Sidney Resources Corp (PK) (SDRC) Quote

BlaBlaBla...

This company and its princiapls, have little or no integrity.... and I'll lean toward the "no" end

Its a thing of pride for them to see this company moved forward with integrity.

Sorry, but I just don't see much "integrity". I see some promoters (Hally and SeanRae) with zero technical qualifications to be running a mining company spouting hype, bullshit, and really bad math.

If there is economically minable gold in their mining claims, they have yet to make the case. But they could still succeed if the gold is really there and they are willing spend a few dollars on some legitimate assessment work with credible third-party consultants. Not hyperbolic posts on X from SeanRae quoting Hally quoting some geologist who says "if the XRF data is correct....... Not posting dollar estimates of the value of the "precious metals" in the concentrates using bad math, and without some kind of believable data and assumptions to back up their estimates. If this were a SEC-reporting company....they'd get slapped down big-time for those kinds of screwy dollar estimates.

So yeah.....instead of proving they have gold, all that other garbage (PGMs, REE, meteorites) paints a very bad picture of this company. Very bad.

invest in people who will do what it takes to ensure their investment grows

Do what it takes? No matter how disingenuous or outright dishonest? That's a sad way to make money, and ultimately, not viable. Those situations inevitably spiral down into lawsuits and legal actions....

They are even stacking their children's college funds and Roth IRA's with this stock.

Lordy. Those are the exact folks who should not be investing in a non-reporting OTC "mining company". If someone wants to invest as a lottery ticket, or like the thrill of the gamble.....sure, SDRC is for you. But holy crap....don't invest your kid's college funds or your retirement monies. I can't believe how stupid that is.

Investors should not stand for this kind of hype. Unless they are okay with it and don't care about the dishonesty, in the hopes that it doesn't matter what bullshit is said as long as it results in a run that they can sell into. That might be what's going on.

I do believe you are describing most investors in general who will hope to take part in both the buying and selling of their investments. They would primarily, most exclusively, invest in people who will do what it takes to ensure their investment grows so that some day it can be sold at a higher value. This concept may be foreign to you because you're not an investor.

In the case of SDRC, we have witnessed time frames of investment ranging from a couple years to multiple decades. More often than one would assume from the tone of this conversation, we are witnessing investors in SDRC who will likely hold onto this stock with no plan to sell all of it, or any of it ever. They are even stacking their children's college funds and Roth IRA's with this stock. They do so purely because they believe in the trajectory and ethic of the company so much, and in how well it has treated them over these years.

Call these people what you want. They couldn't care two shits. They're too busy making money, and putting it where it counts. SDRC takes investors like these seriously and sees their investment as a stewardship. investors take SDRC seriously because they have demonstrated stellar drive, ethic, and knowhow to set goals and go after them efficiently, contentiously, with shareholder value as a prime motive.

More than a few of management are investors too. There are no preferred stock issued and nobody as undue control over the share structure. it is a pure corporation and a true group effort. Its a thing of pride for them to see this company moved forward with integrity.

It would be super easy, pretty fast, and relatively cheap to prove that PGMs actually occur at the SDRC claims. So why won't they do it?

Any claim that the ores are unassayable, that the PGMs are somehow "hidden" by other metals, or silica.....is bullshit. And that they have to send samples to Germany or some other specialty lab that no one has ever heard of....is bullshit. There are a dozen main-stream, credible labs that can give them their PGM results with reliable results.

Investors should not stand for this kind of hype. Unless they are okay with it and don't care about the dishonesty, in the hopes that it doesn't matter what bullshit is said as long as it results in a run that they can sell into. That might be what's going on.

I'm with gitreal:

Finding PGMs in the part per million range would be pretty stunning....if true.


I would be willing to bet money that there are no detectable PGMs in the rocks at the SDRC claims, even at ppb levels.

PGM's rarely occur in the same formation as gold and silver... AND have never been discovered in economic size or grade anywhere in the continental US, besides at the Stillwater.

I'd the odds are remote...very remote. Which indicates that SDRC is a sham.

They are not interested in serious investors (savvy with mining stocks). The less knowledge, the better. True for any OTC stock.

You are darn tootin' spot on!!

I will just say that the PGM/REE/Meteorite nonsense being spouted by Hally and SeanRae would be embarrassing to any serious investors and any real geologists associated with the project.

Mistake #1: They say they have 1,381,830 grams of processed concentrates, which they multiply by 35.27 to come up with 48,742,659 ounces. Completely wrong. The conversion from grams of gold to ounces of gold is to divide by 31.103, the actual result being 44,532 oz.

Mistake #2: They assume 80% recovery of their 48,742,659 oz. of concentrate and come up with 38,994.13 oz of "precious metals". The actual answer, using their 48 million oz of concentrate is.....38,994,127 oz. So, it seems they have the numbers right in this calculation, but the decimal is seriously misplaced.

So, bad/careless at math. But what investors should be especially aware of is that they assume the processed concentrates (pictures of which are shown on X in super sacks) are nothing but "precious metals". They don't say what the precious metals are, they don't say what concentrations each precious metal is, and they pick some recovery number out of the air (or somewhere else) as 80%. And it looks like they assume every ounce of that concentrate is pure gold, but still unclear how they came up with that $1,382 number (80% of what??). And typically, you'd smelt concentrate and recovery nearly 100%. So, why 80%, no idea. Any smelter would be quite happy to work with material that has that much precious metals in it.

Funniest thing of all....the pictures of the material in those super sacks looks like....sand. Not concentrate, which would normally be gray or black.

Another super sack of concentrates! $SDRC

Concentrate - A fine, powdery product of the milling process containing a high percentage of valuable metal.#Idaho #Gold #Silver #PGMs #Mining #Production #Progress #WorkContinues #Invest #America #Success #Video @wfmining pic.twitter.com/R7uC3KjIKZ— Sidney Resources Corp. (@SDRCMINING) July 1, 2024
Sidney Resources Corp.
@SDRCMINING
Another super sack of concentrates! $SDRC

Concentrate - A fine, powdery product of the milling process containing a high percentage of valuable metal.

#Idaho #Gold #Silver #PGMs #Mining #Production #Progress #WorkContinues #Invest #America #Success #Video
@wfmining
0:17 / 0:34
6:05 AM · Jul 1, 2024
·
6,198
Views

The cited "Estimated Results" is clearly far from a definitive nor exhaustive account. Let's not pretend that it is or is even meant to be. For conversations sake, I do see some problems that could lead to a wide margin of error if you were to treat it as such. We must understand that we will necessarily not have access to the same information the company does in order to do that though:

One thing that stands out to me is the conversion of grams to ounces instead of troy ounces. The spot price of precious metals is the market's conversion rate per troy ounce. There are approximately 31.1035 grams in a troy ounce. 1,381,830 grams would equal 44,416 troy ounces.

The value of $1382.00 per ounce is stated as a "portion of the potential values." This implies there might be higher possible values, but does not provide a basis for the chosen value. For calculations sake, market fluctuations and metal purity levels have already seriously affected this value, and gold is clearly not the only metal present in any of their concentrations. Recovered Ounces = 44,416 × 0.80 = 35,533 ounces. Total Value = 35,533 ounces × 1382.00 dollars/ounce = 49,111,906 dollars. A small difference, perhaps.

The aforementioned problems are not what concern me as an investor. The margin of error between $49million and $53million for 6 months of work (set to expand) is nominal. What will interest me most are calculations confirming previous projections of the stockpiles grade, and a break down of all in sustaining costs of running this operation, in order to arrive at a projected long term value of the project. We don't know how much stockpiled ore it took to create this amount of product, nor do we have a break down of costs to know how much profit will be available for the company and shareholders.

That all being said, I appreciate the preview from SDRC but realize that every one of these numbers can and probably will change.

Revenues before reserves.


I think those 3 words answer all of those questions.

https://x.com/SDRCMINING/status/1811400089044132267


Initial Production Report (Estimated Results)

As of July 10, 2024, Sidney Resources Corporation had crushed and milled material to produce 1,381,830 grams of processed concentrates. This translates to 48,742,659 ounces ready for re-concentration and leaching. If we conservatively anticipate 80% recovery, there will be around 38,994.13 ounces of precious metals. If Sidney is successful in recovering $1382.00 per ounce (a portion of the potential values), the year-to-date minimum value will be $53,889,883.35.

There are two serious math errors in this statement by SDRC. Can you spot them?

Aside from the ambiguous term "precious metals" and why they can't spell out exactly what is in the concentrates. This isn't rocket science, yet they seem to struggle with simple stuff.

REE may not be pursued beyond the detectable levels of XRF.

Some REE are very easily detectable with XRF, but still would be several orders of magnitude below any level of interest. I have submitted hundreds of samples for whole rock geochem analyses and amongst all the metals, etc. also received REE results that are above what would be considered "background". But are still so far from economic that it is nothing more than a curiosity.

I don't see how PGM's wouldn't be found in anything that isn't an amount measured in ppm.

If I interpret your triple negative properly, I think you are saying that if there are any detectable PGMs they'd be in the PPM range? Is that what you are saying? That's not really true, a good fire assay for PGMs would "see" them down into the ppb range. And as I said before, I would be willing to bet money that there are no detectable PGMs in the rocks at the SDRC claims, even at ppb levels.

It remains to be seen if anything beyond the gold and silver (or even the gold and silver for that matter) can or will be proven to be of an economic / commercial grade resource

They've already said quite boldly that there is $53 million worth of precious metal in their stockpiles. Now you're saying that remains to be seen?

Filtering through the flagrant remarks and assumptions of failure,

I do think your suggestions are reasonable. The PGM's should be presented as is.... In original sample amount, raw ore grade; Not concentrated amount because there's plausible deniability that the math could be wrong or fudged. This is one of the situations where it will be worth presenting with accredited opinion, and a brief report for context.

REE should be presented as-is as well, but as-is only... especially if they are not prepared to pursue what they could reasonably concur to be an economical resource of REE (or the possibility thereof.) Those detected are merely at or near XRF threshold levels as far as presented so far. Unless they have new undisclosed information about these proving otherwise, I doubt they will be pursued as a resource. The fact that Sean has pointed out XRF readings of REE may be somewhat of a "red flag" but probably not a malignant one as if it necessarily means outright fraud. Like you said, REE's are relatively common and exist almost ubiquitously in at or near detectability thresholds. He didn't lie, though he did get excited about it, and did expect others to as well. Perhaps it is amateurish at best... and some may insist this judgement isn't one to be made by a qualified CEO. My personal preference would be to remain reserved and prudent with these things as well. I think its forgivable, but look forward to them presenting some more definitive findings when appropriate.

Sean's last tweet was very telling, and does answer some, if not all questions about what the company's plans are with any new discoveries. I don't think they realized how groundbreaking it is to have such a problem of PGM's in their stockpiles at the time they first disclosed it. I think they are realizing a bit too late how much more calculated, strategic, and prudent it will be appropriate to be with the cards that are in their hand. We agree that the prize is big if they can substantiate some of the claims being thrown around so far, and will work to secure their interests before doing so lest it provoke competitors.

I am working on buying property regionally for the corporation and creating partnerships with other properties that are controlled by other groups. This is a control play. It takes time. The data is fantastic. I will publish it as soon as I am able. Strategically, I have already shared more than I want but I want the shareholders to know why I have not published the amazing assays.

I believe that's exactly what they have done and they are working to secure their position in the district as we speak and before a more full or substantial disclosure of their work pertaining to this discovery.

The geology is wrong, and there are no previous findings of PGMs in the district. Finding PGMs in the part per million range would be pretty stunning....if true.

And before you say it is frivolous or too expensive.......hiring a professional geologist or mining engineer to sample, submit to a lab, and write up a brief report would only be a few thousand bucks, maybe $5K depending on how many samples. Can you imagine the level of excitement if the claims of PGM and REE are valid?? It would not only blow the roof off this company's share price, but it would be a revolution in Idaho geology and explorers would flood to the district.

No, none of that will happen. This is the OTC, where you can claim any silly thing you think will sell a few shares.

I think that's reasonable.

REE may not be pursued beyond the detectable levels of XRF.

In anything other than a concentrated form, I don't see how PGM's wouldn't be found in anything that isn't an amount measured in ppm. It remains to be seen if anything beyond the gold and silver (or even the gold and silver for that matter) can or will be proven to be of an economic / commercial grade resource any time soon given the grass roots financed / non dilutive / pre-revenues financial position of the company.

I do expect circumstances to change in the coming years however with a history of gold sales behind them. At that point, the company will pursue bankability of their assets and perhaps formal feasibility studies and reserves will be established at that time.

Yes, prove with a credible sampling and analysis program, using a third-party professional geologist or mining engineer that the PGMs exist in anything more than trace amounts. I would put money on there being no PGMs at all, zero, nada.

And prove that that REE occur in anything remotely close to commercial levels (even a tenth of commercially viable levels, and I will be impressed).

Keep in mind that REE are not that rare, and almost any rock you pick up will have detectable levels of numerous REE. When I see a "mining company" proclaim "WE HAVE REE", it is an instant red flag to me. No responsible and competent mining company would say such a thing unless they truly had more than background or slightly elevated REE. As I said, REE occur in most any rock. It is just about the number one thing I see with the scammy OTC mining companies I have encountered over the years. That, and PGMs.

Never seen one promote a meteorite impact. That's a new one.

So all they have to do is prove PGMs & REE's?

Is that all they have to do to attain credibility and legitimacy in your eyes? Something tells me that even after that's done you'd still be here talking the same tone.

No, I am not going to rehash everything I have pointed out over the past month or two.

I will just say that the PGM/REE/Meteorite nonsense being spouted by Hally and SeanRae would be embarrassing to any serious investors and any real geologists associated with the project.

What "facts" would you need to ignore?

Please take your time and provide an exhaustive list.

Try assuming SDRC is legit

Ignore fact and truth? Nope.

Gitreal, grasping at straws for no reason.

I know you have enough criticisms that could make a Barrick or Newmont look like a dumpsterfire. You make it seem like you are the only person here to have done due diligence on the company, which is not true at all. Astroturf is all that is. Quite a few people who still follow the company since Bill Brown's days are well past posting here for its now very predictable toxicity. All the research you ever do is for the purpose of validation of your underlying thesis: a mining stock on OTC = scam, necessarily.

Everybody knows, the odds of any stock promoted on OTC failing are most certainly in your favor. It's most unimpressive to take your side. Compounding this, you focus on mining. Look at the success rate of early stage mining projects as a group: dismal! Look at the size and stage of the companies being predated upon: Mom and Pop shops and startups have vastly higher failure rate than well-banked corporations. Yes, OTC has a lower barrier of entry as far as reporting and listing requirements (which is actually becoming stricter), and companies list here despite the OTC's baggage of the past, shitty reputation, and the predatory market-making that comes along with it.... its a business, and plays a necessary role in our economy, and is a necessary source of capital for some companies, some who have gone on to do very good and important things in our world. I say we embrace it and work towards an infrastructure in OTC that ensures legitimacy. I appreciate that you guys have found your own little way of doing that, but me and my investor peers have ours too.

The truth is, SDRC is a legit business undergoing staggering growth in one of the toughest industries on the planet. They are going outside the typical modes of finance, industry standards, and de-risking protocols to do so despite being called "insane" by so called experts. OTC is a startup environment and this is a startup, pre-revenues. Incentivisation structure is key, and we have one oriented strongly towards shareholders. No hot shot management, no big salaries, no flamboyant marketing, no unduly frivolous exploration campaigns. We are witnessing a creatively engineered attempt to preserve shareholder value, while they use their non-toxically financed means to build the foundations for future success, self-funded.

Some of the things you knock the company for are actually good things. You're not looking at things like a growth investor. Again, you're just trying to prove your underlying thesis, and spend so much time and emotion on your precious thought leadership on Ihub of all places, for what? The luls? You've never provided any suitable comparables in insisting that SDRC is bad investment. You have never said anything good about any company like its some sort of rule. You have made it clear that you are not a trader or investor yourself. This hobby you have of populating investment discussion boards with your perspective is remarkable to say the least.

Try assuming SDRC is legit and they could benefit from your constructive criticism. They are climbing quite a steep learning curve going from where they were just a few years ago so quickly. It's quite a balancing act, being so grass-roots transparent and engaging with shareholders about their process and problemsolving while also trying to be strategic and playing that multi-layered chess game we know they are.

This morning's tweet from CEO Sean:

https://x.com/seanraezalewski/status/1815756380202049955?s=46&t=-3SMZVvPu_o9A1sKRFwAMg

Sean-Rae Zalewski @SeanRaeZalewski

A lot of people are asking why we have not published these assays yet.

It is simple. I am working on buying property regionally for the corporation and creating partnerships with other properties that are controlled by other groups.

This is a control play. It takes time. The data is fantastic. I will publish it as soon as I am able. Strategically, I have already shared more than I want but I want the shareholders to know why I have not published the amazing assays.

Cheers,

We are all going to win.

Sean - CEO $SDRC

"Strategically, I have already shared more than I want." Call bullshit or not, few take the baseless vitriol on this platform seriously anymore. I'm happy with my investment and look forward to seeing these matters play out as they have been these past few years.

Some folks are lazy. Some folks don't have the patience to bother with facts. Some folks don't want the truth.

You have a CEO telling investors they have REE, then proceeds to list elements that are not REE......how can you trust anything he says? These things need to be pointed out.

Why? That discussion is quite relevant--and telling--as to the depths of the lies that emanate from SDRC.

Can the 2 of you take your differing perspectives private? Filtering through your argumentative points is quite tedious!

Dobson on discovery of enormous dome-shaped anomaly:

Dan Hally:
I'm Dan Hally, here with Steve Dobson, our geologist, taking a look at some unique geology. In a second, I'll have Steve explain what we're looking at. One of the things we love about Steve is that, as a geologist, he spends a lot of time on the project site, but he also spends almost every evening roaming the hills and the surrounding area to look for evidence to explain the complexity of the ore we're dealing with. So here's everyone's favorite geologist, Steve. All right, Steve, what are we seeing back there?

Steve Dobson:
Well, we're on the east flank of a contact zone that I've been tracing for the last month. What you can see here are these stratified rocks in the foreground. Those are actually Precambrian crystalline basement rocks, and they look like sediments, which is really strange to me. They are stratified and almost look like sedimentary rocks, but they're not. These are crystalline basement rocks, all stratified in a circular arc. In the background, you can see how large an area we've been working on. I'll pan and show what looks like a big bowl or a crater. That would be the west rim, and it comes around to where we are now standing on the east rim. I've traced this out for, oh, I don't know, a 180-degree radius—not all of it, of course. The center is all quartz monzonite porphyry pluton, a big pluton in the middle, rimmed with Precambrian basement rock on the outside that is all laminated like that. Very strange. I can't really explain why it's bedded, why it's laminated, but it is. We're just trying to put little pieces of the puzzle together on a working hypothesis. That's what we're doing, and it's certainly helping to explain and understand why we're seeing what we're seeing and the complexity of the ore.

Dan Hally:
We really appreciate Steve's work. You don't get a lot of geologists who spend the time in the region to really understand it. With Western Frontier, that's the type of quality service we're getting throughout this project. We know this is a complex project, but we're figuring it out. And as always, we like to say we've got gold and a few other things. We're going to go ahead and sign off, but that's a little geology lesson. Right there in front of me, that's the quartz monzonite, and right there is that layered basement rock. Really unusual to see that. Thanks again, Steve. Appreciate it.

Steve Dobson:
You bet. We'll keep working on it.

Dan Hally:
Dan Hally, Sidney Resources, July 11th, 2024. Just a follow-up to what Steve was explaining. So this is the rim that you see, and Steve's been tracing this out. He can find the zones where the quartz monzonite meets up with the stratified basement rocks that look like sedimentary rocks, but they are not. These are basement rocks, forming a big bowl. One of the theories is this may be tied to the Beaverhead impact, suggesting there would have been multiple meteorites that hit, and this being one of the contact zones would explain a lot of what we're seeing, what we're recovering, and what's showing up in assays. It's very interesting but very complex. We're definitely figuring it out. Way in the distance, amongst all of this quartz monzonite, there looks to be a small pocket of limestone, which has no business being up here, but it just fits into the puzzle. That may be a remnant of what was not blasted out by the impact. There's a lot of other material that Steve has seen, showing signs of an impact, and this layering of the basement rocks may very well be explained by compression. We've seen other stratified rocks modified by incredible heat. It's very interesting. That's just a little break from the actual warm project site as we continue to look into the geology and really understand the entire district. Dan Hally, signing off.

The video released earlier today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE7TYpvTC4Q

with their in-house geologists Steve or Guy, or even any one of the metallurgical experts in consult, annotated or quoted directly.

Will it be another one of those situations where SeanRae heard it from Dan Hally who heard it from one of the geologists? Those are always fun.

lol again with "you must be the IR guy"

🤣

Great, I love reading technical documents written for/by shady OTC companies. I look forward to seeing how they explain the 8% iridium, the native iron, the PGMs, and what the REE concentrations actually are. And hopefully their math skills are better than Dan's.

Maybe you can help them write the document?

"geologists know better, and have their reputations to consider"

I guarantee you will be reading an in depth company release momentarily on this subject, with their in-house geologists Steve or Guy, or even any one of the metallurgical experts in consult, annotated or quoted directly. They will present their case for the geological backdrop along with a compilation of lab assay results. They will also reveal the reasons why we haven't seen such disclosure already, ie: what they have been waiting for (perhaps land acquisitions.)

You will be wrong about details from time to time but will continue to insist the company is a scam. SDRC will prove some occurrence of PGM's in at least one of their ores, and go on to do all the other things they have promised/planned, and you will still be down our throats scam scam scam everything's a red flag scam. Till the bitter end with you.

Never been wrong in 12 years?

I have been wrong many times...about details, and have admitted it. But wrong about whether a scam stock was a scam? Nope.

They're easy to spot.

You mistake knowledge and truth for arrogance.

You know who's arrogant? SDRC management who have the hubris to repeat the same lies to investors over and over.

You're so arrogant its unsettling.

I can see it now, when SDRC releases the results of their work... You will deflect, change the subject, resort to arguing semantics. Never been wrong in 12 years? Never admitted and/nor convinced is more like it. Ihub is a haven for 2 kinds of people: mentally ill people, and people with a vested interest in the subject matter. ....and you've already made it clear you don't have any investment ideas.

Why have Dan and SeanRae spout endless hyperbolic nonsense, pure BS, when they have actual geologists who are trained and qualified to represent the technical integrity of the company??

It is really shameful.

Is it because the geologists know better, and have their reputations to consider? Well, thanks to the power of Internet searches, they are now forever linked with bogus PGMs, REE, and meteorites, bad math, and so on. Hope it is worth it for them.

"We have another geologist on board, a guy who is actually a mentor for Steve. I mean, you've got two great people working to solve this problem, and it's not even really a problem, it just takes time."

Nice! Compiling all the lies in one place is helpful. Actually it's not comprehensive....there are many more.

Metallic iron. LOLOL.....

Also show several rare earth elements. Thorium, Gallium, Ruthenium, and Yttrium - text from Dan Hally - COO

3 of 4 are not REE. Maybe Dan should quit playing geologist.

All company communications (so far) concerning PGM's:

https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1787508017929322702
Sean-Rae Zalewski
@SeanRaeZalewski
$sdrc @SDRCMINING
#PGM’s #platinumgroupmetals #iridium persistent iridium in ore. Also metallic iron in our ore. It’s a big deal. #IYKYK
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1787521989126631701
Sean-Rae Zalewski
@SeanRaeZalewski
$SDRC @SDRCMINING

What does the presence of PGM's in our samples mean? If the data remains consistent with what we are seeing it could increase the value of every ton of ore by 2x or 3x! That is HUGE #mining #PGM #GOLD #REE #SILVER

More to come, much more.
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1787508379876815275
Sean-Rae Zalewski
@SeanRaeZalewski
We are definitely dealing with a very complex ore. We believe we have metallic iron because it will not oxidize regardless of what we throw at it. Note the high iridium which makes sense with metallic Fe, elevated levels of nickel and chromium.
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1787556622287466558
Sean-Rae Zalewski
@SeanRaeZalewski
Went through all the XRF data from Doc….iridium did show in the ore. So did Osmium and platinum which is what you would need to see. Also elevated levels of Chromium and Nickel which are indicative of a meteorite. Also show several rare earth elements. Thorium, Gallium, Ruthenium, and Yttrium - text from Dan Hally - COO @SDRCMINING
$SDRC let’s goooo!
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1787849237868249339
Sean-Rae Zalewski
@SeanRaeZalewski
There seems to be some confusion. The presence of PGM in $SDRC ‘s ore is a definite boon.

The offtake agreements that we are discussing and working on with the groups that will be the buyers recognize the PGM’s, and that will be part of the offtake agreement.

An independent geologist said “He said if the XRF data on the ore is correct, the ore could be worth $45K a ton with the gold, silver, platinum and iridium the XRF indicate are present in the raw ore”

This quote is directly from COO Dan Hally in a email to me.

#gold #PGM #silver #win #invest #goldmining
https://www.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/402361/content
From SDRC Q1 2024 Quarterly Report:
"We have encountered unusual anomalies occurring in the dore' material and are conducting extensive testing at numerous fire assay labs to determine the exact mineral composition of the material to determine the best course forward in processing and testing the concentrates. During fire assay testing it has been determined that a significant amount of Gold is reporting to the slag and high volumes of silver are reporting to the tailings. The reporting of valuable metals like gold, silver, copper, and iridium in our XRF scans further illustrates the rich potential of our mining operations. We are continuing to test materials to determine the level of any iridium and other platinum group metals that are being identified in the XRF scans. It is our opinion that XRF scan results do not confirm the presence of iridium and other platinum group metals but with this information and other indicators we have observed we believe there is sufficient evidence to warrant further study."
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1788194011674562963
Sean-Rae Zalewski
@SeanRaeZalewski
We have discovered / uncovered the associated 6 foot in width and 8 foot in width veins as mentioned in last years PR associated with the new claims and ore pile.

In my opinion, this should be very a very bullish position for our shareholders as it exponentially increases the probable reserves held by the corporation.

$sdrc

As a reminder the previous inferred reserves placed the low range of the assets before this claim in Warren at about $5 B when gold was in the 1800’s. That is based on the USGS data and Goldstone reports from the 80’s and various other geological reports over the last 20 years on the sure.

9000 ft confirmed distance on your property. Peak if the structure is about 1 1/2 feet in width with a lower width of 4ft running over 800 ft deep.

Now add these others and it gets really amazing.

Cheers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=970FPNqnMWM
Youtube Video, "Gold & PGMs under the Microscope!"
Dan Hally:
"We did some modifications to the entire circuit. We took some components out of the circuit. We've just done a lot of work and a lot of testing, and then you have to send it off to the labs to see if what you're doing is correct. There's gold, and what we suspect is a PGM. There's some gold there, a PGM possibly, gold, gold. You just see a lot, and this is just, again, a small dip in what the tables are concentrating. There's a floater in there that needs to get out of the way, but it's kind of interesting what we see now. This here is silica. Another word for silica is essentially sand. Okay, you can also see the dark materials in the silica. Now, that's some pretty interesting looking stuff right there. Not a lot, but that may very well be a Platinum Group alloy. You know the stuff floating isn't, but what I'm talking about is the silvery gold-looking material that's not floating around. If it floats, it's not gold. Not in a pan anyway, but you can see some more of it there. So, we're having to figure out how to deal with the silicas, how to deal with the gold, and what we're working on is a circuit where we're going to recover the free gold first. We're going to get that free gold before it alloys. Here's just another example. This is just out of the number two cons, again just a dip in the pan, and let's take a look here to see if we see any gold. You see a lot of this silvery material; well, we suspect that this is part of the PGM family. I'm going to set this down here a little bit, just so I can get a better zoom in on it for you. It's a little tough, I'm sorry. It's a lot easier when I'm not holding on to it, but what we're looking at there is what we believe may be some Platinum Group Metals. Some of the Platinum Group metals are worth $5,000 plus an ounce, and as you can see, there's a lot of that material here. So, we're having to do a lot of studying and a lot of work, but what we're seeing is a lot of gold. You can see gold here, you can see gold there, and the different stages of oxidation for the gold. That's what we want to recover. Oh, there's some good gold right there. I mean, that's a pretty nice-looking bit of gold, and why is it that color? It has to do with the oxidation, so the pyrite oxidized out of that. Again, you can see what may be the Platinum Group stuff, but there's more gold, more gold. I'll just show you what the pan looks like; it's pretty impressive. What this means is we think we've got this dialed in and how it's separated. We're still doing work, we're still doing testing. We have another geologist on board, a guy who is actually a mentor for Steve. I mean, you've got two great people working to solve this problem, and it's not even really a problem, it just takes time. This stuff takes a lot of work. You have to understand this to do it the right way because what we're not going to do is spend a bunch of money getting a bunch of equipment that isn't the right equipment. The work we're doing now is putting together the knowledge and information we need so we can put in the right facility for the long term. We're talking about a project that can run 20 to 30 years and cover a lot of ground. That's what we're doing. It just takes some time, so everybody's just got to be patient. But what we do know is we've got gold. Dan Hally signing off."
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1806709232898551953
Sean-Rae Zalewski
@SeanRaeZalewski
We have discovered / uncovered the associated 6 foot in width and 8 foot in width veins as mentioned in last years PR associated with the new claims and ore pile.

In my opinion, this should be very a very bullish position for our shareholders as it exponentially increases the probable reserves held by the corporation.

$sdrc

As a reminder the previous inferred reserves placed the low range of the assets before this claim in Warren at about $5 B when gold was in the 1800’s. That is based on the USGS data and Goldstone reports from the 80’s and various other geological reports over the last 20 years on the sure.

9000 ft confirmed distance on your property. Peak if the structure is about 1 1/2 feet in width with a lower width of 4ft running over 800 ft deep.

Now add these others and it gets really amazing.
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1808163389715226905
Our on-site third-party geologists have observed that the ore from this vein appears to be consistent with the geology of the tested and ore stockpile. $SDRC #GOLD #PGM huge densities! #WORLDCLASS #PLATINUM #SILVER #IRIDIUM #REE #OSMIUM
https://twitter.com/SDRCMINING/status/1808161227312427148
This is a dried sample from the Little Giant - Lucky Ben vein. It looks nearly identical to the stockpiled ore. The same materials we suspect are the #platinum group metals and the #gold.

All samples are being dried and prepared for shipment to the assay lab in Germany : $SDRC

#Idaho #Gold #Silver #PGMs #Mining #Production #Progress #WorkContinues #Invest #America #Success #Video @wfmining
https://twitter.com/SeanRaeZalewski/status/1812867243610411252
Just wait until we get to publish the next set of assays! #GOLD #REE #PGMS #IRIDIUM #PLATINUM #SILVER $SDRC #PALLADIUM #OSMIUM

SDRC's critics are their greatest asset!

What a congregation we have here! ...and the constructive support never ends! I just want to thank you all for all the valuable help you have given this company over the years. I'm sure their appreciation cannot be expressed adequately with words.

Of all the shady OTC mining companies I have tracked over the years, maybe a third have promoted PGMs that didn't exist, and a third promoted REE that were at nothing more than background. Then, there are the other commodities that are popular promotion items - lithium is a common one, antimony, barium, diamonds, and so on.

One even promoted meteorites (with 8% iridium even) that somehow snuck into their pile of ore! Can you imagine how gullible anybody would have to be to buy off on that?

when SDRC's balance sheet blows up

Good luck with that....which, I'm 99% sure, if not more, will prove to a fantasy.

I'm afraid you're in over your head in your ongoing discussion.....

How did they forget rhodium....

Bwahaa.... what a mess this will prove to be...

If you'd open your mind, and use that noggin, you might just come to realize that gitreal knows whereof he speaks.....

..just sayin'

Don't forget there was similar pgm nonsense that goes back to FrankiPoo Ekekija, the Nigerian fraudster that hooked up with those scammers at EFLN. Remember, he had bogus claims of as much as $20-60 trillion in assets, most of which were apparently based on Wyoming claims associated with BYRG....

The SEC came down hard on them all.

how they've multiplied their mineral rights footprint in the Warren valley.

How about they focus on their current mining operations? Produce a few ounces of gold/platinum/iridium. And all those meteorites to harvest......

Ask again in q4 if anybody cares about the math when SDRC's balance sheet blows up, investors get a cash injection, and the company discloses how they've multiplied their mineral rights footprint in the Warren valley.

The math may not be exhaustive, nor measured, but its inference, and all mining companies arrive at inferred values before measured ones

Inference? No, the math they've used is flat out wrong, or uses ridiculous assumptions.

Why make up numbers at all?

Lay out your model for extrapolation for all to see, make projections based on operational updates. That's exactly what they have done. The math may not be exhaustive, nor measured, but its inference, and all mining companies arrive at inferred values before measured ones. It's incidential that most inferred projections are revised down when they become measured. What is unclear to me, is whether or not we will ever arrive at a traditionally measured reserve besides the ongoing updates of production, analysis of output, the eventual revenues, and subsequent expansion.

You may not see any point to it Gitreal, and there may not be any if your only goal is to figure out how much gold they have, or expose inconsistencies. For investors (of which you are not), this stock represents a disproportionately steep risk to reward setup, and an under-the radar one, interestingly enough, taking unique advantage of its precariously unconventionalness. It's their undervaluedness, because "No serious investor would take this seriously," is presented as the core proposition in the near term; An asset rather than a liability. Breakthrough revenues, revenue growth, and a dividend are concrete, and are reaching for interest beyond this industry and into generalist investing.

Money will flow, and it will transform this company, that's what most occupying the bid care about. The company could (to use a term I heard Mark Bristow use) "high grade" the hell out of their first year, nobody will ever know, and SDRC go on to use that money to expand even more vigorously than in previous years, and nobody would ever care in retrospect because they have outpaced their mineral depletion with replenishment, growth in scope of their operations, while making use of their new financial means to get all of it done to an ever rising standard of certainty.

18,000 to 28,000 tons grading 3.74 opt Au? More BS.

Why don't they make up numbers that are more believable?