Member Info for Goldbug99

Finally a successful hole. 592m @ 83°=586m true depth, AND it transects the stockwerk. Shame they scarpered off to Clay Lake without drilling a few more (even deflections). IMHO it will all hang on these awaited assays.

@DS: I'm not sure which you hate here? The company or the project? If you have no faith in management, that is easy. Replace! If it's the geology you don't believe, why bother even being here?

The positives: an active drill program, regular updates (just over a month since the last), some technical detail including a map.

The negatives: disappointing grades at depth*, failure to reach stated objectives, disintegration of the promised model testing into just more shallow in-fill drilling.

(* bear in mind, the true depths are actually quite shallow, and the hole bottom is at the very margin of the surface anomaly, so the low grades bear no relationship to the intended objective - the deep core zone of the mineral system - see below)

Whilst nobody can fault management for the vagaries of geology, the technical team have some explaining to do!

The latest hole is on the anomaly margin, drilling off target, and at 60° inclination reached a depth of less than 360m, probably a lot less, as inclined holes invariably corkscrew and climb. I doubt they did a down-hole survey, as they make no mention of true depth and the track is shown as dead straight.

IMHO, the hole is drilling off-target! Excuses about seeking a connection to Corkascrea notwithstanding, they missed it! If it had been sited 500m west and steeper and deeper we might now know what is actually happening in this system at depths below 500m (and ideally 1,000m).

Bear in mind this is the same team that just three months ago "missed" drilling an obvious surface target in Finland, with no "real time" feedback (if the 1st hole is a dud you modify subsequently - assuming there is a competent geo. with authority on site), that they had a year+ to plan and prepare for, condemning their shareholders to further year's delay.

I seriously doubt their competence at this stage. A fraction of the cost invested in a serious and experienced consultant gold geologist with Canadian/Australian experience in the planning AND EXECUTION would have paid dividends.

You can't hold the team responsible if the geology just isn't there, but you can if they can't reach it, or miss it!

The current trades and SP back me up.

Well decent grades in the 10-15g/t range, so in Curraghinalt territory, but only in the 40-200m depth range (remember these are angled holes, so the true depth is closer to 30-150m). Looks like they have just re-drilled the same old shallow lode zones. What happened to the 500+m deep targets we were promised? That's what will make or break this project.

As to this Buddingtonite buzzword, "we're on the edge of a massive deep hydrothermal system" I hope this doesn't turn into a repeat of their Karelian comedy "it's definitely positively there, promise, cross our hearts and hope to die, but somehow we just missed it". They've got the money right now, so drill the damn holes!

@carters "They will either hit gold and rise or they won't"

Assuming they tell anyone! Appalling communications. This is the same team that can complete a program and report a complete non-event (they missed the supposed target), with independent expert commentary, in the ice and snow of Finland, but can't hop in the car and drive a half hour to update on two months of progress.

Unfortunately being taciturn creates the impression that they don't want to report poor results, hence the SP.

Damn, a month on from PDAC and now back to the last placing price despite an ongoing multi-rig drilling program to prove a potential company-changing concept. They really need to work on their news management here. I mean, they are using a highly reputable assay lab down the road, not sending out to Canada or Australia for cripes sake.

@toffee: they've re-emerged on ADV as qprswc49 (formerly green diamond 1?), complete with:

💰⛏ 💎🦊 🧨💥🙏 🧁🦆🦆🦆👊🇫🇮 - 26 out of the last 40 posts.

Having reached the end of doubling down they seem desperate to bolster the value of a diminishing equity.

I keep an eye here merely to be forewarned of any attempts to sell this dog with fleas into CGNR to rescue the shareholders.

@DS: what do you mean poor results? Seem quite respectable, and they seem to have finally gotten the message on technical reporting. A map plus section!!!

@ortus: I would certainly hope so, plus a comprehensive AIM admission document, and with a TSE listing, an independent NI43-101. At that point at the latest, it would be shown that KDR actually just has a load of liabilities, but no assets. An unidentified Cu-Ni "target" in NI with no outcrops, no drilling, no samples or geochem, just some stream sediments. Two kimberlites in Finland discovered in the 1980s that have never been bulk sampled in 50 years, and a geophysical target they never seem to get around to drilling.

Stick to the gold! It's real.

*Cu-Ni-PGE province

@Robme: it brings zero value, just liabilities, and rewards poor performance, incidentally by the SAME management team. Better to write off the loan and shares.

Ask why a "discovery" hailed as a company maker over a year ago, hasn't been touched and again, the winter opportunity has slipped away? It doesn't take much, a single hole a few tens of metres, or even an excavator trench will prove/disprove a large kimberlite in a day for a few $'000. But no. Because ruining the "story" would require selling the diamond asset and moving on to the worthless fantasy of a NI magmatic Cu-Nu-PGE being spun.

This is the last thing CGNR needs, having finally plucked up the courage (and backing) for an all-or-nothing dice throw on a deep high-grade gold play. I personally believe the results will be positive, or at least inconclusive enough to breath some more life into the gold story, and attract Canadian money and professional management. Either way, it should happen by this summer, or not at all.

@toffee "they may have to take KDR under their wing".

Nooooo😱!

Nearly 20:1 on the M/cap., £1.6M in debt and £125k loan they can never repay, convertible at 15× the current SP.

They have had a year plus to plan and fund drilling their company-making "stonker" ™ and yet crickets. Now they've missed the winter boat yet again. And remember these are the SAME clowns owed £1.6M by the company they ruined, also running the show HERE! No diamonds, no platinum, nickel or copper - it's a fairytale. The sooner Jones, McBorrow, Cutall and McNumpty are put out to pasture, the listing moved to TSE and a gold professional management team is appointed the better. Come on Mr Sherman, it's time 🔪🔪🔪!

Well good news at last. Shame about the 1st hole, but at least the drilling is substantial and deep. A Canadian listing would require a far higher standard of technical reporting, oversight, sign-off and better ir/pr and that's maybe where we are heading with this RNS? 🤞

@Robemy71: Did I raise the issue of land ownership and permitting or did you? It's quite clear the early money will be made on discoveries, not development. If you read ANY of my past posts, you will see my claim, unlike our friend DS, that 0.5M is not to be sneezed at, not at $2k/oz, not at $3k/oz and certainly not at $5k/oz. Ms Moroney's deep high grade concept will be the make-or-break, however. If anything has kept my interest, it's been her previous input.

As you are so in management's pocket as you claim, how about asking them to release more timely updates on drilling results, like a time line for metres and assay results? Comparable companies at this make-or-break stage bombard the market with technical updates on an almost weekly basis. Rigs operating, metres drilled, assays as they come in. Rigs can easily drill 25-35m a day, that's 500m a fortnight, and assays can be turned around in under a week if the lab is down the road.

@Robemy71: You are being disingenuous here. It's a genuine concern. Just because the company owns (some of) the land doesn't stop 3rd party objections/appeals. Anyone, including the usual green suspects and their barristers in far-away leafy Dublin suburbs, can throw spanners in the works. Ireland has history here! It's not all down to the locals hoping to score big on land sales and jobs.

The hope here has to be that grades sufficient to justify underground costs and too deep for an open pit are found in this next drilling round, because a massive low-grade open pit is problematic.

The issues with low-grades are the enormous volume of tailings, and open pits, the large volume of waste rock generated. Both require unsightly, land-hungry surface disposal, and will be rich in pyrite, arsenic and other nasties, prone to AMD. Nearby massive gypsum pits and limestone quarries cited as precedents don't have these issues!

Bear in mind, Dalradian's plan is all undergound at 13-15g/t and still ran into problems.

Better to face the issues and work around them than stick your fingers in your ears and whistle, as you seem to be doing. Pretending a problem doesn't exist doesn't make it go away. Some clarity/assurance they are pre-empting this from the company would help here!

Finally going somewhere 👍📈

@carters. As I said, double digit grams over double digit meters. We can only hope. But professionally-run companies keep investors informed with meaningful detail. While the geology is in the hands of the gods, knowing how many, how deep and where the holes are going might inspire some confidence that it's not going to be a Demir repeat. Look at any Canadian company which has to issue detailed 43-101 technical reports. CGNR has never even provided as much as a map or section. I can't imaging the likes of Mr Ryan are thrilled with the current setup, unless they are being told what we are not.

So, £2M (still) in the kitty, apparently deep drilling has started (when, where, how much?) but the SP still languishing.

Proving up the Fosterville concept would seem to be the only strategy left, all it would take is double digit grams over double digit meters, to be a Company maker-or-breaker, given that the promised JV talks seem to have evaporated without further mention over the last 12 months. Still, only just over a month to the next PDAC jamboree where a row of new suitors are already being lined up I'm sure.

Is it too much to ask for some leadership and for the Chair to come out with a clear and bold statement of objectives, plans and a timeline? Apparently so, or is material news now restricted to insiders on the far side of the pond?

@soletrader on the off-chance you are not joking: Reverse Circulation (RC): $30 - $55 (Advanced exploration, better samples)

Diamond Drilling: $110 - $250+ (Advanced, high-quality core samples), but nobody is asking why they are not doing this, nor why they get such poor value for money. If all you need is grade assays then RC is far cheaper, and far quicker!!!

Either way, AGM tomorrow, so they are going to have to say something PDQ if they expect to be able to answer the very obvious questions.

@soletrader: Demir did very little drilling for the budget they had, hardly any at Clontibret, and at an average cost of £900/meter. I did a detailed analysis here a few months back. £5M should have paid for a systematic 25,000m+ drill program proving up at least 1-2Moz - that's the industry standard. And they should be percussion drilling (cheaper and quicker) for resource work, not coring.