VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESSWIRE / December 10, 2024 / Granite Creek Copper Ltd. (TSXV:GCX)(OTCQB:GCXXF) (“Granite Creek” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce drill results from the 2024 drill campaign on at its wholly owned Carmacks copper-gold-silver project located in central Yukon, Canada. As previously mentioned, the Company identified a new zone within the Carmacks project called the Gap Zone (see news release dated October 3, 2024), located between existing high-grade, pit-constrained resources. The exploratory drill program intercepted copper mineralization in all four drill holes, laying the foundation for a follow-up resource definition and expansion drilling campaign. See below for selected drill results.
Table 1 – Selected Assay Results
Drillhole
From(m)
To(m)
Length*(m)
Cu(%)
Au(g/t)
Ag(g/t)
CRM24-026
172.21
180.15
7.94
0.13
0.017
0.7
CRM24-027
250.00
253.70
3.70
0.94
0.124
5.8
and
258.50
279.75
21.25
0.53
0.072
3.3
Including
261.30
270.30
9.00
0.70
0.090
4.4
CRM24-028
255.04
269.99
14.95
0.40
0.037
2.7
CRM24-029
247.00
261.85
14.85
0.51
0.059
3.4
Including
254.60
259.00
4.40
0.77
0.093
6.5
Figure 1 – Gap Zone plan view showing drill locations and traces
The Gap Zone lies between the proposed 147 and 2000S pits and was first identified by a 2022 geophysical IP survey (see news release dated November 21, 2022). Likely representing a fault offset from the main 147 Zone, the Gap Zone has the potential to add significant tonnage and extend the mine life envisioned by the 2023 Preliminary Economic Assessment (see news release dated January 19, 2023)
Granite Creek President and CEO, Timothy Johnson, stated, “The success of this drill program highlights the continued prospectivity of the Carmacks project. There remain multiple untested drill targets on the project, both proximal to the proposed pits as outlined int the 2023 PEA, as well as distal areas and across the northern sector which has seen only modest exploration. The project hosts significant copper-gold-silver resources and has the potential for major expansion across the 177 square kilometre land package in this top mining jurisdiction.”
Carmacks Deposit
The 177 sq km, Carmacks project contains over 824 Mlbs Measured and Indicated and 29 Mlbs Inferred copper equivalent (“CuEq”) metal within a National Instrument 43-101-compliant, high-grade resource of 36.2 million tonnes grading 1.07 % CuEq (0.81% Cu, 0.31 g/t Au, 3.41 Ag)1. The road accessible project is located along the Freegold Road, a Resource Gateway Road currently being upgraded by the Yukon government and is within 20 km of the Yukon electrical grid. The project is also situated within the Minto Copper Belt, a roughly 80 km long belt of rocks known for high grade occurrences of copper-gold-silver mineralisation.
The 2023 Carmacks Preliminary Economic Assessment (“PEA”), completed by SGS Canada, identified increased resources along with improved recovery as prime means of increasing the Net Present Value (“NPV”) of the project. Work completed this year by Kemetco Research (see news release dated January 17, 2024) demonstrated that recoveries exceeding the target outlined in the PEA can be achieved. The just completed drill program was designed to show that significant resource expansion is possible and specifically targeted areas that could lead to an expanded mine life as envisioned by the PEA.
About Granite Creek Copper
Granite Creek Copper is a focused on the exploration and development of critical minerals projects in North America and more recently on geologic hydrogen. The Company’s projects consist of its flagship 177 square kilometer Carmacks project in the Minto copper district of Canada’s Yukon Territory on trend with the formerly operating, high-grade Minto copper-gold mine and the advanced stage LS molybdenum project and the Star copper-nickel-PGM project, both located in central British Columbia. Recent acquisitions include the Union Bay geologic hydrogen project as well as entering into a letter of intent to acquire the Duke Island ultramafic project for it’s geologic hydrogen potential, both projects located in the state of Alaska. More information about Granite Creek Copper can be viewed on the Company’s website at www.gcxcopper.com.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:
Timothy Johnson, President & CEO Telephone: 1 (604) 235-1982 Toll Free: 1 (888) 361-3494 E-mail: info@gcxcopper.com Website: www.gcxcopper.com
Qualified Person
Debbie James P.Geo, has reviewed and approved the technical information contained in this news release. Ms. James is a Qualified Person as defined in NI 43-101 and supervised the 2024 drilling program. She is not independent of the Company because she has received employment income from the Company and holds stock in the Company.
1Mineral Resources are reported within a conceptual constraining pit shell that includes the following input parameters: Metal prices of $3.60/lb Cu, $1,750/Au, $22/oz Ag, $14/lb Mo and pit slope angles that vary from 35° for overburden to 55°for granodiorite host, metal prices are in US$. Metallurgical recoveries reflective of prior test work that averages: 85% Cu, 85% Au, 65% Ag in the oxide domain and 90% Cu, 76% Au, 65% Ag in the sulphide domain. Mo recovery is assumed to be 70% in both oxide and sulphide domain. Totals and Metal content may not sum due to rounding and significant digits used in calculations. Cu Eq calculation is based on 100% recovery of all metals using the same metal prices used in the resource calculation: $3.60/lb Cu, $1,750/Au, $22/oz Ag, $14/lb Mo.
Forward-Looking Statements
Forward Looking Statements: This news release includes certain statements that may be deemed “forward-looking statements” or “forward-looking information”. All statements in this release, other than statements of historical facts including, without limitation, statements regarding expected use of proceeds from the private placement and future plans and objectives of the company are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainties. Although Granite Creek Copper believes the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on a number of material factors and assumptions. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements include failure to obtain necessary approvals, unsuccessful exploration results, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, results of future resource estimates, future metal prices, availability of capital and financing on acceptable terms, general economic, market or business conditions, risks associated with regulatory changes, defects in title, availability of personnel, materials and equipment on a timely basis, accidents or equipment breakdowns, uninsured risks, delays in receiving government approvals, unanticipated environmental impacts on operations and costs to remedy same, and other exploration or other risks detailed herein and from time to time in the filings made by the companies with securities regulators. Readers are cautioned that mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. Mineral exploration and development of mines is an inherently risky business. Accordingly, the actual events may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. For more information on Granite Creek Copper and the risks and challenges of their businesses, investors should review their annual filings that are available at www.sedarplus.ca.
Neither the 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.
Vancouver, British Columbia–(Newsfile Corp. – December 9, 2024) – Riverside Resources Inc.(TSXV: RRI) (OTCQB: RVSDF) (FSE: 5YY) (“Riverside” or the “Company”), is pleased to announce it has signed an option agreement to acquire a 100% interest in the Taft Project (“Project”). The Project covers a total area of 3,000 hectares (30 km2) and is located in the highly prospective Revelstoke Carbonatite Belt region of British Columbia for Rare Earth Elements (REE) and gold mineralization. This transaction aligns with Riverside’s strategy of targeting high-value mineral assets in favorable jurisdictions and taking advantage of government support led by technical quality as a focus. Critical metals, such as rare earth elements (REE), are essential for national security and economic prosperity and Riverside is actively strengthening its position by acquiring and staking high-potential critical metals projects. The Company plans to begin a field program on the Project immediately.
“Riverside Resources has a long history of identifying and acquiring high-potential mineral assets in stable jurisdictions, and the Taft Project is another excellent example of this approach,” stated John-Mark Staude, President and CEO of Riverside Resources. “As the demand for critical minerals continues to grow, particularly in the fields of renewable energy, electric vehicles, and advanced technologies, projects like Taft play an essential role in securing North America’s access to these vital resources.”
“With governments increasingly emphasizing the importance of developing domestic supply chains for critical minerals, including recent initiatives by the United States and Canada to support exploration and production, Riverside is proud to contribute to this strategic imperative. By acquiring and investing in projects like Taft, we are not only enhancing our portfolio but also progressing the global transition to cleaner energy and more resilient supply networks.”
Project Option Terms:
As per the Agreement, Riverside can earn a 100% interest in the Taft Project by making staged cash payments totaling CAD $125,000 over five years, as detailed below:
a) $15,000 upon signing of the Agreement; (paid) b) $15,000 on or before the 1st anniversary of the Effective Date; c) $20,000 on or before the 2nd anniversary of the Effective Date; d) $20,000 on or before the 3rd anniversary of the Effective Date; e) $25,000 on or before the 4th anniversary of the Effective Date; and f) $30,000 on or before the final anniversary of the Effective Date.
Additionally, Riverside will commit to a minimum of $320,000 in exploration expenditures over the same period, as detailed below:
a) $ 60,000.00 on or before the 1st anniversary of the Effective Date; b) $ 60,000.00 on or before the 2nd anniversary of the Effective Date; c) $ 60,000.00 on or before the 3rd anniversary of the Effective Date; d) $ 60,000.00 on or before the 4th anniversary of the Effective Date; and e) $ 80,000.00 on or before the final anniversary of the Effective Date.
This transaction involves no royalties, aligning with Riverside’s ongoing commitment to maintaining royalty-free projects. Consistent with its business model over the past 15+ years, Riverside creates royalties only when optioning or selling projects to third parties in future business transactions.
Exploration Plans
The exploration program will begin with stream geochemistry studies initiated this summer, followed by soil and rock geochemical prospecting. Fieldwork will include geological mapping and reconnaissance traverses, building on earlier government studies and prior prospector reports. The focus is to delineate the Rare Earth Element potential associated with carbonatite intrusions, which are key mineralization targets for both the property and the company within this belt. Additionally, the program will investigate gold anomalies identified in initial surveys, building on previous exploration efforts in the area. Riverside’s planned investments include geological mapping, sampling, and targeted drilling to further define the resource potential of the project.
About the Taft Project
The Taft Project presents a high-potential opportunity to discover critical mineral resources essential to the increasing demand for renewable energy, technology, and advanced materials. Its favorable geological setting and strategic location within a supportive jurisdiction highlight its importance in Riverside’s portfolio. Geological mapping of the REE-rich terrane has identified promising areas along the belt, supported by favorable geochemistry and indicator minerals. Current sampling and exploration efforts, in collaboration with local prospectors, aim to refine targets through access, sampling, and mapping. These activities are paving the way for a focused exploration program in 2025, targeting both REE and gold zones.
Figure 1: Location map and mineral concession map with tenure under option in red and Riverside 100% owned tenure in yellow.
The scientific and technical data contained in this news release was reviewed and approved by Freeman Smith, P.Geo, a non-independent qualified person to Riverside Resources who is responsible for ensuring that the information provided in this news release is accurate and who acts as a “qualified person” under National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects.
About Riverside Resources Inc.:
Riverside is a well-funded exploration company driven by value generation and discovery. The Company has over $5M in cash, no debt and less than 75M shares outstanding with a strong portfolio of gold-silver and copper assets and royalties in North America. Riverside has extensive experience and knowledge operating in Mexico and Canada and leverages its large database to generate a portfolio of prospective mineral properties. In addition to Riverside’s own exploration spending, the Company also strives to diversify risk by securing joint-venture and spin-out partnerships to advance multiple assets simultaneously and create more chances for discovery. Riverside has properties available for option, with information available on the Company’s website at www.rivres.com.
ON BEHALF OF RIVERSIDE RESOURCES INC.
“John-Mark Staude”
Dr. John-Mark Staude, President & CEO
For additional information contact:
John-Mark Staude President, CEO Riverside Resources Inc. info@rivres.com Phone: (778) 327-6671 Fax: (778) 327-6675 Web: www.rivres.com
Eric Negraeff Investor Relations Riverside Resources Inc. Phone: (778) 327-6671 TF: (877) RIV-RES1 Web: www.rivres.com
Certain statements in this press release may be considered forward-looking information. These statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology (e.g., “expect”,” estimates”, “intends”, “anticipates”, “believes”, “plans”). Such information involves known and unknown risks — including the availability of funds, the results of financing and exploration activities, the interpretation of exploration results and other geological data, or unanticipated costs and expenses and other risks identified by Riverside in its public securities filings that may cause actual events to differ materially from current expectations. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this press release.
Neither the 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.
Kelowna, British Columbia–(Newsfile Corp. – December 3, 2024) – Strathmore Plus Uranium Corporation (TSXV: SUU) (OTCQB: SUUFF) (FSE: TO3) (“Strathmore” or “the Company“) is pleased to announce that the Company drilled two newly identified uranium roll fronts on the Beaver Rim project. Four drill holes were completed, including the discovery of the two mineralized zones on the South Sage claim group. The intercepts included 7.5 feet grading 0.042% eU3O8 from 1,119-1,126.5 feet (hole BR-03-24) and 4.5 feet grading 0.024% eU3O8 from 1,090-1,094.5 feet (hole BR-01-24).
The Beaver Rim areas drilled lie 1 to 3 miles south of Cameco’s fully permitted in-situ recovery Gas Hills project. The goals of the drilling program were to determine the validity of our geologic model for Beaver Rim and that it’s a legitimate uranium exploration target. This included:
Finding out if the arkosic-rich sediments beneath Beaver Rim correlate to the uranium bearing sediments to the north in the adjacent Gas Hills mining district?
Did these sediments act as the geologic passageway for uranium transport from the south through the project area towards Gas Hills?
Are these sediments suitable for uranium deposition and was there any uranium mineralization discovered in the Beaver Rim sediments?
With completion of the initial phase of drilling, Strathmore believes we have answered “Yes” to each of the questions regarding the geologic model, by having encountered uranium mineralization on the Beaver Rim project. The targeted host sandstone, the Puddle Springs Arkose member of the Eocene Wind River Formation was tested with the drilling. Results of the drilling show that the Puddle Springs is a very clean quartzite and feldspar-rich coarse sandstone and lesser mudstones. The member varied in thickness from 130-170 feet. Mineralization above grade cutoff (0.015% eU3O8) was encountered in two holes (BR-01-24, BR-03-24) in two separate sandstone intervals. A third hole, BR-02-24, showed above background gamma levels in three distinct sand intervals with notable alteration of the granitic sandstones in all holes drilled.
Based on these results, Strathmore believes the Beaver Rim area is a viable uranium exploration target. The Company plans to continue exploration of the project in 2025, including on the Diamond claim group to the west where previous drilling by Strathmore Minerals in 2012 encountered stacked roll front mineralization.
Hole ID
Latitude
Longitude
Collar (Ft)
From (Ft)
To (Ft)
Thickness (Ft)
Grade %
BR-01-24
42.72470
-107.51230
7,118
1,090.0
1,094.5
4.5
0.028
BR-02-24
42.72918
-107.51454
7,178
Below cutoff
BR-03-24
42.72495
-107.51283
7,126
1,119.0
1,126.5
7.5
0.042
1,137.0
1,139.5
2.5
0.028
BR-04-24
42.76613
-107.50053
7,403
Below cutoff
Note: The tabled geophysical results are based on equivalent uranium (eU3O8) of the gamma-ray probes calibrated at the Department of Energy’s Test Facility in Casper, Wyoming. A series E Century Geophysical logging tool with gamma-ray, spontaneous potential, resistivity, and drift detectors was utilized in the logging. The reader is cautioned that the reported uranium grades may not reflect actual uranium concentrations due to the potential for disequilibrium between uranium and its gamma emitting daughter products. Further analysis on radiometric equilibrium will be conducted by Strathmore in the future.
Beaver Rim Technical Report The Company has refiled to Sedar a technical report for the Beaver Rim project titled Technical Report on the Gas Hills-Beaver Rim Uranium Exploration Project, Fremont and Natrona Counties, Wyoming, USA. The report was authored by Mark B. Mathisen, C.P.G., of SLR International Corporation, and dated May 31, 2022. The report was required for Company regulatory purposes and inadvertently misfiled at the time in 2022. The report is available at www.sedarplus.ca. An updated report is planned upon completion of the autumn exploration program at the Beaver Rim project.
About the Beaver Rim Project The Gas Hills uranium district is the largest uranium district in the State of Wyoming; with more than 100 million pounds of uranium being mined between 1954 to1988 when production ceased due to declining prices. Historical and recent reports suggest 50 to100 million pounds of uranium may exist in the Gas Hills district. The Beaver Rim project consists of 265 wholly owned mining claims totaling 5,475 acres. The project area was previously explored by American Nuclear in the 1970s, Cameco between1990 to early 2000’s, and most recently by Strathmore Minerals in 2012, where uranium mineralization was encountered at depths of 700-1,000 feet, contained in stacked, Wyoming-type roll front deposits within arkosic-rich sandstones of the Eocene-age Wind River Formation.
The Beaver Rim project lies immediately south and adjacent to Cameco’s fully permitted Gas Hills in-situ recovery project. Cameco reported for their Gas Hills project indicated and inferred mineral resources of 13.3 million and 6 million pounds of uranium, at 0.14% and 0.08% eU3O8 respectively (reported Dec. 31, 2023). Additional, historically defined resources controlled by Cameco are noted to trend from their Property south beneath the Beaver Rim claims including the West Diamond, East Diamond, North Sage, and South Sage properties. Strathmore is reviewing the greater Beaver Rim area and past exploration as part of its intent to acquire additional properties with the potential to contain uranium mineralization.
About Strathmore Plus Uranium Corp. Strathmore has three permitted uranium projects in Wyoming: Agate, Beaver Rim, and Night Owl. The Agate and Beaver Rim properties contain uranium mineralization in typical Wyoming-type roll front deposits based on historical and recent drilling data. The Night Owl property is a former producing surface mine that was in production in the early 1960s.
Cautionary Statement: “Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as the term is defined in policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.”
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 Strathmore Plus Uranium 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.sedarplus.ca. The forward-looking statements included in this press release are made as of the date of this press release and Strathmore Plus Uranium Corp. disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as expressly required by applicable securities legislation.
Qualified Person The technical information in this news release has been prepared in accordance with the Canadian regulatory requirements set out in National Instrument 43-101 and reviewed on behalf of the company by Terrence Osier, P.Geo., Vice President, Exploration of Strathmore Plus Uranium Corp., a Qualified Person.
Kelowna, British Columbia–(Newsfile Corp. – December 3, 2024) – F3 Uranium Corp. (TSV: FUU) (OTCQB: FUUFF) (“F3” or “the Company“) is pleased to announce rush assay results for drillhole PLN24-176 (see NR September 10, 2024) of the ongoing 2024 drill program on the PLN Property which returned 7.5m of 30.9% U3O8, including an ultra-high grade core with 4.5m of 50.1% U3O8.
Sam Hartmann, Vice President Exploration, commented:
“PLN24-176 represents the best hole drilled to date at the JR Zone in terms of grade thickness, including a true width assay interval of 4.5m of 50.1% U3O8, starting at a shallow vertical depth of only 190m below surface. This drillhole was collared approximately 14m up-dip of PLN24-137 which returned 15.0m of 3.2% U3O8, including a high grade 2.5m interval averaging 18.6% U3O8 (See NR July 30, 2024). These results from PLN24-176 emphasize the need for tightly spaced drilling in these high grade basement hosted structurally controlled uranium deposits, which can often result in opening up additional targeting areas for high grade mineralization; in this case in the up-dip direction.”
JR Zone Assay Highlight:
PLN24-176 (line 035S):
7.5m @ 30.9% U3O8 (196.0m to 203.5), including:
5.5m @ 42.2% U3O8 (197.0m to 202.5m), further including:
4.5m @ 50.1% U3O8 (197.5m to 202.0m)
Table 1. Drill Hole Summary and Uranium Assay Results
Assay composite parameters: 1. Minimum Thickness of 0.5 m 2. Assay Grade Cut-Off: 0.05% U3O8 (weight %) 3. Maximum Internal Dilution: 2.0 m
Composited weight % U3O8 mineralized intervals are summarized in Table 1. Samples from the drill core are split in half sections on site. Where possible, samples are standardized at 0.5m down-hole intervals. One-half of the split sample is sent to SRC Geoanalytical Laboratories (an SCC ISO/IEC 17025: 2005 Accredited Facility) in Saskatoon, SK while the other half remains on site for reference. Analysis includes a 63 element suite including boron by ICP-OES, uranium by ICP-MS and gold analysis by ICP-OES and/or AAS.
The Company considers uranium mineralization with assay results of greater than 1.0 weight % U3O8 as “high grade” and results greater than 20.0 weight % U3O8 as “ultra-high grade”.
All depth measurements reported are down-hole and true thickness are yet to be determined.
The Company’s 4,078-hectare 100% owned Patterson Lake North property (PLN) is located just within the south-western edge of the Athabasca Basin in proximity to Fission Uranium’s Triple R and NexGen Energy’s Arrow high-grade world class uranium deposits which is poised to become the next major area of development for new uranium operations in northern Saskatchewan. PLN is accessed by Provincial Highway 955, which transects the property, and the new JR Zone uranium discovery is located 23km northwest of Fission Uranium’s Triple R deposit.
Qualified Person:
The technical information in this news release has been prepare in accordance with the Canadian regulatory requirements set out in National Instrument 43-101 and approved on behalf of the company by Raymond Ashley, P.Geo., President & COO of F3 Uranium Corp, a Qualified Person. Mr. Ashley has verified the data disclosed.
About F3 Uranium Corp:
F3 Uranium is a uranium exploration company advancing its newly discovered high-grade JR Zone and exploring for additional mineralized zones on its 100%-owned Patterson Lake North (PLN) Project in the southwest Athabasca Basin. PLN is accessed by Provincial Highway 955, which transects the property, and the new JR Zone discovery is located ~25km northwest of Fission Uranium’s Triple R and NexGen Energy’s Arrow high-grade uranium deposits. This area is poised to become the next major area of development for new uranium operations in northern Saskatchewan. The PLN project is comprised of the PLN, Minto and Broach properties.
Forward-Looking Statements
This news release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws. All statements that are not historical facts, including without limitation, statements regarding future estimates, plans, programs, forecasts, projections, objectives, assumptions, expectations or beliefs of future performance, including statements regarding the suitability of the Properties for mining exploration, future payments, issuance of shares and work commitment funds, entry into of a definitive option agreement respecting the Properties, are “forward-looking statements.” These forward-looking statements reflect the expectations or beliefs of the management of the Company based on information currently available to it. Forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including those detailed from time to time in filings made by the Company with securities regulatory authorities, which may cause actual outcomes to differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements. These factors should be considered carefully, and readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and information contained in this news release are made as of the date hereof and the Company undertakes no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, unless so required by applicable securities laws.
The TSX Venture Exchange and the Canadian Securities Exchange have not reviewed, approved or disapproved the contents of this press release, and do not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
F3 Uranium Corp. 750-1620 Dickson Avenue Kelowna, BC V1Y9Y2
Contact Information Investor Relations Telephone: 778 484 8030 Email: ir@f3uranium.com
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD “Dev Randhawa” Dev Randhawa, CEO
For most commentators, a “stable price level” is the key for economic stability. For instance, let us say that there is a relative increase in consumer demand for potatoes versus tomatoes. This relative increase is depicted, all things being equal, by the relative increase in the price of potatoes. To be successful, businesses must pay attention to consumer demand. Failing to do so is likely to lead to losses. Hence, by paying attention to relative changes in prices, producers are likely to increase the production of potatoes versus tomatoes.
According to many economists, if the “price level” is not “stable,” then the visibility of the relative price changes becomes blurred and, consequently, businesses cannot ascertain the relative changes in the demand for goods and services and make correct production decisions. This leads to a misallocation of resources and to the weakening of economic fundamentals. Thinking this way, unstable changes in the price level obscure a business person’s ability to ascertain changes in the relative prices of goods and services. Thus, businesses find it difficult to recognize a change in relative prices when the price level is unstable.
Given such presuppositions, it is not surprising that the mandate of the central bank is to pursue policies that will allegedly bring “price stability” (i.e., a stable price level). By means of various quantitative methods, the Fed’s economists have established that policymakers should aim at keeping the yearly growth rate of prices of goods and services at two percent. Any significant deviation from this figure supposedly constitutes deviation from stable growth.
The Assumption of Money Neutrality & “Price Stability”
At the root of price stabilization policies is a view that money is neutral, that is, changes in the money supply only have an effect on the price level while having no effect on the relative prices. For instance, if one apple exchanges for two potatoes then the price of an apple is two potatoes or the price of one potato is half an apple. Now, if one apple exchanges for one dollar, then the price of a potato is $0.50. Note that the introduction of money does not alter the fact that the relative price of potatoes versus apples is 2:1 (two-to-one). Thus, a seller of an apple will get one dollar for it, which, in turn, will enable him to purchase two potatoes.
Let us assume that the stock of money has doubled and, as a result, the purchasing power of money has halved, or the price level has doubled. This means that now one apple can be exchanged for two dollars while one potato for one dollar. Despite the doubling in prices, a seller of an apple with the obtained two dollars can still purchase two potatoes. Assuming money neutrality, an increase in the quantity of money leads to a proportionate increase in prices. Conversely, a fall in the quantity of money results in a proportionate decline in the prices. Why is this way of thinking problematic?
Money is Not Neutral
When new money is injected, there are always first recipients of the newly-injected money who benefit from this injection. The first recipients, with more money at their disposal, can now acquire a greater amount of goods while the prices of these goods are still unchanged. As money starts to move through the economy, the prices of goods begin to rise, unevenly and disproportionately. Consequently, late receivers of the inflated money realize costs from the monetary injections and may even find that most prices have risen so much that they can now afford fewer goods.
Artificial increases in money supply generate a redistribution of wealth from later recipients, or non-recipients of money, to the earlier recipients. Obviously, this shift in wealth alters individuals’ demands for goods and services and, in turn, further alters the relative prices of goods and services. Inflationary increases in money supply set in motion new dynamics that give rise to changes in demands for goods and services and to changes in their relative prices. Hence, increases in money supply cannot be neutral.
Again, a change in relative demands here is on account of wealth diversion from the latest recipients of money to the earlier recipients. This change in relative demands cannot be sustained without ongoing increases in the money supply. Once the growth rate of the money supply slows down or ceases altogether, various activities that emerged on the back of this inflationary increase in the money supply come under pressure. It follows, then, that an artificial increase in the money supply gives rise to changes in relative prices, which sets in motion an unsustainable structure of production.
Hence, the Fed’s monetary policy—which aims at stabilizing the price level—necessarily involves growth in the money supply. Since inflationary changes in the money supply are not neutral, this means that the central bank policy amounts to tampering with relative prices, which leads to the disruption of the efficient allocation of resources.
While increases in money supply are likely to be revealed in general price increases, this is not always the case. Prices are determined by real and monetary factors. Consequently, it can occur if the real factors are pulling things in an opposite direction to monetary factors. In such a case, a visible change in prices may not take place. While money growth is buoyant, prices might display moderate increases. If we were to pay attention to changes in the price level and disregard increases in the money supply, we would reach misleading conclusions regarding the state of the economy. On this, Rothbard wrote,
The fact that general prices were more or less stable during the 1920s told most economists that there was no inflationary threat, and therefore the events of the great depression caught them completely unaware.
There is No “Price Level”
The whole idea of the general purchasing power of money and, therefore, the “price level” cannot even be established conceptually. When one dollar is exchanged for the one loaf of bread, we can say that the purchasing power of the one dollar is the one loaf of bread. If one dollar is exchanged for two tomatoes, then this also means that the purchasing power of the one dollar is two tomatoes. Such information regarding the specific purchasing power of money at that moment in time does not, however, allow the establishment of the general, total purchasing power of money. It is not possible to ascertain the total purchasing power of money because we cannot meaningfully add up two tomatoes to the one loaf of bread. We can only establish the purchasing power of money with respect to a particular good in a transaction at a given point in time and at a given place. According to Rothbard,
Since the general exchange-value, or PPM (purchasing power of money), of money cannot be quantitatively defined and isolated in any historical situation, and its changes cannot be defined or measured, it is obvious that it cannot be kept stable. If we do not know what something is, we cannot very well act to keep it constant.
Conclusion
For most commentators, the key to healthy economic fundamentals is “price stability.” A “stable price level,” it is held, leads to the efficient use of the economy’s scarce resources and hence results in better economic fundamentals. It is not surprising that the mandate of the Federal Reserve is to pursue policies that will supposedly generate price stability. Through monetary policies (inflation) that aim at stabilizing the price level, the Fed actually undermines economic fundamentals. An ever-growing interference of the central bank with the working of markets moves the US economy towards the growth path of persistent economic impoverishment and drastically lower living standards.
On the contrary, what is required is not a policy of dubious “price stability,” but rather allowing free price fluctuations and maintaining sound money. Only in an environment free of central bank tampering can free and voluntary fluctuations in relative prices can take place. This, in turn, permits businesses to abide by consumer instructions.
Tariffs have been a key instrument in government trade policies for centuries. For instance, one of the wealthiest ancient countries, Khazaria (7th-10th centuries CE), did not tax its citizens directly but instead imposed tariffs on all passing caravans due to its strategic location along major trade routes. In the United States, before introducing the federal income tax (1913), the government generated revenue primarily through tariffs. The role of tariffs is widely debated today, especially during election periods.
What Are Tariffs?
A tariff is, in essence, a tax imposed by a government on goods and services imported from other countries. The main purpose of tariffs is to make imported goods more expensive, thereby protecting domestic industries from foreign competition, to raise government revenue, and/or to influence trade policies. Tariffs can be broken down into two main types:
Specific tariffs: a fixed fee imposed per unit of imported goods (e.g., $100 per ton of imported steel)
Ad valorem tariffs: a percentage of the value of the imported goods (e.g., 10 percent on imported electronics).
Historically, tariffs were one of the primary sources of revenue for governments. Today, although their revenue-generating role has diminished, they are still used to protect domestic industries, control trade balances, and as leverage in international negotiations.
How Tariffs Work
When a company imports goods subject to tariffs, it must pay the tariff at the border, typically to customs authorities, before the goods are cleared. This means companies often pay the tariff upfront before selling the goods in the domestic market. When a tariff is imposed, it raises the cost of imported goods at the point of entry, which has several effects on the economy:
Raising Prices for Consumers
The most direct effect of tariffs is that they often make imported goods more expensive. Importers—facing higher costs because of tariffs—typically attempt to pass these costs on to consumers in the form of higher prices. For instance, if a 10 percent tariff is placed on imported cars, the price of those cars may rise by a similar amount. However, this increase is not always guaranteed, as market dynamics often prevent the transfer of the additional costs to consumers.
Protecting Domestic Producers
By making foreign goods and factors more expensive, tariffs create a protective barrier for domestic industries. Domestic producers can try to increase their prices, as the cost of imported alternatives rises. For instance, if tariffs are imposed on imported steel, domestic steel manufacturers benefit because the higher price of imported steel makes their products more attractive, even if they are more expensive than they would be in a fully open market.
Retaliatory Tariffs and Trade Wars
Tariffs can also spark retaliatory measures from trading partners, leading to trade wars. When one country imposes tariffs, affected nations may respond by placing tariffs on goods exported by the initial country, which escalates the situation. Trade wars can disrupt international supply chains, raise costs for businesses and consumers, and reduce economic growth.
Market Dynamics and Tariffs: Passing on Costs
Often, however, the costs of tariffs cannot be truly passed on to consumers. The extent to which the burden of tariffs is transferred depends on market dynamics, such as competition and consumer demand. In highly-competitive industries, companies may absorb the costs of tariffs to maintain their market share, sacrificing profit margins rather than risking losing customers to competitors. This pushes up production costs, hampers market dynamics, and may even push firms out of business.
The Austrian Approach to Tariffs and Comparative Advantage
The Austrian School of economics advocates for minimal government intervention in markets, promotes free trade, and supports individual liberty. Austrian economists view tariffs as detrimental to the natural efficiency of the market, because they distort price signals and lead to the misallocation of resources. Murray Rothbard explained that “Tariffs injure the consumer with the ‘protected’ area, who are prevented from purchasing from more efficient competitors at a lower price.”
The Austrian critique of tariffs is heavily rooted in the concept of comparative advantage, which argues that countries should specialize in producing goods where they are relatively more efficient. Even if a country is more efficient at producing all goods than another country, both can still benefit from trade if each specializes in goods for which it has a comparative advantage. This principle—originally developed by David Ricardo—emphasizes that trade allows for a more efficient allocation of global resources, lowering production costs and increasing prosperity for all participants.
In the context of comparative advantage, consider two countries—Country A and Country B—both of which produce electronics and textiles. Suppose Country A requires 8 hours to produce 1 unit of electronics and 4 hours for 1 unit of textiles. Country B, however, requires 10 hours to produce 1 unit of electronics and 8 hours for 1 unit of textiles.
Even though Country A is more efficient in producing both electronics and textiles, the principle of comparative advantage suggests that each country should specialize based on where they have a relative advantage. For Country A, the opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of electronics is 2 units of textiles (8/4). For Country B, the opportunity cost of producing 1 unit of electronics is 1.25 units of textiles (10/8). Thus, even though Country A is absolutely better at producing both goods, it is relatively better at producing textiles, while Country B is relatively better at producing electronics. If both countries specialize accordingly—Country A in textiles and Country B in electronics—and then trade, they can both enjoy more of each good than if they tried to produce both themselves.
However, if Country A imposes a 20 percent tariff on imported electronics from Country B, the cost of those imported electronics increases, making them less competitive in Country A’s market. This could cause Country A to shift resources inefficiently back into electronics production, even though it is less cost-effective than focusing on textiles. This illustrates how tariffs can disrupt the natural efficiency of trade and specialization, leading to suboptimal outcomes for both countries.
In general, from an Austrian perspective, tariffs distort price signals, which are essential for the efficient allocation of resources in a market economy. Prices in a free market reflect the underlying scarcity of goods, consumer preferences, and production costs. Tariffs, by artificially inflating the price of imported goods, disrupt these signals and lead consumers and producers to make inefficient choices.
Imposing tariffs for the sake of addressing a trade imbalance will not resolve the underlying cause, which is typically a loss of competitiveness in the entire industry or in specific goods. Tariffs make these industries even less competitive than they were before tariff imposition. Moreover, creating a “protective area” will force other companies to flock into protected industries, essentially depriving established firms of their initial monopolist benefits while leaving the overall misallocation of production and harm to consumers intact. Rothbard explained, “In the long run, therefore, a tariff per se does not establish a lasting benefit even for the immediate beneficiaries.”
Austrian Approach and National Security Concerns
While Austrian economists emphasize the efficiency of free markets and the advantages of comparative advantage, the case for free trade becomes more nuanced when national security concerns arise. Unfortunately, when national security is supposedly at stake, economic priorities often yield to political and strategic imperatives. Throughout history, political instability and conflicts have led governments to emphasize self-sufficiency over market efficiency, particularly in industries claimed to be vital to defense. During such times, the state uses “national defense” as a pretext for profound and widespread interference in the economy.
With modern states, war spending is determined by central planning and is not determined by consumer demand or guided by private markets. Thus, any approach to “national defense” will inevitably diverge from the Austrian preference for minimal intervention. However, it is hard to imagine that war preparation would go unnoticed, and if a nation depends completely on a particular resource from an unfriendly country, the market price of that product would skyrocket. This, in turn, would signal entrepreneurs to either stockpile large quantities of the resource at current prices, seek alternative suppliers that were previously ignored because of prohibitive costs, or seize the opportunity to revive domestic production.
The reliance on administrative measures often stems from a belief that market forces cannot respond quickly or effectively to crises, leading to policies that distort incentives and stifle innovation. By undermining price signals, governments often create monopolies or grant undue privileges to certain industries, consolidating power in ways that harm overall economic efficiency. This skepticism of market mechanisms reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of their adaptability and the profound role they play in dynamically coordinating resources, even under the pressures of wartime.
VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESSWIRE / November 28, 2024 / Metallic Minerals Corp. (TSXV:MMG)(OTCQB:MMNGF) (“Metallic Minerals” or the “Company”) announces that the Company has applied for TSX Venture Exchange approval to extend the expiry date on certain share purchase warrants (the “Warrants”).
Per the application, 4,800,000 Warrants that were originally issued as part of a private placement transaction on June 8, 2022 (see June 9, 2022 news release) exercisable at $0.50 per warrant and expiring December 8, 2024 will now be extended to an expiry date of June 8, 2025.
In addition, the Company proposes to extend the expiry date for 735,500 warrants issued pursuant to a private placement transaction on June 30, 2022 (see June 17, 2022 news release) exercisable at $0.50 per warrant and expiring on December 30, 2024 will now be extended to June 30, 2025.
All other terms and conditions of the Warrants remain unchanged.
About Metallic Minerals Metallic Minerals Corp. is a resource-stage mineral exploration company, focused on copper, silver, gold, and platinum group elements in top North American jurisdictions. Our objective is to create shareholder value through a systematic, entrepreneurial approach to making exploration discoveries, growing resources, and advancing projects toward development.
At the Company’s La Plata project in southwestern Colorado, the expanded NI 43-101 mineral resource estimate highlights a significant porphyry copper-silver resource containing 1.2 Blbs copper and 17.6 Moz of silver1, with numerous additional targets showing potential for a district-scale porphyry system. The Company announced a 9.5% strategic investment focused on La Plata by Newmont Corporation in May 2023 with two subsequent top up investments in 2024. The U.S. Geological Survey has identified the La Plata mining district as a critical minerals resource area under the Earth Mapping Resources Initiative program and has completed significant geologic and geophysical studies to enhance understanding of the critical mineral potential in the district. The La Plata project is located between the communities of Mancos and Durango, Colorado, north of Highway 160.
In Canada’s Yukon Territory, Metallic Minerals has the second-largest land position in the historic high-grade Keno Hill silver district, directly adjacent to Hecla’s operations, with more than 300 Moz of high-grade silver in past production and current M&I resources. The inaugural Resource Estimate at the Company’s Keno Silver project added 18.2 Moz silver equivalent2 to the Company’s total resources in 2024. Hecla is the largest primary silver producer in the USA and soon to be Canada’s largest with full production at its Keno Hill operations in 2024.
The Company is also one of the largest holders of alluvial gold claims in the Yukon and is building a production royalty business by partnering with experienced mining operators.
Metallic Minerals is led by a team with a track record of discovery and exploration success on several major precious and base metal deposits in North America, as well as having large-scale development, permitting and project financing expertise. The Metallic Minerals team is committed to responsible and sustainable resource development and has worked closely with Canadian First Nation groups, US Tribal/Native Corporations, and local communities to support successful project development.
Forward-Looking Statements This news release includes certain statements that may be deemed “forward-looking statements”. All statements in this release, other than statements of historical facts including, without limitation, statements regarding potential mineralization, historic production, estimation of mineral resources, the realization of mineral resource estimates, interpretation of prior exploration and potential exploration results, the timing and success of exploration activities generally, the timing and results of future resource estimates, permitting time lines, metal prices and currency exchange rates, availability of capital, government regulation of exploration operations, environmental risks, reclamation, title, statements about expected results of operations, royalties, cash flows, financial position and future dividends as well as financial position, prospects, and future plans and objectives of the Company are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainties. Although Metallic Minerals believes the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on a number of material factors and assumptions. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements include failure to obtain necessary approvals, unsuccessful exploration results, unsuccessful operations, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, results of future resource estimates, future metal prices, availability of capital and financing on acceptable terms, general economic, market or business conditions, risks associated with regulatory changes, defects in title, availability of personnel, materials and equipment on a timely basis, accidents or equipment breakdowns, uninsured risks, delays in receiving government approvals, unanticipated environmental impacts on operations and costs to remedy same and other exploration or other risks detailed herein and from time to time in the filings made by the Company with securities regulators. Readers are cautioned that mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. Mineral exploration, development of mines and mining operations is an inherently risky business. Accordingly, the actual events may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. For more information on Metallic Minerals and the risks and challenges of their businesses, investors should review their annual filings that are available at www.sedar.com.
Neither the 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.
North Vancouver, British Columbia–(Newsfile Corp. – December 2, 2024) – Lion One Metals Limited (TSXV: LIO) (OTCQX: LOMLF) (ASX: LLO) (“Lion One” or the “Company”) is pleased to release the Company’s financial results for Q1 FY 2025, and announces that the Company has entered into an agreement to amend certain terms and draw down a further USD $4,000,000 (“Tranche 3”) of its Senior Secured Financing Facility (the “Financing Facility”) provided by Nebari.
Financial Highlights Q1-FY25
During the three-month period ended September 30, 2024, the Company achieved the following:
Mine operating income of CAD$1,529,978
Record revenue of CAD$10,468,452
3,129 ounces (oz) of gold sold, and 1,093 oz of silver sold
Average realized gold selling price of CAD$3,332 per oz
Cost of sales per gold oz of CAD$2,843 (net of silver revenue)
Mine Operations Highlights Q1-FY25
During the three-month period ended September 30, 2024, the Company achieved the following mining physicals:
Total 54,829 tonnes mined
21,852 tonnes of waste mined
32,977 tonnes of mineralized material mined at average grade of approximately 4.83 Au g/t
Total capital development of 283 meters
Total operating development of 666 meters
Decline advancement of 163 meters and vertical development of 155 meters
Mine production during the quarter was impacted by mine equipment availability in July and August as two underground loaders and a single boom jumbo were out of service for repairs. A new underground loader arrived on site in September resulting in improved equipment availability. Despite the mine equipment utilization issues, the mine was still able to deliver 32,977 tonnes of mineralized materials at 4.83 g/t Au, including 28,922 tonnes of mineralized materials at 5.16 Au g/t and 4,055 tonnes of lower grade mineralized materials at 2.46 Au g/t. The Company will stockpile the lower grade materials (mineralized materials below 3 Au g/t) with the intention of feeding the lower grade mineralized materials once the mill expansion has been completed and excess milling capacity is available.
In the near term, the Company will continue to add mining equipment to improve equipment availability and invest in critical mine infrastructure projects such as the raise bore and mine ventilation project which started in October 2024 and scheduled for completion in January 2025.
Pilot Plant Operations Highlights Q1-FY25
During the three-month period ended September 30, 2024, the Company achieved the following mill physicals:
31,391 tonnes of mineralized material processed at an average head grade of 4.6 Au g/t
Record 3,639 oz of gold recovered
2,889 oz gold doré poured
3,129 oz gold refined and sold
Overall 78.2% recovery achieved for the quarter
Record 81.3% recovery achieved in September
81 days of mill operations in the quarter
11 days of mill downtime, including 9 days for scheduled mill maintenance
Approximately 1,889 oz of mineralized material (primarily gold) was retained within the mill circuit as in process store of metal as of September 30, 2024, with an additional 112 oz of gold doré stored in inventory.
Mill production during the quarter was impacted by a scheduled nine-day mill maintenance shutdown in July 2024, which was conducted to maintain and upgrade the Tuvatu processing plant facilities. These upgrades will have a significant impact on processing efficiency and cost savings moving forward. Major upgrades completed during the shutdown include re-lining the primary ball mill with rubber liners, replacing the bowl/mantle for the cone crusher, replacing the #1 conveyor belt, replacing the grinding and gravity circuit piping with flexible slurry hoses, and installing new detox feed pumps and feed splitter box for the detox circuit. Despite the down time from July, the Company nevertheless achieved a record quarterly gold production of 3,639 oz recovered for the three-month period ending September 30, 2024. This marks three consecutive quarters of record production during the pilot plant phase of operations at Tuvatu.
The Company advises that it has not based its current mine development plan on a feasibility study of mineral reserves demonstrating economic and technical viability, and as a result there may be an increased uncertainty of achieving any particular level either of the recovery of minerals or of the cost of such recovery, including increased risks associated with developing a commercially mineable deposit.
Drilling Highlights Q1-FY25
Lion One has a total of five drills currently operating at Tuvatu. Three drills are located underground and are engaged in grade control and infill drilling, while two drills are located on surface, engaged in near mine exploration, extension, and infill drilling.
During the three-month period ended September 30, 2024, the Company completed 9,809.9 meters of diamond drilling in 65 completed holes, with a further 5 drill holes still in progress.
September 2024 Quarter Exploration Summary
Activity
Number
# of drill holes completed
65
# of drill holes in progress at end of Quarter
5
# of meters drilled
9,809.9
# of drill core samples submitted for analysis
13,984
# of channels excavated and sampled
164
# of samples from channel sampling
1,701
# of surface rock chip samples collected
96
# of samples analyzed in Lion One Laboratory
20,748
On October 1, 2024, the Company reported significant new high-grade gold results from near-mine exploration and infill drilling at the West Zone target, located 300 m to the west of to the Tuvatu Gold Mine in Fiji.
Highlights of West Zone exploration and infill drilling:
105.20 g/t Au over 2.1 m (including 248.35 g/t Au over 0.3 m) (TUDDH-636, from 67.8 m depth)
70.07 g/t Au over 2.1 m (including 73.43 g/t Au over 1.2 m) (TUDDH-647, from 144.5 m depth)
102.38 g/t Au over 1.2 m (TUDDH-645, from 97.7 m depth)
19.82 g/t Au over 5.1 m (including 68.88 g/t Au over 0.9 m) (TUDDH-636, from 34.5 m depth)
146.61 g/t Au over 0.6 m (including 289.85 g/t Au over 0.3 m) (TUDDH-645, from 164.3 m depth)
24.16 g/t Au over 3.3 m (including 96.78 g/t Au over 0.3 m) (TUDDH-652, from 173.5 m depth)
49.72 g/t Au over 0.8 m (including 78.61 g/t Au over 0.4 m) (TUDDH-755, from 52.94 m depth)
42.44 g/t Au over 1.8 m (including 61.66 g/t Au over 0.6 m) (TUDDH-636, from 60.6 m depth)
7.68 g/t Au over 4.2 m (including 28.63 g/t Au over 0.3 m) (TUDDH-645, from 142.4 m depth)
14.86 g/t Au over 2.0 m (TUDDH-636, from 228.8 m depth)
*All drill intersects are downhole lengths, 3.0 g/t cutoff.
Subsequent to the quarter end, on November 12, 2024, the Company reported that development of a new near-surface roscoelite-bearing high-grade gold zone had commenced at Tuvatu. Roscoelite is a rare green to black vanadium bearing mica mineral, the presence of which is a defining characteristic of alkaline gold systems such as Tuvatu. It is directly associated with higher-grade gold occurrences and as such it is an important indicator mineral in these systems.
An initial bulk sample of the near-surface roscoelite zone at Tuvatu returned 11.6 g/t gold from 861 tonnes of mineralized materials mined at full mining widths. The Company is enhancing its mine plan with this gold-rich roscoelite material, which is already being processed through the pilot plant.
Roscoelite veining is directly related to high-grade gold mineralization at the nearby Vatukoula gold mine in Fiji where over 7 million ounces of gold have been produced over the last 95 years. Roscoelite is also observed in association with gold mineralization at the Porgera gold mine in PNG, which has been a top ten ranked gold mine globally and which has produced over 25 million ounces of gold. Vatukoula and Porgera are both alkaline gold systems similar to Tuvatu. At Porgera, the most economically significant veins are the Stage II quartz-roscoelite-pyrite veins with native gold, found in the Roamane fault zone. Similar Stage II quartz-roscoelite-pyrite veins are also observed in the new near-surface roscoelite zone at Tuvatu.
Nebari Tranche 3 Draw Down
In addition to releasing the quarterly financial results, the Company also announces that it has entered into an agreement to amend certain terms and drawn down a further USD $4,000,000 (“Tranche 3“) of its Senior Secured Financing Facility (the “Financing Facility“) provided by Nebari Gold Fund 1, LP, Nebari Natural Resources Credit Fund I, LP, and Nebari Natural Resources Credit Fund II, LP (collectively, “Nebari“), previously announced on January 13, 2023 and January 2, 2024. Including the gross up for the original issue discount, Tranche 3 represents a further US$4,347,826 of principal under the Financing Facility. Proceeds from the Financing Facility have to date facilitated construction and commissioning of the Company’s 100% owned Tuvatu Gold Mine in Fiji, and Tranche 3 will facilitate investments as part of a Mine Enhancement Plan to stabilise and increase current production and prepare the mine to support future expansion of the process plant.
The Company has now fully drawn down the Financing Facility. In addition to amending the terms of the Financing Facility to facilitate drawing down Tranche 3, the Company amended certain reporting covenants.
Interest on the first USD $23 million drawn in Tranche 1 of the Facility remains at 8% (plus three-month SOFR), and amortization is on the Maturity Date 42 months from the original closing date, and no closing fees were payable. The USD $8 million drawn under Tranche 2 was subject to an 8% original issue discount and interest remains at 10% plus SOFR, with progressive amortization over 42 months from the Tranche 2 funding date, and closing fees equal to 2% of the amount funded. The USD $4 million drawn under Tranche 3 is subject to an 8% original issue discount and interest is 10% plus SOFR, with progressive amortization over 6 months from 30 June 2025, with closing fees equal to 2% of the amounts funded.
In connection with the drawdown of Tranche 3, the Company has agreed to issue Nebari an aggregate of 4,142,759 common shares in the capital of the Company as a loan bonus in accordance with the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange. The Company has also agreed to amend the exercise price of the 15,333,087 share purchase warrants issued to Nebari as part of the Financing Facility to an exercise price of $0.38 per warrant. All other terms of the warrants remain the same, including the acceleration provision that requires Nebari to exercise the warrants that can be triggered upon the volume weighted average price of the Company’s common shares on the TSX Venture Exchange being in excess of 200% of the exercise price of the warrants on each of 20 consecutive trading days. The issuance of the share loan bonus and amendment of share purchase warrants is subject to the approval of the TSX Venture Exchange.
Competent Persons Statement The information in this report that relates to mineral exploration at the Tuvatu Gold Project is based on information compiled by the Lion One team and reviewed by Melvyn Levrel, who is the company’s Senior Geologist. Mr Levrel is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration, and to the activity being undertaken, to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edition of the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves’ (JORC code). Mr Levrel consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on the information in the form and context in which it appears.
Mr. Patrick Hickey, P. Eng., MBA, who is an officer of the Company, is a Qualified Person under the meaning of Canadian National Instrument 43-101, is responsible for the development and engineering content of this report.
Lion One Laboratories / QAQC Lion One adheres to rigorous QAQC procedures above and beyond basic regulatory guidelines in conducting its drilling, sampling, testing, and analyses. The Company operates its own geochemical assay laboratory and its own fleet of diamond drill rigs using PQ, HQ and NQ sized drill rods.
Diamond drill core samples are logged and split by Lion One personnel on site and delivered to the Lion One Laboratory for preparation and analysis. All samples are pulverized at the Lion One lab to 85% passing through 75 microns and gold analysis is carried out using fire assay with an AA finish. Samples that return grades greater than 10.00 g/t Au are re-analyzed by gravimetric method, which is considered more accurate for very high-grade samples.
Duplicates of 5% of samples with grades above 0.5 g/t Au are delivered to ALS Global Laboratories in Australia for check assay determinations using the same methods (Au-AA26 and Au-GRA22 where applicable). ALS also analyses 33 pathfinder elements by HF-HNO3-HClO4 acid digestion, HCl leach and ICP-AES (method ME-ICP61). The Lion One lab can test a range of up to 71 elements through Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES), but currently focuses on a suite of 23 important pathfinder elements with an aqua regia digest and ICP-OES finish.
About Lion One Metals Limited Lion One Metals is an emerging Canadian gold producer headquartered in North Vancouver BC, with new operations established in late 2023 at its 100% owned Tuvatu Alkaline Gold Project in Fiji. The Tuvatu project comprises the high-grade Tuvatu Alkaline Gold Deposit, the Underground Gold Mine, the Pilot Plant, and the Assay Lab. The Company also has an extensive exploration license covering the entire Navilawa Caldera, which is host to multiple mineralized zones and highly prospective exploration targets.
On behalf of the Board of Directors, Walter Berukoff, Chairman & CEO
Neither the TSX-V nor its Regulation Service Provider accepts responsibility or the adequacy or accuracy of this release
This press release may contain statements that may be deemed to be “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, included herein are forward-looking information. Generally, forward-looking information may be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “proposed”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, or “believes”, or variations of such words and phrases, or by the use of words or phrases which state that certain actions, events or results may, could, would, or might occur or be achieved. This forward-looking information reflects Lion One Metals Limited’s current beliefs and is based on information currently available to Lion One Metals Limited and on assumptions Lion One Metals Limited believes are reasonable. These assumptions include, but are not limited to, the actual results of exploration projects being equivalent to or better than estimated results in technical reports, assessment reports, and other geological reports or prior exploration results. Forward-Looking information is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance, or achievements of Lion One Metals Limited or its subsidiaries to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Such risks and other factors may include, but are not limited to: the stage development of Lion One Metals Limited, general business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties; the actual results of current research and development or operational activities; competition; uncertainty as to patent applications and intellectual property rights; product liability and lack of insurance; delay or failure to receive board or regulatory approvals; changes in legislation, including environmental legislation, affecting mining, timing and availability of external financing on acceptable terms; not realizing on the potential benefits of technology; conclusions of economic evaluations; and lack of qualified, skilled labor or loss of key individuals. Although Lion One Metals Limited has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated, or intended. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. Lion One Metals Limited does not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except in accordance with applicable securities laws.
The president of the National Bank of Poland, Adam Glapinski, recently revealed that the central bank would continue to buy gold, and is aiming for the precious metal to make up 20% of the bank’s reserves.
The National Bank of Poland (NBP), also known as the Narodowy Bank Polski, became the joint biggest gold buyer amongst central banks in the second quarter of 2024, tying with India, according to the World Gold Council. This was after the NBP bought approximately 19 tonnes of the precious metal.
The president of the National Bank of Poland, Adam Glapinski, also said earlier this year that the central bank was planning to ensure that gold made up 20% of its reserves. At present, gold accounts for about 14.7% of the NBP’s reserves.
Grzegorv Dróżdż, market analyst at Conotoxia, said: “At the end of the second quarter of this year, Poland’s gold reserves rose to 377.4 tonnes, and the pace of purchases of the bullion, held mainly at the Bank of England, since April this year has surpassed even the world’s largest economies.”
During the second quarter of the year, the price of gold also crossed the record level of $2,500 (€2,249.26) per ounce
This has led to more speculation about whether gold may be a good investment right now and why central banks have been scrambling to shore up reserves of the precious metal lately.
Why are central banks buying up more gold bullion?
One of the main reasons that central banks are stocking up more on gold recently is to be able to sufficiently diversify their reserves to protect against macroeconomic uncertainty and geopolitical shocks.
This is because, in terms of economic and geopolitical volatility, when currency and other asset prices may fluctuate, gold is seen as a safe haven asset and an inflation hedge.
As such, gold’s relatively stable performance during times of crisis, as well as its inflation hedge qualities are driving factors behind central banks picking the metal. It is also an effective way to diversify central bank portfolios and is considered to be highly liquid, with no default risk.
It is also less affected by policy risk and can be used as a valuable collateral and policy tool. In some cases, gold can also help countries facing international sanctions, such as Russia, to avoid them. This in turn, incentivises these countries to buy more gold and use it to help maintain their liquidity, in case other means of finance are blocked off or difficult to access.
On the other hand, the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) considerably slowed its gold-buying trend in the second quarter of the year.
In Poland, gold demand has surged following the COVID-19 pandemic and because of the Russia-Ukraine war. Several investors also fear that the Russian invasion in Ukraine may spill over to Poland and want to prepare themselves in case of such a scenario by investing more in gold.
In other parts of the world, stubbornly high inflation has also driven people more towards gold, with other geopolitical shocks such as the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas wars exacerbating this trend.
has also revealed that it is investing in foreign equities and corporate bonds with the help of exchange-traded funds (ETFs), as another way to diversify its reserves. What factors impact the gold market?There are several factors impacting the gold market, namely, US dollar movements, real and expected inflation rates and gold jewellery demand, amongst others. Central bank purchases of gold can also have a significant impact on the metal’s prices. Although to a lesser extent, gold mining production can also have an impact on prices. Gold prices can spike if gold mining companies’ have to spend more on production costs, such as digging deeper mines, or face other issues such as labour strikes, environmental protests and weather phenomena, to name a few. At present, most of the world’s gold mining output comes from China, Australia, Russia, Canada and the United States.
Dróżdż also said: “The gold market, like many others, is driven by two forces: demand and supply. In the past few quarters, an increase in demand has been particularly evident.
“Moreover, the continued weakening of the dollar may indicate that gold could outperform other key assets in the near term. Conotoxia’s baseline scenario assumes that gold price momentum could slow down by the end of the year, with a possible correction, but is likely to remain above the $2,500 per ounce level.”
(Bloomberg) — US President-elect Donald Trump warned the so-called BRICS nations that he would require commitments that they would not move to create a new currency as an alternative to using the US dollar and repeated threats to levy a 100% tariff.
“The idea that the BRICS Countries are trying to move away from the Dollar while we stand by and watch is OVER,” Trump said in a post to his Truth Social network on Saturday.
“We require a commitment from these Countries that they will neither create a new BRICS Currency, nor back any other Currency to replace the mighty U.S. Dollar or, they will face 100% Tariffs, and should expect to say goodbye to selling into the wonderful U.S. Economy,” he added.
Trump on his campaign trail pledged that he would make it costly for countries to move away from the US dollar. And he’s threatened to use tariffs to ensure they complied. Saturday’s threat took on new relevance as the president-elect prepares to retake power in January.
Trump and his economic advisers have been discussing ways to punish allies and adversaries alike who seek to engage in bilateral trade in currencies other than the dollar. Those measures include considering options such as export controls, currency manipulation charges and levies on trade, according to people familiar with the matter.
Trump has long stressed that he wants the US dollar to remain the world’s reserve currency, saying in a March interview with CNBC that he “would not allow countries to go off the dollar” because it would be “a hit to our country.”
The BRICS nations — as Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa are collectively known — discussed the issue of de-dollarization at a summit in 2023. Backlash against the dollar’s dominance gained traction in 2022 when the US led efforts to impose economic sanctions on Russia.
Economic advisers to Trump and his campaign have spoken in particular about targeting the BRICS effort.
Earlier: Trump Aides Discuss Penalties for Nations That De-Dollarize
“There is no chance that the BRICS will replace the U.S. Dollar in International Trade, and any Country that tries should wave goodbye to America,” Trump said Saturday.
The president-elect has already rattled world markets ahead of his second term with threats to levy an additional 10% tariffs on goods from China and 25% tariffs on all products from Mexico and Canada if those countries do not do more to stem the flow of illegal drugs and undocumented migrants across US borders.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with Trump on Friday to discuss trade and border issues in a bid to tamp down tensions between the two allied nations after the tariff threat.
