Re: TSX exposure

HIGH-GRADE NI-CU-PT-PD-ZN-CR-AU-V-TI DISCOVERIES IN THE "RING OF FIRE"

NI 43-101 Update (September 2012): 11.1 Mt @ 1.68% Ni, 0.87% Cu, 0.89 gpt Pt and 3.09 gpt Pd and 0.18 gpt Au (Proven & Probable Reserves) / 8.9 Mt @ 1.10% Ni, 1.14% Cu, 1.16 gpt Pt and 3.49 gpt Pd and 0.30 gpt Au (Inferred Resource)

Reply New Message

Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message

Bentonstocks

Rank: President [?]

Points: 6383 [?]

Votes: 291 Score: 3.8 [?]

Your Vote:

Please Log In to Vote

Did you know? You can earn activity points by filling your profile with information about yourself (what city you live in, your favorite team, blogs etc.)

Re: TSX exposure

in response to

Re: TSX exposure

Sum4All

posted on Aug 17, 2009 04:25PM

Well... It could have been necessary for Windfall simply because it was separate property, but I know that NOT was quite worried that the TSX would force the issue for Windfall.

As for the chrome, well it is effectively another resource and not part of the nickel, so the requirment may apply for the chrome as well... I have to admit that I am not sure how this works.

Note, however, the "technical report" requirement in the listing requirements. As I said above, I know for sure that there was a concern with Windfall specifically with regards to the NI 43-101... Although "technical report" does not specify much, in the case of Windfall, it was made clear to me that a major issue was the an NI43-101.

It would not surpise me in the least if NOT were doing the NI 43-101 for the chrome to satisfy the TSX.