Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Copper Fox -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mudguy who wrote (9213)	2/9/2015 2:27:59 PM
From: louel	1 Recommendation Recommended By Underhill69 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10654

Something to note. In the CF's BFS they have mine life at 21 years. In this report Teck optimization program is considering a much shorter 12 year LOM. That's a loss of roughly 43% It may suggest the waste rock is nothing more than waste rock or a good portion of the mineral is to deep to be economically accessible. A direct influence on value. I don't know how anyone could spin that as a positive. From my point of view those 1 and 2 Billion dollar valuations just disintegrated like a glass vase out of a two story window.

To: mudguy who wrote (9213)	2/9/2015 4:06:55 PM
From: CanadaGrant	6 Recommendations Recommended By Hog Head mahzman2 minder mudguy Tap66 and 1 more member Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10654

"The legal notes at the bottom are staggering in their substance and implications." When I read that verbal diarrhea legal disclaimer I was kind of surprised. It was like someone telling you that everything you have been told, are being told and will be told isn't necessarily the truth and if you believed it, that's your problem, not theirs. "We are not responsible for anything" is the way I read it. Too bad they didn't start making that declaration a few years ago when it really mattered and idiots like me thought they were reading or listening to something that was actually true.....

To: mudguy who wrote (9213)	2/9/2015 9:34:58 PM
From: CanadaGrant	1 Recommendation Recommended By Hog Head Respond to of 10654

"the actual mineralization in the Schaft Creek deposit may not be as favorable as suggested by the measured, indicated and inferred resource estimate; the measured, indicated and inferred resource estimate for the Schaft Creek deposit may not be reliable or indicative of any commercial benefit to Copper Fox;" Wow. How about that little gem? Are they saying that after spending around 90 million dollars of investors money producing a FS, it might not be reliable? Or of no commercial benefit? Two years after the fact they come out with this garbage and wonder why the share price drops or shareholders have more questions than they did yesterday. If the FS might not be reliable why did they spend 90 million on it then wait two years before issuing the above disclaimer? My opinion is a legal disclaimer issued two years after the fact has no legality at all..... Why even come out with this stupid statement now or did they think once again, nobody would notice?