GREY:SLKEF - Post by User
Comment by
victor2009on Jul 26, 2011 2:36pm
209 Views
Post# 18874716
RE: déjà vu? (throughmud)
RE: déjà vu? (throughmud)throughmud,
I'm not sure what meets the "up-to-date" requirement. However, the requirement you refer to is one that relates to listing on the TSX. The thing that concerns me with ISM, is the apparent ability (once listed) to make promises of updated reports, including an economic feasibility report promised for 2008, and not deliver on the promises. In the time since listing, ISM has dropped far below the price at listing, and has failed to produce a report that shows an ounce of reserves. In that same length of time, other companies have provided numerous NI43-101 reports AND developed producing mines. In my opinion, at some point, if exploration fails to indicate an economical property, there should be some reasonable requirement for management to justify carrying the property as an asset - a write down must be warranted. In that way, If management refuses to be forthcoming on economic prospects, the financial statements would at least tell the story.
By next week the promised update will be three months late. And my bet is, if it is ever provided, it will not include an economic feasibility report.