Gold Price Today

[jasong]

44 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

I have had federal claims undergo the validity exam process and I think it was each 10 acres were required to be economically valid. It was a multiyear process and a lot of work. We did lose ground and some was 10 acres - half a claim. As near as I can tell it’s basically if the Feds want you gone for some reason (we were in a preserve) they can hit you up. Or they can ignore you. And seems like all those fees paid to support those huge blanket claims buys you an ignore. Little guy in the wrong spot, you get the eyeball. So yeah, what makes these claims with no discovery valid? An assumption of possible extension of mineralization, unproven? Seems pretty weak. Where is that line drawn other than via budgets and opinion?

Yep. Exactly how it works - $ talks. It's unfortunate.

I've had a BLM geologist (the one that did the permit approvals) argue with me about the whole blanket staking thing back and forth. Got nowhere, so went in and used his own "red book" to prove my point, which I was able to do. His response was basically "listen, I don't actually disagree but what you need to understand is that those large corporate project claim fees add up to big money. How much do yours add up to?" Basically - money talks and the law applies differently to me than it does to someone richer than me. 

I believe very strongly that laws and our rights apply to us all, regardless of how rich or poor we are though. If the law applies to me in one way, then it better apply to everyone that way to, or we have disorder and corruption. 

[Clay Diggins]

1 hour ago, Steve Herschbach said:

So yeah, what makes these claims with no discovery valid? An assumption of possible extension of mineralization, unproven? Seems pretty weak and in my case it was show the gold or lose the ground, period. Where is that line drawn for the big boys other than via budgets and opinion?

This is where the misunderstanding begins. Claims without a discovery? Big mining companies don't locate claims just because. Millions are spent on any project before deciding to claim. I see the geology reports and I see geologists getting excited over a discovery before staking. That part is always very private for the reasons stated in my previous post. I've never seen staking just to hold ground. If one of the big companies have claims you can bet your bottom dollar they are prepared to prove their discovery on request.

This isn't just theory. Besides seeing it work that way in real life the SEC is really strict about listed mining companies spending investors funds on bets or boondoggles. If a company can't show verified field reports and subsurface deposit modeling before selling a project to investors they are subject to fines and their company can be closed. Holding mining claims costs a lot more money than just annual fees for big mining companies.

I know of two small prospectors on this forum alone who have made blanket claims over a discovered deposit. After spending the time and funds to define the deposit they have now leased their blanket claims to big mining companies. This isn't just about the big guys. An astute prospector can make very good money feeding the big mining companies proven defined deposits. It really is all about the minerals in the mining business - not about the claims.

The big guys are protected from mineral challenges because the way the mining industry is designed companies are motivated to prove their minerals as soon as possible after location. The faster they perfect their claims the sooner they can book their new deposit values and use the increase in their company assets to increase their market value. BLM would be foolish to challenge most of these claims because they would end up expending their resources to do what the SEC and the profit motive already do. It's not a secret handshake.

[jasong]

1 hour ago, Clay Diggins said:

This isn't just theory. Besides seeing it work that way in real life the SEC is really strict about listed mining companies spending investors funds on bets or boondoggles. If a company can't show verified field reports and subsurface deposit modeling before selling a project to investors they are subject to fines and their company can be closed. Holding mining claims costs a lot more money than just annual fees for big mining companies.

 

Half the story. Reality is that most exploration companies today are not US companies who are regulated by the SEC, but listed on Canadian and Australian exchanges.

Then they form another LLC in some US state, in order to file mineral claims. (1872 and U.S.C. requires claimaints be US "citizens"). Being private, the SEC has no jurisdiction. 

Virtually every junior or explorer I've encountered has been listed on the TSX.V (Toronto). A few others in Australia. This means they don't report to the SEC other than when they fill out some forms if they sell foreign stock to US investors, or similar. Thus, the US regulatory agency responsible for ensuring they make valid discoveries on their claims is the BLM, not the SEC. 

[Steve Herschbach]

2 hours ago, Clay Diggins said:

This is where the misunderstanding begins. Claims without a discovery? Big mining companies don't locate claims just because. Millions are spent on any project before deciding to claim. I see the geology reports and I see geologists getting excited over a discovery before staking. That part is always very private for the reasons stated in my previous post. I've never seen staking just to hold ground. If one of the big companies have claims you can bet your bottom dollar they are prepared to prove their discovery on request.

This isn't just theory. Besides seeing it work that way in real life the SEC is really strict about listed mining companies spending investors funds on bets or boondoggles. If a company can't show verified field reports and subsurface deposit modeling before selling a project to investors they are subject to fines and their company can be closed. Holding mining claims costs a lot more money than just annual fees for big mining companies.

I know of two small prospectors on this forum alone who have made blanket claims over a discovered deposit. After spending the time and funds to define the deposit they have now leased their blanket claims to big mining companies. This isn't just about the big guys. An astute prospector can make very good money feeding the big mining companies proven defined deposits. It really is all about the minerals in the mining business - not about the claims.

The big guys are protected from mineral challenges because the way the mining industry is designed companies are motivated to prove their minerals as soon as possible after location. The faster they perfect their claims the sooner they can book their new deposit values and use the increase in their company assets to increase their market value. BLM would be foolish to challenge most of these claims because they would end up expending their resources to do what the SEC and the profit motive already do. It's not a secret handshake.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one. I’m not as ignorant as you might think “misunderstanding” things. There is no way in my opinion that a perfect donut of 1000 claims surrounding a pit mine in some, not all instances, is anything but a buffer. They all have a 100% valid discovery, no holes in the mineralization at all? Interesting geology is all I can say. The reasons are simple - keep the possibility open that mineralization might extend in unknown directions based on future, not present drilling. Happens all he time. Prevent the possibility of people placing speculative nearby claims to profit on the possible future extensions, essentially road blocking and holding the company hostage for a payout. But proven at time of staking? No. I actually agree there might be valid reasons for the practice, but that all these buffer claims surrounding mines, every one being valid if subjected to a 10 acre by 10 acre exam? Sorry, no.

Yeah, they might be prepared to defend as you say. Defend against what? Challenges that don’t come? But like I said I’ll let it go at this point, agree to disagree. And totally off subject anyway! 

[Lesgold]

And back on topic, all of a sudden those little bits of fluff that we find with the 6000 are worth $10 each. Wow, that’s insane. Only 800 bits to pay for the machine…….. Better get a coil on the ground.

[Clay Diggins]

23 minutes ago, jasong said:

Half the story. Reality is that most exploration companies today are not US companies who are regulated by the SEC, but listed on Canadian and Australian exchanges.

Then they form another LLC in some US state, in order to file mineral claims. (1872 requires claimaints be US "citizens"). Being private, the SEC has no jurisdiction. 

Virtually every junior or explorer I've encountered has been listed on the TSX.V (Toronto). A few others in Australia. This means they don't report to the SEC other than when they fill out some forms if they sell foreign stock to US investors, or similar. Thus, the US regulatory agency responsible for ensuring they make valid discoveries on their claims is the BLM, not the SEC. 

Yep exploration companies and juniors have a large percentage of their claims in unexplored areas. They form a significant portion of my client base and most of them are actually Canadian or European citizens living, working, raising kids and paying taxes in the U.S. As a group some of the nicest people I work with.

Your typical exploration company is three or five geologists that graduated from college 5 - 10 years ago and one older geologist. They have all worked for a major mining company. They hold an average of ~200 claims over what they believe they will be able to prove is a deposit worthy of big bucks to some major mining company. Pretty much by definition these are the "little guys" of mining.

Initially they are funded out of pocket and from family, friends and believers. Once they find a deposit the real work begins of trying to prove the deposit while scratching for funds. Without a bunch of bucks the drilling, modelling etc. that is required to sell to the big boys just isn't going to happen.

Without proof of deposit to market standards you've got less to sell. So like all the other exploration companies they end up on the TSX trying to impress a crowded market enough to complete their project. If they succeed and meet SEC standards they could sell their discovery and become very wealthy. Sometimes those successful exploration companies continue to grow into juniors (that usually have a major miner as a silent partner) but the most likely successful outcome is their company is purchased and repurposed and they all either retire or become mining consultants to the industry.

And that is why SEC standards of proof apply to anyone trying to hit the big time in mining. Only a few companies in the world have the ability to develop a large deposit. Those companies all trade in NY and are subject to SEC standards. Those big companies will purchase or lease a worthy deposit but the further away from market standards your proof work is the lower the price goes and the less likely they are to buy it.

The BLM has no statutory duty to determine mineral validity of a mining claim for anything but 1) a mineral patent application, 2) a mineral withdrawal subject to prior rights or 3) a private adverse claim of mineral ownership. The BLM can order a mineral exam at any time but without a request from another federal agency, a court or congress non statutory mineral validity exams are extremely rare.

A small rich mine can make a man and his family wealthy as individual miners. A large moderately mineralized deposit can be mined for the wealth of many for generations. Which you prefer is more of a personal decision. I prefer that both coexist to give men more options in the future. Other points of view are equally valid I suppose.

[Clay Diggins]

2 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

We will have to agree to disagree on this one. There is no way in my opinion that a perfect donut of 1000 claims surrounding a pit mine in some, not all instances, is anything but a buffer. They all have a 100% valid discovery, no holes at all? Interesting geology is all I can say. Yeah, they might be prepared to defend as you say. Defend against what? How about you show us the number of times these large claim blocks have been subjected to validity claims by the feds? Then I might start thinking otherwise.

Way back in 2022 the federal courts invalidated the 2,447 acres of mining claims situated over the largest and richest copper/silver deposit in the United States due to a lack of proof of discovery.

Read it here: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/19-17585/19-17585-2022-05-12.html

Whether you agree with the decision or not this is a federal appellate court decision that creates precedence. See why the mining companies are being extra careful about always having proof of valid mineral discovery in hand? This is a big deal in the mining industry in the United States now.

 

[davsgold]

and the gold chart and price in Aussie Dollars, works out to like a bit over $130 per gram

[phrunt]

I wonder what price it would have to reach before Reg Wilson would make the effort to bend over to pick up a subgram "flake" 🙂