surrealistrader
2日前
Sean makes me happy with my decision to sell.
Sean's behavior is an affront to intelligence. He needs to get off social media and focus on reporting material information properly. Anyone investing at this point is dangerously operating with significant material omissions and misrepresentations, and I suspect the recent private placements are as well. A promise to list on TXSE under yet another deadline, knowing how dramatic the changes will need to take place with this company in order to make it possible, without showing any sign or progress on those changes currently, is just shameless and wrong. That "assay chart" is an abhorrent insult as well. Literally nothing is correct about it. I am deeply disgusted with people who go along with this kind of thing, with no care for learning how legit companies do it. There is a proper way of releasing sample analysis as a public mining company, conducive to the higher standards of the exchange listings you're targeting, not to mention required by government agencies, all of which current management is intent on acting in contempt of. I don't want to hear anything is "too expensive" anymore after hearing about your 200+ billion. Start today and get Sidney an SEC audit and reporting schedule, send the memo out to your significant shareholders to get themselves a CIK. Contract the registered geologists that are qualified to report on your mineral assets and get those technical reports written. If you wish to advertise reserves or AISC, you will need to present feasibility studies.
"Jim Lee, chief executive of the TXSE, told the Financial Times the new exchange’s standards, including earnings tests, minimum prices and other unspecified measures, would be stringent enough to in effect exclude more than a third of the companies listed on Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange. "
"TXSE’s minimum requirements would keep out speculative penny stocks."
Source Cited: https://www.ft.com/content/da5be183-c339-42d2-b1e4-1aad83568d1c
I mean you have got to be kidding me, people. Wake up.
gitreal
2日前
I was wondering what you were talking about, so I hunted it down on X:
Wow. All I can say is that this is like no assay report I have ever seen, and I have looked at assay reports from a dozen different labs over 30+ years. As pointed out already, the info at the top is cut off. No telling what these numbers mean. Who collected the samples? Where did they collect the samples? How did they collect the samples? What QA/QC did they do? What lab is it? What element is represented by that oz/ton? Is that a concentrate or a rock sample? And so on......
This tells me that Sean Rae a) knows nothing about mining and exploration, b) thinks his investors are equally stupid and uninformed, and c) has no business being the CEO of a "mining" company.
And yes, management of penny stock companies spend their days perusing every post on every social media where comments are made about their company. Sometimes they even post themselves - openly sometimes, but more likely under an alias. I assume every post I make is read by Sean Rae.
So.....Sean, buddy.....just thought you should know that you made a huge mistake when you came out with this PGM/Meteorite nonsense. It will be your undoing, your investors are not all as dumb as you think they are. Was that PGM stuff your idea, or Sunny's? I'm guessing it was his idea, and you thought it sounded great! And tonight's posting of an "assay" was not the smartest move either. Just shows you have no idea what legit mining/exploration efforts look like. This isn't it.
surrealistrader
2日前
SDRC won't qualify for TSX as is.
Dramatic changes are needed, and for one, they will need to completely overhaul their promotion program. All disclosure pertaining to mineral assets will need to be compliant with Canada's NI 43-101. These necessarily mean the kind of technical reporting I've been calling out for on this platform for years now, along with the contracted registered and qualified third party experts writing them. They will definitely need to stop teasing things on Twitter or through their other known unofficial channels in the absence of the proper qualified third-party technical reporting! If they mean to use investor capital in essentially the way they have been doing for years now, the Canadians would demand the feasibility studies and reserves just as I have too. If previous claims about their mineralogy cannot be substantiated in this way, I'm afraid their plan to uplist onto any foreign (or domestic exchange besides OTC for that matter) will not be possible. Such a failure at this stage in the game would invite more negative attention than positive I think.
There are also governance requirements for TSX that SDRC can't fulfil as is. TSX regulations (as well as broader Canadian governance standards) require the company to have independent directors and a designated audit committee with independent members as well.
Does he mean TSXV? That would be more reasonable. I'm afraid SDRC has their work cut out for them regardless. Canada, when it comes for gold mining, is way more competitive and fastidious than US, and investors specializing in mining looking at IPO's will eat this stock alive if not planned carefully. The so called meteorite PGM deposit is bound to backfire when subject to the scrutiny of that market. These deadlines Sean likes to put out, for the obvious purpose of provoking FOMO are ridiculous and do not have the best track record.
Everyone should be extremely skeptical of this newly crafted pump angle. The company will need to essentially reform itself into a new animal to make this work and he's saying it can be done in 1 year. Did he mean TSXV? Maybe just maybe he means TSXV because that's basically Canada's OTC. Maybe just maybe that could work for them... but TSX would definitely be a nightmare to pull off regardless of the time period. This smells to me. Perhaps this is finally the market insiders plan on dumping into... if they could even pull off getting the security listed there, and stay listed there long enough to do it in the first place....
surrealistrader
2日前
So, SDRC's now going to IPO on TSX in 13 months?
Is that assay chart signed off by a lab? What lab? What's being measured, who did it, and where was the sample taken from? Will there be any details disclosed about sampling methodology? Why is the elements column cut off from the screenshot? Are these planned to be released in full or will they all be curated from larger data sets at the discretion of the company as already indicated by their average grades?
I mean I just can't with how stupid this has all become. I am so happy I've resigned from supporting this reckless and dangerous clown. Both investors and the company itself are operating with significant material omissions going into next year.
In order to prove securities fraud, the government must generally establish the following elements:
1. Material misrepresentation or omission: The defendant made a false statement or failed to disclose information that a reasonable investor would consider important in making an investment decision.
2. Scienter: The defendant acted with intent to deceive, manipulate, or defraud, or with reckless disregard for the truth.
3. Connection with the purchase or sale of a security: The fraudulent conduct occurred in connection with the purchase or sale of a security.
4. Reliance: In certain circumstances, the government may also need to prove that the investor relied on the fraudulent information in making their investment decision.
5. Loss causation: The government may need to demonstrate that the defendant's fraudulent conduct directly or indirectly caused the investor's financial loss.
surrealistrader
3日前
If you're intent on selling your shares higher, why not join the pump train with everyone else? I'm sure many are out there on social media, without shame, merely looking to take in suckers to their ask.... and yes, some also treat this stock as some sort of religion. I believe there are some who do actually believe they are doing good in the world by helping this company. This is the OTC, so, few would care about much of anything that goes on here, regardless, if not for the opportunity to make huge gains in the swings. The SEC surely doesn't (most of the time.)
Clearly everybody is different. I found SDRC during a time when my education in mining investment was gaining momentum. I was following a lot of mining companies, beginning to understand the principles of speculation in this industry, and learning analyze things fundamentally. I was making money, but it started to really kick off off the backboard of the Fed's aggressive policies during the pandemic, which turned out to be great for a lot of us, but simultaneously a tempting and dangerous thing. I know that optionality afforded by the rising gold price would eventually result in a theme of M&A in the industry, but also transform the bottom lines of the shittiest, smallest projects. They stand to benefit the most because the market could make or break their ability to get financed or be potentially profitable at all. Regardless of the company having any gold to sell or not, this temporary arrangement did wonders for microcaps. Stocks like AABB had a crazy move of which I made money on, but it was made tongue in cheek-ly, and definitely not a result of fundamental soundness. What was taking place can only be described as a sort of anthropological and psychological phenomenon, and during a time when most of the new money looking into gold stocks knew nothing about mining nor cared to. I invested in SDRC as it was making moves around the 2-4 cent range. I believed I was early enough, it had the right kind of following and exposure to attract people looking for a stock like this, the marketcap made sense to me at the time, I thought the thesis of re-commericalizing an old producing mine was different enough to plausibly be an edge, but most importantly, interesting enough from the historical angle to be attractive to new speculative money, who for the most part, have no connection to mining otherwise. I believed the company had potential to achieve some success in exploration and perhaps eventually become profitable on a small scale. I buddied up to the few people I could find on social media who were gung ho about SDRC thinking that they came upon the stock like I did. Was I wrong? Yes and no.
....Several months later the company's operations pivoted to technological development and the novel concept of laser mining. I went down the rabbit hole with Gary and Gabe's work at MERG and became hopelessly hooked. I believe it was my affinity for science fiction and my background in the manufacturing industry that got me. I think I do have a latent dream of inventing something and bringing it to market myself.
SDRC represents a right of passage for me during a time when I spent years going against what I knew to be correct and logical in preference for (oh i don't know) greed and the joy of the group's success. I met a lot of people who were world building around SDRC, and quite a few who were driving their kids college funds and their own retirements on this stock. Their unreasonable expectations were egged on by what I now describe as "the cult." Its a real thing for many people, insofar as the group doesn't err from constantly upping the ante and consistently gaslighting one another to certain realities. What I did realize was that the vast majority of, if not all of, even the most outspoken and authoritative people in the group promoting this stock, did not understand mining investment or cared to learn how experienced mining investors think. At some point, however, someone makes an unrecoverable blunder in the storytelling and it becomes dangerous. That is exactly what happened with the so called necessarily economic PGM discovery and the commitment to build out processing before even releasing 1 assay chart (let alone the whole meteorite angle ruling out all known economic comparables.) The potential for harm that SDRC can do now when subject to the ruthless scrutiny of the broader markets, or if insiders give up in some form or bail, is painfully evident, and equally painfully evident is that there has been virtually no one who cares enough to say anything about it. It's just a shitty OTC stock, moving right along, right? Nobody said much about BRYYF after realizing the company was structured in a way that it was plausible that shareholders didn't stand to benefit regardless of what happened to the property, when the 3rd attempt at a failed series of feasibility studies never came when planned, and the employee Kuaku on twitter announced to the world that Barrick was on site (which wouldn't have happened if things were going well.) I cringe looking back for only discussing my research in private, deciding to join the pump train despite prejudices, and never speaking up until after it was too late.
I think eventually SDRC will produce a group of people who feel remorse and guilt over what will inevitably take place here. It may come with or without a rise in the stock price. The stock does have potential especially if a new gold mining bull is found to be upon us and SDRC's catalyists can stay relevant for people long enough in order to capitalize upon it as it makes its way towards its historical crescendo. I do however know that SDRC's edge (and power to convince new money) is indeed a predominantly anthropological phenomenon and that there are still some people that aren't just here to make money.
Wiscotrader
3日前
It is impossible to argue with the two points about avoiding the dividend discussion and getting a pass from answering real questions. I do not understand how other investors can be so tolerant of an entire year of sidestepping the elephants in the room. We are way past the window where a dividend could be awarded in 2024, so at this point just simply addressing that and moving it back to Q1 or Q2 would be 100% better than pretending they didn’t publicly commit to Q4 of this year. I’ve written here before that I don’t believe this is a scam or that the company leaders are out to hose their investors. But they do themselves no favors in constantly avoiding the topics that their investors care most about. The information we were, and still are, waiting for was supposed to be published at the end of the 60 day acquisition quiet period - I don’t know anyone who wasn’t under that impression. Now, almost 30 days later the LOI expired and was re-signed, the terms of the LOI have been agreed to, and this is supposedly being held up by a purchase agreement signature. How on Earth does it take 30 days for the other party to sign an agreement where the terms are agreed upon? Moreover, do we honestly fear a bidding war breaking out over these properties if data is published on X? Both the company and the CEO have been hashtagging PGMs and REEs in their posts throughout the entire year. Isn’t the cat out of the bag? Yet they insist on withholding data until after the acquisition is closed, and if you’re not in the camp that this is a scam you’re beside yourself wondering how this benefits shareholders. I don’t know how Sean could put himself in a more unenviable position as CEO - it has become literally pass or fail for him in my eyes, and he needs to deliver significant information to get that passing grade. There must be more frustrated bulls than it appears. Communication has been abysmal.
gitreal
4日前
Thanks, that saves me some time when I start digging into XTPT, maybe over the Holiday. Just too busy right now. Maybe I'll start with that 43-101. I have seen some that evaluate properties with zero drilling, and just large-scale geological mapping, and a handful of heavily biased grab samples from dumps. This sounds like that.
I always thought that everything that Mac Shahsavar touches seemed sketchy as hell. You've touched on his past highlights in the penny stock world, and yup, he really is sketchy as hell. I wonder if perhaps he does a lot of the setting up of the share structures, etc. while Sunny spends his time promoting to his loyal following.
And then there's Cyros in his role procuring crappy claims, and waving his XRF around. My limited experience with using an XRF involved a couple week's rental, and I do remember that the two of us that were going to use it had to take a short course/certification on safe usage of the device. Point it down at a sample on a table and take a reading, while you are sitting there in a chair and your nether regions are under the table.....you've just fried your huevos!!. It seems that Cyros is the type of guy that would point it at his head and take a few readings just for kicks......
There are several mining companies I follow that report some things to the SEC when they are not required to, as they are non-reporting companies. The Form 4's and 8's are for effect only....."look, the CEO is buying shares!"
surrealistrader
4日前
Here's the deal with XTPT.
The thing we should be aware of with this (Bernice District in Churchill County, Nevada) project is that the company recently had a preliminary technical report written by a registered geologist, in the format conforming to 43-101. This work looks legit and honest albeit at a prohibitively early stage. Virtually no modern exploration has been done to prepare for the report and it shows with its sheer ambiguity. There's a large amount of uncertainties and challenges still to getting this off the ground. Current investors, in my view, aren't forward looking to the elimination of these uncertainties so much as looking forward to the macro thesis playing out in their favor, a sort of supply chain breakdown with China, perhaps a World War 3 type scenario, which would in turn give them a favorable exit event before any real exploration or mining takes place. Perhaps under such circumstances, our government would be the ones to throw money at domestic projects professing to pursue Antimony regardless of how remote the lead. Even if everything goes right, exploration will be an expensive uphill battle, development will take time, not to mention permitting for roads and whatnot, any prospect of a sustainable or proven operation is obviously a good amount of years ahead.
It looks to me that the first and main problem will be accessibility. The old workings they're attempting to re-commercialize span 7 miles across a very unforgiving terrain. Completely abandoned since the world war days, there's absolutely no infrastructure out there supporting accessibility. Steve Cyros's videos have somewhat confirmed that any previous work in pursuit of Antimony looks to have been small scale artisanal type operations, all of which underground and very far apart from one another. Production history is unclear. There are some inconsistencies with the historical production reporting that does exist. Whatever sales of Antimony product were predominantly during the years of the world war era, with some photographs of a substantial smelting operation then, but is very tough to line up the dots so to speak. We are supposed to believe many adits were mined and pooled together to be reported under others. Some are labeled "prospect" but show signs of a stamp mill and relatively more extensive workings... lots of smoke and mirrors. I don't see nearly as many signs of stock promotion back then like I did with BYRG's New Rambler, but I may be wrong, and would love to look at what they were saying then if so.
Fast forward to now, the current plan is to take liberty from SDRC and go after the "old tailings" piles as a sort of hail mary to revenues. SDRC, well, specifically Irish Metals (who's actually out of the picture now) was the subject of an XTPT PR, for playing a role in the planning stages of a new antimony processing plant in Nevada. Announcing a thing at such a stage, especially with companies like UAMY desperate for domestically sourced feed, seems a bit bizarre or at least immature.
Besides the mining side of things at a stage where its still an almost total crapshoot and uphill battle, my biggest gripe with XTPT, however, occupies the corporate side of things. I don't trust Mac Shahsavar, his pump and dump history, nor that of his Winnipeg entourage (a few names of which I suspect are pseudonyms or aren't actual people.) I don't like his connections to scandals of the past like POTN, his "National Group of Companies" owning old p&d website "longandshortreports.com", or how his Nasdaq-listed NHMC disappeared off the map during the dotcom bust leaving investors stranded. I especially don't trust his usage of the preferred class of shares on all his stocks; with conversion rights capable of engulfing the entire common share class many times over. I feel like any money being thrown at these stocks are for promotional purposes only. This includes all fancy technical reporting, airborne geomagnetic imagery, and who knows what else. Just as an example, BRGC has an SEC CIK# but isn't actually SEC reporting or audited. What is reported are Form 4 stock purchases by the CEO. Retail bulls delight in this but anyone with a brain sees its just a cheap pump tactic.... The guy owns virtually the entire share structure and we are supposed to go nuts when he spends a few thousand dollars on the open market? The overall intelligence of the banter doesn't inspire confidence for me, with many bulls professing the form 4 purchases as their prime bullish case as they were taking place. The lot of these are pump stocks. Also, again with the shameless use of astronomical "Inferred" values to the same end. Sometimes I think the insiders are all just throwing darts at a board, coming up with experiments to run for the benefit of their audience, hoping to stay alive long enough so something would stick.
gitreal
4日前
P.S. Probably well past time to take a deep dive into XTPT. Sunnyland pumping it hard, but I'll bet a closer look will find a washed-up, low-grade, too small, or otherwise uneconomic antimony deposit, with hyped-up, ridiculous valuations, valuable dumps seemingly overlooked by previous owners, and very little modern exploration done by management. Maybe Cyros with his XRF running around "discovering" antimony. Maybe a little platinum to sweeten the deal.
Just a hunch.
surrealistrader
6日前
The BYRG story is the craziest of them all.
The shenanigans there predate WW1, lots of shameless and euphoric stock selling promotions then and shady stuff involving the local smelting trusts, sending ores out to NJ, workers dying in an ore lift accident which upon impact "opened up a new copper and platinum glory hole," a fire that destroyed all the buildings and records the day a government assessor came on site, a decade long lawsuit contesting the distressed tax sale of the property that was supposedly "mispriced". Mindboggling stuff. Perhaps we shouldn't get into all that here....
BYRG management's initial attraction to Wyoming's Medicine Bow region was by way of collaboration with famous mining scammers NVCFund and Frank Ekejija. Their Snowy Range "project" is just north over the mountain by BYRG's New Rambler, and BYRG was a stakeholder.
Before anyone says that BYRG isn't related to SDRC, Dan Hally, Head of Operations at SDRC, also a director of Sunnyland's and Steve Cyros's Red Beryl Mining Company, was made Head of Exploration at BYRG. Groudhog Mining and Milling, SDRC's former mining contractor and collaborator with Gary Mladjan on (now SDRC's) laser mining tech at MERG, is now the mining contractor at BYRG. Sunnyland and Red Beryl Mining Company are key players running BYRG behind the scenes.
surrealistrader
6日前
Remember BRGC's Rhodium? Another Steve Cyros XRF miracle.
Remember in 2022 how they made a powerpoint presentation curating together a series of outrageous Rh XRF readings at BRGC's properties? (The ones sold to them by Steve Cyros and Sunnyland's RBMC?) Remember how there was a formal sampling campaign since then, release of an assay chart, testing for Rh as well as Pt and Pd? Take a look at those charts. Zero rhodium, zero platinum, zero palladium: none above threshold limits. Is this to explain their recently weird usage of lower threshold tests at BRGC? Are they still trying to exhaust ways to manufacture something they could pass as a positive and necessarily an economic deposit? The point of mentioning this is to show with a prime example, that the Sunnyland consortium has faked PGM readings before. Bringing Cyros onto SDRC to take pictures with his magical XRF gun was a mistake. Who knows what else cheap theater the prospect generating machine lead by Steve Cyros has been passed off to his buyers of mining claims on ebay?
To my understanding, SDRC was supposed to prop up the rest of Sunnyland's stocks; a series of "historical mining" resurrection plays taking liberty from SDRC's successes. Instead, SDRC, with peculiar timeliness, has resorted to appropriating sketchy practices showcased by the others, which I think will ultimately backfire for them. As for the rest of the RBMC investments, unfathomable amounts of shares have been accumulated while these were still shells, as well as via deals on the backend before their respective pumps for retail benefit. Their stories all began with a property or series of properties sold to them by RBMC. All of these are notably saturated by the issuance of Preferred Shares owned by insiders, with conversion terms that DWARF anything even available for retail to buy. Red Beryl Mining Company owns way more of these others besides SDRC.... None of this is to mention SDRC's long time abstinence of using Preferred Shares until recent quarters. When before this year the share-structure was exclusively common and relatively transparent, now the terms, including the conversion rights, of SDRC's newly issued preferred shares remain non-public, determined by the board at time of issuance. There's absolutely no transparency on these, and Sean even lied to me in private chat about working on a PR that addresses this months ago. So far none.
As of recently, the Sunnyland MO has imparted sketchy practices onto SDRC - most notably Steve Cyros's unique style of geological fakery. Your community leader is bringing down your crown jewel by advising a fake PGM story, (not to mention a slew of other shameless and unbelievable things like insane AISC's and inferred values without any commitment to drill, comparing Sidney Resources to Lundin Mining, and I'm very sure the list goes on.). During a first revenues moment of truth year no less, this novel PGM promotion is dangerous as it indicates something wrong with the core story and the sustainability of their path to profitability. Considering this manufactured "occurence" economically feasible from the get go made it intolerable to me that SDRC has ceased exploration and foregone any hope of releasing a formal feasibility study years ago. To introduce PGM's after 150+ years of virtually nothing about it in Warren, Marshall Lake, or even the broader Idaho Batholith, during this company's test processes for production / metallurgical stage (and not in the exploration stage,) was the main red flag that broke the camels back for me. Exacerbating my concerns, my research had me splat against a brick wall. Not even known meteorites or tektites remotely explain the rhodium concentrations let alone Iridium and other PGM's, and these definitely don't concentrate so well by mistake if the initial discovery was indeed from an analysis of slag. You definitely will not be able to see native forms of these nobile minerals by eye enough to change the color of your super-concentrate's from what should be black to a sandy white.... Calling bullshit on this triggers a house of cards for me and I think the Sunnyland group are the main perpetrators, with recent additions of Sean and the Western Frontier crew playing a notable supporting role. To find out why SDRC thinks they need these particular guys on their team, running with desperate ideas like this in order to succeed is not a dignifying rabbithole to go down.
gitreal
7日前
We went through years of struggle, operating on pennies, really, until Sean joined the team. Sean is one of the most intelligent and thoughtful business strategists I've ever met. He has incredible drive, such devotion, and a deep care for doing things the right way, which aligned with our core values—the values that Sue, Greg, and I shared.
Making your company look as scammy as possible is not "doing things the right way". This year-long PGM/meteorite promotion will not attract any new, sophisticated investors who have significant money to invest. It will only attract the bottom-feeders, who are looking at SDRC as a lottery play.
Accumulating super-sacks of concentrate, but not sending a single one for precious metal recovery by a professional smelter? Endless "lab" experiments in Homer buckets to try to separate the metals? Why? Just send it to a real smelter, they'll figure it out with no problem. I think I know why they are not sending it out for smelter....the metals simply aren't there in any kind of concentration to make it worthwhile.
Issuing ludicrous valuations like $212 billion? No drilling, no professional reports signed off by P.Geo's? And that numbskull Cyros running around the woods with his trusty XRF getting readings that are not only outrageous and extremely unlikely, but downright geologically impossible. I swear, he's pointed it at his head one time too many.
surrealistrader
1週前
Why does it feel like you're singling me out here? I've been amicable with both Dan and Sean over the years via email and direct chat. I have relied heavily on direct communication with the company in the past to fill in holes in research. I can't possibly go into all the examples because there are so many and span years. Certainly some were successful and some harder questions resulted in a brick wall, being ignored outright, and sometimes speaking about it resulted in reprimand from Sunnyland or Sean himself.
At first, I exclusively emailed Dan as he has been extra helpful in answering questions pertaining to the known history of the Lucky Ben. Sidney are relying heavily on old anecdotal accounts, interviews, production reports, maps, and newspaper articles so I was pleased to be directed to a major resource and effort to preserve them.
Specifically around the time they announced their commitment to produce in under two years, I started sending some harder questions via email:
1. Will SDRC be providing a (Lucky Ben) Feasibility Study to the market? What was the rationale behind determining that constructing a mine, investing in infrastructure, machinery, buildings, etc during the process of exploration would produce an economically feasible result at the time of production?
2. Is SDRC, (or the Lucky Ben,) open to being acquired? If so, what measures are being taken to "mark these assets to the market” at each stage so a production company can properly evaluate the value of the project?
3. In 2021, it was said a New Zealand mining firm was evaluating SDRC for financing. What were the details of this exchange? Has SDRC been approached by any other potential financiers of development? What were the details of those exchanges?
4. I was delighted to see Mike Irish with his impressive background added to the board. I am especially interested in his having worked at Newmont Mining. Besides his expertise in novel refining methods, is he acting as a consultant in other mining industry related matters as well?
5. I remember you mentioning in 2021 that, based on the 1987 Goldstone report, done when gold was roughly priced at $400 an ounce, Sidney Resources was estimated to have an in ground recoverable resource valued at $228 per ton, and that SDRC would be profitable at a spot price of $400 an oz. At the time, we did not have the 3rd dimension afforded by a drill program, and I could not find any materials concerning the estimated on costs of extraction, or timeline to depletion. What were the factors that were considered in maintaining that SDRC remains profitable at $400? If it remains true (WOW!) how long into production can we expect such resilience?
These above questions were ignored outright. Insisting that my questions were reasonable, I did eventually bring up related issues publically. I began expressing concern with their usage of AISC, the decision to stop exploration, and to forego economic feasibility study, and did point out that my recent questions pertaining to these were being ignored. I was then taken aside by Mr Sunnyland. I was given a talking to, was informed the company believed I was bullying them into answering my questions, and it resulted in me at the time accepting I was out of line, and subsequently deleted my posts.
There was that other time when Steve Dobson began being quoted in company PR's and began helping Dan write technical reports. I was trying to figure out the man's background, what geological associations he is a part of, any accreditation, resumes, past companies for comparison, anything, but was frustrated to find his name completely absent from the internet at the time. Sean took it upon himself to spoon feed me info in direct message about Steve's good reputation and how he is lauded for his past work as a state geologist in Montana, his work with Platinum Group Metals in Butte, and a few other tidbits... Wheras, there was no sign of it publicly elsewhere... Before this, Sunnyland asked himself and leveled with me and said he thinks its because they are embarassed that Steve has no current accreditation, which is why they are only responding to my inquiries selectively.
Then there was that time I was going hard into PGM and meteorite research. I had made several series of twitter threads with graphics and citation about all the different ways terrestrial and extraterrestrial, that iridium may concentrate, with a focus on the Idaho Batholith. I went into things like the KpH boundary, tieing in the nearby Beaverhead impact, the different kinds of known economic deposits for such metals (like Bushveld and Merinsky), all in a desperate attempt to exhaust how iridium could have concentrated so well in certain samples advertised. Sean reached out in direct message and complimented my research and filled me in that the running theory is indeed a meteorite impact and that platinum group metals were the reason behind the low fire assay numbers.
And then there was the conversation I had with Sean about the matter with Don Durrett....
The guys definitely are friendly, and if respectfully approached, will speak to you. I believe their relatability is one of their strengths lending to current endeavors, and a big reason why people feel good investing in them. A lot of the answers I did receive indirectly painted a picture much better than the answers that were given directly. I happen to think that they are biting off an enormous bite to chew specifically with PGM's discovered in the metallurgy stage, and deciding to be quiet about it after promoting it so vigorously. This was always a smaller scale gold project, and perhaps a technologies development play, and now its grown to fantastical levels without the solid foundation needed to support it. This company should be in pursuit of mineral reserves, a geological backdrop conducive to their claims, and formal economic feasibility studies that investors can read. I believe in many respects they are, for the most part, "winging it" as they go, and only when hiccups happen they reach out to consult with industrious people from within their network. At the current marketcap, and with an impending series of moments of truth, it is certainly debatable whether their miserly ways should continue to be considered the correct course of action.
surrealistrader
1週前
Acknowledging SDRC's "inferred" resource is 3x the size of Bre-X's, Bre-X was way more sophisticated an operation and way more convincing than SDRC will ever be. SDRC's ongoing history of sketchy promotions cannot be undone, and will continue to severely limit the stock's potential.
In the 1990's, before its peak, institutions and major mining companies were all vying for a stake in Bre-X. Sidney Resources is confined to a much more limited target audience of private investors and OTC stock enthusiasts. Investors everywhere (besides SDRC's target audience) have the red flags and pitfalls of Bre-X fresh in their minds, will not tolerate prejudice, and especially will not tolerate anything that holds the subsequently adopted industry safeguards in contempt as SDRC brazenly does.
In all seriousness, SDRC would not stand a chance outside the obscurity of the OTC, and I theorize, that they have no intention to.
I will delight in being proven wrong. I promise to correct the record if or when that happens. I believe the company knows they would get unwanted attention if they get too big so they do what it takes to achieve success on OTC but invest nothing in what it takes to succeed anywhere else.
surrealistrader
1週前
At its peak, Bre-X inferred 57,330,000 troy ounces of gold at their Busang project in Indonesia.
Sidney Resources is now promoting an inferred resource of 152,000,000 ounces of "precious metals" at their Warren District Project in Idaho, USA.
Is SDRC is about to give Bre-X, unanimously considered "the greatest gold mining scam of all time," a run for its money? Can SDRC pull off a market run with 3 times the imaginary resource?
If you're investing in the gold mining industry and don't know what Bre-X is, for the dire sake of your mining investment education I strongly urge you to read up on some of the many accounts of the scandal that have saturated gold mining industry canon since the 1990's. Perhaps you might enjoy listening to this podcast (https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1428-the-six-billion-dollar-gold-scam/episode/16069066-episode-1-the-dollar6-billion-gold-scam), or at the very least watch the movie "Gold" with Matthew McConaughey (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800302/) loosely adapting the series of events to film.
So, what has changed in the industry since the 1990's? In short, the mining investment community will never let another mining company pull off another Bre-X.
Reason 1. In response to Bre-X, we now have enhanced regulatory oversight. Governments and stock exchanges have significantly tightened rules for resource reporting. Unlike in the US OTC where basically anything goes, standards have been adopted like the NI 43-101 in Canada, and similar requirements for SEC-reporting companies in US, which require that all resource estimates be independently verified by qualified geologists. Also unlike in the US OTC, mining companies are required to adhere to specific disclosure requirements such as detailed exploration data, methodologies, and results, all subject to third-party audits. Beyond this, mining companies are under tremendous pressure to partner with global organizations, financial institutions, and third party mandated ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) frameworks, ensuring more transparency and accountability.
Reason 2. Third-Party Audits are not only required, but have become more stringent. Independent verification by respected geological firms or consultants is now standard practice for public mining companies. These experts analyze drill core samples and oversee assays, making it much harder to fake results. SDRC celebrates their contempt for these practices, and forgoes them in the interest of "saving costs."
Reason 3. Mining investors have changed since the scandal too, stressing greater importance in identifying red flags and disqualifying scams. This one's a biggie. The Bre-X case serves as a cautionary tale in the mining industry, making investors, regulators, and professionals more vigilant. The industry now recognizes and reacts quickly to suspicious behaviors like overly optimistic claims or refusal to allow accredited independent site visits. Institutional investors are more specialized, educated, and rely on robust due diligence, decreasing the chances of falling for fraudulent claims. Most would not consider investing in a public mining company on an exchange that has not adapted to the above framework (such as a non SEC-reporting stock on the OTC Pink Sheets like SDRC.)
Reason 4. With the rise of social media and instant global communication, companies are subject to even more pervasive scrutiny from a larger community of analysts and commentators. Frauds are more likely to be exposed early, reducing the time they have to grow. If they somehow do grow beyond cult status, the attraction of greater amounts of people inevitably brings greater scrutiny.
I certainly doubt and do not expect this stock to do what Bre-X did. The bullish SDRC community, however, seems to be hell bent on replicating something like Bre-X. If they somehow are successful in this, sure, I might have missed out on getting rich off an impending tidal wave of suckers, but I will be honored by being one of the few naysayers/whistleblowers of the next great mining scam of our time.
thedroetdude
1週前
Bold move coming here. Long story short, no revenue, company has created some dore, currently in the middle of an acquisition, supposedly holding substantial PRs until complete.
But while you're here lemme introduce you to the regulars.
gitreal - chronic skeptic. Probably some retiree or work from home guy with nothing better to do in his off time but doubt anything and everything - while proclaiming scam on all his boards.
surrealist - dumped about 800k shares because he couldn't handle the emotional roller coaster of the OTC when the stock was around mid .20s. long time bull turned bear. been bashing ever since. Internally questioning whether he made the right move ever since and probably has sellers remorse.
dave gruel - sold his original investment of a whopping $400 or so. Now just playing with house money and flipping for his weekly fast food run. Wants the stock to go back to low .20s so he can sell high .20s. Secretly he's worried that wont happen and that he is missing out on a big run. So, he likes to bash as well.
mr34 - probably a stake holder. just mad it isnt trading at $4 yet so like to entertain the bears with convo
CC88Trade - The community bull, fighting an uphill battle as most of the plebs in and on iHub are bears.
... and myself - doubts of the company until revs are proven (2025 is my guess).. Honestly, the funding for the full size mill is huge news, but kinda still kept under the radar by the acquisition waiting game. Time will tell.
Hot Features
プレミアム
ブラジル証券取引所、NASDAQ、NYSE、AMEX、LSEなどの主要取引所からの複数のリアルタイム株価を監視します。
