RE: Bleating14 Aug 2016 21:15
Do you see the contradictions in your post, your commentary.
First you state 'it is incorrect to suggest a 50% low entry deal is risky on the asset base', then go on to say 'All in all the asset base is acceptable to those investing long term or it is not ~if not sell the stock~ there is high risk.' & ' Most research and fully informed PIs understand the high risk here.'
In response to your questions:
1. Numerous mentions of working on a mine plan, where is it and what resources? They were expected Q3.
2. CMG is owned by a Russian, who have spent $30 million already trying to prove up comercial resources. NMG get 50% $2.6 million and a commitment to spend $6 million over 2 years at Bolnisi alone. Hmmm!
3. See point 2, also £1million raised in Jan 2016 & £1.1million in July 2016 to perform due diligence on DG. We also see 500,000,000 options issued to GK, employees and advisors of the company in July. Due to license commitments and ongoing costs, absolutely NMG do not have enough cash to honour license commitments. But you obviously understand this as you further contradict yourself with this ' I understand and expect delays and eventual fund raising ~it is the usual format for a start up resource producer~unless you believe in miracles.'
4. They clearly have been implying a mine plan and production start up in Q3. There is not enough information to determine comercial ability available. In fact, from what I have seen thus far, it remains in serious doubt at this time.
I'll continue on the asset base in next post.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
