GET THEM UNDER SCRUTINY IMO this was a scam from the start. As a US guy I cannot go to the regulators in Canada and give them my POV. In the first NI 43-101, the authors said that there was evidence in the variograpy that indicated a directional trend to the gold mineralization. The next sentence said that an analysis of the directional nature of the deposit was "beyond the scope of this report". This is an essential part of the analysis of a vein deposit, one needs to restrict which blocks are assigned a value, in other words no block beyond the width of the vein would be given a grade above ZERO.
Now, in early drilling discussion, the geos were predicting where they would intercept the gold mineralization, narrow veins. So the folks that were in the company early knew that this was a vein deposit, knew the thickness of the veins and their approximate location.
In the NI 43-101 instead of setting limits on the search ellipse, limits that match apparent vein thickness, the authors sread values lteraaly i50 meters in barren rock. Someone at NGM told the Authors to NOT examine the directional nature of the mineralization, IMO so that a large resource could be published. They spread values to blocks 50 meters, in barren rock between drill holes and veins. This feels like a scam.
Before the first NI 43-101 the company was smearing highgrade 1 meter intercepts over multiple 10's of meters of barren rock. They published the assay logs on the internet and this scared me as a shareholder and I sold my shares.
A "friend" of mine recommended the NGM to me, at first glance all looked ok, until I started digging. I followed the company because I was very interested in how they resolved this smearing, whay a skock.
My "friend" bragged about how he personally brought in Caland, a $200,000,000 investor from Europe. If I was Caland, I would want to see those responsible for this deception, if proven true, lose their cahones.
Don't believe me, check the NI 43-101. I read the subsequent NI 43-101s to see if they ever corrected this errpr (IMO) of treating this vein deposit like a disseminated deposit, rather than a narrow vein deposit. As far as I could tell, the same methodology ws used. I TOLD MY "friend" my view, I guess facts didn't mattter
My "friend" also told me that he had run the deposit by Mercenary G who told him that Garricon would never be a mine. I told my "friend" that the MG's view was my view as well. IMO the deception just got worse, a Bre-X like scam, all documented and plain to see.
Those of you that lost money need to speak out to the regulators IMO. I did not lose much because I bailed as soon as I saw the smearing of grade over long lengths of barren rock. They knew this was a vein deposit, but prevented the work by NI 43-101 authors from examining the true directional nature of this deposit. It stinks!
This is my opinion, what anyone else does should be based on their own DD. I did not suffer a loss, so I am not INJURED. Many are and I would think that one of the folks who lost BIG money here would be intersted to see if they were defrauded.
Where there's smoke....
DYODD Not Investment advice