Recent events relative to Emgold and the Idaho-Maryland Mine Project

July 23, 2009 - Emgold announces plans to partner with Dunn Capital Partners (www.dunncapital.ca, a Canadian company, not the same as www.dunncapital.com) to financially back a 10-to-1 reverse stock split as a high-risk funding plan.
http://www.emgold.com/s/News-2009.asp?ReportID=356892

August 25 - Grass Valley City Council deems the first Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) officially inadequate; a new one will be required.  Also, Council determines that project description changes are needed from the applicant. 

September 30 - Dunn's other customer sued Dunn for a large amount of money due to failure to back a similar deal.
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS212356+30-Sep-2009+PRN20090930

October 7 - Emgold announces they have decided not to go with Dunn for the investment deal.
http://www.emgold.com/s/News-2009.asp?ReportID=367440

On or about October 12 - Idaho-Maryland Mining Corporation (subsidiary of Emgold) local property on Centennial Drive is posted as available for rent or lease.
http://www.svn.com/aspx/pws/Template2/default.aspx?TranID=78334

October 23 - Dunn Capital Partners issues a critical press release stating their reasons for deciding to terminate relations with Emgold.  This press release uses some very strong and specific language, and is entirely contradictory to Emgold's press release of October 7.  The press release can be found online at www.pr.com/press-release/187617. 

 

October 27 – Emgold tries to defend itself by claiming that the Oct 23rd Dunn press release uses unfounded allegations.  You can see this release online at
http://www.benzinga.com/press-releases/m30565/emgold-mining-corporation-response-to-dunn-capital. 

 

Our Analysis of Dunn v. Emgold

The major statements made in the Dunn press release are: 

  1.  impact to an urban location (Grass Valley is a city = urban, and there will be significant and unavoidable impacts per the DEIR)  TRUE!
  2. citizen petitions, (http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/stop-reopening-idahomaryland-goldmine)  TRUE!
  3.  the risk of water loss to local wells,  (see DEIR)  TRUE!
  4. the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA exists)  TRUE.
  5. hydrologist reports. (see DEIR comments on http://www.bannermountain.org) TRUE!
  6. In combination of inadequate support documents to prove the adherence to California’s Environmental Quality Act.  (See above, GV City Council stated that the current DEIR was INADEQUATE).  TRUE!

As you can see, all 6 of the statements made by Dunn are supported by facts.

 

November 4 - The Union runs an article about Emgold and Dunn and Dave Watkinson adds CLAIM-GV to the mix. Union Article re: Dunn, Emgold, and CLAIM

 

December 21 - Emgold announces stock "restructuring", actually a reverse-split of 10:1. Essentially, this means that the number of shares have been reduced by a factor of 10. If you owned 1000 shares Friday, today you own 100. Of course, in a reverse split, the share price is increased by a factor of 10 as well so your value at the moment of the reverse split is unchanged. The goal of this sort of stock "change" is to try to make the stock more attractive to potential investors. It is easier to get someone to purchase shares at 29 cents each than at 2.9 cents each. Interestingly, in the few hours since this announcement the stock traded down, closing down over 7%, a significant vote of confidence from the market!