Columbus Gold Corp CGTFF

NG buyout offer for CBGDF by March??

[123buyholdhope]

Our organizations warn that if France was to allow this first large-scale exploitation of a gold deposit, it would set a precedent that would open the floodgates to numerous comparable mining projects. Moreover, the second wave is already taking shape: with 36 concessions or operating licenses already granted and 21 exploration permits requested or in progress, mining companies from all over the world have already staked out 320,000 hectares of the territory of French Guiana. https://www.rainforest-rescue.org/petitions/1084/no-to-industrial-gold-mining-in-the-forests-of-french-guiana Most on this board seem agreed that this mine will go into production although we may differ re., the amount of time it will take to first pour. However, might this anti mining fervor demonstrated by environment groups such as the one above re., French Guiana, in fact, actually work in CBGDF's long term favor? We recently asked why NG was so quickly and so quietly doing in fill drilling of which there was no initial shareholder/public warning or drilling information provided? After all, such drilling would at the very least help CBGDF in increasing their asking amount for a 45% sale. Why would NG do this if they intended to buyout CBGDF, it makes no financial sense? Alternatively, has this infill drilling been undertaken so as to get as many ozs and as much area to be mined identified into the ESIA, before the whole mining proposal is considered? Speculatively, might this new NG drilling in fact include areas that CBGDF recently drilled (data that was announced after the BFS was presented). This CBGDF drilling was designed to increase oz evidence by extending the pit length ways on both sides (it almost doubled the length of the BFS pit) as well as going much lower with depth drilling (went approx., 175m below the original depths already drilled)? Again why would NG be in such a rush to do all this in fill drilling from purely an economic point of view (they are the one's paying for this); makes no sense? However, could the reason for NG's actions be motivated by not just economics but at least equally so both timeline and politics? Obviously they is much antagonism towards the mine coupled with the fears generated by the mining disaster in Brazil as well as France being the environmentalists hub, and several French ministers non supportive of this project. So, to get this mine into production despite all the jobs and $$ it would mean for a struggling economy, what will Macron and French Guiana supporters have to give up? I can't imagine that such a large project as this will be passed without tangible concessions to the other side. Therefore, is Paul Isnard to be limited to the mine as outlined in the ESIA with no further exploration etc outside the defined boundaries, as per the report? Doubling the pit size will make this a massive mine! Thus will there be new FG zoning limits placed both on where future mining exploration will occur and how many future mine licenses will be approved. Further, may such approval of future mines etc depend on the perceived success of the NG/CBGDF mine operation? Notice according to the above qoute there are 50 + FG concession/exploration licenses in the pipe line. These would represent significant leverage to offer to opposition environmental groups. Don't think that FG gold exploration is not all negotiable, remember Iamgold lost the their Camp Caiman project with if my memory serves me correctly around a $100 mill already sunk into it. Maybe this is why Barrick and Newmont have put for them just modest amounts into partnering with prospective French Guiana explorers without really committing themselves. If licenses are limited they are already in if they lose theirs it's a tax write off. CBGDF's mine's future maybe directly related to any further exploration in FG and the majors may have read the political tea leaves. What would serious curtailing and or restrictions on future gold mining in FG mean for the valuation of a NG/CBGDF mine? Personally I think it would add significant value to the project in the eyes of interested others. This might be considered a national gold mine for FG (already with 2.75 P&P, 3.9 M&I, 1 mill oz resource). What might serious infill drilling produce over a doubled pit along with major in depth increases established in the ESIA? Such a mine would be a target for reserve hungry majors who wanted a major role in a hard to penetrate gold region. With a rising gold price plus these other enhancing factors the CBGDF SP will do well and I believe we will see it well over $2 in the next two years (e.g., 45% may = 1.5 mill oz reserve with gold at $1300 AISC $800 = $500 minus 50% for loan cost with 155 mill shares; play with your own numbers) So, again, my advice to Guistra is don't sell for pennies! However, if I was NG and the CBGDF SP drops to reflect the coming company split and I believe the mine will be green lighted, I would come in with a 20% above premium bid immediately BEFORE the infill and ESIA results are released (end of March?) $0.70 - 0.80 per share for what will be realistically 3.5 - 4 mill oz P&P would be an absolute steal, and I would be very surprised to see any rival bids to partner an aggressive Russian miner. Personally I did not come into CBGDF for a 2 bagger in FG and I hope others will be like minded but it means I think an 18 month 2 yr perspective.; however, all must make their own decisions. GLTA with the split. There's another complex story to unfold.