American Creek Resources Ltd ACKRF

I never doubted the crypto coin ever being created

[FastTrade]

There are over 10,000 crypto creations out there, Most ranging from insignificant to virtually non functioning/non existant.
How this (Cunningham) token fares on the market with absolutely nothing of value in itself deemed official to back it remains to be seen.

Hence the disclaimer from the Biconomy website:

"Risk Warning: Cryptocurrency investments have high market risks. Please invest carefully. Biconomy will do its best to select high-quality coins, but will not be responsible for your investment losses."

Not to be taken lightly where fools rush in.

[Signman]

I will admit this whole thing kinda disappoints me. There is a reason why I love Au & Ag ... It's real money and it always has been. It has always been valued and still is all over the world. It's beautiful ... and you can hold it. It has value from its scarcity and proof of work. All things that crypto almost completely lacks. It disappoints me that something as great and worldly

[cskhurasu]

Signman, I agree with you. There is no substitute for real gold in hand and these coins or tokens backed by in ground gold are some sort of strange hybrid that can be created far more easily than gold mines can be found, developed and mined.

[FastTrade]

Sign - I couldn't agree more. Crypto is a big risk at best. High risk for confiscation, fraud and market volatility. Where physical grams, half grams, ounces, and gold in the ground is safe money and money in the bank.

[NineLives]

Sign - I couldn't agree more. Crypto is a big risk at best. High risk for confiscation, fraud and market volatility. Where physical grams, half grams, ounces, and gold in the ground is safe money and money in the bank. Guys you just described the junior PM explorer markets in the America's ! Both Crypto and these markets are very similar. Some are good based upon real management and a

[cskhurasu]

Do you think that gold-backed tokens could siphon off demand for real gold?

[NineLives]

No CSK, these tokens are backed by real Gold so whether the gold is bought or is used to support a block chain token it is still taken out of the market. Yes crypto trading is very similar to trading junior explorers, hit and miss, first the euphoria then reality sets in. Actually having a block chain token supported by a physical asset makes much more sense as the price will rise and fall in

[FastTrade]

NL- would you be so kind as to enlighten us as to what real and physical gold and from where the token is backed by. This quintessential little detail has eluded me from day one.

[NineLives]

FastTrade, sorry I don't understand your question ? If you're asking what's backing the token then it's the Gold in the ground which can increase as more is discovered on a particular claim.

[FastTrade]

Yes i know - AMK gold in the ground at 20% ownership. How is that applicable to the Cunningham token prior to the buyout as backing.

[Mustang80]

These discussions are getting exhausting. List token, Gem loans money to Cunningham to buy AMK. AMK bought. Cunningham sells tokens backed by gold in ground & repays loan...Sprott apparently got in early to AMK rode it up & now sees a way to get in on ground floor with Cunningham tokens. Would I prefer to wait until PEA to sell AMK? Sure. But one needs to play the cards that are dealt

[FastTrade]

Mustang80 - the points you made are the common misconceptions that have been spread about here. -but GEM for one, doesn't loan out the money. Not at the rate of $208 million dollars they don't. GEM guarantees the backing to the crypto format selling the tokens after they are sold providing Cunningham in this case with a reduced return in cash. GEM will not lend Cunningham Mining $208M up

[cskhurasu]

Maybe it goes like this. Cunningham signs over BC placer claim to GEM. GEM issues tokens backed by placer gold. Tokens sold by Cuningham for cash to buy AMK.  The placer claim has no proven resource.

[cskhurasu]

Other issues. AMK ounces are not allocated but are jointly owned by TUD and TUO and therefore at risk for their performance. What happens if some ounces are produced? Who has a call on them? If AMK, which tokens are backed by mined gold vs in ground gold? If the token really only has gold backing once the AMK deal closes, because the placer property has no resources, who will buy the tokens to

[roberto146]

Cskjurasu: What happens if some ounces are produced? Who has a call on them? If AMK, which tokens are backed by mined gold vs in ground gold? Ownership of production is established by the percentage ownership of each of the Treaty property and would be divided accordingly. With AMK there is only one token, the placer property has nothing to do with it. As I have commented several times the

[cskhurasu]

OK. I just learned something. The NGTGOLD tokens do not hold gold but rather the shares of AMK which own gold, once the acquisition closes. So the token holder is twice removed from gold unlike a gold ETF. this solves a number os problems. However, the holder of NGTGOLD tokens retains the risk that TUD may default, fail to maintain filings or mistate resources since AMK's ounces are held

[fairdinkem]

They get all the money and we lose all the GOLD, is that it?

[Stockmoves1]

At least guys like Roberto have something meaningful to say vs the constant gibberis / feed me some 27's / sprott is not here to waste our time like these turkeys / I can take the 62% gain

[roberto146]

"Stockmoves1: At least guys like Roberto have something meaningful to say vs the constant gibberis ..." When discussion boards degenerate into a steady stream of comments about 'Bashers', 'Shorties', and 'Hit the ignore button' (to eliminate exposure to inconvenient facts) is when a lot of people are not doing their homework. I never put anyone on ignore

[Stockmoves1]

Thats great if you do not get the same arugument 99k times over and nothing changes !!

[CaptainE]

Strong disagree Roberto. But believe who and what you want. 

[roberto146]

CaptainE: "Strong disagree Roberto." All the Re: Re: Re:'s make it difficult to identify responses to prior posts - are you responding to my reply to FastTrade about 'one token', or the reply to Stockmoves1 about challenging opinions with fact-based discussion?

[FastTrade]

There is only one token being issued here. It will be issued as NGTG$ for Cunningham Mining Ltd. It is a fact this token this company has no proven gold in the ground backing. They don't own AMK and there will be no AMK gold in the ground backing until they do

[roberto146]

FastTrade: "There is only one token being issued here. It will be issued as NGTG$ for Cunningham Mining Ltd. It is a fact this token this company has no proven gold in the ground backing. They don't own AMK and there will be no AMK gold in the ground backing until they do" >>>> I'm assuming you know NGTG is only for Nuggettrap, but just to clarify, for those who don&

[curtis111]

Roberto, from Cunningham news release. I've spoken to Cunningham, one token. Not two. Where are you getting your information, if there is something I'm missing please point me in right direction.  The wording is very clear, AMK 20% interest is in addition to Nugget Trap. Ryan Cunningham, CEO of Cunningham, stated: "With this pending future transaction Cunningham Mining is

[roberto146]

curtis111: "Roberto, from Cunningham news release. I've spoken to Cunningham, one token. Not two." News release 9/19/24: Nuggettrap If they told you it's one, now it's one I guess. All the NR and PR implied two dedicated tokens identified with the separate projects, NTG and NTGGOLD. I suppose the idea now is that the Nuggettrap and AMK projects are now merged, and backed

[roberto146]

cskhurasu: "Maybe it goes like this. Cunningham signs over BC placer claim to GEM." I don't think GEM issues tokens, they sell exchange-listed tokens. The way I understand the "token subscription agreement" which is the news release wording of the agreement that is made with all their clients is that GEM acts as a distribution agent, the discount on the token is their

[NineLives]

Absolutely no idea, don't work for Cunningham but have traded crypto's. As mentioned several posts below it's going to be one very complicated equation. Yes do-able, very much so but they're going to have to take every eventuality into account when delineating each gram of resource that supports each token. All I did was briefly summarize how they might do it. If done properly it

[Robizounskin]

This is called speculation, after the transaction is done 20% of Treaty Creek will be part of the Cunningham's portfolio backing up the gold token.  To me it's much better than regular crypto backed by thin air and demand factors only.  Gold token value will be set by the demand and the physical gold value potential baking itself.  Don't forget that Cunningham will

[FastTrade]

Rob... Yes and that's a big if. If Cunningham were to become one of the 3 Amogo's then they would have gold in the ground backing for their token. Without buying out AMK first they have no gold in the ground backing to support the token or potential token sales that could take a lifetime to build up if at all. Read the white paper. They haven't substantiated legitimate gold in the