Aurcana Announces $50 million Loan Facility

June 28, 2013

Aurcana Corporation (“Aurcana” or the “Company”) (TSXV: AUN, OTCQX: AUNFF) is pleased to announce that it has accepted an indicative terms sheet from RK Mine Finance, part of the Red Kite Group, one of the largest metal merchants in the world, for an unsecured 3 year loan facility of $50 million and silver Offtake Agreement for the silver produced at the Shafter mine.

The proceeds to be drawn down under the Debt Facility will be used by the Company for the expansion of the Company’s mines and working capital purposes.

The board of directors of Aurcana Corporation has approved the proposed term sheet. Closing of the transaction is subject to approval from RK Mine Finance’s Investment Committee and executing all final legal documents. Closing is expected to occur in July 2013.

About Aurcana Corporation

Aurcana Corporation is a primary silver producing company with two producing mines: La Negra Mine in Mexico and Shafter Mine in Texas, US. The Company is in a position to grow organically from its existing mines in its pursuit to become an emerging senior silver producer. Aurcana continues to focus on its future growth.

The Company’s shares are also traded in the United States on OTCQX under the symbol “AUNFF”. Investors can find current financial disclosure and Real-Time Level 2 quotes for the Company on


“Lenic Rodriguez”, President & CEO

For further information contact:
Lenic Rodriguez, President & CEO
Catalin Chiloflischi, Corporate Communications Director
Phone: (604) 331-9333
Toll Free: (866) 532-9333
Fax: (604) 633-9179


This news release may include certain forward-looking statements. These statements are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainties. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as “expects” or does not expect”, “is expected”, anticipates” or “does not anticipate” “plans”, “estimates” or “intends” or stating that certain actions, events or results ” may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be “forward-looking statements”. Forward-looking statements are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties which could cause actual events or results to materially differ from those reflected in the forward-looking statements.

Actual results may differ materially from results contemplated by the forward-looking statements. Important factors that could differ materially from the Company’s expectations include, among others, risks related to regulatory approval. When relying on forward-looking statements to make decisions, investors and others should carefully consider the foregoing factors and other uncertainties and should not place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statements, oral or written, made by itself or on its behalf, other than as required pursuant to applicable securities laws. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

    Jun 28, 2013 28:54 AM
    Jun 28, 2013 28:58 AM

    I just looked at TA for AUNFF
    It’s good, with RSI about 24, no trend at moment, but should be up and away from here.

    Disclaimer. I have owned shares in this company for several years, been holding while they dropped in price, and will be adding more.

    Jun 28, 2013 28:06 PM

    This might be a good stock for new investors. The company killed the old investors by their 1 for 8 reverse split on April 30th. Soon after the stock plunged about 75%…back almost to where it was before the reverse split. Loyal shareholders were killed.

      Jun 28, 2013 28:17 PM


      Your point is very well taken.

      Big Al

    Jun 28, 2013 28:31 PM

    A reverse split doesn’t do anything directly to shareholders, David. In fact, it’s an action taken that can help a stock be more attractive to a wider number of shareholders that would otherwise be prohibited from buying shares of a stock priced under a given price (e.g., under a $1). Aurcana fell because the entire sector fell. Aurcana was hit hard because it’s a small company and because there’s some frustration among shareholders that management over-promises and under-delivers, but that nevertheless, the shares are a reasonable value given the company’s properties.


    Eric Dubin
    Independent Buyside Analyst

    Jun 29, 2013 29:04 AM

    Timing was wrong and they knew it.

    Jun 30, 2013 30:08 PM

    I’m sorry, David, but a reverse stock split doesn’t suffer from bad timing either (unless it is involved with an additional action that is judged by the market as being of poor timing or design, such as a poorly executed secondary offering). A reverse split is a neutral action to the share capital in terms of relative ownership positions. Go look at any good book on financial accounting if you don’t believe me.

    Take a pizza and slice it four ways. Now, imagine taking that same pizza before it was sliced and magically, you’re able to slice it anew 50 times. It’s still the same pizza and as long as the ownership percentage stakes remain unchanged, there is no change to the company’s shareholders. By increasing the price per share, institutional investors were suddenly able to buy the stock, opening the stock up to a new set of potential buyers.

    No, the stock didn’t fall on account of a reverse stock split. It fell because the company wasn’t able to deliver to their throughput targets and Aurcana’s shares were discounted downward to account for the increasing risk of further failures to deliver what was promised.


    Eric Dubin
    Independent Buyside Analyst

    Jul 03, 2013 03:05 AM

    Naked shorting destroys all the rules. When there is no regulation, a reverse split opens the door to orchestrated destruction of a company without regard to fundamentals. The only thing that is real about naked shorting is that it is criminal. Why give criminals more ammunition to destroy your company unless insiders profit from such illegal activity.