valuing for example Novo at $2.26 and not to mention the other juniors, while insider and main bull Kirkland Lake paid $5 just a couple of months ago per share of Novo. Since that purchase, Egina was announced, and the stock dropped 20% because; 1) Hot money didn’t get their assays and 2) QH said that the upper and most nuggety horizon would produce volatile assays with 5 tonne samples. Anyone thinks that this nuggety nature was a surprise for Kirkland when they bought at $5? Please.
As a matter of fact, the bears ARE the consensus, they just don’t realize it since they in my opinion 1) Only focus on ONE small patch from ONE of the gold systems, 2) Doesn’t seem to have run any numbers and what different success scenarios would mean for the Pilbarians, and 3) Doesn’t realize that the market has discounted the Pilbarians down to the bone already.
… Just go over the forums for the last couple of months and I think you will agree with me.
When you hear people say that they don’t think any of the gold in Pilbara will be economical do extract, one might ask how anyone can possibly know that since we haven’t even gotten to trial mining and the huge Pilbara Craton is very under explored. And again (I keep harping on this), nothing close to blue sky for even one of the systems is priced in, so you are not paying much for the potential anyway, since the bears and their bearish views ARE the consensus at these valuation levels.
While everyone and their mother is obsessing over the first tens of 5t bulk samples from one (in this context) small patch, Novo and Pacton are quietly buying up as much additional land as they can in the Egina area Central Pilbara. Remember, this area is about much more than the Mt Roe conglomerates, and this is what Brent Cook has said about specifically the Mt Roe conglomerates:
“It goes for tens of kilometers” – Brent Cook
“It’s big. It’s really big. We just don’t know if it is economic” – Brent Cook
“There’s no doubt there is gold there. There is tens of millions of gold in this conglomerate unit” – Brent Cook
… It’s up to one self to determine what kind of chance of success is priced in for that Karratha target alone, not to mention the other 99% of the land package and multiple other targets. Again, investing is not about absolutes (black and white). I want to buy companies where I can see a favorable Risk/Reward scenario which basically means, in the case of junior explorers, that the upside potential has been overly discounted due to perceived risks, bad sentiment and/or the market poorly understands the sum of its parts.
[x] Market heavily discounting every project given what is already confirmed
(tens of km strike, BC wide open with better grades, Egina not valued at all since it didn’t really budge on the news).
[X] Bad market sentiment dragging pretty much everything down no matter the developments (with few exceptions)
(Whole sector is off 50%-80% from its 2016 highs)
[X] Market having a hard time understanding/valuing what Pilbara is about.
(Tunnel vision on one project and most of the discussion is about the hurdles and not really discussing what it would mean if the hurdle is overcome)
(Case in point: Dropped over 20% due to assays not being reported in Denver and that the upper CW/Purdy grades would be volatile)
(Kirkland Lake doubling down at $5 with superior information while SP and thus consensus is doom and gloom)
… Food for thought. Make up your own mind.
Note!!! This is NOT investment advice. Junior mining stocks are risky and can be very volatile. Novo Resources has been my biggest position since 2016 and might buy and sell stock at any time. I can’t guarantee 100% accuracy in terms of what is contained in this post and thus would encourage everyone to do their own Due Diligence. This post is contains my personal view on Novo.
Best regards,
The Hedgeless Horseman
Follow me on twitter: https://twitter.com/Comm_Invest
Follow me on CEO.ca: https://ceo.ca/@hhorseman
Don’t forget to sign up for my Newsletter (top right on front page) in order to get notification when a new post is up!
If you want to learn more about Novo Resources and the Pilbara Gold Rush you can purchase all my premium content HERE.
If you find my work valuable and want to help me keep publishing most of my research for free then please consider making a donation.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||