Insider Legacy Secret
Author

admin

Browsing
In Investing

OPINION — Goldenomics 102: The Shadow Price of Gold

No Comments

By Darren Brady Nelson

One of the underrated, and easily dismissed, stories from the first 100 days of the second Donald J. Trump presidency was in March 2025, when the president said: “We’re actually going to Fort Knox to see if the gold is there, because maybe somebody stole the gold. Tonnes of gold.”

Two developments have happened since. First was his May 2025 executive order “Restoring Gold Standard Science.” Second was his signing the July 2025 GENIUS Act. The former could be a word teaser for “Restoring The Gold Standard.” The latter seems to be a step in that direction.

Source: The White House.

Fort Knox gold

The US Department of the Treasury’s Weekly Release of US Foreign Exchange Reserves shows the levels of various official assets, including gold. It reported gold of 261.499 million fine troy ounces. An estimated 56 percent of that is in Fort Knox, with the remainder in West Point, Denver and New York.

The Federal Reserve Act 1913 still gives the power to the US Federal Reserve: “To deal in gold coin and bullion at home or abroad, to make loans thereon, exchange Federal reserve notes for gold, gold coin, or gold certificates, and to contract for loans of gold coin or bullion (and much more).”

The question of how much gold is in Fort Knox and elsewhere is not only important for the purposes of DOGE, but even more so in the case of a potential return to a gold standard. And such an incredible return is not mere speculation, but is due to some credible public comments.

Source: Visual Capitalist.

Trump gold standard

Private citizen Trump commented, as a presidential candidate, about a possible return to a gold standard in June 2016, when he said: “Bringing back the gold standard would be very hard to do, but, boy, would it be wonderful. We’d have a standard on which to base our money.”

More recently, Steve Bannon stated in December 2023: “Nixon took us off the gold standard … over a weekend … in an emergency executive order. That is going to be reviewed strongly in the second Trump term … getting rid of the Fed, yeah, maybe you start with converting back into gold.”

Economist Judy Shelton has an October 2024 book as a guide: “When the US dollar is backed by gold, America prospers, and so does the rest of the world. But this is no curmudgeonly demand to return to the gold standard of yore; (but) gold for a new international monetary order.”

Some sort of gold standard might dovetail with a new global trading system, as outlined in the “Mar-a-Largo Accord” of November 2024, as well as with the GENIUS Act of July 2025, which: “establishes a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins (must redeem for a fixed value).”

Shadow gold price I

Shadow pricing is a method long used in cost benefit analysis that adjusts prices from, or creates prices for, failed or non-existent markets. The shadow price of gold (SPoG) in August 2018 was defined as: “The linkage between the US monetary base and the implied price of gold.”

The In Gold We Trust (IGWT) annual report from May 2025 uses a similar definition: “The theoretical gold price in the event of full gold backing of the base money supply.” The report adds: “The reciprocal value of the (SPoG) gives the degree of coverage of the monetary base.”

The reciprocal SPoG, based on current market prices, is the “Gold Coverage Ratio” (GCR). The report explains further that: “Currently, the (GCR) in the US is only 14.5%. To put it crudely: Only 14.5 cents of every US dollar currently consists of gold, the remaining 85.5% is air.”

Gold backing of monetary base, in percent, 01/1920 to 03/2025.

Gold backing of monetary base, in percent, 01/1920 to 03/2025.

Source: Incrementum.

Shadow gold price II

According to IGWT: “In the gold bull market of the 2000s, (GCR) tripled from 10.8% to 29.7%. A comparable (GCR) today would only arise if the gold price were to almost double to over $6,000. The record value of 131% from 1980 would correspond to a gold price of around $30,000.”

IGWT goes beyond just $USD: “The international shadow gold price (ISPoG) shows how high the gold price would have to rise if the money supply (M0 or M2) of the leading currency areas were covered by the central banks’ gold reserves in proportion to their share of global GDP.”

“This view impressively reveals the extent of the monetary expansion: With an — admittedly purely theoretical — 100% coverage of the broad money supply M2, the gold price (per ounce) would be over $231,000; even with a moderate 25% coverage, it would be around $58,000.”

International shadow gold price at different gold coverage levels (log), in USD, 12/2024.

International shadow gold price at different gold coverage levels (log), in USD, 12/2024.

Source: Incrementum.

Shadow gold price III

In May 2024, James Rickards predicted: “My latest forecast is that gold may actually exceed $27,000. I don’t say that to get attention or to shock people. It’s not a guess; it’s the result of rigorous analysis.”

This was based on a similar approach to SPoG and GCR that he called “the implied non-deflationary price of gold under a new gold standard (iPoG).” Rickards calculated a gold price, based on iPoG, of $27,533 per ounce.”

He divided US$7.2 trillion of M1 money supply by 261.5 million of gold troy ounces (or 8,133 metric tonnes) in official US reserves estimated by the World Gold Council. The M1 figure is 40 percent of US$17.9 trillion as: “this percentage was the legal requirement for the US Federal Reserve from 1913 to 1946.”

In summary, the sort of gold prices that might be reached under a return to a gold standard, using the shadow price of gold approach, range from lows of US$6,000 to highs of US$231,000, with US$27,533, US$30,000 and US$58,000 in between.

Whatever the gold price ends up at, it would be a once-in-a-lifetime windfall for those holding gold at that time. After that, gold would cease to be an investment, as it has been since 1971 and 1974. Because gold would be actual money once again, and it would be sound money at that.

About Darren Brady Nelson

Darren Brady Nelson is chief economist with Fisher Liberty Gold and policy advisor to The Heartland Institute. He previously was economic advisor to Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts. He authored the Ten Principles of Regulation and Reform, and the CPI-X approach to budget cuts.

Click here to read Goldenomics 101: Follow the Money.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More
In Latest News

Federal agencies directed to delete employee COVID vaccination records and exemption requests

No Comments

In a sweeping move aimed at rolling back pandemic-era mandates, the Trump administration on Friday directed all federal agencies to erase any records related to employees’ COVID-19 vaccination status, prior mandate noncompliance or exemption requests.

The guidance, issued by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), was a response to recent litigation and is part of a broader push to reverse what officials have described as ‘harmful pandemic-era policies’ imposed under the Biden administration. 

‘Things got out of hand during the pandemic, and federal workers were fired, punished or sidelined for simply making a personal medical decision,’ OPM Director Scott Kupor said in a statement.That should never have happened. Thanks to President [Donald] Trump’s leadership, we’re making sure the excesses of that era do not have lingering effects on federal workers.’

Former President Joe Biden signed Executive Order 14043 in September 2021, directing federal agencies to require COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of federal employment. 

After the controversial demand, numerous lawsuits were filed by federal employees, unions and states alleging the mandate violated constitutional rights and federal labor laws.

A federal appeals court blocked enforcement of the order in 2022m and Biden repealed the mandate in May 2023, prompting OPM officials to issue a memorandum to human resources directors stating that ‘agencies should review their job postings … to ensure that none list compliance with the now revoked Executive Order 14043 as a qualification requirement.’ 

The memo also reminded agencies that the executive order could no longer be enforced.

In a memo to heads and acting heads of departments and agencies Friday, Kupor announced that, effective immediately, agencies are barred from using a person’s vaccine history or exemption requests in any employment-related decision, including hiring, promotion, discipline or termination. 

Unless an employee affirmatively opts out within 90 days, all vaccine-related information must be permanently removed from both physical and electronic personnel files.

Agencies must certify compliance with the memo by Sept. 8, according to the memo.

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Latest News

WATCH: GOP senators divided over whether Epstein documents are a distraction or a needed reckoning

No Comments

Republican senators offered a range of responses when pressed on how the Trump administration has been handling the Epstein files controversy, with some calling it a distraction and others arguing the American people are ‘entitled’ to answers.

Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the ‘first phase’ of declassified files related to Jeffrey Epstein Feb. 27, noting the move was following through on President Donald Trump’s commitment to ‘lifting the veil’ on Epstein and his co-conspirator’s actions. Bondi also said the same month she was in possession of an Epstein ‘client list.’

However, the February declassification contained mostly information and files that had already been publicly available, and the Justice Department subsequently indicated that no ‘client list’ exists. Since then, a series of events, including a clash between FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino and Attorney General Bondi, have led to mounting pressure on the Trump administration to release more files. 

‘This is factual. Epstein trafficked a lot of young women, some of whom were minors. The American people are entitled to know who — if anyone — he trafficked these young women to, besides himself, and why they weren’t prosecuted,’ John Kennedy, R-La., said. 

‘Now that’s a very simple question that’s at the bottom of all of this. The Department of Justice is going to have to answer that question to the satisfaction of the American people.’

 

Kennedy’s call for transparency comes after the president described the Epstein situation as a ‘hoax’ while blasting Democrats and other ‘weaklings’ who continue to buy into it. 

‘Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this ‘bull—-,’ hook, line, and sinker,’ Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform last month amid mounting reports of internal division within the administration over its handling of the Epstein case 

When asked about how the Trump administration was handling the Epstein furor, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., said he thought the situation was being used by Democrats to create a ‘distraction’ from the ongoing investigations into former President Biden and others, like the probe related to Biden’s use of an autopen tool to sign important documents and the investigation into whether Obama-era officials manufactured evidence to accuse Trump of Russian collusion.

‘Look what’s being investigated right now through the Biden administration. … So, what are they going to talk about now?’ Mullin asked. ‘This is nothing but a distraction from the actual facts that is coming out about the Biden administration. Of course, the Democrats say, ‘Well, we’re just about transparency.’ Well, where was the transparency the last four years?’

Democrats have suggested Trump could be implicated in the files, but Mullin said that if such a circumstance were true, the information would have been leaked by the Biden administration. 

Mullin’s counterpart in the Senate, Republican Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford took more of a middle ground in his response about how the administration has been handling the Epstein files.

‘The challenge is there are people that are victims that are in it, and there are folks that are not criminals that are in it as well,’ Lankford said. ‘And the challenge the Department of Justice has is you’ve got a girl that was 14, 16 years old and was abused. Well, now she’s, let’s say 26 or 30, married and has children. 

‘Maybe her family knows about this, maybe they don’t. I don’t know the situation, but we gotta figure out a way to be able to protect those folks that are genuine victims on all this as well as getting out as much information as you possibly can.’

For Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, the debate about the Epstein files was not something she was interested in talking about when approached by Fox News Digital.

‘I’m going,’ Collins responded when pressed on the matter outside the Capitol complex.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Investing

Prismo Metals Announces Closing of Oversubscribed Private Placement

No Comments

(TheNewswire)

Prismo Metals Inc.

Vancouver, British Columbia, August 8th, 2025 TheNewswire Prismo Metals Inc. (‘ Prismo ‘ or the ‘ Company ‘) (CSE: PRIZ,OTC:PMOMF) (OTCQB: PMOMF) is pleased to announce that further to its news releases dated July 3, 2025, July 18, 2025 and July 31, 2025, the Company has proceeded with an upsized closing of its previously announced non-brokered private placement (the ‘Private Placement’ ) of units of the Company (‘ Units ‘) at an issue price of $0.06 per Unit (the ‘ Third Closing ‘). The closing was increased from 6,000,000 Units to the issuance of 6,425,000 Units for gross proceeds of $385,500.

Each Unit consists of one common share of the Company (a ‘ Share ‘) and one-half of one common share purchase warrant of the Company (each whole warrant, a ‘ Warrant ‘). Each Warrant entitles the holder to purchase one Share for a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date of issue at an exercise price of $0.10.

‘In the past few weeks, we have raised a total of $1,077,500 in gross proceeds reflecting investors’ interest in our recently optioned silver projects in Arizona, the historical high-grade Silver King and Ripsey mines,’ said Alain Lambert, CEO. ‘Exploration at Silver King is currently underway and our Chief Exploration Officer, Dr. Craig Gibson, has put in place a comprehensive first year exploration plan which includes a phase one drill program of a minimum of 1,000 meters.’

Dr. Craig Gibson, Prismo’s Chief Exploration Officer said: ‘The team has arrived on site, and we have begun a detailed mapping and sampling program at both projects at surface exposures and in accessible underground workings. A drill program is planned for Silver King, with about 1,000 metres initially. The Silver King drill program is designed to test the mineralized body at four elevations, as well as lateral to the pipelike body. Dewatering of the Silver King shaft to gain access to the upper levels may also be undertaken as submersible pumps are in place.’

The Company previously announced a first closing of the Private Placement on July 18, 2025 for aggregate gross proceeds of $575,000 and a second closing of the Private Placement on July 31, 2025 for aggregate gross proceeds of $ 117,000 . Due to strong investor demand, the Company has now raised aggregate gross proceeds of $1,077,500. The Company intends to use the aggregate proceeds from the Private Placement for exploration at the Company’s Silver King project as well as for working capital and general corporate purposes. There may be circumstances, however, where for sound business reasons, a reallocation of funds may be necessary.

Prismo also announces that further to its news release dated July 31, 2025, it has settled the debt settlement agreement (the ‘ Agreement ‘) with a creditor of the Company (the ‘ Creditor ‘) pursuant to which the Company issued to the Creditor, and the Creditor accepted, an aggregate of 1,375,000 common shares of the Company (each, a ‘ Settlement Share ‘) at a price of $0.06 per Settlement Share in full and final settlement of accrued and previously outstanding indebtedness owing to the Creditor in the aggregate amount of US $60,000 (CA $82,500) (the ‘ Debt Settlement ‘). The Creditor is one of the original optionors of the Palos Verdes silver project in Mexico, and the Debt Settlement was the final payment owed to the Creditor.

‘The Palos Verdes project remains an important asset for Prismo Metals,’ said Alain Lambert, CEO. ‘We continue to monitor Vizsla Silver’s exploration activities in the Panuco district and how it might impact our exploration plan at Palos Verdes. Mr. Lambert noted: ‘In their July 29 th , 2025 news release , Vizsla Silver stated: Notable targets to be tested in the central, and east area of the district with potential to host similar mineral resources to that outlined in Project #1 in the west include: Jesusita-Palos Verdes is a northeast trending vein target in the east area of the district. Positive drill results and alteration-based interpretations done by Prismo Metals, combined with significant silver anomalies on surface and extensive vein outcrops warrant additional drilling at depth. ‘

The Palos Verdes project is located in the historic Panuco-Copala silver-gold district in southern Sinaloa, Mexico, approximately 65 kilometers NE of Mazatlán, Sinaloa, in the Municipality of Concordia. The Palos Verdes concession (claim) covers 700 meters of strike length of the Palos Verdes vein, a member of the north-easterly trending vein family located in the eastern part of the district outside of the area of modern exploration. The project is surrounded on three sides by Vizsla Silver Corp. (TSE: VZLA).

Shallow drilling (

In connection with the Third Closing, the Company issued an aggregate of 288,900 finder’s warrants (the ‘Finder’s Warrants’ ) and paid finder’s commissions of $17,334.00 to a qualified finder. Each Finder’s Warrant is exercisable for a period of 24 months from the date of issuance to purchase one Share at a price of $0.10.

All securities issued or issuable in connection with the Private Placement and the Debt Settlement are subject to a four-month hold period from the closing date under applicable Canadian securities laws, in addition to such other restrictions as may apply under applicable securities laws of jurisdictions outside Canada.

Multilateral Instrument 61-101

The Company has issued an aggregate of 10,000 Units pursuant to the Third Closing to a ‘related party’ of the Company (the ‘ Interested Party ‘), constituting, to that extent, a ‘related party transaction’ as defined under Multilateral Instrument 61-101 – Protection of Minority Securityholders in Special Transactions (‘ MI 61-101 ‘). The Company is exempt from the requirements to obtain a formal valuation and minority shareholder approval in connection with the participation of the Interested Party in the Third Closing in reliance on sections 5.5(a) and 5.7(1)(a) of MI 61-101, as neither the fair market value of the Third Closing nor the securities issued in connection therewith, in so far as the Third Closing involves the Interested Party, exceeds 25% of the Company’s market capitalization. The Company did not file a material change report more than 21 days before the expected closing of the Third Closing as the details of the Third Closing and the participation therein by the Interested Party therein were not settled until recently and the Company wishes to close on an expedited basis for sound business reasons.

About Prismo Metals Inc.

Prismo (CSE: PRIZ,OTC:PMOMF) is mining exploration company focused on three silver projects (Palos Verdes, Silver King and Ripsey) and a copper project in Arizona (Hot Breccia).

Please follow @PrismoMetals on , , , Instagram , and

Prismo Metals Inc.

1100 – 1111 Melville St., Vancouver, British Columbia V6E 3V6

Phone: (416) 361-0737

Contact:

Alain Lambert, Chief Executive Officer alambert@cpvcgroup.ca

Gordon Aldcorn, President gordon.aldcorn@prismometals.com

Neither the Canadian Securities Exchange nor its Market Regulator (as that term is defined in the policies of the Canadian Securities Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This release includes certain statements and information that may constitute forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. Forward-looking statements relate to future events or future performance and reflect the expectations or beliefs of management of the Company regarding future events. Generally, forward-looking statements and information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as ‘intends’ or ‘anticipates’, or variations of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results ‘may’, ‘could’, ‘should’, ‘would’ or ‘occur’. This information and these statements, referred to herein as ‘forward‐looking statements’, are not historical facts, are made as of the date of this news release and include without limitation, statements regarding discussions of future plans, estimates and forecasts and statements as to management’s expectations and intentions with respect to, among other things: the intended use of any proceeds raised under the Private Placement.

These forward‐looking statements involve numerous risks and uncertainties and actual results might differ materially from results suggested in any forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things: the potential inability of the Company to utilize the anticipated proceeds of the Private Placement as anticipated; and other risk factors as detailed  from  time  to  time  and  additional  risks  identified  in  the  Company’s  filings  with  Canadian securities regulators on SEDAR+ in Canada (available at www.sedarplus.ca ).

Although management of the Company has attem pted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements or forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and forward-looking information. Readers are cautioned that reliance on such information may not be appropriate for other purposes. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, forward-looking information or financial out-look that are incorporated by reference herein, except in accordance with applicable securities laws. We seek safe harbor.

NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO UNITED STATES NEWS WIRE SERVICES
OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

Copyright (c) 2025 TheNewswire – All rights reserved.

News Provided by TheNewsWire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More
In Investing

Agriculture Market Update: Q2 2025 in Review

No Comments

Fertilizer prices continued to rise in Q2, driven by supply shortages as well as fallout from US tariffs.

According to data from the World Bank, the average quarterly phosphate price rose to US$673.20 per metric ton (MT) during the April to June period, up from US$600.50 in Q1 and US$536.70 recorded in the second quarter of 2024.

On a monthly basis, the price averaged US$715.40 in June, up from US$582.70 in January.

Potash prices have also gained since the start of the year, with the quarterly average rising to US$359.20 per MT from US$319.20 in Q1. The monthly price posted consistent increases, rising to US$363.13 in June from US$302 in January.

What factors impacted phosphate in Q2?

Phosphate prices have risen over the last several years as China, the world’s largest supplier, continues to impose export restrictions on the amount of fertilizers allowed to leave the country.

Between 2021 and 2024, China’s phosphate exports experienced significant declines, falling from 9 million MT to 6.6 million MT. Then, in December 2024, China halted new export applications for phosphate due to the rising cost of sulfur, which is necessary for separating phosphates from rock.

In an April 22 article, Josh Linville, vice president of fertilizer at StoneX, noted that during the first three months of 2022, China exported 950,000 MT of phosphate, but only 13,000 MT during the same period in 2025.

At the time, Linville suggested that even if there were to be a shift in Chinese policy during the second quarter, it might not lead to an increase in exports due to a lack of inventory in the country.

“It appears that while they have increased their urea export quota, the same is not expected for phosphate. We continue to believe that domestic demand has been raised due to a combination of agriculture and industrial demand spikes.’

India is among the main drivers of agricultural demand, and the country has been working to rebuild its stockpiles of fertilizer since they reached a low of 1.1 million MT in late 2024. With Chinese supply missing from the equation, importers have had to pay premiums to other major producers in Morocco and Saudi Arabia.

The result has led to a 44 percent increase in Indian imports, which are expected to reach 1.09 million MT for July and 2.16 million MT for the April to July period, while also pushing prices for phosphate upward.

Adding to market stressors since the start of the year are tariffs on products entering the US. As Linville pointed out, phosphate production is limited mainly to five countries: China, Morocco, Russia, the US and Saudi Arabia.

The US is not able to meet domestic demand and has been reliant on Saudi Arabia, which was free of tariffs until it came under the umbrella of Trump’s 10 percent baseline tariffs when he announced them on April 1.

However, given the tightness in the phosphate market, suppliers are unlikely to absorb any additional costs.

“Globally, supplies are very tight, and demand continues to be high, so global manufacturers can be picky about where they send their products. Given that they want to make more money, they are likely deciding to send the product to their highest netback location. Saudi Arabia has been heard telling US customers that they have no problem sending products to the US if they pay the tariff rate,” Linville explained. He added that the extra 10 percent on the current phosphate prices is a significant cost, and will ultimately flow down to US farmers.

What factors impacted potash in Q2?

Potash prices have steadily increased since the start of the year, but the market has been relatively quiet.

“Today, potash is seeing a little price support due to perceived tight supplies and large demand,’ said Linville.

Since the start of the year, potash prices have increased by 20 percent, rising to US$363 in June from US$302 in January. On a year-on-year basis, the June price is up 17 percent from the US$310 recorded in 2024. However, prices are far from the all-time high of US$1,200 set in April 2022 as supply lines were disrupted after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

With minimal potash production of its own, the US is reliant on imports. Traditionally, those have come from Canada, which is the world’s top supplier of fertilizer, but also to a lesser extent, Russia, which is number two.

While uncertainty remains about whether tariffs will have a direct effect on prices for potash, Linville suggested that there may be some cost increases stemming from this uncertainty.

“To date, Russia has not had a duty or tariff regarding potash, so the product has been allowed to flow freely. Our belief is that Canadian potash has never been subjected to an actual tariff rate given its standing on the North American trade agreements. However, with so much confusion regarding what is real and what is not out there, the fear that it might be included helped to push prices higher almost constantly since the start of 2025,’ he said.

‘Again, those prices make their way to the farm gate.’

New supply set to come online includes BHP’s (ASX:BHP,NYSE:BHP,LSE:BHP) Jansen mine in Saskatchewan. It was originally set to start production in 2026; however, in its Q2 operational review, released on July 18, BHP announced that the project costs had ballooned to the US$7 billion to US$7.4 billion range, up from US$5.7 billion.

The increase has impacted the project’s timeline. Up until the announcement, development was ahead of schedule and was expected to start in 2026, but it has since reverted to the original timeline that will see it begin in 2027.

Additionally, BHP said it was considering pushing the second stage of production back to 2031 while it undergoes a CAPEX review, citing the potential for additional potash supply coming to market in the medium term.

“The comment about the medium-term supply outlook was a rather small and inconspicuous part of the announcement, but I continue to believe it says loads more about the outlook,” Linville said about BHP’s decision to review stage two.

Potash and phosphate price forecast for 2025

The phosphate market is unlikely to change in the near term.

There isn’t much expectation that China will increase supply, and while there are some significant projects in the works, how many will enter the production is yet to be seen as demand continues to increase from the battery sector.

Linville sees a continuation of current trends, noting that the market isn’t in a place to recover quickly:

“A major discussion point has been surrounding demand destruction that is anticipated. The hope is that this will help values to fall. Unfortunately, I think the market continues to underestimate how bad of a shape phosphate is in.’

As for potash, Linville expects the market to maintain stability.

“My longer-term outlook is that potash values will see relatively little price volatility, and that lower prices should become common. However, the stage appears set for 2025. Summer fill programs have been successful. Demand continues to look good. Anything is possible, but it appears price structures for potash are stable to higher,” he said.

Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More
In Investing

Lode Gold Completes Final Tranche Financing for Total $1.51 Million

No Comments

Lode Gold Resources Inc. (TSXV: LOD,OTC:LODFF) (OTCQB: LODFF) (‘Lode Gold’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce that it has completed the third and final tranche of its previously announced non-brokered private placement offering for $1 million. In this final tranche, the Company has raised an additional $326,780 through the issuance of 1,815,446 Units at a price of $0.18 per Unit. The Company has now raised a total of $1,513,768 through the issuance of 8,409,825 Units.

Each $0.18 unit consists of one common share and one common share purchase warrant. Each warrant shall entitle the holder to purchase one common share at an exercise price of $0.35 per common share for a period of three years following the date of closing.

The Company may accelerate the warrant expiry date if the Company’s shares trade at $0.65 or more for a period of 10 days, including days where no trading occurs. The closing of the offering is expected to occur one business day following receipt of all required regulatory approvals.

The proceeds raised from the offering will go toward execution of the business plans for Lode Gold and its subsidiary, Gold Orogen (BC 1475039 Ltd.).

About Lode Gold

Lode Gold (TSXV: LOD,OTC:LODFF) is an exploration and development company with projects in highly prospective and safe mining jurisdictions in Canada and the United States.

In Canada Lode Gold holds assets in the Yukon and New Brunswick. Lode Gold’s Yukon assets are located on the southern portion of the prolific Tombstone Belt and cover approximately 99.5 km2 across a 27 km strike. Over 4,500 m have been drilled on the Yukon assets with confirmed gold endowment and economic drill intercepts over 50 m. There are four reduced-intrusive targets (RIRGS), in addition to sedimentary-hosted orogenic exploration gold.

In New Brunswick, Lode Gold, through its subsidiary 1475039 B.C. Ltd., has created one of the largest land packages in the province with its Acadian Gold Joint Venture, consisting of an area that spans 445 km2 with a 44 km strike. It has confirmed gold endowment with mineralized rhyolites.

In the United States, the Company is focused on its advanced exploration and development asset, the Fremont Mine in Mariposa, California. It has a recent 2025 NI 43-101 report and compliant MRE that can be accessed here https://lode-gold.com/project/freemont-gold-usa/.

Fremont was previously mined until gold mining prohibition in WWII, when its mining license was suspended. Only 8% of the resource identified in the 2025 MRE has been extracted. This asset has exploration upside and is open at depth (three step-out holes at 1,300 m hit structure and were mineralized) and on strike. This is a brownfield project with over 43,000 m drilled, 23 km of underground workings and 14 adits. The project has excellent infrastructure with close access to electricity, water, state highways, railhead and port.

The Company recently completed an internal scoping study evaluating the potential to resume operations at Fremont based on 100% underground mining. Previously, in March 2023, the Company completed a Preliminary Economic Assessment (‘PEA’) in accordance with NI 43-101 which evaluated a mix of open pit and underground mining. The PEA and other technical reports prepared on the Company’s properties are available on the Company’s profile on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca) and the Company’s website (www.lode-gold.com).

ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY
Wendy T. Chan
CEO & Director

Information Contact:

Wendy T. Chan
CEO
info@lode-gold.com
+1-(604)-977-GOLD (4653)

Kevin Shum
Investor Relations
kevin@lode-gold.com
+1 (604) -977-GOLD (4653)

Cautionary Note Related to this News Release and Figures

This news release contains information about adjacent properties on which the Company has no right to explore or mine. Readers are cautioned that mineral deposits on adjacent properties are not indicative of mineral deposits on the Company’s properties.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information

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.

This news release includes ‘forward-looking statements’ and ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation. All statements included in this news release, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements including, without limitation, statements with respect to the use of proceeds, advancement and completion of resource calculation, feasibility studies, and exploration plans and targets. Forward-looking statements include predictions, projections and forecasts and are often, but not always, identified by the use of words such as ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘plan’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘potential’, ‘target’, ‘budget’ and ‘intend’ and statements that an event or result ‘may’, ‘will’, ‘should’, ‘could’ or ‘might’ occur or be achieved and other similar expressions and includes the negatives thereof.

Forward-looking statements are based on a number of assumptions and estimates that, while considered reasonable by management based on the business and markets in which the Company operates, are inherently subject to significant operational, economic, and competitive uncertainties, risks and contingencies. These include assumptions regarding, among other things: the status of community relations and the security situation on site; general business and economic conditions; the availability of additional exploration and mineral project financing; the supply and demand for, inventories of, and the level and volatility of the prices of metals; relationships with strategic partners; the timing and receipt of governmental permits and approvals; the timing and receipt of community and landowner approvals; changes in regulations; political factors; the accuracy of the Company’s interpretation of drill results; the geology, grade and continuity of the Company’s mineral deposits; the availability of equipment, skilled labour and services needed for the exploration and development of mineral properties; currency fluctuations; and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate and actual results, and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company’s expectations include a deterioration of security on site or actions by the local community that inhibits access and/or the ability to productively work on site, actual exploration results, interpretation of metallurgical characteristics of the mineralization, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, future metal prices, availability of capital and financing on acceptable terms, general economic, market or business conditions, uninsured risks, regulatory changes, delays or inability to receive required approvals, unknown impact related to potential business disruptions stemming from the COVID-19 outbreak, or another infectious illness, and other exploration or other risks detailed herein and from time to time in the filings made by the Company with securities regulators, including those described under the heading ‘Risks and Uncertainties’ in the Company’s most recently filed MD&A. The Company does not undertake to update or revise any forward-looking statements, except in accordance with applicable law.

Corporate Logo

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/261839

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More
In Investing

Crypto Market Update: Ethereum Rallies Past US$4,000, Trump Orders Crypto Review in 401(k)

No Comments

Here’s a quick recap of the crypto landscape for Friday (August 8) as of 9:00 a.m. UTC.

Get the latest insights on Bitcoin, Ethereum and altcoins, along with a round-up of key cryptocurrency market news.

Bitcoin and Ethereum price update

Bitcoin (BTC) was priced at US$116,381, trading flat over the last 24 hours. Its highest valuation on Friday was US$116,112, while its lowest valuation was US$117,596.

Bitcoin price performance, August 8, 2025.

Chart via TradingView

Ethereum (ETH) was priced at US$3,956.05, up by 3.3 percent over the past 24 hours. Its lowest valuation on Friday was US$3,806.16, and its highest was US$3,997.11.

Altcoin price update

  • Solana (SOL) was priced at US$175.34, up by 2.8 percent over 24 hours. Its lowest valuation on Friday was US$168.36, and its highest was US$178.02.
  • XRP was trading for US$3.24, up by 6.1 percent in the past 24 hours. Its lowest valuation of the day was US$3.03, and its highest valuation was US$3.37.
  • Sui (SUI) is trading at US$3.75, up 0.5 percent over the past 24 hours. Its lowest valuation of the day was US$3.67, and its highest was US$3.88.
  • Cardano (ADA) was trading at US$0.7825, up by 2.9 percent over 24 hours. Its lowest valuation on Friday was US$0.7521, and its highest was US$0.8044.

Today’s crypto news to know

Ethereum breaks US$4,000 as Ripple and Chainlink spark altcoin rally

Ethereum surged past US$4,000 early Friday, hitting near year-to-date highs amid a broader rally in altcoins led by Ripple and Chainlink.

XRP jumped up to 8 percent after Ripple announced a US$200 million acquisition of Rail, a stablecoin payments platform designed to expand its cross-border settlement network.

Chainlink’s LINK token rose as much as 11 percent following news of its new Chainlink Reserve, which will accumulate LINK using revenue from institutional and on-chain fees.

Other major coins, including Solana, also saw gains in early trading. Ripple’s deal aims to integrate stablecoin pay-ins and payouts for USD and other currencies without requiring businesses to hold crypto.

The rally also coincided with President Trump’s executive order promoting alternative assets like crypto in retirement accounts, adding to bullish sentiment in the market.

Trump order opens door for Crypto and private equity in 401(k)s

President Trump has signed an executive order directing the Labor Department to review its fiduciary rules for retirement plans, potentially clearing the way for assets like cryptocurrency, private equity, and real estate to be included in 401(k)s.

While no laws have changed, the move signals a shift from the Biden-era stance that warned against crypto in retirement accounts.

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) still requires fiduciaries to choose “prudent” investments, meaning employers will need to justify the inclusion of volatile or opaque assets. Legal experts say the order could influence how federal agencies interpret the rules, but it won’t override decades of court precedents on fiduciary duty.

For now, employers remain cautious due to the risk of lawsuits over imprudent or overly expensive options. Crypto in 401(k)s remains rare, though large firms like BlackRock are already exploring target-date funds with alternative assets.

Binance artners with Spain’s BBVA to bolster asset security

Binance is teaming up with Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (BBVA), Spain’s second-largest bank, to give customers the option of storing their assets with a regulated custodian rather than directly on the exchange.

The arrangement is designed to reassure investors after Binance’s US$4.3 billion fine from US regulators in 2023 over anti–money laundering failures.

With BBVA acting as an independent custodian, customer funds would remain secure even if Binance faced hacking, insolvency, or further regulatory action. The partnership leverages BBVA’s strong reputation for compliance and innovation, aiming to encourage more cautious investors to engage with crypto.

The move also follows leadership changes at Binance, including founder Changpeng Zhao’s resignation and brief prison sentence, as the company works to repair its image.

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More
In Economy

Trump’s 39% Tariff on Gold: Revenue Grab or Prelude to Revaluation?

No Comments

In the early hours of trading on Friday, August 8, 2025, global markets were shaken by the announcement of a 39 percent tariff on imported gold bars weighing 100 ounces or more by the Trump administration. US December gold futures reached an all-time high price of $3,534.10 per ounce shortly after the declaration was made. This sudden move injected uncertainty into the bullion market, unsettling dealers, refiners, and institutional investors trading in larger “exchange delivery” formats. While gold is rarely targeted by protectionist measures — unlike base metals, agriculture, or manufactured goods — this decision warrants close attention, both for its immediate market impact and potential implications for future monetary policy.

Likely Purposes

From an economic perspective, there are several plausible motivations (several of which may hold true simultaneously) for such a steep and sudden measure.

  1. Raising Revenue

    The simplest explanation is fiscal. A 39 percent levy on high-value imports is a substantial revenue generator, particularly if the target is a commodity with significant daily transaction volume.
  2. Targeting Switzerland

    The tariff could also be intended to primarily target Switzerland, a key player in global gold refining and bar creation. Switzerland is central to the gold supply chain, as it refines and standardizes much of the world’s gold before it’s distributed. By imposing a tariff on large gold imports, the US could limit Switzerland’s ability to sell refined gold at favorable prices, disrupting its dominance. This move would reduce reliance on Swiss refining and could be a response to recent tensions between Switzerland and the US over trade and tariff disputes. It signals the US aiming to punish Switzerland for its perceived intransigence in tariff discussions, as well attempting to wrest some control away from foreign gold pricing.
  1. Restricting Supply and Controlling Markets

    A more strategic interpretation is that the administration may be attempting to restrict the flow of foreign gold into the US market. By making imports of 100-ounce bars prohibitively expensive, policymakers could reduce inflows, tightening domestic supply and potentially influencing prices. This approach mirrors past episodes where governments have sought to control the domestic availability of gold ahead of significant policy changes.
  2. Countering Money Laundering and Imposing Compliance Costs

    Gold is often used in international transactions, particularly among institutional investors or high-net-worth individuals, as a way to move value across borders with fewer restrictions. By imposing a tariff, the US could be making it more expensive for these large transactions to occur within its borders, thereby reducing the attractiveness of using gold for these purposes. While it wouldn’t directly address outflow-related money laundering, the tariff could serve to discourage the use of gold bars in cross-border wealth transfers into the US, which could be seen as a measure to limit some money-laundering opportunities.
  3. Positioning Ahead of a Major Policy Shift

    A 39 percent tariff on gold bars over 100 ounces could be a preparatory measure for the US to revalue its gold reserves, which are currently undervalued at $42 per ounce. The tariff could prevent arbitrage by limiting the ability of speculators to buy gold at lower international prices and sell it domestically at a higher future price, particularly if the US plans to revalue its gold to market prices around $3,200 per ounce. It would also help accumulate gold within the US, ensuring that domestic supply is maintained for a potential gold-backed or partially gold-backed dollar. Additionally, the tariff could stabilize domestic gold prices, mitigate speculation, and prepare the market for revaluation, signaling an intention to shift away from the dollar’s exclusive backing. This would reduce external manipulation and maintain US control over its gold supply, easing the transition to a new monetary framework while strengthening the dollar’s global position.

The Arbitrage Dimension

Ironically, if the tariff leads to a sustained domestic price premium for 100-ounce bars — either because of higher import costs or restricted supply — it could create exactly the kind of large-scale arbitrage the measure may have been intended to suppress.

Arbitrage occurs when price discrepancies for the same asset exist in different markets, allowing traders to buy low in one venue and sell high in another. In this case, if US gold prices rise sharply relative to London, Zurich, or Hong Kong due to the tariff, there will be a strong incentive for market participants to find ways to bypass the tariff or repackage gold into non-tariffed forms (such as smaller bars or coins) to import at lower cost.

At the institutional level, this could take the form of shipping gold to jurisdictions without the tariff, refining it into untaxed units, and then legally reintroducing it into the US market. On the futures side, arbitrageurs might use COMEX delivery mechanisms, swaps, or other derivative structures to capture the spread between the artificially elevated domestic price and the world market price. While such activity would eventually narrow the gap, it could generate windfall profits in the interim — ironically undermining the tariff’s supply-restriction intent and adding volatility to the very market it seeks to control.

Historical Precedents

Although the United States today operates under a fiat monetary system, the federal government has a long history of direct and indirect intervention in the gold market — often under the banner of “monetary stability” or “national interest.”

The most famous episode came in 1933–34, when the Roosevelt administration, facing a banking crisis and deep deflation, first prohibited the private ownership of most gold coins and bullion, then revalued gold from $20.67 per ounce to $35 per ounce. This represented a devaluation of the dollar’s gold content by nearly 41 percent and transferred substantial wealth from private holders to the government’s balance sheet. Importantly, the sequence began with restrictions on ownership and movement of gold — control first, revaluation second.

In the early 1970s, as the Bretton Woods system frayed, President Nixon “closed the gold window,” ending the dollar’s convertibility into gold for foreign central banks. While framed as a temporary suspension, it effectively severed the last formal link between the dollar and gold, freeing the Federal Reserve to pursue more accommodative monetary policies without the discipline of a fixed parity.

Even after the dollar floated freely, interventions persisted. In the late 1970s, as inflation accelerated and gold prices surged, the Treasury engaged in large-scale gold sales and swaps — sometimes in coordination with other central banks — to temper upward price movements. These efforts were often more symbolic than decisive, but they reinforced the notion that US authorities considered gold prices a matter of policy concern.

The 39 percent tariff on gold imports highlights the core concern that led EC Harwood to found the American Institute for Economic Research’s — the ongoing threat posed by governmental interventions in personal freedom and sound money. While the gold market should reflect private demand, mining supply, and global investment flows, it is often distorted by policies that serve short-term political goals. This tariff, with its abrupt implementation and targeted impact, risks distorting market pricing and suppressing economic freedom. It underscores the truth that, in times of fiscal strain or geopolitical risk, governments often turn to gold as a convenient target for intervention.

The immediate effects will likely be felt most by large bullion traders and institutional investors, with wider price differentials and reduced liquidity in the US market. History shows such measures rarely occur in isolation, and this could signal a broader shift in US monetary policy — whether revenue-driven or something more substantial. What’s clear is that AIER’s mission, focusing on defending financial freedom and sound money, remains as relevant as ever. The risks to market integrity that inspired our founding persist, and defending open markets and sound money continues to be an urgent, vital necessity.

by
Read More
In Latest News

US appeals court blocks Trump contempt proceedings ordered by Boasberg

No Comments

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 Friday that U.S. District Judge James Boasberg cannot move forward with possible contempt proceedings against the Trump administration.

The case involves the administration’s alleged violation of an emergency court order blocking the administration from using a 1798 law to summarily deport hundreds of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador — the latest in an evolving, high-stakes court clash that has played out for months in various courts. 

Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao, two Trump appointees on the majority-Democrat bench, sided with the Trump administration Friday in blocking Boasberg’s contempt motion from moving forward. 

Judge Nina Pillard, an Obama appointee, dissented. 

The 2-1 ruling is all but certain to be appealed to the full court to be heard en banc, where the Democrat-majority bench is seen as more favorable to the plaintiffs, or directly to the Supreme Court for review.

‘The district court here was placed in an enormously difficult position,’ Katsas said Friday, writing for the majority.

‘Faced with an emergency situation, it had to digest and rule upon novel and complex issues within a matter of hours. In that context, the court quite understandably issued a written order that contained some ambiguity.’

Katsas noted that the appellate court ruling does not center on the lawfulness of Trump’s Alien Enemies Act removals in March, when administration officials invoked the 1798 immigration law to send more than 250 Venezuelan nationals to CECOT, the maximum-security prison in El Salvador.

‘Nor may we decide whether the government’s aggressive implementation of the presidential proclamation warrants praise or criticism as a policy matter,’ he added. ‘Perhaps it should warrant more careful judicial scrutiny in the future. Perhaps it already has.’

‘Regardless, the government’s initial implementation of the proclamation clearly and indisputably was not criminal.’

The ruling comes months after Boasberg originally found grounds to move on potential contempt proceedings in the case.

It comes as Boasberg has also ordered ongoing status updates on the location and custodial status of the 252 CECOT class migrants, after they were deported last month from El Salvador to Venezuela as part of a prisoner exchange between the U.S. and Venezuela.

It is unclear how many of those migrants had pending asylum applications in the U.S. or had been granted a ‘withholding of removal’ order blocking their return to their country of origin. 

The long-awaited ruling comes months after Boasberg ruled that the court had found probable cause to move on criminal contempt proceedings after he issued a late-night temporary restraining order on March 15 blocking the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport certain migrants to El Salvador.

Boasberg had also ordered all migrants to be ‘immediately returned’ to U.S. soil, which did not happen. 

Despite the order, hundreds of migrants were deported to the Salvadorian prison, CECOT, in March, where they remained until late last month, when they were sent from the prison in El Salvador to Venezuela, as part of the prisoner exchange. 

Boasbeg ruled in April that there was ‘probable cause’ to move on criminal contempt proceedings against the Trump administration for failing to return the planes to U.S. soil and said the court had determined that the Trump administration demonstrated a ‘willful disregard’ for his order.

The appeals court granted the Trump administration’s request for an emergency stay of the ruling months earlier, prompting questions as to why they did not move more quickly on the motion.


 

Still, the decision is almost certain to be appealed either to the full circuit court to be heard en banc, or directly to the Supreme Court for review. 

The Trump administration for months has sparred with judges who have blocked the president’s executive orders from taking force.

Boasberg, in particular, has emerged as one of Trump’s biggest public foes. Last month, the court attempted to have him removed from overseeing the case and have it reassigned to another case — a long-shot effort that legal experts and former judges suggested is unlikely to go far.

This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
by
Read More
In Investing

OTCQB Venture Virtual Investor Conference: Presentations Now Available for Online Viewing

No Comments

Virtual Investor Conferences, the leading proprietary investor conference series, today announced the presentations from the OTCQB Venture Virtual Investor Conference, held August 7 th are now available for online viewing.

REGISTER AND VIEW PRESENTATIONS HERE

The company presentations will be available 24/7 for 90 days. Investors, advisors, and analysts may download investor materials from the company’s resource section.

Select companies are accepting 1×1 management meeting requests through August 13 th .

August 7 th

Presentation Ticker(s)
Surge Copper. Corp (OTCQB: SRGXF | TSXV: SURG)
ReGen III Corp. (OTCQB: ISRJF | TSXV: GIII)
Silver47 Exploration Corp. (OTCQB: AAGAF | TSXV: AGA,OTC:AAGAF)
Nature’s Miracle Holding Inc. (OTCQB: NMHI)
Zero Candida Technologies Inc. (OTCQB: ZCTFF | TSXV: ZCT)
NextGen Digital Platforms Inc. (OTCQB: NXTDF | CSE:  NXT)
Telo Genomics Corp. (OTCQB: TDSGF | TSXV: TELO)
Zomedica Corp. (OTCQB: ZOMDF)
Metaguest.AI Incorporated (OTCQB: MGSTF | CSE: METG)
Waste Energy Corp. (OTCQB: WAST)
CleanGo Innovations Inc. (OTCQB: CLGOF | CSE: CGII)
Sekur Private Data Ltd. (OTCQB: SWISF | CSE: SKUR)
CyberCatch Holdings, Inc. (OTCQB: CYBHF | TSXV: CYBE)

To facilitate investor relations scheduling and to view a complete calendar of Virtual Investor Conferences, please visit www.virtualinvestorconferences.com .

About Virtual Investor Conferences ®

Virtual Investor Conferences (VIC) is the leading proprietary investor conference series that provides an interactive forum for publicly traded companies to seamlessly present directly to investors.

Providing a real-time investor engagement solution, VIC is specifically designed to offer companies more efficient investor access. Replicating the components of an on-site investor conference, VIC offers companies enhanced capabilities to connect with investors, schedule targeted one-on-one meetings and enhance their presentations with dynamic video content. Accelerating the next level of investor engagement, Virtual Investor Conferences delivers leading investor communications to a global network of retail and institutional investors.

Media Contact:
OTC Markets Group Inc. +1 (212) 896-4428, media@otcmarkets.com

Virtual Investor Conferences Contact:
John M. Viglotti
SVP Corporate Services, Investor Access
OTC Markets Group
(212) 220-2221
johnv@otcmarkets.com

Primary Logo

News Provided by GlobeNewswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com
by
Read More