NuLegacy Gold Corp V.NUG

Alternate Symbol(s): NULGF

Metals & Mining Gold

NuLegacy Gold Corporation is a Canada-based exploration company focused on exploring for high-grade Carlin-style gold deposits on its premier 108 sq. km (42 sq. mile) district scale Red Hill property. The Red Hill is on trend/adjacent to three of Nevada Gold Mines' Carlin-type gold mines; the Pipeline, Cortez, and GoldrushII. Its Red Hill Property is located in the Cortez Gold Trend of north-central Nevada, United States (US). The Red Hill Property encompasses a total of 1,363 unpatented lode mining claims covering approximately 108 square kilometers (km2), of which 881 mining claims totaling approximately 68 km2 are owned, subject to certain underlying royalties, 100% by NuLegacy Gold Corporation and 482 claims comprising approximately 40 km2 are 100% controlled by NuLegacy pursuant to the Idaho Lease. Its Rift Anticline drill target (approximately 10 km2 within the 108 sq. km Red Hill property) has favorable Carlin-type gold system geology located within Nevada's Cortez gold complex.

TSXV:NUG - Post by User

NuLegacy Gold Corp

Bullboard Posts

Comment by BillSmith9on Apr 05, 2018 1:58pm

60 Views

Post# 27837418

RE:RE:Was I fair to say John Budreski is a fan of Streaming deals?

In addition to being a negotiating tactic, or card to play, would a streaming deal be so bad?

I don't know, because I haven't looked into it much. I am starting to see it as an option.

Let's say for example there's a small explorer with plenty of outstanding shares, who believes they are undervalued.

Could a streaming deal for a percentage of output be better than issuing shares or taking on debt?

In some respects isn't it like borrowing, except repayment is deferred & in gold?

Could a streaming deal be a better way to realize the value of the resources, than isuing shares?

Could the answer to all 3 be yes?

On the other hand, does anyone know how much it might interfere with an acquisition? I would think it could cut the price received. In effect, isn't a buyer getting 95% or 97% of whatever the output is? This example contemplates a streaming deal for 3-5% of output. Which sounds a bit like diluting share value. Hmmm...