They could also pick off royalties that other companies have like these NSRs on Pacton that Frontline Gold holds at present:

____________________________________________________

Frontline Gold provides update on its Red Lake Net Smelter Royalties

“The 4 option agreements to purchase entered into between Pacton and Frontline cover 262 mineral claims totaling approximately 4,900 Ha. Frontline retains net smelter return royalties ranging from 0.25% to 2.25% on all of the Red Lake properties optioned. ”

Frontline’s President and CEO, Mr. Walter Henry, “These 4 option agreements and the associated NSR’s puts the Company in a position to capitalize on the Red Lake Properties developments through Pacton’s exploration programs and through Pacton’s cash and share payments and the potential future net smelter return benefits. The option payments provide Frontline with working capital and funds to complete additional property acquisitions.”

https://www.juniorminingnetwork.com/junior-miner-news/press-releases/1706-tsx-venture/fgc/77868-frontline-gold-provides-update-on-its-red-lake-net-smelter-royalties.html

A technician over at ceo.ca posted longer range silver chart with what he is interpreting as a massive cup and handle.

If this is plays out, whoa momma!

____________________________

@ylr – “$Silver Quarterly chart. It’s a massive cup handle play”

http://cdn.ceo.ca/1fd2b9r-Silver.png

Great chart. Can’t argue with the image of a cup. WOW! Thanks, Ex.

Sure SilverDollar. It could mean there are a number of years left to the Silver rally and that it is heading much higher than most (even the most bullish) even realize.

Matthew – good point on that chart showing the 50 week MA is finally back over the 200 and 233 week MAs. As you noted, that hasn’t happened in 7 years, which is really wild to think about.

Silver is looking good…

The 38.2% retracement would be a good spot for support.

The weekly picture looks fine and in fact the technical picture in general shows no cause for alarm. Brixton is moving more like its peers than most realize but is ahead of them since it bottomed before most in March and became daily overbought before most thereafter. As a result, it has now corrected that overbought reading more than most and now looks better than most from a risk-reward perspective in the short term.
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=BBB.V&p=W&yr=4&mn=7&dy=0&id=p24740227341&a=681845445

I have to say that I don’t agree that Hog Heaven must be JVed or sold. Those ounces in the ground can stay right where they’re at and the market will account for their increasing value as silver rises.

Yes the market value of the ounces in the ground at Hog Heaven will move up with higher Silver/Gold/Copper prices, but they don’t have any way of moving that project forward as Gary just admitted in that interview, and their plan is simply to drill 3-5 holes in it to show the market the value, and then gradually bring the resource to a PEA & PFS in 2-3 years, and then maybe a FS a year or so after that, which is slow plan because they are spread over too many projects based on their capital and available team to deploy. He admitted to Matthew (CruxInvestor) in that interview that they don’t have any desire to develop into a mine themselves, but would likely need a JV partner to move that project forward.

There are plenty of stranded deposits like in that in the Jr resource would that will get rerated higher with rising metals prices, but I prefer a company with a solid plan to move projects forward and execute, not just poke a few high grade holes in the ground and wait for “market joy” as he commented.

To each their own, but I’m looking for companies that can get a project quickly delineated to sell, to develop into production, or to get attractive enough where a big boy miner wants to acquire them.

The fact that he is considering acquiring more projects is insane, as to really explore Thorn correctly, in his own words it will take 10 years at $10 million per year to really do it right. How are they ever going to do that raising 4-5 per year and just poking a few holes in each property.

I still believe they would have been way better off, continuing their momentum at Langis /Hudson Bay, which is what caused their share price to jump so dramatically back in the 2016 surge, pausing the work on Thorn, never picking up Atlin Gold and confusing the message, and quite possibly not picking up Hog Heaven. They should have thrown everything at Langis/Hudson Bay to get it to development stag and then sold it to another company or brought in a partner with experience building mines and producing.

However, since they decided to buy Hog Heaven back in 2017, then at that point, they should have frozen all other work on all projects, and spent every waking moment moving that PEA and PFS along the last 3 years instead of just piddling around with it for years.

Again, I hope they twin some old historic high-grade holes at Hog Heaven, and get the market excited in June & July and that the ounces in the ground underpin this excitement, as I’d love a liquidity event like that to sell out of this stock for win and move the funds to a company with a more solid business plan and some semblance of milestones to look out for.

I think you’re missing the boat with this one, Ex, and it seems Sprott and McEwen might agree.

We’ve been here before but regarding 2016, Brixton was already up 8-fold by the time it acquired Hudson and the launch in early February was perfectly in line with the launch in every miner. The whole sector took off regardless of any news so it is pure guesswork figuring out how much of Brixton’s rise was due to news. A massive, sector-wide mean reversion was due and virtually no one played it right because few understood it. I can’t think of any miners that were left out of the fun, news or not.

It seems to me that you and many others might not be accounting for the effects of the 50% dilution (not counting the 30 million warrants) that took place last year. That paper overhang was sure to have a material impact on price action and could continue to since the paper was issued at a higher price than the current one.

To each their own but I’m looking for situations that are likely to deliver significant capital appreciation and Brixton fills the bill very well.

BBB daily:
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=BBB.V&p=D&yr=0&mn=9&dy=0&id=p73977812272&a=762246884

Yes to each their own, and we have been here before and I’ve posted all the press releases from early 2016 showing that from Feb – June they were picking up Langis and Hudson Bay, and moving into Silver as Silver was finally taking off and it was the main driver of why Brixton moved up over 10 fold, and why many lessor known silver developers (like BBB was before that moment) didn’t.

The press releases and changes to their website at the time about BBB switching over to acquiring more high-grade Silver projects in early 2016 is precisely why so many people started following BBB, and I was one of them. There were people following for Thorn prior to that, but mostly a much smaller group of Gold discovery drill junkies. What made Langis and Hudson Bay new and different in early 2016 was they were brownsfield projects with prior producing mines, power/water/infrastructure, and they could be fast tracked into production over a few years. That isn’t what they did though, and they went off on a series of tangents, have exploration ADD, and have had an identity crisis ever since the new journey they started in 2017.

In early February of 2017 they did a strange company update talking about plans to do some upcoming drilling work on Thorn, announced they had picked up land in the Atlin gold camp (why? where did this idea to acquire another project come from?). Most confusing was they had very little plan for focusing on Langis & Hudson Bay other than using the prior year’s work for tax credits. The newer Brixton investor base that got positioned during 2016 for their Silver properties were a bit confused at only doing gold drilling at Thorn, or why they picked up Atlin, but weren’t doing much with Langis/Hudosn Bay.

Well $BBB did a capital raise in April 2017, and then in June 2017 announced that they bought a polymetallic silver/gold/Copper deposit, Hog Heaven in Montana (out of complete nowhere). Why? What happened to Langis & Hudson Bay? Why did they now buy 2 new projects – Atlin & Hog Heaven? Was there something wrong with prior 3 properties Thorn/Langis/Hudson Bay? Why were they blowing money & shares to add more projects instead of working on what they already had? Where was the focus at and which was the flagship?

I thought it was weird after announcing all that for the first half of 2017 to then release Langis exploration results highlighting the Cobalt potential. (huh? they just got done announcing the focus was on Thorn/Atlin/and now Hog Heaven). They popped out a release on Thorn, and then went back to Hog Heaven on the next. It was at this point that I believe a lot of investors bailed as they were all over the mulberry bush on strategy and guidance.

2018 was more of the same with one press release per location in a round-robin, but none of it getting real traction with investors. They logged core at Hog Heaven, but still never really explained the plan there, explored some at Thorn and Atlin. Next they started really playing up the Cobalt grades and narrative more in mid 2018 though as that commodity was hot and they did have fantastic grades at Langis in sympathy with their Silver. However, from Aug-Nov 2018 they went off chasing Diamond Kimberlites at Langis. (WTF?)

In 2019 they gave up on kimberlites at Langis, and shifted over to expanding land at Atlin, did a random update from a few Hog Heaven holes, and then worked most of the year on Thorn, but started promoting the Copper as much as the Gold there.

In early 2020 their company update was that Thorn and Hog Heaven were their focus (and suddenly Hog Heaven moved up the batting order on their website, which is always changing, and Hog Heave was featured more prominently on their corporate presentation. They mentioned that Atlin would get little work and didn’t even really mention Langis in their plan. However, the first meaningful exploration they have put out this year in 2020 was drilling at Langis (what? that wasn’t supposed to be a focus so why work on it then?)

In this recent interview it sounds like the balance of the year is a few holes at Hog Heaven and then more work on Thorn, but now they are considering the potential of merging or acquiring more properties? (say it ain’t so). Pick a project and go with it.

As was quite evident to Matthew right away when asking questions and listening to the responses back, the Brixton business plan seems to be all freaking over the place. When he kept asking Gary about their key focus and if investors understood their business plan, there were not really solid reaffirming answers back, but just a lot of general buzz words like “district scale” “unlock value” and nebulous plans or outcomes on each project to “make money.”

I get that they want to bring on a large investor to JV Thorn due to the size & cost that will be required, but as Matthew asked a few times, what will have to be done to get them over the line in the eyes of a Major? Since there are several types of geology and deposits on Thorn, it almost sounds too large for a company of their size to even work on enough to attract one of the big boys, as it is like 3 different deposit types all on one land package.

As for Hog Heaven, he said they want to drill 3-5 holes to get some market “joy” out of those high grade drill hits to showcase the potential. However, if they aren’t going to build a mine there themselves and just want to “unlock value”, (which is a pretty generic strategy and hard to measure), then they are going to need to bring in a JV partner on it or need to sell it to monetize it over to a Silver/Gold/Copper producer that has the funds and experience to actually develop it into a mine.

As for Atlin and Langis, it doesn’t sound like each is getting much work this year, but again, they did just release some nice drill holes on Langis. It is a bit frustrating because Langis is small enough and high grade enough, that a company of Brixton’s size could actually move it forward if they just put 80-90% laser focus on it, and then got it to the point where someone wanted to buy it from them or JV it together and get a mine built. It doesn’t seem they are going to put 80-90% focus on any of these projects though.

I’ll stop ranting there, but as a 4 year shareholder that has traded around my BBB position dozens of times, I remain unimpressed after this interview and Gary seemed to have a total lack of focus, vision, and specific strategy. I must say, great interview to Matthew @CruxInvestor, as it really exposed some gaps in the Brixton business plan and their strategy more clearly than ever.

Hoping they devise a more compelling strategy and still hoping they hit it big at Hog Heaven and Thorn this year can make some traction on getting a larger partner. Maybe a new team or board members would be helpful. Cheers!

Again, I agree with you that their metals value will give them upside leverage to rising Silver & Gold prices, and even if they just keep doing a few drill holes on each property in a round robin, their shares will go up.

It is just a personal choice that I prefer a company with a clear plan to on how to move exploration results, into a development plan, and ultimately a plan to develop the project into a new mine, or sell the project, or to be attractive enough to be taken over for their project. I’m just not thrilled with the last few years track record, or the answers Gary gave in that interview, and would rather have an escape hatch out of their company into a different vehicle.

Hoping that BBB hits big time at Hog Heaven and Thorn for a liquidity event and escape hatch, but wishing you and anyone else that stays further success.

One more thought – I liked the chart you posted and agree it does look constructive, so I’m looking forward to seeing BBB head higher and believe the upcoming June-August drill results should be a nice kicker.

Ex, you can state your claims as facts all you want but there is precisely zero reason to doubt that Brixton would have mean-reverted with everything else in 2016. ZERO. To say that YOU know that it didn’t have enough going for it without the news shows a great lack of understanding of how markets work.
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=BBB.V&p=W&st=2010-01-29&en=2016-08-03&id=p33605617331&a=762304103

I was negatively impressed with the Crux guy as his taking Gary to task was rooted in his own multifaceted ignorance of how the mining sector works and the impact a bear market has on this highly cyclical sector. So I was not surprised when I saw the following in the comment section:

“Silver scares me, because I don’t understand it.” — CRUX Investor

In my experience, the last thing you should want from an exploration team is for it to attempt development of the assets. Upside catalysts disappear and downside ones multiply.
It is also in my experience that the last thing I want, especially during a bull market, is the opportunity cost, dilution and great risk that comes with holding development plays.
Assets in the ground with exploration related news flow is where it’s at most of the time and that’s the model Brixton should stick with. Prove up ounces and then peddle them to the highest bidder. Plenty of bidders will materialize in the months and years ahead. That’s how it works when obvious opportunities pop up during a bull market.

Matthew I believe you are greatly misunderstanding the points I am making and didn’t address many of the points I did make, once again.

Every time this has come up I shown factually how the news releases relating to Brixton acquiring the NEW SILVER properties at Langis & Hudson Bay in a series of releases about their acquisitions and increasing land holdings from February – August is precisely why Brixton outperformed 99% of other mining companies in 2016, and as someone that was closing following the story unfold and actually invested in BBB back in that 2016 surge, I have a better frame of reference that someone trying to armchair quarterback that it was a simple “mean-revision.”

Give me a break man, if that was the case then all the marginal gold explorers (because that is what Brixton was until Feb or 2016 when the switched their focus much more over to Silver) would have all been 10-13 baggers. Yes, there were other Silver stocks that did become 10 baggers but they were much more well established like Impact, Alexco, Americas Silver, First Majestic, Silvercrest, etc…

It was Brixton’s move into Silver that caused them to outperform most of their peers, and that was FAR more than mean reversion, and shows how little you know about their story at that time or that all Gold and Silver companies didn’t all rise the same amount. There is no way BBB would have performed like that if they had only kept drilling at thorn – 0%. If you can’t understand that then that is on you. I did understand it and how the markets work and is exactly why I positioned in it based on that newsflow.

As for CruxInvestor, he is a bit tough on CEOs because he knows most mining companies are “lifestyle companies” and most business owners, especially mining explorers do not have clear business plans or strategy. You can say what you want about his style or biases after watching just 1 video, but Gary didn’t have good answers to the most basic questions about what investors should really focus on, on their primary message, and if investors understood their strategy. Sorry, but that was a very weak and bungled interview by Gary, and validated the points I’ve made for years about Brixton having exploration ADD and an Identity Crisis.

Personally, I’ve watched dozens of CruxInvestors videos and can point out that he is at least good at getting to the heart of the value drivers of a company, weeding through marketing fluff, and calling out company executives where their talking points don’t really add up to the reality of what they have done.

For Brixton, he was spot on that the reality is after 10 years, their team has done very little except confuse their investor base, purchase more an more land and targets, and poke some holes in a number of very different deposits in different places making very little headway on any of them. I understand that as a company moves towards development that the risks increase, but so does the market cap.

Yes it has to be counter-balanced with dilution, and taking on a big project means big dilution, but it typically means a big rerating, like what we are seeing at present with Pure Gold, Silvercrest, Orezone, or Wallbridge. I’d much rather see that kind of plan unfolding into development with a great re-rating, than these annual $4-$5 Million raises for Gary and crew to go poke a bunch of holes into properties they aren’t don’t anything to move forward in a meaningful way, with measurable targets, or a clear road map of what they want to achieve.

To each their own, but I can thing of plenty of other teams and companies in the Gold and Silver space that I’d rather back with some semblance of a plan.

Yes, we all know that ounces in the ground all by themselves will get re-rated higher, and that will happen to Brixton, but they have not been knocking the ball out of the park by any stretch, and their rise of the March lows is commensurate with most other companies in the precious metals space, but their moves in 2016 were not, and there is clear reason why, whether you can see it or want to address it or not.

Again, I hope you do well in the investment, and I intend to hold on for this year’s drilling for the market “Joy” Gary hopes to create at Hog Heaven and Thorn, but I have no desire to hang around in their stock longer than that, as he’s already laid out he wants to do another capital raise into that strength, and I plan on exiting before that wave of dilution hits, because I ultimately don’t like their business plan.

I understand your points just fine. I simply don’t agree with most of them.

Give me a break indeed. Like I said, you don’t understand markets.

Crux’s “style or biases” are not the problem. Ignorance is, just as I stated. Perfectly good answers are very often not good enough for people who don’t understand. I see it constantly but to his credit for honesty, the guy admits that silver scares him because he doesn’t understand it. Enough said and maybe he’s not wired for any of this stuff just like his fans.

Case in point: “For Brixton, he was spot on that the reality is after 10 years, their team has done very little except confuse their investor base, purchase more an more land and targets, and poke some holes in a number of very different deposits in different places making very little headway on any of them.”

What you highlight as smart is exactly what caught my attention as stupid. Tiny explorers are uniquely ill-equipped to make progress during a bear market and the bear we just had was a particularly brutal one. The fact that Brixton came through it without printing half a billion shares followed by a couple of reverse splits is a job well done. Only a complete amateur would expect such left-for-dead “optionality” plays to make noteworthy headway in such an environment.

Unless an explorer is already sitting on a proven and probable extremely economic deposit (as in profitable at vastly lower metals prices) before the bear market begins, it would be foolish to expect any advancement beyond some drill holes. In the real world, that excludes all silver deposits and most gold deposits. Raising money and burning it repeatedly for any reason is just stupid when silver is on its way from $50 to $11. Countless explorers have found out the hard way what an energetic and overly optimistic but clueless management team can do to a company. Even when money is available to risky juniors in a bear market it comes at a terrible price whether equity or debt and there are plenty of zombie juniors out there as a result. Brixton is not one of them by a long shot and I’d bet that if it was, the interviewer wouldn’t understand that it was because the company behaved as he thought it should.

Surviving a bear market while doing minimal damage to your share structure and shareholders is winning in this business. Do I have to point out that Impact did little more than that as well?

Tell that to companies like Integra, Reservoir, Kaminak, Mariana, Silvercrest that explored and delineated ounces and were acquired.

Even after that the new incarnations of Silvercrest and Integra started 5-6 years after Brixton, and are already way in front of them again. That is because their teams know how to build value and Brixton’s doesn’t.

Look at successes like Wallbridge, Adriatic, or Great Bear that started long after Brixton, but did real work and got rated higher accordingly.

Sorry, I don’t by the “ill-equipped explorers” thesis, because competent teams moved the ball forward on their projects and got rerated accordingly.

Again, in that exact same environment look at Pure Gold moving from exploration to development and now first gold pour by Christmas.

Look at Silvercrest exploring and developing to a takeover win, and then starting a new company, exploring and developing and now getting near a production decision.

It can absolutely be done correctly on a smaller budget at first, and then when more investor interest comes in, then the funding shows up the valuations are MUCH higher than Brixton’s, and most of them started after Brixton.

I’m interested in those kinds of stories, and yes the share count is important, but not as important as overall value creation. I’ll take the higher shareprice and marketcap over a tight share structure any day.

As for Impact, that is completely apples and oranges and you know it. They are a producer, were already producing during the whole bear market, and have continued to produce through it. Yes they were prudent, but their exploration actually led to new pits they produced from over the last 10 years, and their team actually has a clue. I’m thrilled with Fred’s leadership, but Gary’s pales in comparison.

Let’s just leave it at that because I don’t believe we are going to be in agreement about this and we are looking at different factors in how we are evaluating their businesses, their competence, and the objectives we want to see.

Wishing you well in the investment and in all your investments, but it may be best on Brixton just to agree to disagree.

Apples to oranges. The companies you mentioned are the exceptions and for many good reasons. Remember Claude? Same thing.
That Crux guy foolishly brought up Roxgold and Equinox when grilling Fred Davidson which is on par with you bringing up Silvercrest and Kaminak now. There’s no comparison.

Now maybe you can explain Sprott’s ignorance?

Oops, how can I not address Pure Gold? It is mind-boggling that you’d bring that one up unless you were joking.

An all-star team snags an all-star property from Claude and easily and endlessly raises a ton of money to do what it wants and you think there’s a comparison to be made? Madsen was turnkey compared to Brixton’s projects, especially Thorn (Hog and Lang-Hud came to Brixton years after Pure Gold picked up Madsen).

Did you ever read about Madsen?
https://puregoldmining.ca/news/laurentian-goldfields-purchase-madsen-gold-mine-prolific-red-lake-gold-camp

You’re comparing apples to space ships. 🤦‍♂️🙄

I owned PGM and made great money with it but am perfectly happy that I sold it in 2016. Same goes for Kaminak and I can assure you that neither should be compared to Brixton.
Development went well yet investors’ money was essentially dead for four years…
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=PGM.V&p=W&yr=12&mn=0&dy=0&id=p72394330323

Nice deflections, but those companies going from explorers to developers and takeover targets or into near term producers are quite relavent, (Far more so than bringing in a decade long producer into the equation like Impact).

As for going back to 2016, yes they both had big runs, but if it was mean-revision for the miners based on their metals in the ground, then why didn’t Pure Gold blow away Brixton in that mean revision. That whole thesis falls apart for anyone that can pull up a performance chart. I’ve laid out the reasons for Brixton’s outperformance of almost all other mining stocks in the 2016 surge to be tied directly to their picking up Langis & Hudson Bay for the high grade Silver which there were pressers from Feb to Aug 2016 on clear as day and I was active talking to other investors about it at the time and that is where the buzz was, not on Thorn which had only had a luke warm reception at that time after 5 years of working on it.

I remember Pure Gold back in 2016 and had a position in it for a little while myself, but sold out to rotate into stocks with more oomph at the time as it moved from advanced exploration from 2013 (long after Brixton had acquired Thorn in 2010) and had moved it towards the development stage.

This move towards development is why Pure Gold was “dead money for 4 years,” but at least it was a money loss for 4 years like Brixton was after the 2016 peak.

If investors had bought into both in 2016 and held the whole time they’d still be way the hell better off in PGM than BBB at this point, so the proof is in the pudding, (not the spaceship).

http://cdn.ceo.ca/1fd6id7-Pure%20Gold%20versus%20Brixton%20since%20PMs%20Bottomed.JPG

The same thing would be true on most time frames for PGM versus BBB. Look at a 1 year perf chart, a 6 month, a year to date, a 3 month. PGM was far better than BBB, and that is because they are actually growing the value faster and hitting timelines and milestones that make sense to the market. It is a very relevant comparison, and Brixton would do well to emulate what Pure Gold has done.

I’m far more confident in Mark O’Dea’s leadership and track record in multiple companies from True Gold, to as a Director of NexGen, and his current work at Pure Gold, Liberty Gold, and Discovery Metals.

Again, Discovery Metals is a company with a great resource, with exploration and development work that makes sense to the market, and that is why DSV has been surging since their acquisition of Levon resources last year where they took out a bad Silver explorer/developer without and a real strategy and brought it into a company with a management team that knows how to execute a plan. One can only hope that some other company does the same thing with Brixton’s assets one day.

No deflection, just don’t want to waste much energy when I know it’ll be for nothing. There’s just too much cluelessness on display. One little example among many: “If investors had bought into both in 2016 and held the whole time they’d still be way the hell better off in PGM than BBB at this point, so the proof is in the pudding, (not the spaceship).”

Way to miss the point, Ex. PGM is the space ship playing on a completely different level in another galaxy and with different goals and you cluelessly compare it to Brixton?
It’s just silliness that shows you didn’t know what you were buying when you bought Brixton. The company didn’t change or do something wrong, you chose wrong. Did you really not know that many (probably most) explorers have no intention of ever developing a project? If you did know that, do you understand that it’s a perfectly legitimate model that has nothing to do with being a “lifestyle” company?

You can bet your last dollar that Eric Sprott knew what he was buying and approved of the plan.

Sorry friend, but the cluelessness here is coming from you with the audacity that you actually believe you know better than me why I bought Brixton, or that I don’t understand what the goals and business models are as they relate to mining exploration and development companies.

Gimme a break Matthew and quit talking to me like this is the first mining stock I’ve ever purchased, or that you have such a better understanding of Brixton or any of these stocks than my “cluelessness” – it’s pretty condescending and petty of you.

At least I was comparing explorers that moved their projects forward in the same time period and with the exact same market backdrop that Brixton did, instead of bringing in full-fledged producers like Impact into the discussion. They were very fair comparisons, and again, why didn’t the ones with more metals to start with (spaceships) mean revert higher than Brixton in 2016? (because that is clearly not the only catalyst that was moving BBB back in 2016, and to think that it all it was driving it then is the clueless notion).

I was well aware of why I purchased the stock in 2016 and what they were saying at the time, and the company absolutely changed directions massively in 2017 picking up both Atlin and Hog Heaven, then in 2018 chasing Cobalt and Diamond Kimberlites, and then in 2019 getting mostly focused on Copper at Thorn, and now back to working on Hog Heaven and Thorn, but putting out releases on Langis out of nowhere without a clear goal in mind. It is all over the place and they don’t have nearly as good or clear of a business strategy as many other explorers or developers out there.

When they purchased high grade Silver projects near prior producing mines, to prove up a high-grade resource at brownfields site with power/water/infrastructure, and then suddenly abandon them to go chase 2 additional projects at the same time, while walking their massive initial project along it is fragmented and much different than why I purchased it, and I should have sold out of my remaining portion in 2017 or 2018 when those changes came, so that part is on me.

I thought they’d do more of what Skeena resources did by buying brownfields exploration assets near prior producing mines and using modern exploration techniques to find out how much of a resource is left and then move it towards updated resource estimates, quantifiable economics, and gain interest and traction in the marketplace. I’d rather have picked Skeena over Brixton as well, but BBB wasn’t my best pick and I should have exited when things changed.

Yes, I realize Eric Sprott purchased it just like about 60 other Gold & Silver companies including him purchasing Pure Gold, Discovery Metals, Silvercrest, Great Bear and Wallbridge just discussed above.

Let’s just let it rest man, and agree to disagree on Brixton. I don’t need any more insulting or condescending replys back.

Calling it like I see it and bluntness saves time and energy.

Re: “why didn’t the ones with more metals to start with (spaceships) mean revert higher than Brixton in 2016? (because that is clearly not the only catalyst that was moving BBB back in 2016, and to think that it all it was driving it then is the clueless notion).”

So you also don’t know that there’s a lot more to leverage than just ounces in the ground? What about market cap, debt and share structure? In 2016, Brixton was much tinier and had a lot fewer shares out. In addition, if you ignore the initial double from .05 to .10 due to the extremely low volume (which made the double rather meaningless and the nickel low anomalous), it performed half as well that year and right in line with IPT, AXU, etc.

Not all gains are created the same but you and I went round and round on that too, months ago because you didn’t get that volume matters. For example, what good would a ten-bagger be if you couldn’t realize the gain due to a lack of volume? Early in the last bull almost 20 years ago I saw many juniors with low share counts and tiny volume cruise from dimes to dollars quickly but there was no way to realize the gain on a decent position. Brixton in 2016 wasn’t quite that bad but it was close. Average volume now is easily ten times greater and more like 20 times the beginning of that move. For the first two “up” weeks following the ’16 low, volume averaged a ridiculous 10,000 shares a day. Now it’s more like 20 to 80 times that.

Btw, “replies back” is redundant.