We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   Gold/Mining/EnergyMcEwen Mining

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: StemuliteWorks who wrote (14034)12/21/2015 11:38:10 AM
From: JW@KSC
1 Recommendation   of 23818
stemuliteworks, karmacredit and the Board - Do you guys remember when US Gold acquired Nevada Pacific Gold along with 2 other Companies on the Same Day?

You wonder what thinks of his protégé now?

Unlikely he thinks of him as " pantywaist" or a " boy in short pants.."

You wonder what Rob thinks about his protégé now?
missed this....Ball(less) talking his book......I would poke him one if nobody was looking....Had respect, now he can suck balls as far as I am concerned.....Wonder how Rob feels about his protege now?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but look at who recommend your post.
Let's be a little kinder than that to Ian Ball.

Unlikely Rob thinks of him as " pantywaist" or a " boy in short pants.."

Here's just a short piece written on the subject, while sitting by the pool enjoying the Sunshine and 80 degree weather here: (with condolences to benwood)

Not long after US Gold Crop acquired Nevada Pacific Gold, and its property in Nevada and NPG' and its Magistral Gold Mine Claim in Sinaloa State in Mexico, ( that's not just any gold mine claim, the Magistral Gold Mine claim boundary is a very substantial 510 square miles) the Boy Wonder volunteered to go to Mexico, knowing many others in the company had family and would not want to be gone for a long period of time, so Rob gave Ian Ball a $3,000,000 Budget to do some exploration.

So just as to remind everyone here, Ian ball was responsible for discovering McEwen Mining’s El Gallo 2 project, scheduled to become one of the 15 largest silver mines in the world and building the El Gallo 1 gold mine that is forecasted to produce 75,000 ounces gold in 2015.

"McEwen also credits his protégé with leading the team that recently built the El Gallo 1 gold-silver mine five miles south of his El Gallo 2 discovery under budget and on schedule — a rarity in mine construction."

Is it any Wonder they call Ian Mining's Golden Boy.

That link has a Great Story on Ian Ball' Background and how he " Met Rob " in the first place.

Thanks Ian

Remember too, that Rob thought enough about the young man to appoint him Senior Vice President

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: labaguette who wrote (14039)12/21/2015 2:29:35 PM
From: JW@KSC
1 Recommendation   of 23818
Lab, Your answer follows......Actually I kinda like the way the Rules are laid out on Delisting, they seem to be in MUX's favor, unlike the typical Company faced with Delisting.

the last day of december could be interesting in order to get the 1$ in average .but the rules are unclear to be delisted . does the nyse need each close above or only the average ?

Lab - GOOD QUESTION -The answer to your question lies in Rule 802.01C

802.01C Price Criteria for Capital or Common Stock A company will be considered to be below compliance standards if the average closing price of a security as reported on the consolidated tape is less than $1.00 over a consecutive 30 trading-day period.
DEFINITION of 'Consolidated Tape' An electronic program that provides continuous, real-time data on trading volume and price for exchange-traded securities. Through the consolidated tape, numerous major exchanges, including the Nasdaq, the Chicago Board Options Exchange and the New York Stock Exchange, report their trades and quotes. Securities often trade on more than one exchange, and the consolidated tape reports a security's trading activity for all of these exchanges, not just its primary exchange.

Read more: Consolidated Tape Definition | Investopedia

Again I like the way the Rules are written as it gives a lot of wiggle room before delisting in the case of a Company such as McEwen Mining, with lot's of Irons in the Fire, and $30M Cash Balance.

But Regardless of there being lots of wiggle room in the NYSE Rules for a company such as McEwen Mining..........., Rob did state:

"We've made good progress in a difficult market. This year we strengthened our balance sheet, increased production, and decreased our costs," said Rob McEwen, Chief Owner. "I'm not going to take this lying down, I have no intention of being delisted from the world's premier stock exchange."

Just a taste of the rules are highlighted below along with a Link to all the NYSE Rules of Delisting

And regardless of what happens the last day of December, will still have until June as Rob Stated because if MUX does Filing for delisting, as we still have 6 months until the June AGM before a Delisting would occur.

Perhaps Rob could have been a little more clearer in his statement about the price needing to remain above a $1.00.

The NYSE rules provide that since the resolution to implement a reverse split requires the approval of the Company's shareholders, its stock will continue to trade on the NYSE, subject to compliance with all other NYSE requirements, provided that the Company must obtain the shareholder approval by no later than its next AGM, and must implement the action promptly thereafter. The price condition will be deemed cured if the price promptly exceeds $1.00 per share, and the price remains above the level for at least the following 30 trading days, otherwise the Company's stock will be delisted from the NYSE. If the Company regains compliance with the pricing requirement prior to implementing the reverse split, the Company can elect not to implement the reverse split.

IMHO as a small Retail Investor with lots of knowledge as to Rob's Business Acumen Efforts, he will undoubtably procure an Alternative to Delisting. I'm sure he can find a way without interfering with his specific plans to early, to create McEwen Mining a power house Bigger Than GG, given unforseen events that took place, after he began his efforts in to grow in MUX in to a Mining Powerhouse.

MUX would be on the S&P 500 and well on its way catching up with GG, had it not been for the Gold Manipulation and the Creation of ETF's. Manipulation devaluing the POG, and ETF's taking away from Capital Investments in Mining by Creating an easy way for investors to invest without the Inherent Risks of investing directly into Mining Companies.

The entire Rules NYSE Section 8 Suspension and Delisting

804.00 • The Committee, in its sole discretion upon written motion of either party or upon its own motion, may extend any of the time periods specified above.

802.02 Evaluation and Follow-Up Procedures for Domestic CompaniesThe following procedures shall be applied by the Exchange to domestic companies that are identified as being below the Exchange's continued listing criteria. Notwithstanding the above, when the Exchange deems it necessary for the protection of investors, trading in any security can be suspended immediately, and application made to the SEC to delist the security.

Once the Exchange identifies, through internal reviews or notice (a press release, news story, company communication, etc.), a company as being below the continued listing criteria set forth in Para. 802.01 (and not able to otherwise qualify under an original listing standard), the Exchange will notify the company by letter of its status within 10 business days. This letter will also provide the company with an opportunity to provide the Exchange with a plan (the "Plan") advising the Exchange of definitive action the company has taken, or is taking, that would bring it into conformity with continued listing standards within 18 months of receipt of the letter. Within 10 business days after receipt of the letter, the company must contact the Exchange to confirm receipt of notification, discuss any possible financial data of which the Exchange may be unaware, and indicate whether or not it plans to present a Plan; otherwise, suspension and delisting procedures will commence. If the company submits a Plan, it must identify specific quarterly milestones against which the Exchange will evaluate the company's progress.

The company has 45 days from the receipt of the letter to submit its Plan to the Exchange for review; otherwise, suspension and delisting procedures will commence. If the company is determined to be below the criteria listed in Section 802.01B, the Plan it presents must demonstrate how it will return to compliance with the applicable continued listing standard by the end of the Plan period.

In any event, all companies submitting a Plan must include quarterly financial projections, details related to any strategic initiatives the company plans to complete, and market performance support. Exchange staff will evaluate the Plan, including any additional documentation that supports the Plan, and make a determination as to whether the company has made a reasonable demonstration in the Plan of an ability to come into conformity with the relevant standard(s) within 18 months. The Exchange will make such determination within 45 days of receipt of the proposed Plan, and will promptly notify the company of its determination in writing.

The company must disclose receipt of the letter by issuing a press release disclosing the fact that it has fallen below the continued listing standards of the Exchange within the time period allotted by SEC rules for the making of a filing with respect to Exchange notification of that event, but no longer than four business days after notification. If the company fails to issue this press release during the allotted time, the Exchange will issue the requisite press release.

If the Exchange does not accept the Plan, the Exchange will promptly initiate suspension and delisting procedures and issue a press release disclosing the forthcoming suspension and application to the SEC to delist the company's securities.

If the Exchange accepts the Plan, the Exchange will review the company on a quarterly basis for compliance with the Plan. If the company fails to meet the material aspects of the Plan or any of the quarterly milestones, the Exchange will review the circumstances and variance, and determine whether such variance warrants commencement of suspension and delisting procedures. Should the Exchange determine to proceed with suspension and delisting procedures, it may do so regardless of the company's continued listing status at that time. The Exchange will deem the Plan period over prior to the end of the 18 months if a company is able to demonstrate returning to compliance with the applicable continued listing standards, or achieving the ability to qualify under an original listing standard, for a period of two consecutive quarters. In any event, a company that does not meet continued listing standards at the end of the 18-month period, will be subject to the prompt initiation of suspension and delisting procedures.

If the company, within twelve months of the end of the Plan period, is again determined to be below continued listing standards, the Exchange will examine the relationship between the two incidents of falling below continued listing standards and re-evaluate the company's method of financial recovery from the first incident. It will then take appropriate action, which, depending upon the circumstances, may include truncating the procedures described above or immediately initiating suspension and delisting procedures.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)

From: wolfgangrene12/21/2015 2:56:54 PM
3 Recommendations   of 23818
Ok, I admit to being MUX biased. So I shifted the short term daily channel to the more positive position, showing a 1.37 upside target.
Now MUX! Don't make a fool out of me! …….(that 60 min gap is still a drag)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: JW@KSC12/21/2015 3:35:15 PM
2 Recommendations   of 23818

In DD Heaven Today.....

NO PR on the MUX WEB SITE YET .......

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwired - Dec. 21, 2015) - NV Gold Corporation (TSX VENTURE:NVX) (the "Company") announced today that it and its wholly-owned Nevada subsidiary, NV Gold Corporation (USA) ("NVX US"), have entered into an Asset Purchase and Sale Agreement (the "McEwen Agreement") with McEwen Mining Inc. ("McEwen"), to sell the Afgan-Kobeh Property in Eureka County, Nevada, (the "Afgan Property") to McEwen for US$450,000. Since the transaction represents a sale of substantially all of the Company's undertaking, the transaction is subject to shareholder approval by special resolution. The transaction is also subject to approval of the TSX Venture Exchange.

The terms of the Agreement also provide that:

McEwen's obligations are subject to McEwen receiving, by December 21, 2015, an agreement (the "Support Agreement") from John E. Watson, the Company's President and CEO and holder of 44.8% of its outstanding shares, under which Mr. Watson agrees to vote his shares of the Company in favour of the special resolution to approve the transaction (now received by McEwen);McEwen's obligations are subject to McEwen being satisfied, by December 21, 2015, with its title investigation in respect of the Afgan Property (McEwen has advised that it is now satisfied);the Company will retain its reclamation bond and remain responsible for completing the reclamation of the Afgan Property required by that bond, but McEwen will be responsible for all other reclamation in respect of the Afgan Property; andthe Company has agreed to hold a shareholders meeting to approve the special resolution to approve the transaction on or before February 1, 2016.The Company announced a transaction with Mr. Watson on November 27, 2015 under which Mr. Watson agreed to acquire the Afgan Property for US$304,626 and the shares of SwissGold Exploration AG for US$50,000 and Watson would be repaid US$354,626 in debts owed to him by the Company (the "Watson Transaction"). The Watson Transaction could be terminated by the Company if the Company received a superior proposal for the assets. The Special Committee of non-conflicted directors formed to consider the Watson Transaction also considered the terms of the McEwen Agreement on behalf of the Company and determined it constituted a superior proposal and that the Company should enter into the McEwen Agreement and terminate the agreement with Mr. Watson. McEwen is entirely at arm's length to the Company and Watson. The Company will terminate the agreement with Mr. Watson.

Wayne Yang, the Chairman of the Special Committee, commented: "The Afgan Property should complement the development of the Gold Bar Project owned by McEwen Mining and located adjacent to the Afgan Property. We are pleased that we were able to reach an agreement with McEwen Mining that will result in the Company substantially paying down its debt, having some additional funding to pursue other business opportunities as well as retaining SwissGold Exploration AG, the owner of its Surselva property. The Special Committee also wishes to acknowledge Mr. Watson's contribution to securing additional value from McEwen by agreeing to enter into the Support Agreement."

The Annual General and Special Meeting of the Company at which the shareholders will be asked to approve the special resolution in respect of the McEwen Agreement is scheduled for January 26, 2016 and, if the special resolution passes and all other approvals are received, closing of the transaction will shortly follow the meeting.

On behalf of the Board of Directors,

(sgd.) "Wayne Yang", Chairman of the Special Committee of Directors

For further information, visit the Company's website at

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Service Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Forward-Looking Statements

This news release includes certain forward-looking statements or information. All statements other than statements of historical fact included in this release, including, without limitation, statements regarding the financial position of the Company and other future plans and objectives of the Company are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company's plans or expectations include regulatory issues, market prices, availability of capital and financing, general economic, market or business conditions, timeliness of government or regulatory approvals and other risks detailed herein and from time to time in the filings made by the Company with securities regulators. The Company disclaims 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 otherwise required by applicable securities legislation.


NV Gold Corporation
John E. Watson

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)

To: JW@KSC who wrote (14043)12/21/2015 3:59:45 PM
From: wolfgangrene
   of 23818
Rob has been really making the moves of late.
JW, thanks, for your DD.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: wolfgangrene who wrote (14042)12/21/2015 4:04:03 PM
From: JW@KSC
   of 23818
Wolf - Just a few minutes ago I was thinking after looking at today's volume, I'd like to see it climb above 2M on the day..

Let's just hope Chart Gaps Not do, what they normally do.

With the news today, there's Hope.

All around the mulberry bush
The Monkey chased the weasel.
The Monkey thought 'twas all in fun.
Pop! goes the weasel.

A $1078 for an ounce of Gold,
A $14.27 an ounce of Silver.
That's the way the money flows,
Pop! goes the weasel.


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: JW@KSC who wrote (14045)12/21/2015 4:12:26 PM
From: wolfgangrene
1 Recommendation   of 23818
I hope so also, but I can handle that gap fill because of the strong MUX financial position and knowing a falling wedge is a reversal formation.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: JW@KSC who wrote (14043)12/21/2015 4:15:55 PM
From: Erie
   of 23818
Getting a prospective property next to Gold Bar for under a half million USD sounds like a winner to me. It won't figure much in the valuation in the short term, but with prospective luck in a few years, . . . .


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: wolfgangrene who wrote (14046)12/21/2015 4:17:06 PM
From: wolfgangrene
   of 23818
Maybe that NV property has something lighter than precious metals lurking under ground.
Hope there are no smoking signs up everywhere.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: JW@KSC12/21/2015 5:06:25 PM
1 Recommendation   of 23818


Overview The Afgan-Kobeh project is located about 28 miles northwest of Eureka in Eureka County, Nevada, and consists of 109 unpatented lode mining claims. These claims cover an area of approximately 2,180 acres in all or portions of Sections 17-20 and 29-32, T22N, R51E, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian.

NV Gold purchased the Afgan-Kobeh property from Gold Standard Royalty (Nevada) Inc. for $200,000 in cash ($100,000 paid on closing date and remaining $100,000 paid on first anniversary of the closing date (June 14, 2011)), 600,000 shares, and 600,000 share purchase warrants of NV Gold; Gold Standard will retain a 1% NSR royalty on the property and on claims located within an area of interest. Gold Standard is a subsidiary of Golden Predator Royalty & Development Inc.

The Afgan-Kobeh project contains a semi-continuous zone of gold mineralization that lies along the contact of thinly bedded siltstones of the Webb Formation with the underlying Devils Gate Limestone. This contact dips easterly at shallow to moderate angles, with the bulk of the mineralization occurring in brecciated Webb sediments that are frequently altered to jasperoid.

Mineralizing controls beyond the east-dipping Webb – Devils Gate contact are presently poorly understood. It is possible that high-angle structures and/or karstic features influenced the localization of higher-grade areas. An understanding of these controls would enhance both future exploration efforts and resource modeling at Afgan-Kobeh.

The Afgan-Kobeh resource is open for expansion in several areas:

Up-dip (to the west) beyond the present resource limits in the northern portion of the deposit. This target, which includes the largest outcroppings of jasperoid in the project area, was partially tested by Midway in 2007 with positive results; andAlong the poorly defined southern limits of the deposit, which are characterized by relatively deep resources of higher than average grades. These deeper existing resources need to be tested up-dip along the projection of the Webb – Devils Gate contact to the surface.Mine Development Associates (MDA) believes the best opportunity for significant expansion of the existing resource base lies to the southwest of the present extents of the Afgan deposit. The prospective near-surface Webb – Devils Gate contact can be inferred for a distance of approximately 4,500 feet between the southern limit of the existing resources and the southernmost exposure of Devils Gate limestone on the Afgan-Kobeh project, and is likely to continue further to the south beneath alluvial cover.

This southern target area has the potential to provide significant additional shallow and presumably oxidized resources to the Afgan-Kobeh project.

Technical Report (NI 43-101) : June 24 2011

History Lyle F. Campbell originally located claims north of Afgan-Kobeh in the late 1970s and optioned the claims to American Selco, Inc. (“Amselco”). Amselco subsequently identified anomalous gold in outcrop to the south and staked the original claims of the Afgan claim block. The Kobeh claims south of the Afgan claim block were added to the project by Great Basin Exploration and Mining, Inc. (“Great Basin”) in 1991. Exploration has been primarily focused on the Afgan portion of the property, where significant gold mineralization was encountered in drilling in the 1990s.

The property has been explored by Amselco, Hecla Mining Company (“Hecla”), Santa Fe Mining, Inc. (“Santa Fe”), Phelps Dodge Mining Company (“Phelps Dodge”), Great Basin, Cominco American Inc. (“Cominco”), White Knight Gold, Inc. (“White Knight”), and Midway Gold Corp. (“Midway”) from 1980 through 2007. In addition, the Lyle F. Campbell Trust (“LFC Trust”), underlying owner of the Afgan and Kobeh claims for much of the period from 1980 to 2007, explored the project at various times when no leases were active. Westley Explorations Inc. and Castleworth Ventures Inc. also held parts of the property in the past, but did not undertake significant exploration activities. In 2007, Gold Standard Royalty (Nevada) Inc. (“Gold Standard”) purchased all of the properties of the LFC Trust, and NV Gold purchased its interests in both the Afgan and the Kobeh properties from Gold Standard in 2010.

Exploration of the property has included drilling of 160 holes totaling 50,837 feet. Phelps Dodge drilled 63 RC holes on the Afgan portion of the property in 1990-1991, which has been the largest drilling program to date. Gold mineralization was intercepted in 55 of their 63 holes. Geologic mapping, geochemical sampling, regional gravity and electromagnetic surveying, and CS-AMT and other geophysical surveys have been completed on the property.

There has been no gold production from the Afgan-Kobeh project.

The Afgan-Kobeh project consists of 109 unpatented lode mining claims that cover an area of approximately 2,180 acres within Eureka County, Nevada.

2010 drill hole locations

Mineral Resource Mineral resources reported for the Afgan deposit were modeled and estimated by Mine Development Associates in March 2004 and classified in accordance with Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) definitions.

Afgan-Kobeh Gold Resources

Indicated Resources



Au Grade

Au Ounces

(oz Au/ton)

(oz Au/ton)





Inferred Resources



Au Grade

Au Ounces

(oz Au/ton)

(oz Au/ton)





A cutoff of 0.01 oz Au/ton was chosen to capture mineralization potentially available to open-pit extraction and heap-leach processing.

All of the resources are oxidized.

No Measured resources are reported for the project due to:

the general lack of QA/QC data;some uncertainty with regards to the exact location of a number of the drill holes;the insufficiency of metallurgical data; andthe absence of density data.

Geology and Mineralization Gold occurs on the Afgan-Kobeh project as oxidized, epithermal, disseminated, sediment-hosted mineralization located primarily at the brecciated base of a clastic section identified as probable Webb Formation of Mississippian age. The Webb Formation overlies the Devonian-aged Devils Gate Limestone, which hosts a small portion of the gold resource. The Webb – Devils Gate Limestone Formation contact has been interpreted by previous workers to be a fault that dips at low to moderate angles to the east. The Webb – Devils Gate contact is the principal control of the Afgan-Kobeh gold mineralization, although high-angle east-northeast-trending structures may also be of secondary importance in the localization of higher gold grades. Tertiary volcano-sedimentary rocks unconformably overlie the Paleozoic rocks and are oriented roughly parallel to the Webb – Devils Gate contact.

Modeling by Mine Development Associates (MDA) in 2004 produced a block model of the Afgan deposit in which approximately 80% of the mineralized blocks are modeled as Webb Formation, while 20% are modeled as Devils Gate Limestone. The gold mineralization was modeled by MDA to lie within a semi-continuous zone that extends for over 4,100 feet in a north-northeast direction and 1,500 feet east-west.

The Afgan deposit is similar to other sediment-hosted gold deposits in Nevada, such as the Rain gold mine. At Rain, gold is associated with brecciated, oxidized, silicified and argillized mudstones, siltstones, and sandstones of the Webb Formation immediately above its unconformable contact with the Devils Gate Limestone.

NI 43-101 Technical Report (NI 43-101) : June 24 2011

Source: SOURCE : Link NV Gold Corp.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10