Auryn/Medinah - 2021 - 2nd Half General Discussion

Zotron;

I’ve been investing in gold/silver miners for the past 35 years.

It’s hard to find a JV deal as shitty as the one the AURYN signed.

Having the property tied up for 5 years (actually 5 1/2 years) with absolutely NO gain for AUMC.

No Funds - As a minimum, usually a junior will receive at least compensation for permitting costs.
Typically also a signing bonus, even as small as $50,000.
Yearly payments, these might be in the range of $75.000 to $100,000 or more.

No Exploration - I actually can’t remember seeing a JV deal where the major was not required to spend a minimum on exploration for each year, until the year when the full % could be obtained. ( In this case year 5, $7M )

No Investment in AUMC - Most majors will invest in some shares of the junior. Typically, this would be to ‘lock in’ a 10-19.99 % share of the company’s float. This is done to make sure that if there’s a significant find, then the major will profit if there is a buyout of the junior.

My previous post :

"The property is tied up for 5 years with $0 minimum investment required during that time up until the end date last year, then the $7M.

… Please note, the currently named LDM project is a consolidation of over 3,000 hectares and is significantly larger than what has historically been known by our shareholders as the LDM (see the graphic included below.) …"

3 Likes

Agree! That was bad negotiating on MC part! If someone else wants to do business with us can we sit at the table or do we need Hoch 5 years to expire before we get back to the negotiating table?? Copper and gold is all time high and the property is just sitting.

1 Like

It’s not tied up.

6 Likes

Today’s hearing has been canceled. The reason is because it has been “vacated”. I assume this means the whole custodial issue is over/ended. You can search here: https://www.clarkcountycourts.us/Portal/ Look under Bauman, Barbara.

Events and Hearings

  • 07/01/2021 Complaint

Comment
[1] Application for the Appointment of Custodian

  • 07/01/2021 Exhibits

Comment
[2] Exhibit A to Application for the Appointment of Custodian

  • 07/01/2021 Exhibits

Comment
[3] Exhibits B through E to Application for the Appointment of Custodian

  • 07/01/2021 Initial Appearance Fee Disclosure

Comment
[4] Initial Appearance Fee Disclosure

  • 07/01/2021 Summons Electronically Issued - Service Pending

Comment
[5] Summons

  • 07/01/2021 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing

Comment
[6] Notice of Hearing

  • 07/07/2021 Affidavit

Comment
[7] Affidavit and Declaration of Barbara McIntyre Bauman in Support of Motion for the Appointment of Barbara McIntyre Bauman as Custodian of Canopus Biopharma, Inc. Pursuant to NRS 78.347(1)(b)

  • 07/07/2021 Affidavit

Comment
[8] Affidavit and Declaration of Barbara McIntyre Bauman in Support of Motion for the Appointment of Barbara McIntyre Bauman as Custodian of Canopus Biopharma Inc Pursuant to NRS 78.347(1)(b)

  • 07/07/2021 Ex Parte Motion

Comment
[9] Ex Parte Motion for an Order Shortening Time

  • 07/19/2021 Affidavit of Attempted Service

Comment
[10] Affidavit of Attempts

  • 07/23/2021 Affidavit of Service

Comment
[11] Affidavit of Services

  • 07/23/2021 Affidavit of Service

Comment
[12] Affidavit of Service

  • 07/29/2021 Memorandum

Comment
[13] Court’s Memo RE: Remote Appearance Information for AUGUST 3, 2021, Hearing PLEASE REVIEW IN ITS ENTIRETY

  • 07/30/2021 Notice

Comment
[14] Notice of Related Case and Order Granting Custodianship to G. Reed Petersen and Request for Continuance

  • 07/30/2021 Errata

Comment
[15] Errata to Notice of Related Case and Order Granting Custodianship to G. Reed Petersen and Request for Continuance

  • 07/31/2021 Notice

Comment
[16] Notice to Vacate Application for the Appointment of Custodian

  • 08/03/2021 Hearing

Judicial Officer
Kishner, Joanna S.

Hearing Time
9:00 AM

Cancel Reason
Vacated

Comment
Peittioner’s Application for the Appointment of Custodian

6 Likes

Interesting that they don’t list pursuing JV negotiations on their list of objectives every quarter. I don’t think that violates any NDA.

While earning profits on the gold production is exciting and will result in share price appreciation, it’s a shame that the copper targets could potentially get shelved for many more years. It’s not a bad move by MC, because he is probably banking on copper prices continuing to rise in the coming years, only increasing his leverage and the urgency of the Majors to grab a piece of the action. From a shareholder perspective however, that informational blackout does zero good for us in the meantime.

Going from silence to the announcement of a major JV deal on the porphyries is very much akin to going from Bald Eagle’s sentiments to Brecciaboy sentiments. In the vacuum of silence regarding Majors interest in the property, Bald Eagle’s assessments can’t be refuted until the monumental deal smacks us all, including him, over the head. I think you both offer valid analysis, it’s just we don’t know what we don’t know. If majors are playing a chess game, it’s difficult for even insiders like MC to interpret. So how can a Brecciaboy or Bald Eagle really give us valid insight as to the state of affairs in a high stakes poker game that neither are in the building for, let alone the actual table.

If Auryn can give us any perspective on the state of those affairs it would be appreciated. They were allowed to mention Freeport’s interest and two other unnamed Major’s interest at that informational meeting. Should we assume that since they have not added any additional commentary from that time that a deal is not likely in the nearterm? Again, I’m not sure how much leverage we have. They may want significantly more drilling performed on our dime before they are interested. How would we ever know what they are thinking? It’s all speculation.

3 Likes

TheRod, thanks for that information and opinion.

I took a look back at the information we received on the Hochschild deal (the OTC 09/30/2018 Company Report, as confirmed by AUMC’s December 2018 Shareholder Update), and I see that the wording says that Hochschild is to “invest” $7 Million within 5 years to earn a 51% joint interest, and then has the option to “invest” an additional $23 Million to earn an additional 9%. I remember asking for a copy of the deal to no avail.

That’s quite the tease!

Please elaborate if you can. If not, please tell us you cannot.

Thanks

1 Like

Not a tease. I’m saying the property nor AURYN has any constraints regarding partnering on a work project or JV anywhere in the ADL district.

Thanks Kevin. I think the Rod was specifically referencing the LDM property which by our JV agreement with HOCH has the property tied up until 2023 with no requirement to spend any money until the 5th year.

This property is tied up. Yes?

2 Likes

From that bastion of truth known as IHUB:

“Medinah employed a nevada attorney on the august 3 court case and had the application delayed as they promised the court they would comply with all issues to bring mdmn current We should see lots of info forthcoming in the near future???”

3 Likes

No. The property is not tied up.

1 Like

Thanks Kevin.

So will assume the HOCH agreement has been terminated or renegotiated or the original terms allowed for Auryn to pursue other avenues until X amount of dollars had been expended?

1 Like

If the contract was terminated which we have not been told so that it has would it not be a material event and have to be disclosed by Auryn? The last thing that was mentioned on the LDM from Auryn was Rod mentioned earlier and is in the financials.

1 Like

Madmen - I responded to your message, hope my response went through.

Bubba

1 Like

Hi Zotron,

I think you might have hit the nail on the head in regards to the possibility that Hoch’s agreement may have been modified. This is still speculative but as I said before, mining is a race; it’s a race to become cash flow positive, in as nondilutive of a fashion as is possible, so that SHAREHOLDER REWARD GUARANTEES can be issued to the owners of the corporation. If you can’t trust the markets that these development stage corporations trade on then cash flow positive mining corporations, the producers, can reward their owners with cash dividends or share repurchase plans followed by cash dividends. With a share repurchase/cancellation plan, subsequent cash dividends will be more generous on a per share basis because there are less shares out there to divide up any given-sized pile of cash to be distributed. If the mine life associated with Auryn’s mesothermal vein system is significant, then the cash dividend process can be significantly long. The generosity of the cash dividend on a percentage of share price basis will, with great certainty, put the share price at the proper level even in a corrupt market. Otherwise, shareholders could simply take their cash dividend and buy back underpriced shares and then expose the next cash dividend distribution to a greater number of shares. I don’t sense that Auryn will be trading on the OTCPinks for much longer but I’m not convinced that the more senior trading venues are that much less corrupt.

If I were Maurizio, I’d go balls to the wall on the mesothermal vein system in order to win that race to becoming cash flow positive. The Pegaso Nero and the LDM will probably not provide for any positive cash flow opportunities for quite some time. I think it’s plausible that, as you suggested, Maurizio may have restructured the LDM deal with Hochschild so that their proven expertise in underground vein mining could help Maurizio win that race via exploiting the mesothermal veins. It’s not clear to me how much expertise the Auryn staff has in underground vein mining. I think we’re all trying to make heads or tails out of Hochschild saying that they recommend that 3 holes be drilled at the LDM but apparently, it’s not going to be by them, at least as Hochschild the partner in an LDM JV with Auryn. Initially, we all took it as a bit of a slap in the face that this JV partner, that was theoretically earning in a 51% ownership in the LDM by spending $7 million within 5 years, turns around and says you guys pay for the drilling. That made no sense. The question arises as to what the most plausible explanation might be. Again, this is speculation. Obviously there appears to be more to the story but after the results received during the trenching program and the grades being received from the work on the veins (85 gpt gold in the Don Luis 1 Vein), why would Hoch walk from the LDM when it appears that the grades of the underlying magma chambers that are feeding ALL OF THESE SRUCTURES looks so promising? Maybe Hochschild’s development efforts (and money) got reassigned to an area in which positive cash flow, and therefore victory in this “race”, is nearer at hand.

So, what are the facts. The 6-line- kilometers of IP/IR and their on-site sampling in the 2 LDM adits did indeed identify 3 targets worthy of spending some big bucks on. That seems like promising news but why in the heck doesn’t Hoch pay for it so that they can earn their 51% stake via spending only $7 million? Something must have changed. Did the terms of this JV end up being scrapped and a different approach was agreed to? At first, Auryn said that they would consider doing the recommended 3-hole drill program perhaps by selling some shares to fund it. Later, they said that the 70 million shares outstanding figure is not going to be increased. So, what gives? Did the LDM project get back-burnered and reincorporated into the Pegaso Nero/porphyry area projects where it probably belongs?

For me the elephant in the room is the fact that any major or consortium of majors that executes a strategic alliance with Auryn to co-develop the porphyries will obviously want the LDM’s 3,000 hectares. I think that this is an absolute given since this is a “Mining District” and the development plan needs to address the “mining district” in its totality. Recall how Auryn consolidated all of those disparate mining concession groups into one entity. The LDM deal with Hoch may have undone some of that consolidation. In my mind, the LDM JV with Hoch pretty much precluded a deal on the porphyry areas unless there was some clause to the JV deal that addressed any scenario wherein this JV was stalling a deal on the porphyries. Recall that hyperspectral satellite imaging survey showing a 7 Km swath of “about a dozen” intrusives. If you’re going to cough up the big bucks to build out this project then you’re going to want to annex that 3,000 ha LDM parcel NOW before your work might prove that it’s worth a bunch of money and you end up having to pay up for it LATER. This re-amalgamation of the LDM and the porphyry areas THEORY would also extend the mine life. Hoch would rather have a lesser percentage of the entire project than just the right to codevelop the LDM. Think about how inefficient it would be for Hoch to hire a helicopter to do an aeromagnetic study on just the LDM and the new partners on the porphyry areas hire a different firm to do the same type of study on the Pegaso Nero and porphyry areas.

What we learned yesterday from Kevin is that TODAY there are no encumbrances present that keep Auryn from doing a deal with anybody on any part of the ADL. That’s perfect. Maybe Hoch is part of a group to co-develop the entire ADL less the mesothermal vein area or maybe not. Another question is, would Hoch simply walking away from the JV not represent a “material event” necessitating a press release? I would think so, which makes me feel that Hoch might still be hanging around in some type of capacity other than as a JV partner at the LDM and only the LDM.

Hoch wouldn’t design and build a processing facility for the LDM if there’s going to be one next door. What’s interesting is that nobody has said that Hochschild “walked” from the LDM or ADL project in general, yet we got that atypical news about the 3 drill holes without any further explanation. I’m hoping that the lack of further explanation might have something to do with the chance for an upcoming deal on the porphyry areas but I certainly can’t guarantee that. Kevin’s comment tells us that IF the LDM JV was holding up a deal on the porphyry areas then it no longer is. Five years ago, at the “informational meeting” in Las Vegas, there appeared to be some solid interest in the porphyry areas. Since then, copper has more than doubled in price and all that people can talk about is “the electrification of America”. New copper discoveries remain few and far between. Hochschild’s “walking” from the LDM deal AFTER the tremendous results Auryn got on the trenching program as well as the follow up work done on the mesothermal vein system makes no sense. Their forte is UNDERGROUND VEIN SYSTEMS and they’re really good at it. Admittedly this is speculative but I think it makes sense. Thanks for your input Zotron!

3 Likes

Regarding Hochschild. Sequence of events:

8/22/18 Notification: LOI was signed.

12/18/18 Notification: LOI converted to a signed contract

7/10/19 Notification: Last time Hochschild is mentioned in a company notification ( 2 years ago )

5/15/21 OTC Disclosure: The mention of Hochschild references the LOI from August 2018 and that they did no drilling. Why would it not reference it as a signed contract from December 2018?

May be there was a requirement that some degree of drilling was required by a certain date and because it did not happen the contract was terminated. I agree that this would have needed to be disclosed but because the LDM is not tied down it must be the case. JMO

1 Like

Was going through old notifications and PR’s to remind myself of the journey and progress made by Auryn. Remember this one below? Still hanging our hats on the BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF VALUE.

When will the Majors commit? Have they made an offer that Maurizio turned down? Do they require more drilling on our dime before they commit? Perhaps both are true. With limited drilling they will want a huge equity stake. Maurizio said he wouldn’t give 51%. They won’t reduce their equity % stance until their risk is drastically reduced via more proven drill results.
That is likely where we stand on developing up the rest of the property. Clearly these Majors aren’t acting desperate or worried about losing out. How’s everyone’s confidence on Maurizo’s negotiating skills? His strategy could be to just make them wait so as not to show desperation on our end and show them we can be profitable without them. My burning question is how does that change their sense of urgency?

https://www.streetinsider.com/dr/news.php?id=11476834

Excerpt from the article:

AURYN Mining Chile SpA has multiple world class P.Geo’s, Geologists, and Mining Engineers that have analyzed the data from their ADL drillings and trenching discoveries and determined that various claims targets are assaying results referred to as Bonanza Gold finds. Several Mining Engineers and Mining Geologists have also reported the evidence of Copper and Gold Porphyry structures on the Altos de Lipangue Plateau that are yet to be fully drilled and explored. Recently, AURYN officials uncovered a 1.7 kilometer gold vein at surface that they assayed over one (1) meter intervals. The results of these activities, as determined by the AURYN geological team, have expressed US billions of dollars of commodity values.

Jp1127,

Consider my note on Hot Chili Ltd on the Other Mining Stock thread.

HCL is miles ahead of Auryn on the big copper resource definition scale. And they just sold 9.99% of the whole thing for $14M. Of course they got Glencore on their side so that’s something. Anything Auryn could get at this point would probably be pretty disappointing in terms of price. And they are a long way out from a feasibility study which could lead to a production decision and permitting of the project which is basically what it takes to get real money. It takes a lot of work and big money and lots of patience to get a major copper project moved forward.

Auryn could definitely do better in the short term if they can execute on the gold project. The gold project itself could lead to a decent exit, else if not they can perhaps do some of the early limited drilling themselves to lead to a better JV deal going forward.

1 Like

One must always remember, when mining in ANY country, one must keep your
eyes and ears open, to that countries political heart beat.

** from ** The impact of shifting politics on the mining investment landscape in the Andean region
Blog Mining Prospects

McCarthy Tétrault LLP

Chile: Prospects for Pragmatic Outcomes

Mass protests and violent unrest in Chile, which began in October 2019, shocked mining investors, who knew Chile as a solid democracy with a longstanding market orientation and a strong rule-of-law track record. Subsequently, when, in an attempt to stem riots, politicians offered a pathway for the drafting and public approval of a new constitution, many investors raised their level of alert. Then, in May 2021, when Chileans elected a constitutional assembly to draft such a new constitution and right-leaning parties failed to secure the one-third of seats that would have given them a veto over the draft, that level of alert was raised.[1]Additional cause for acute concern came that same month when surveys of Chileans’ voting intentions for the November presidential elections showed that Daniel Jadue, the leader of the country’s communist party, had pulled ahead of all other candidates. On top of that, left-wing parties in Chile’s congress brought forward a bill to impose punitive new royalties on copper and lithium mining, which would, at the high end, be imposed at a rate of up to 75%, computed by reference to gross sales. All of these developments have driven both headlines and trepidation among Canadian and other miners.

However, the picture has grown rather more nuanced of late:

  • First, on July 16, a somewhat more moderate left-wing party’s candidate, Gabriel Boric, bested the communist party leader, Jadue, in a primary to determine who would lead the left-block into the general election – and did so by a resounding margin, giving some credence to those who argued that Chileans’ relative pragmatism should prevail in the end.[2]
  • Second, after much in the way of theatrics in the weeks immediately following the opening of the constitutional convention, the delegates appear to be getting down to work and taking more seriously the grave task they are charged with. This may be partly a result of recent polls that showed a slight downwards trajectory in public approval of the constitution-drafting process.[3] The delegates know that whatever document they draft must ultimately be approved by the electorate before it can come into effect, and the vote will be mandatory, meaning that less radical elements of the electorate, which may have sat out the election of assembly delegates (which only saw 40% of voters turn out) will have their voices heard.[4] Therefore, while the new constitution, which will be presented to the public in mid-2022, seems likely to propose changes to areas of law that are relevant to mining, including mineral property rights, Indigenous Peoples’ rights, the environment, and workers rights, among others, it is not a foregone conclusion that these changes will be radical in nature, and they may be manageable for mining companies.
  • Third, the royalty proposal, which originated in the lower house of congress, is of suspect constitutionality, given that the (current) Chilean constitution assigns taxing powers to the executive branch.[5] Moreover, far from hurtling through the legislative branch, the bill is currently the subject of much careful and reasoned scrutiny in a senate committee. The committee has been taking advice on it from international metals and mining industry experts, who have left little doubt about the damaging effects that the bill would have on mining investment. Therefore, many analysts expect that, while taxes on mining are bound to increase, actual increases are likely to fall far short of the nearly expropriatory regime proposed in the lower house.

Companies wishing to proceed with investments will need to give greater attention to their exposure to social and environmental risks, and to their cost structures, and will need to draft financing, joint venture and other agreements in a manner that will enable them to respond flexibly to possible legal changes. Mining investors already present in the country must carefully examine the benefits of any existing tax stabilization agreements that they may have signed, while foreign investors generally can look to the protection available under international investment treaties. Canada’s Free Trade Agreement with Chile provides investors with some protection.[6]

2 Likes

Thanks CHG! Maybe Doc can give us a compare and contrast on HCH’s Copper Porphyry Targets versus AUMC’s so we can gain an even better perspective on that Glencore deal.

1 Like