Member Info for DeathStranding

The gold price clearly has no bearing on CGNR.

Which targets are you referring to exactly? The company's October presentation deck does not allude to a series of multi million ounce targets.

As shown time and time again, gold price makes no difference here.

As for multi million ounce potential, would be useful if one of the geologists on the company's board actually laid out where this potential is, and why it has proven so elusive to the company's own geologists 16 years on from the maiden resource, and Demir's expert geologists after 2 years of exploration and €5 million of spend. The ounces added over 16 years by the Conroy pteam is minus 483,000. What do they propose to reverse this trend?

Maiden resource was in 2008 (1 million oz). It's been tested plenty, and it is smaller than originally expected, not larger. Announcing a resource update with all the drilling since 2017 would be the only way for investors to gauge whether this has any future.

Except every time you've said there will be a re-rate, there wasn't one, ie, you've been wrong all along.

Only a few weeks until the financial results. Will be interesting to see the actual financial condition of the business and hear from the board what the plan is. That's if they pass audit which could be tricky.

Demir and AAZ couldn't have been convinced by the Fosterville comparison. Nor the current directors since none of them invested at 4.5p.

Lots of drilling done at Clontibret and no ounces added. An updated resource would be a good place to start comparing the hype vs reality. Surely not too much for investors to ask from a resource based company.

You've been wrong all along.

This is not tier 1. Soon find out how seriously they take it. Accounts due out at the end of next month.

Doubt it. Big difference between a non-exec doing a couple of meetings a month, and running a cashless junior on the other side of the world.

What qualifications does John Sherman bring to a chairmanship of a junior exploration company? Nothing in his profile indicates he has any credentials in mineral exploration or mining finance. He didn't even put money in at the rock bottom raise.

The company's latest presentation dated October 2024 doesn't put much of a spotlight on Clay Lake. Only one slide. The highlight is 100m 0.6 g/t which is a years old intersection. That grade of refractory gold is uneconomic, presumably why it's only a "Drill Testing" project. Try again.

So you keep saying. Without any proof. Every other company updates their resource at every opportunity - it's how value is accrued. Why no update here in 7 years despite thousands of metres of drilling?

None of the current directors thought this was sufficiently investible to put money it at 4.5p. Are they the ones you are looking to to negotiate a multibag JV deal.....?

One of those approaches failed to execute (they walked, although you insist they didn't). The other executed and spent €5m then walked, despite rising gold price. Not a strong argument that they had two parties interested 3 years ago. You've been wrong all along.

The chief negotiator, who has kept this business going by sheer force of personality, is sadly deceased. Doesn't seem like a "very good" negotiating position. Who is taking up negotiations?

How so?

Think you'll find they didn't have anyone talking to them back in March.

I think its excellent news. But to promote this as having a confirmed resource is incorrect. There is not a published resource estimate for this project.

Confirmed resource? There isn't one.