Dear Dufjam,

Thank you for your question, but I have to say that I am bit surprised by this line of questioning, especially now.

We issued the press release on September 30, 2015 announcing the transaction with PyroGenesis that included in the first paragraph a complete description of the royalty and this is the first time I am being questioned about the fairness of the royalty…

People seem to have forgotten the key raison why we negotiated the 10% royalty; we wanted to be the only Silicon player that would benefit from this new transformative technology being developed by PyroGenesis. 

From the September 30, 2015 Press Release: “PyroGenesis has granted Uragold a worldwide exclusive right to the usage of the PUREVAP ™ Quartz Vaporization Reactor technology, in return for 10% of sales, with set minimums, as royalty payments.”

Another key motivation behind the royalty was (is) to make certain that PyroGenesis was (is) well incentivized with the PUREVAP success. I can confirm that they are very motivated and excited with the potential of the PUREVAP process.

At this time, I am not aware of any information that would require us to change our working hypothesis, so discussions about potential future scenario that may or may not occur regarding the royalty are purely hypothetical and I prefer not to answer these “what if” type questions.

Comparing our Royalty deal with PyroGenesis to other is not that simple, because our deal is more then a plain Jane mining transaction royalty deal, as we have the exclusive right to a transformative process and technology…

Regards,

Bernard Tourillon
CEO HPQ-Silicon Resources Inc.

PPS, I will relay your message to my counterpart at the Government … but I cannot give any guarantee that they will work any faster…