Reckon I got it from stockhouse Ed.
Here are a couple of quotes:
"SpruceBruce, if I tell you what I think of this company I might be accused of being a spammer.I would not be a large share holder if I thought this company had no future.This company has the best and the largest landholding east of Sudbury for finding Nickel,copper,gold cobalt, rare earth mineral and other metals.It already has proven gold
deposits which justifies a higher share price then it has."
“The recent rise in the price of gold also should change your thinking
about Flag resources.
With the assumption that Flag has a minable source of gold already
at Jess/Wolf Lake Lake and hopefully will multiply this many times”
He knows enough not to use the terms like "proven reserves" because that usage has legal implications (see Canadian national policy 43) but the innuendo is mis-leading to persons relatively new to the industry. I do not know if SpruceBruce is a pro or a novice or somewheres in between, but if he is relatively new, and was looking for a company with a proven deposit, he could be easily mis-led. And then when the truth comes out---- What happens to bruce's opinion of Flag and the mining/exploration business in general?
Even worse is this NR from Flag:
"CALGARY, Nov. 19 /CNW/ - Flag reports that there is a continuity of gold
values, to a depth of 900 feet, in the Jess Lake gold deposit.
<<
Drill Logs
0 - 100 feet 15 feet .32 oz gold per ton A81-1
100 - 200 feet 20 feet .345 oz gold per ton A88-55
200 - 300 feet 4 feet .73 oz gold per ton A89-12
300 - 400 feet 27.5 feet .28 oz gold per ton A84-7
400 - 500 feet 18.8 feet .062 oz gold per ton A85-6
500 - 600 feet 13 feet .146 oz gold per ton A90-7
600 - 700 feet 26 feet .175 oz gold per ton A88-62
700 - 800 feet 23 feet .068 oz gold per ton A89-1
800 - 900 feet 10 feet .22 oz gold per ton A89-20"
The innuendo is that there is a deposit of gold showing continuity from o to 900 feet in depth. the Cdn policy states that you have to announce all the holes. Where are holes 88-1 through 88-54 and holes 88-56 through 88-61?
And the host of holes from all those other years? I am not sure how the regulators up there in Canada view the legality of this kind of crap, but if it is not illegal it is at the least, unethical. |
