RE:RE:RE:Piss Poor Hatrick -
Cook was a field geo until about a decade ago when he found newsletter-writing and appearing at pony shows like Kitco more to his taste. I am not sure he was ever much of a geologist to start with. He turns up over and over and over at almost every metals conference as though he were the last word as an authority or expert, which he is not, but he is presented in such a way that the gullible believe that he is. And he is
available.
This is what he says about himself on his website:
"Brent Cook is an independent exploration analyst with over 30 years of experience in both property economics and geology evaluations.
Brent received a BSc in Geology from Utah State University in 1978.
As a seasoned geologist, Brent's knowledge spans all areas of the mining business from the conceptual stage through to detailed technical and financial modeling related to mine development and production.
. . . . "
https://www.explorationinsights.com/about/brent-cook/
Nowhere does he say he is a "hit man." He does brag about "advising" many parties and their cats on matters geological.
I have heard him speak many times and he never says anything really substantive IMO but I have heard him malign companies before. I believe he does this because it creates a sensation and increases his popularity with the sickos who get a charge out of damaging companies because of jealousy or other nefarious motives.
But on this occasion, I think he went too far and it is not beyond the realm of thought that he could be called up on the legal carpet, to wit, sued for damages to Maple Gold along with Kitco as his co-defendant. He is responsible for what he says and the rebuttal from the company shows just how Cook selectively slandered them, how superficial his commentary was either intentionally or through incompetence, and in the process damaged them and the shareholders.
From Maple Gold's release:
In Maple Gold’s opinion, this newsletter writer erred in several ways on this occasion, which resulted in several erroneous conclusions that the Company believes had a potentially negative impact on the Company’s recent share price: - Inadequate context was provided about the deposit characteristics and exploration stage
- The conversation was limited to focusing on a single aspect of the press release, i.e. the presence of a 1.5m high grade interval within a broad, lower grade interval
- The use of an interval calculator to obtain a “residual” interval (156.5m) and grade (0.44 g/t Au) described by the newsletter writer as “all waste”, overlooking the 52m long interval averaging 3.53 g/t Au (uncut) shown at the bottom of the broader interval (headlined in the release, highlighted in the first paragraph, table and shown on the cross section).
- The current largely inferred resource cut-off was confused with an eventual mine reserve cut-off to support the declaration that the average “residual” grade as calculated corresponded to waste. For reference, the closest analogue geologically to Douay in the Abitibi, the Malartic mine, has used mine cut-offs of 0.28 to 0.35 g/t Au (Agnico Eagle August 13, 2014 News Release).
More critically, the 52m long interval included 21m of 7.87 g/t Au uncut (also disclosed in Maple Gold’s press release), within which 20 of 36 samples gave between 1.1 to 186.1 g/t Au – hardly waste! Furthermore, had the newsletter writer plugged the 1.5m high-grade interval from the 52m @ 3.53 g/t Au interval into the “drill hole interval calculator”, the “residual” average grade over the balance of the 52m interval returns more than 1 g/t Au. Again, clearly the suggestion that the entire drill-hole other than 1.5m was “all waste” was a very erroneous conclusion reached by a simplified approach to support a specific narrative.
Maple Gold appreciates the intention of the newsletter writer to help educate investors, but the way this example was used was not balanced or fair to the Company and resulted in misleading takeaways for investors. The Company acknowledges that, while a significant portion of the drill hole clearly carried robust grade distribution, portions of the top ~100 metres of the drill-hole may not make a pit-constrained resource estimation depending on the cut-off grade applied. Determining what material will be mined, stockpiled or considered waste is premature at this point and will be something considered in a PEA in the future. I believe what Cook said goes well beyond "commentator's license" and is clearly slander meant to damage the company and us.
It was Edmund Burke who said it best, "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Maybe it is time someone called Bent Crook on his selective deception.