Insider Legacy Secret
Author

admin

Browsing
In Economy

Did Trump Really ‘Make Showers Great Again’? Not Exactly

No Comments

President Donald J. Trump recently signed an Executive Order directing the Secretary of Energy to rescind certain restrictions on water pressure established by his predecessors. 

As the White House put it, the president was ending the “Obama-Biden war on water pressure and [making] America’s showers great again.”

This isn’t the final salvo in the decades-long Appliance Wars — nor did the order accomplish what many on social media claim.

I first encountered the Appliance Wars in the 1990s, courtesy of my favorite TV show, Seinfeld. In a memorable episode, Kramer, Jerry, and Newman are all visibly irked (and unkempt) as they wrestle with the newly mandated “low-flow” showers.

“There’s no pressure; I can’t get the shampoo out of my hair!” Kramer laments. “If I don’t have a good shower, I am not myself. I feel weak and ineffectual; I’m not Kramer.”

The scene comes from “The Shower Head,” Season 7, Episode 15, which aired in 1996. I didn’t catch it until a few years later while in college, but even then the episode felt fresh, edgy, and smart. 

What I didn’t know was that the Appliance Wars had already been raging for decades.

The Appliance Wars

On December 22, 1975, President Gerald Ford signed into law the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, which granted the president powers over energy exports. The law included regulatory power over household appliances to increase energy efficiency.

The legislation was a response to the 1970s oil crisis, an event that was exacerbated by price controls imposed by President Richard Nixon. The first energy efficiency regulations under the EPCA focused primarily on items like refrigerators, air conditioners, and water heaters, but over time, the scope of these regulations expanded and became more stringent.

In 1992, the Energy Policy Act amended the EPCA to require stricter efficiency standards for appliances and water efficiency standards, including a rule that mandated lower-flow showerheads that limited outflows to 2.5 gallons of water per minute. 

The federal government’s attempt to save the planet by regulating showerheads seemed common sense to some and absurd to others. For writers at Seinfeld, it was clearly the latter. 

Yet the low-flow showers that Seinfeld mocked were not stringent enough for some. 

In 2010, the Obama Administration reduced the maximum flow of showerheads to 2.0 gallons per minute. Some states have gone further. California, for example, has regulations that limit the maximum flow rate for showerheads to 1.8 gallons (and 1.2 GPM for bath faucets).

Twitter and media were abuzz last week that Trump had “made showers great again,” but his executive order didn’t scrap the federal rule, something the White House’s own statement confirms.

“President Trump is restoring sanity to at least one small part of the federal regulations, returning to the straightforward meaning of ‘showerhead’ from the 1992 energy law, which sets a simple 2.5-gallons-per-minute standard for showers,” the press release stated.

The executive order reversed a complicated Biden rule — it was 13,000 words, according to the White House — on the definition of the word “showerhead.” What it did not do was repeal the 1992 regulation.

‘If Washington Can Regulate Showerheads’

The Trump administration is taking a victory lap for “Making Showers Great Again,” but the federal regulation that inspired “The Shower Head” is still in place — it’s just slightly less stringent than the 2-gallon per minute rule initiated during the Obama presidency. (To be fair, the 2.5 limit is written into the US Code, which cannot be changed with the stroke of a pen.) 

That episode ended with Kramer buying “hot” showerheads off the black market. The episode captured the absurdity of attempting to conserve resources in a top-down fashion. As Kramer pointed out, he couldn’t get clean with the new showerheads, which resulted in him taking longer showers. 

Longer showers are indeed a consequence of lower-flow showerheads, but these are the kind of practical consequences that rule-making bureaucrats rarely consider. We’re supposed to take it on faith that federal regulators know the optimal amount of water each individual requires to live, wash, and flush. They don’t, of course.

The Showerhead Wars are funny because they are a Kafkaesque absurdity. The wars lay bare the stupidity of a soulless bureaucracy that can spend 13,000 words defining the term “showerhead” to make our lives less enjoyable and efficient. 

The joke is ultimately on us. Because if Washington can regulate your showerhead, it can regulate anything — and that’s the problem.

by
Read More
In Economy

What Scrooge Effect? Americans Keep Giving, Despite the Welfare State

No Comments

We just made it through another tax season. Congress has begun debating whether and how to extend the Trump tax cuts from the 2018 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. While many elements of that tax debate are worth commenting on, I want to highlight the standard deduction because it sheds light on an underappreciated part of American philanthropy.

Prior to the introduction of the federal income tax in 1913, charitable donations did not have meaningful tax deduction benefits. Yet Americans gave generously. In fact, if anything, American philanthropy has declined due to the Scrooge effect of the welfare state. “Are there no [state-funded] prisons [or work-houses]?” Ebenezer Scrooge asks in Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol.

The questions reveal that Scrooge (and others) feel that their higher taxes to fund a variety of social and “poverty-reduction” programs take the place of direct philanthropic giving. Americans also keep a lot less of what they earn today than they did a hundred or a hundred and fifty years ago—as most of us know from recent personal experience.

The case of welfare programs crowding out charity has been made eloquently by Marvin Olasky in The Tragedy of American Compassion. Various religious and fraternal orders provided health insurance, old-age insurance, and other social services to their members throughout the nineteenth and into the twentieth century. These services were later replaced by state unemployment benefit schemes, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

These government programs “crowded out” charitable, philanthropic, civil society—contributing to problems of declining social capital elaborated by Robert Nisbet (Quest for Community) and Robert Putnam (Bowling Alone). Government agencies and government checks replaced civic networks and systems of support. Yet American philanthropy is still alive and kicking in the U.S.

The Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University estimates that Americans gave $557.16 billion to charity in 2023. That’s about $1,600 per capita. By comparison, Canadians gave about $400 per capita to charity and Brits gave about $250 per capita. Even as a percentage of GDP, the U. S. ranks well above European countries. According to one source, the U. S. is one of the most charitable countries in the world.

What’s remarkable is that the vast majority of Americans who give to charity receive no federal tax benefit from doing so. Returning to the individual exemption, when you file your taxes, you can either claim the standard deduction ($14,600 for an individual, or $29,200 for a couple) or you can itemize your deductions. A few expenses can count towards the itemized deductions, but these expenses are highly qualified and don’t add up to much for the average person.

From a benefit standpoint, your qualified expenses, including your charitable giving, must add up to more than the standard deduction before you receive any tax advantage. Suppose someone takes the entire $10,000 state and local tax deduction (SALT) and comes up with $5,000 more in other qualified expenses. They would still be $14,200 short of the $29,200 standard deduction for a couple. This means that any of their charitable giving, up to $14,200, does not render them any benefits on their federal taxes. 

Seventy percent of American households earn less than $127,000 before taxes. So $14,200 would mean donating more than ten percent of their pre-tax earnings before they saw any advantage from the giving being “tax-deductible.” For most Americans, the “tax-deductible” element of charitable giving is practically irrelevant. Yet they give anyway.

Most Americans donate money even though they receive no federal tax benefit. Americans gave generously long before the income tax and the charitable tax deduction existed. A large industry of lawyers and accountants has cropped up to help wealthy people lower their tax liabilities through various forms of charitable giving. Sometimes these methods lead to creative accounting and legal gymnastics that can distort or divert people’s choices of how to use their wealth.

These observations provide a few reasons to want an alternative to our federal tax code 501(c)(3) structure. We should ask whether society would be freer in a world without tax exemptions for charitable giving—a world without the stark for-profit/nonprofit legal divide with all its attendant reporting and hoops. Tax code rules that put their thumb on the scale represent social engineering of the kind free people should reject.

Most Americans give generously without thought of return—even with a large welfare state and high taxes. There is something deeply admirable about this kind of generosity that gives without expecting any material benefit in return. Imagine how they would give if the welfare state were trimmed down and their taxes were lower. That’s what George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” should have meant.

by
Read More
In Investing

Oil and Gas Price Update: Q1 2025 in Review

No Comments

The oil sector faced volatility throughout the first quarter of 2025.

Concerns around weak demand, increasing supply and trade tensions came to head in early April, pushing oil prices to four year lows and eroding the support Brent and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) had above the US$65 per barrel level.

Starting the year at US$75 (Brent) and US$72 (WTI), the oil benchmarks rallied in mid-January, reaching five month highs of US$81.86 and US$78.90, respectively. Tariff threats and trade tensions between the US and China, along with soft demand in Asia and Europe, dampened the global economic outlook for 2025 and added headwinds for oil prices.

This pressure caused oil prices to slip to Q1 lows of US$69.12 (Brent) and US$66.06 (WTI) in early March.

“The macroeconomic conditions that underpin our oil demand projections deteriorated over the past month as trade tensions escalated between the United States and several other countries,” a March oil market report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) notes, highlighting the downside risks of US tariffs and retaliatory measures.

The instability and weaker-than-expected consumption from advanced and developing economies prompted the IEA to downgrade its growth estimates for Q4 2024 and Q1 2025 to about 1.2 million barrels per day.

Despite the uncertain outlook, an announcement that OPEC+ would extend a 2.2 million barrel per day production cut into Q2 added some support to the market amid global growth concerns and rising output in the US.

Prices spiked at the end of March, pushing both benchmarks to within a dollar of their 2025 start values. However, the rally was short-lived and prices had plummeted by April 9.

Oil prices fall as OPEC hikes output and supply risks mount

WTI price performance, December 31, 2024, to April 23, 2025.

WTI price performance, December 31, 2024, to April 23, 2025.

Sinking to four year lows, Brent and WTI fell below the critical US$60 per barrel threshold, to US$58.62 (Brent) and US$55.38 (WTI), lows not seen since April 2021. The decline saw prices shed more than 21 percent between January and April shaking the market and investor confidence.

Watch Hansen discuss where oil and other commodities are heading.

According to Hansen, if prices remain in the high US$50 range US production will likely decrease, aiding in a broader market realignment. ‘Eventually we will see production start to slow in the US, probably other places as well, and that will help balance the market,” the expert explained in the interview. “Helping to offset some of the risk related to recession, but also some of the production increases that we’re seeing from OPEC.”

In early April, OPEC+ did an about face when it announced plans for a significant increase in oil production, marking its first output hike since 2022. The group plans to add 411,000 barrels per day (bpd) to the market starting in May, effectively accelerating its previously gradual supply increase strategy.

Although the group cited “supporting market stability” as the reasoning behind the increase, some analysts believe the decision is a punitive one targeted at countries like Iraq and Kazakhstan who consistently exceed production quotas.

“(The increase) is basically in order to punish some of the over producers,” said Hansen. He went on to explain that Kazakhstan produced 400,000 barrels beyond its quota.

If these countries return to their agreed limits, it could offset OPEC’s planned production hikes.

At the same time, US sanctions on Iran and Venezuela may tighten global supply further, while a growing military presence in the Middle East also signals rising geopolitical risks, particularly involving Iran.

Oil price forecast for 2025

As such Hansen expects prices to fluctuate between US$60 to US$80 for the rest of the year.

“(I am) struggling to see, prices collapse much further than that, simply because it will have a counterproductive impact on supply and that will eventually help stabilize prices,” said Hansen.

Hansen’s projections also fall inline with data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). The organization downgraded the US$74 Brent price forecast it set in March to US$68 in April.

The EIA foresees US and global oil production to continue rising in 2025, as OPEC+ speeds up its planned output increases and US energy remains exempt from new tariffs.

Starting mid-year, global oil inventories are projected to build. However, the EIA warns that economic uncertainty could dampen demand growth for petroleum products, potentially falling short of earlier forecasts.

“The combination of growing supply and lower demand leads EIA to expect the Brent crude oil price to average less than US$70 per barrel in 2025 and fall to an average of just over US$60 per barrel in 2026,” the April report read.

Supply concerns add tailwinds for natural gas

On the natural gas side, Q1 was marked by tight conditions amid rising demand. A colder-than-normal winter led to increased consumption, with US natural gas withdrawals in Q1 exceeding the five-year average.

Starting the year at US$3.59 per metric million British thermal units, prices rose to a year-to-date high of US$4.51 on March 10. Values pulled back by the end of the 90 day period to the US$4.09 level, registering a 13.9 percent increase for Q1.

‘Cold weather during January and February led to increased natural gas consumption and large natural gas withdrawals from inventories,” a March report from the EIA explains.

Natural gas price performance, December 31, 2024, to April 23, 2025.

Natural gas price performance, December 31, 2024, to April 23, 2025.

“(The) EIA now expects natural gas inventories to fall below 1.7 trillion cubic feet at the end of March, which is 10 percent below the previous five-year average and 6 percent less natural gas in storage for that time of year than EIA had expected last month,’ the document continues.

Natural gas price forecast for 2025

Following record setting demand growth in 2024 the gas market is expected to remain tight through 2025, amid market expansion from Asian countries.

The IEA also pointed to price volatility brought on geopolitical tensions as a factor that could move markets.

“Though the halt of Russian piped gas transit via Ukraine on 1 January 2025 does not pose an imminent supply security risk for the European Union, it could increase LNG import requirements and tighten market fundamentals in 2025,” the organization notes in a gas market report for Q1.

Although the market is forecasted to remain tight the IEA expects growth in global gas demand to slow to below 2 percent in 2025. Similarly to 2024’s trajectory, growth is set to be largely driven by Asia, which is expected to account for almost 45 percent of incremental gas demand, the report read.

THe US-based EIA has a more optimistic outlook for the domestic gas sector, projecting the annual demand growth rate to be 4 percent for 2025.

“This increase is led by an 18 percent increase in exports and a 9 percent increase in residential and commercial consumption for space heating,” an April EIA market overview states.

The report attributes the expected export growth to increased liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments out of two new LNG export facilities, Plaquemines Phase 1 and Golden Pass LNG.

Venture Global’s (NYSE:VG) Plaquemines LNG facility in Louisiana commenced production in December 2024 and is currently in the commissioning phase.

Once fully operational, it is expected to have a capacity of 20 million metric tons per annum. The facility has entered into binding long-term sales agreements for its full capacity

Golden Pass LNG, a joint venture between ExxonMobil (NYSE:XOM) and state-owned QatarEnergy, is under construction in Sabine Pass, Texas. The project has faced delays due to the bankruptcy of a key contractor, with Train 1 now expected to be operational by late 2025 . Upon completion, Golden Pass LNG will have an export capacity of up to 18.1 million metric tons per annum.

The EIA forecasts natural gas prices to average US$4.30 in 2025, a US$2.10 increase from 2025. Farther ahead the EIA has a more modest forecast of US$4.60 for 2026.

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

Keep reading…Show less

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

Trump Administration Fast Tracks Permitting for Key US Mining Projects

No Comments

The Trump administration has fast tracked the permitting of 10 US mining projects under the FAST-41 infrastructure initiative, escalating the government’s strategy of bolstering domestic minerals output and reducing foreign reliance.

The announcement, made on April 18 by the White House and the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (Permitting Council), comes in direct response to President Donald Trump’s executive order, which mandates swift and accountable action to facilitate the development of the nation’s vast mineral reserves.

“This is the first use of the Permitting Council’s transparency authority, and we look forward to showcasing the many benefits the Federal Permitting Dashboard can bring to critical infrastructure projects,” said Manisha Patel, acting executive director at the Permitting Council.

The ten projects, which include sites for lithium, copper, antimony, phosphate, potash, and metallurgical coal, have been formally granted FAST-41 status—a designation from the 2015 Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act that streamlines environmental reviews and interagency coordination for major infrastructure projects.

The status does not exempt them from environmental regulations but aims to cut bureaucratic delays and improve transparency by publishing real-time permitting progress on a federal dashboard.

Among the fast-tracked projects are:

  • McDermitt exploration project in Oregon — HiTech Minerals
  • Caldwell Canyon phosphate mine in Idaho
  • Lisbon Valley copper project in Utah
  • Michigan potash project
  • Libby exploration project in Montana

While some of these projects are still in exploration or environmental assessment stages, their inclusion on the dashboard signals priority status.

In practice, this means their permitting timelines will now be coordinated among relevant agencies and tracked publicly to reduce administrative redundancies that have historically delayed US mining ventures for up to a decade.

The move underscores the Trump administration’s broader policy of “American Energy Dominance,” which includes securing domestic supply chains for critical materials used in electronics, electric vehicles, clean energy technologies, and military hardware.

A recent Interior statement warned that continued dependence on imports—especially from geopolitical competitors like China—poses a threat to national security.

“For too long, duplicative processes and regulatory paralysis have delayed the development of the minerals America needs to power everything from national defense systems to smartphones,” Adam Suess, Acting Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management at the Department of the Interior, emphasized in the same release.

“By cutting red tape and increasing accountability, we’re making it clear that under President Trump, the United States is serious about being a global leader in critical minerals,” Suess added.

The designation also includes expansions to lithium projects, with Albemarle’s Silver Peak Mine in Nevada—currently the only operating lithium mine in the US—now poised for accelerated expansion.

The focus on lithium, antimony, copper, and rare earth elements comes as the US seeks to diversify supply away from China, which currently dominates the global trade in many of these strategic materials.

Furthermore, the announcement follows President Trump’s directive earlier this month to launch a federal probe into possible new tariffs on all critical mineral imports, signaling a more aggressive stance toward reshoring key elements of the nation’s industrial supply chain.

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

Keep reading…Show less

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

Trump praises Elon Musk as ‘patriot, a brilliant guy, and a friend of mine’ amid DOGE exit

No Comments

Elon Musk may be easing off his role at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE ), but President Donald Trump isn’t easing off his praise. 

On Wednesday, Trump praised Musk’s smarts and patriotism during an executive order signing in the Oval Office, brushing off critics and defending the tech mogul’s work on federal reform.

‘He’s an incredible… brilliant guy,’ Trump said. ‘He was a tremendous help both in the campaign, and in what he’s done with DOGE.’

DOGE, launched in 2025, has served as a hallmark of Trump’s second-term agenda to cut waste, streamline federal agencies, and apply private-sector principles to federal operations. 

Musk’s informal advisory role in the effort has drawn both attention and criticism.

In an exchange with a reporter, Trump addressed what he described as unfair treatment of Musk and Tesla. ‘They took it out on Tesla, and I just thought it was so unfair because he’s trying to help the country, but he has helped the country… He didn’t need to do this. He did it,’ he said.

Trump’s remarks came as tensions have hit an all-time high for Musk’s electric vehicle company Tesla. 

A Kansas City dealership was recently firebombed, causing over $200,000 in damage. In Europe, a Tesla executive canceled a scheduled appearance in Rome over reported security threats. These incidents have occurred alongside ongoing protests at Tesla’s Berlin gigafactory.

Trump continued his praise, referencing Musk’s aerospace work with SpaceX: ‘When you see those rockets go up and come back and land in the same gantry, nobody else can do that but this man. So he’s just an incredible person, and he’s a friend of mine as a nice person too, as a very nice person.’

He also noted Musk’s broad technological contributions. ‘He’s a great patriot… he makes a great product… it’s a great car. It’s [a] great everything. Starlink is great. What he does is good. He’s doing medical things that are amazing.’

A recent Fox News poll shows that while 49% of Americans think DOGE will make the government more efficient, 52% believe the Trump administration has not been ‘competent and effective’ in managing federal operations — a sentiment unchanged from 2017.


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

What’s the Next US Copper Mine? 27 Copper Projects to Watch

No Comments

Companies with upcoming copper mines in the US could be poised to benefit from tailwinds in the sector, including copper supply deficits and the new administration promising to cut ‘red tape’ for critical minerals projects.

Copper demand is climbing quickly in recent years because of the rapid urbanization of the global south as well as the developing energy transition sectors. However, current copper mines are increasing in age and there is a lack of new copper mines to replace them, both due to limited greenfield exploration and long permitting times.

This has put the world’s copper supply in a difficult situation, and experts expect to see deficits begin to emerge in 2025.

Resource nationalism is also increasing in recent times, with countries heavily focused on building their own critical minerals supply chains. This caused the Biden administration to list copper as a critical mineral in late 2024, which would allow projects accelerated permits, investment incentives and national security enhancements.

Additionally, after new US President Donald Trump took office in January 2025, Trump issued an executive order that would slash red tape to increase domestic critical mineral production, including copper. The move has caused significant environmental concerns, but it could support US copper companies that have previously struggled to receive permits.

Further action to speed up permitting came on March 20, when Trump signed another executive order with the goal of increasing American mineral production. The order included requests to related federal agencies to identify suitable mining sites on federal land and provide a list of priority projects.

This was followed by an announcement by the White House on April 18 that 10 mining projects would be granted increased transparency, accountability, and predictability for the permitting review process, which will improve permitting times for critical mineral projects. The initial list includes two copper sites: the Resolution copper project in Arizona, which is covered in the list below, and an expansion of Lisbon Valley Mining Company’s Lisbon Valley mine in Utah.

In this article we dive into more than 25 US copper projects in the construction, restarting or permitting phase, based on data from mine database Mining Data Online (MDO) as of March 2025. MDO’s database focuses on publicly traded mining companies, so there may be US copper mines being developed by private companies that are not in this list.

Read on to learn about the advanced copper projects that could become new copper mines.

In this article

    Next US copper mine: Copper mines under construction

    Black Butte project

    Ownership: 87% – Sandfire Resources (TSXV:SFR)
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: SEDEX, Stratabound

    Once it enters production, the Black Butte copper project in Montana is expected to produce 120,000 metric tons (MT) of copper concentrate annually. The site’s Johnny Lee deposit hosts proven and probable reserves of 8.8 million MT, containing 226,100 MT of copper at a grade of 2.6 percent.

    Sandfire had previously begun Phase I construction to mine the Johnny Lee deposit, but a Montana district court ruling overturned the prior Record of Decision in 2022 halted it. However, the Montana Supreme Court ruled in Sandfire’s favor in Q1 2024. With its mining permit reinstated, the company is now assessing Black Butte’s economics as it moves toward a final investment decision.

    Florence project

    Ownership:Taseko Mines (TSX:TKO,NYSE:TGB)
    Mine type: In-Situ
    Deposit type: Porphyry

    Located in Central Arizona, the Florence project is expected to produce 85 million pounds of copper annually. According to MDO, Florence will be one of the world’s most efficient copper producers, and copper produced on site will meet the London Metal Exchange grade A standard.

    Overall, the site’s proven and probable mineral reserves are 2.32 billion pounds of contained copper from 320 million MT of ore with an average grade of 0.36 percent copper. Construction at the site reached the 56 percent mark in December of 2024 and is on track for its first production by the end of 2025.

    Idaho Cobalt Operation

    Ownership:Jervois Global (ASX:JRV,OTC Pink:JRVMQ)
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Vein / narrow vein, sediment-hosted

    The Idaho Cobalt Operation (ICO) is located in Northern Idaho near the border with Montana. Even though the project is focused on cobalt production, over the seven-year life of the mine, it is planned to produce more than 15,000 MT of copper.

    While the ICO is still listed as under construction, Jervois Global halted development of the mine in March 2023 due to falling cobalt prices. As of Q4 2024, construction activities remain suspended and the company is focused on maintenance and environmental compliance.

    Next US copper mine: Mines being restarted

    Gunnison mine

    Ownership:Gunnison Copper (TSX:GCU,OTCQB:GCUMF)
    Mine type: In-Situ Recovery, Open Pit
    Deposit type: Skarn

    Gunnison Copper, previously named Excelsior Mining, is currently developing its Gunnison mine in Arizona as an open pit mining operation. Gunnison was originally scheduled to begin operating in 2020 as an in-situ recovery project, but startup was delayed due to low flow rates. Gunnison Copper has been evaluating different alternatives to overcome the challenges and obtained permits to begin well simulation using small-scale, shallow-level hydraulic fracking.

    However, the company determined that an open-pit operation has ‘substantially improved viability’ compared to the ISR operation at this time, and is now advancing the permitting process for the open pit. Gunnison intends to maintain the option of its fully permitted ISR operation and well stimulation.

    Once the open-pit mine is in operation, Gunnison estimates an average annual production of 167 million pounds of copper cathode. The probable mineral reserve for the in-situ operation as of 2016 is 4.5 billion pounds of copper from 782.2 million MT of ore with an average grade of 0.29 percent. The open pit’s 2024 mineral resource estimate showed a measured and indicated resource of 5.1 billion pounds of copper from 831.6 million MT of ore with an average copper grade of 0.31 percent.

    Sunshine mine

    Ownership: Sunshine Silver Mining and Refining
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Vein / narrow vein, mesothermal

    The Sunshine mine has seen production dating back to 1904, with the most recent being in 2008. The site sits within one of the most prolific mining areas of the Coeur d’Alene district in Idaho, United States. Since acquiring the project in 2010, Sunshine Silver Mining and Refining has spent more than US$100 million on-site upgrades and developments with the intent of restarting production before the end of the decade.

    According to MDO, the Sunshine property hosts “one of the highest-grade, large primary silver deposits in the world.” Once restarted, it will also produce copper and several other metals as byproducts, with planned average annual copper production of 1.12 million pounds.

    Next US copper mine: Copper mines in the permitting stage

    Antler project

    Ownership: New World Resources (ASX:NWC,OTC Pink:NWCBF)
    State: Arizona
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS)
    Commodities: Copper, zinc, lead, silver, gold

    As of February 2025, New World Resource’s Antler project is on track to begin construction activities in H2 2025 and complete the permitting process by early 2026. Federally, the only permit remaining is the Mine Plan of Operations, which the Bureau of Land Management stated will be evaluated under an Environmental Assessment. If things proceed as planned, the company will begin shipping concentrate by 2027.

    The site hosts numerous targets and a probable copper reserve of 180,000 MT from 11 million MT of ore with an average grade of 1.6 percent copper. The company anticipates a mine life of 12.2 years with an average annual copper production of 36 million pounds and copper equivalent production of 30,100 MT.

    Arctic project

    Ownership:
     50% – Trilogy Metals (NYSE:TMQ)
    50% – South32 (ASX:S32,OTC Pink:SHTLF)
    State: Alaska
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: VMS
    Commodities: Copper, zinc, lead, silver, gold

    The Arctic project is currently in the feasibility stage. Due to its location, the only significant federal permit required is the 404 wetlands permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers. The remaining permits are issued at the state level.

    The site’s indicated copper resource is 2.35 billion pounds from 35.7 million MT of ore with an average grade of 2.98 percent copper. An additional 189 million pounds are inferred from 4.5 million MT of ore with an average grade of 1.92 percent. Once complete, the mine is expected to produce 234,000 MT of copper annually.

    Back Forty project

    Ownership: Gold Resource (NYSEAMERICAN:GORO)
    State: Michigan
    Mine type: Open pit and underground
    Deposit type: VMS, breccia pipe/stockwork
    Commodities: Gold, silver, copper, zinc

    Back Forty is planned as two open pits, an underground mine and a processing plant. Once fully permitted, Gold Resource plans for a 21 month construction period before mining commences at its Pinwheel open pit. In 2021, a judge denied a wetlands permit for Back Forty due to its impact on the surrounding area. MDO reports that Gold Resource’s revised mine plan avoids impact on the region’s wetlands, which should support the mine permitting process.

    Back Forty will have the capacity to produce 6.8 million pounds of copper concentrate annually. The project hosts an open pit indicated copper resource of 74 million pounds from 9.36 million MT of ore with an average grade of 0.36 percent copper, and an underground indicated copper resource of 47 million pounds from 5.1 million MT with an average grade of 0.41 percent.

    Cactus Mine project

    Ownership: Arizona Sonoran Copper (TSX:ASCU,OTCQX:ASCUF)
    State: Arizona
    Mine type: Open pit and underground
    Deposit type: Porphyry
    Commodities: Copper

    Cactus is a brownfield development project in Central Arizona with a 5.5 kilometer mine trend. The site hosts the past-producing Sacaton mine, a mining stockpile and three primary deposits: Cactus East, Cactus West and Parks/Salyer. Arizona Sonoran Copper is working to complete a pre-feasibility study for the second half of 2025.

    A Q3 2024 preliminary economic assessment( PEA) outlined a 31 year mine life with on-site production of 86,000 short tons of LME Grade A copper cathode per year. In total, the site has a measured and indicated resource of 7.29 billion pounds from 632.7 million MT of ore at an average grade of 0.576 percent copper.

    CK Gold project

    Ownership: US Gold (NASDAQ:USAU)
    State: Wyoming
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Porphyry, breccia pipe/stockwork
    Commodities: Copper, gold, silver

    In 2024, the CK Gold project achieved several permitting milestones. In April, US Gold received its mine operating permit, and in November, its subsidiary, Gold King, received its final permit approval from the air quality division of the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. These permits were the final hurdles needed before the company began developing the project.

    The company plans to produce a copper concentrate that contains gold, copper and silver. CK has a significant copper resource with proven and probable reserves totaling 248 million pounds from 70.4 million MT at an average grade of 0.18 percent copper. US Gold is working towards a feasibility study, and aims to begin construction in late-2025 or 2026 with first concentrate production in 2027 or 2028.

    Copper Flat project

    Ownership: THEMAC Resources (TSXV:MAC,OTC Pink:MACQF)
    State: New Mexico
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Porphyry, breccia pipe/stockwork, hydrothermal
    Commodities: Copper, molybdenum, gold, silver

    Copper Flat is a brownfield project built on a site that has seen mining dating back to the 1890s, with various companies working to bring the site back online since the 1980s. To date, THEMAC has completed its definitive feasibility and environmental studies and has received several key Federal and State permits. The state mining permit is in the advanced stage.

    The site hosts a proven and probable copper reserve of 579.21 million pounds from 113.08 million MT of ore at an average grade of 0.3 percent copper.

    Copperwood project

    Ownership: Highland Copper (TSXV:HI,OTCQB:HDRSF)
    State: Michigan
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Sediment-hosted
    Commodities: Copper, silver

    Copperwood is a fully permitted project and is in active development. Highland spent much of 2024 working to fulfill its obligations to prepare the site as required under the terms of the wetlands and streams permit. Its next development steps are metallurgic testing using ultra-fine flotation technology and community engagement as it moves towards a construction decision.

    Copperwood hosts proven and probable reserves of 25.7 million MT of ore at an average grade of 1.45 percent copper for 820 million pounds of contained copper. Highland expects to produce 65 million pounds of saleable copper per year for a total of 675 million pounds over the mine’s 10.3 year life.

    Copper World Complex

    Ownership: Hudbay Minerals (TSX:HBM,NYSE:HBM)
    State: Arizona
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Porphyry, skarn
    Commodities: Copper, molybdenum, silver, gold

    Copper World is one of the largest copper projects in development in the United States, according to Hudbay. The company is currently in the permitting stage for Phase 1 at Copper World, which will consist of four open pits with an expected mine life of 20 years. The second phase will expand the operation and extend the life of the mine further.

    The site has received all necessary state permits to begin construction and operation after it received its air quality permit in January 2025. Hudbay is expecting annual average copper production of 92,000 MT during the first 10 years and 85,000 MT over the 20 year mine life. In year five, it plans to begin copper cathode production to supply the US market.

    CuMo project

    Ownership: Idaho Copper (OTC Pink:COPR)
    State: Idaho
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Porphyry, vein/narrow vein, breccia pipe/stockwork
    Commodities: Molybdenum, copper, silver, tungsten, rhenium, sulfuric acid

    While Idaho Copper’s focus with CuMo is developing one of the world’s largest molybdenum mines, the company also plans to produce an average of 84 million pounds of copper metal in concentrate per year. CuMo hosts a significant measured and indicated copper resource of 3.81 million pounds.

    Idaho Copper is working towards releasing an updated PEA during the first half of 2025. Additionally, the company expects to begin environmental work for its environmental impact statement sometime this year.

    Empire project

    Ownership:
    80% – Phoenix Copper (LSE:PXC,OTCQB:PXCLF)
    20% – ExGen Resources (TSXV:EXG,OTC Pink:BXXRF)
    State: Idaho
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Skarn, vein/narrow vein, breccia pipe/stockwork
    Commodities: Copper, gold, silver

    Empire is a brownfield project planned as an open-pit mine atop historic underground workings. Phoenix Copper is developing its mine plan for the Idaho Department of Lands and for federal review by the National Environmental Policy Act. The company is aiming to complete the permitting project in 2025 and begin production in 2026 using on-site, pre-owned milling equipment it purchased in 2024.

    Empire’s proven and probable copper reserves are 109.45 million pounds from 10.1 million MT of ore with an average grade of 0.49 percent copper. The mill will produce a copper-gold-silver concentrate and cement copper stream, combining for 89.1 million pounds of payable copper over the nine-year life of mine.

    Mason project

    Ownership: Hudbay Minerals
    State: Nevada
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Porphyry, vein/narrow vein
    Commodities: Copper, molybdenum, gold, silver

    Planned for a mine life of 27 years, Mason is a significant greenfield copper deposit and one of the largest undeveloped porphyry copper deposits in North America, according to MDO. Hudbay considers Mason a ‘long-term future development asset’ and is working on enhancing project economics through metallurgical studies.

    Based on its 2021 PEA, Hudbay expects the mine to produce an average of 112,000 MT of copper concentrate per year and deliver more than 10 million MT over its lifetime.

    NorthMet project

    Ownership:
    50% – Teck (TSX:TECK.A,TECK.B,NYSE:TECK)
    50% – Glencore (LSE:GLEN,OTC Pink:GLCNF)
    State: Minnesota
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Magmatic
    Commodities: Copper, nickel, palladium, gold, platinum, cobalt, silver

    The Teck and Glencore NewRange joint venture consists of two deposits: NorthMet and Mesaba. Permitting for NewRange is stalled in part due to concerns with the mine’s tailings plan. In 2025, the companies plan to advance engineering studies at NorthMet and secure updated development permits.

    The Trump administration’s executive order to speed approvals of critical minerals projects could potentially help the project clear regulatory hurdles. If it is fully permitted, NorthMet is expected to deliver an average of 60 million pounds of copper concentrate per year over a 20 year mine life.

    Palmer project

    Ownership: American Pacific Mining (CSE:USGD,OTCQX:USGDF)
    State: Alaska
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: VMS
    Commodities: Copper, zinc, silver, gold, barite, lead

    American Pacific Mining is assessing its Palmer project through its five-year plan that ends in 2028. In 2024, work included environmental and permitting activities, a variety of studies in preparation for future feasibility plans and drilling to expand the mineral resource.

    As of 2018, the site hosts an indicated copper resource of 154 million pounds from 4.68 million MT of ore at an average copper grade of 1.49 percent, and an inferred copper resource of 124 million pounds from 9.6 million MT of ore at an average grade of 0.59 percent.

    Pebble project

    Ownership: Northern Dynasty Minerals (TSX:NDM,NYSE:NAK)
    State: Alaska
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Porphyry
    Commodities: Copper, molybdenum, gold, silver, rhenium

    According to MDO, Pebble is the world’s largest known undeveloped resource of copper as well as gold. The project has been stalled since November 2020, when the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) rejected its permit applications due to environmental concerns. Since then, Northern Dynasty has been suing to overturn the rejection.

    In February 2025, court proceedings were suspended for 90 days at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USACE. This followed the confirmation of a new EPA administrator and Trump’s executive order supporting critical mineral projects. However, it still remains to be seen whether the Trump administration will support Pebble this time around, as the previous rejection was made during his first term.

    Pebble is planned to produce an estimated average of 320 million pounds of copper concentrate annually, from a measured and indicated resource base of 52.99 billion pounds of copper.

    Pumpkin Hollow project

    Ownership: Kinterra Capital
    State: Nevada
    Mine type: Open pit
    Deposit type: Skarn, breccia pipe/stockwork, iron oxide copper-gold (IOCG)
    Commodities: Copper, gold, silver

    The Pumpkin Hollow project hosts a fully permitted open pit project and a fully permitted and constructed underground mine. Production and development were suspended at the operations after its previous owner Nevada Copper filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in June 2024. That October, Pumpkin Hollow was acquired for US$128 million by an affiliate company of private equity firm Kinterra Capital, which plans to advance the assets.

    Proven and probable copper reserves at Pumpkin Hollow’s open pit project total 3.59 billion pounds from 385.7 million MT of ore with an average grade of 0.47 percent copper. The open pit is expected to produce an annual average of 163 million pounds of payable copper. Additionally, the underground mine is projected to produce 50 million pounds of payable copper annually once it is restarted.

    Resolution project

    Ownership:
    55% – Rio Tinto (ASX:RIO,NYSE:RIO,LSE:RIO)
    45% – BHP Group (ASX:BHP,NYSE:BHP,LSE:BHP)
    State: Arizona
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Porphyry
    Commodities: Copper, molybdenum, silver

    The Resolution project has the potential to supply 25 percent of the total US copper demand, with planned production of 40 billion pounds of copper over its 40 year mine life.

    Permitting for the project has been underway for over a decade, and the US Forest Service published and then rescinded the project’s final environmental impact statement in early 2021. The local Apache Tribe has taken legal action to stop the proposed mine as the deposit sits under a site of religious importance.

    According to BHP’s 2024 annual report, the Resolution joint venture and the US Forest Service are focused on further consultation with Native American Tribes to mitigate harm to the region. The agency has said there is currently no timeline for republication of the final environmental impact statement. After Trump took office in January, Rio Tinto’s CEO said he is optimistic the president will grant Resolution’s final permits.

    On April 19, Resolution was included as one of the initial 10 projects for the federal government’s permitting transparency initiative. The program is designed to produce greater predictability in the permitting process. According to the federal page for the project, ‘a permitting timetable will be published for this project on or before May 2, 2025.’

    Santa Cruz project

    Ownership: Ivanhoe Electric (TSX:IE,NYSE:IE)
    State: Arizona
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Porphyry, breccia pipe/stockwork, vein/narrow vein
    Commodities: Copper

    The Santa Cruz copper project is located on private land in Arizona. It is designed to minimize environmental impact, with a small surface footprint and the use of modern technology and on-site renewable energy to supply up to 70 percent of its energy demand.

    A December 2022 mineral reserve estimate reported an indicated copper resource of 2.8 million MT of copper from 226.72 million MT of ore with an average grade of 1.24 percent copper, and an inferred resource of 1.85 million MT copper from 149 million MT at the same grade.

    Ivanhoe Electric is aggressively working through engineering design and permitting applications for the project. As of February 2025, it has received 10 permits or rights supporting exploration activities, land use conversion and land reclamation. The company plans to submit its major site plan, aquifer protection permits and encroachment permit in Q2.

    In April, the company received a letter of interest from the Export-Import Bank of the United States for potential debt financing of US$825 million. Ivanhoe is on track to release a prefeasibility study in June 2025, and it ‘anticipates permits will be received and initial construction activities will begin in the first half of 2026.’

    Tamarack North project

    Ownership:
    51% – Talon Metals (TSX:TLO,OTC Pink:TLOFF)
    49% – Rio Tinto
    State: Minnesota
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Porphyry
    Commodities: Nickel, copper, cobalt, platinum, palladium, gold

    Tamarack is one of only three high-grade nickel sulfide deposits discovered in this century. Due to its significance, the US Department of Energy has selected it to receive a US$114.8 million grant for the construction of a battery mineral processing facility.

    Despite its nickel primary status, the project will produce 24,000 MT of copper concentrate annually as a by-product material from an indicated resource of 8.56 million MT of ore grading 0.92 percent copper. Talon currently plans to begin construction in 2026, with production beginning in late 2027.

    Twin Metals Minnesota project

    Ownership: Antofagasta (LSE:ANTO,OTC Pink:ANFGF)
    State: Minnesota
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Magmatic
    Commodities: Copper, nickel, platinum, palladium, gold, silver, cobalt, lead

    Twin Metals Minnesota’s development is currently on hold after hitting multiple roadblocks, including the rejection of its mine plan and cancelling of two federal mining leases due to concerns tailings from the mine will impact the Superior National Forest and Boundary Waters Canoe Area.

    In 2022, Antofagasta’s subsidiary Twin Metals engaged in litigation against the US government over the actions, and in September 2023, the district court dismissed the company’s claims, siding with the government. Twin Metals filed an appeal in November of that year.

    If approved, the mine is expected to produce 158,000 MT of copper annually. The company said it is studying the possible impact of Trump’s executive order.

    Van Dyke project

    Ownership: Copper Fox Metals (TSXV:CUU,OTCQX:CPFXF)
    State: Arizona
    Mine type: In-situ
    Deposit type: Porphyry, breccia pipe/stockwork, vein/narrow vein
    Commodities: Copper

    The Van Dyke project covers a project area of 531.5 hectares and hosts historical mine workings, which produced 11.5 million pounds of copper between 1929 and 1945 and an additional 5 million pounds between 1988 and 1989.

    In a 2020 PEA, Copper Fox reported an after-tax net present value of US$644.7 million, an internal rate of return of 43.4 percent and a payback period of 2.1 years. The company forecasts a mine life of 17 years and annual average copper production of 85 million pounds. Copper Fox is currently advancing the project towards a pre-feasibility study.

    White Pine North project

    Ownership:
    66% – Kinterra Capital
    34% – Highland Copper
    State: Michigan
    Mine type: Underground
    Deposit type: Sediment-hosted
    Commodities: Copper, silver

    Kinterra Capital is the operator of White Pine North as of 2023, when Highland sold it 66 percent of the project. In June 2024, the company initiated an environmental baseline study for White Pine North that would be key to supporting its ongoing permitting operations. Using room-and-pillar mining, the partners plan to use begin production at the first panel in 2027 and expect a four-year ramp-up to full plant throughput.

    The project hosts a measured and indicated copper resource of 3.5 billion pounds from 133.4 MT of ore with an average grade of 1.05 percent copper and an additional inferred copper resource of 2.18 billion pounds from 97.2 MT of ore with an average grade of 1.03 percent. Average annual payable copper metal production is projected at 94 million pounds.

    Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, own shares of Northern Dynasty.

    Keep reading…Show less

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

    DNI Gabbard refers intel officials to DOJ for prosecution over alleged leaks of classified information

    No Comments

    Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard referred two intelligence community professionals to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution Wednesday over alleged leaks of classified information, Fox News Digital has learned. 

    An ODNI official told Fox News Digital that the intelligence community professionals allegedly leaked classified information to the Washington Post and the New York Times. A third criminal referral is ‘on its way’ to the DOJ. 

    The official told Fox News Digital that intelligence community professionals should take the move ‘as a warning.’ 

    ‘Politicization of our intelligence and leaking classified information puts our nation’s security at risk and must end,’ Gabbard told Fox News Digital. ‘Those who leak classified information will be found and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.’ 

    ‘Today, I referred two intelligence community leakers to the Department of Justice for criminal referral, with a third criminal referral on its way, which includes the recent illegal leak to the Washington Post,’ Gabbard said. ‘These deep-state criminals leaked classified information for partisan political purposes to undermine President Trump’s agenda.’ 

    Gabbard added: ‘I look forward to working with the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate, terminate and prosecute these criminals.’

    An ODNI official said the move to refer for criminal prosecution is the first step in the process of ‘holding these individuals accountable.’ 

    The official explained the process in their decision-making, telling Fox News Digital that they conducted an internal review and then sent the criminal referral to the Justice Department. The DOJ would then send the referral to the FBI to begin a formal, criminal investigation. 

    ‘We are aggressively investigating other leaks and will pursue further criminal referrals as warranted,’ the official told Fox News Digital. ‘Any intelligence community bureaucrat who is considering leaking to the media should take this as a warning.’ 

    The official added that the Trump administration ‘will identify leakers and leakers will face legal consequences.’ 

    Earlier this month, Gabbard established a new task force to restore transparency and accountability in the intelligence community. Fox News Digital first reported on the Director’s Initiative Group (DIG), which started by investigating weaponization within the intelligence community.

    Officials said the group will also work to root out politicization and expose unauthorized disclosures of classified intelligence. In addition, it will work to declassify information ‘that serves a public interest.’ 

    Gabbard also has held employees who participated in sexually explicit NSA chatrooms accountable, and is pursuing action on those who have made unauthorized leaks of classified information within the intelligence community. 


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

    How to Shield Your Stocks During a Market Decline

    No Comments

    When the stock market is turbulent, it makes sense to hedge some of your valuable equity positions. One way to do it is through options. 

    The adage “Don’t keep all your eggs in one basket” is well-known among investors. While a diversified portfolio reduces your risk, you probably have a handful of favorite stocks that you don’t want to sell. But watching those stocks lose value can be painful.

    The good news: There is a way to reduce your losses on those positions.

    Hedging With Options

    Before diving into the strategies, you need to determine what you want to do with the stocks you want to hold on to. When a market is trending lower, options help protect your investments in the following ways:

    • Protecting your stocks against losses.
    • Generating income from declining stock values. 
    • Realizing profits from declining stocks if the stock moves in your favor.

    Before proceeding further, look at all your portfolio holdings and determine which stocks you want to hold on to, then determine your hedging objectives.

    This article will focus on the strategies you can implement to protect your stocks against losses. You can do this by buying puts, which are similar to an insurance policy. You pay for downside protection to gain unlimited upside potential.

    Here’s how it works.

    1. You buy one put contract for 100 shares of an underlying stock. For example, if you own 100 shares of Apple, Inc. (AAPL), you buy one AAPL put contract; if you own 200 shares of AAPL, you could buy 2 put contracts.
    2. You buy a put with a strike price that could generate a profit that you’re comfortable with on your equity position, and a premium (the price of the contract) that you’re willing to pay to protect your position.
    3. If the stock’s price falls below the strike price, you could sell your put contract for a profit.  You could also choose to exercise your put contract, i.e., selling the underlying shares at the contract’s strike price.

    For example, say you bought 100 shares of AAPL for $110 per share. AAPL stock is trading slightly below $205 but hit a high of $259.81. You want to protect your unrealized gains in case the price falls further. Looking at the daily chart of AAPL below, further downside looks highly probable.

    The 50-day simple moving average (SMA) has crossed below the 200-day, the StockCharts Technical Rank (SCTR) score is at 32.50, which is relatively low, and the relative strength index (RSI) just below 50, indicating neutral momentum.

    FIGURE 1. DAILY CHART OF AAPL STOCK. A declining trend, a technically weak chart, and lukewarm momentum indicate a higher probability of further decline.Chart source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

    If you were to buy a put, what strike price and expiration would you choose? That can be a time-consuming exercise, but the OptionsPlay Add-on in StockCharts does it for you quickly. Here’s how.

    • Below the chart, click the Options menu, found under Tools & Resources. You’ll see the Options Chain by default (Options Summary).
    • Click the OptionsPlay button above the Options Chain to access the OptionsPlay Explorer. You’ll see the three optimal strategies listed.

    FIGURE 2. OPTIMAL OPTIONS STRATEGIES FOR AAPL STOCK. You could sell 100 shares of AAPL, buy a put, or buy a put vertical spread. You can analyze the three scenarios and determine which one will help protect your equity position.Image source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

    The recommended long put (displayed in the middle) is the June 20 $205 put, which will cost $1,170. You have to decide if it’s worth paying this much premium to protect your position in the stock. If the stock price rises above $205 by expiration, your contract will expire worthless. You would have lost $1,170. Are you willing to take that risk?

    You can modify the strategy by changing the expiration and strike price of the contract. This will help determine if there are more favorable risk-to-reward scenarios. The following scenarios could play out:

    Scenario 1: The stock price falls below $205.

    • You could sell the put option for a profit, which will offset some of the unrealized losses from the decline in the stock’s price.
    • You could also choose to exercise the option and sell the shares for $205. You would walk away with a profit of $8,330 ($9,500 – 1,170).

    Scenario 2: The stock price is above $205 by expiration.

    • Your put contract will expire worthless.
    • If you think the stock price will drop as contract expiration gets close, you could roll it to a further-out expiration. You’d sell your $205 June put and purchase another put option with a later expiration.

    When buying puts, your maximum risk is limited to what you pay for the premium.

    There’s More You Can Do

    The strategy on the right shows a put vertical strategy, which has a much lower cost, a higher OptionsPlay score, and a potential reward of $2,145, which is much lower than buying a put.

    The put vertical involves adding a lower strike price put with the same expiration. This would be a two-leg options trade—you buy the June 20 205 put and sell the June 20 $175 put.

    The benefit of the put vertical is that you limit your risk to $855 (the debit). This will happen if  AAPL is above $205 and both puts expire worthless.

    Your potential reward is limited to $2,145 (strike price – debit), which you will realize if AAPL’s stock price falls below $175. The probability of profit of the put vertical is 41.79%, versus 37.48% for the long put.

    The Bottom Line

    Buying puts and put vertical spreads can protect your options positions in a declining market. You still need to evaluate the cost of protection versus your profit potential, just as you would when you’re shopping for insurance.

    The benefit of using the OptionsPlay Add-on is that the legwork is done for you. All you have to do is evaluate the different strategies, which are spelled out for you in simple terms. To learn more about the features available in the OptionsPlay Add-on, visit the StockCharts TV OptionsPlay with Tony Zhang YouTube channel.

    Disclaimer: This blog is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. The ideas and strategies should never be used without first assessing your personal and financial situation or without consulting a financial professional.

    by
    Read More
    In Investing

    Walker Lane Resources: Advancing High-grade Gold, Silver assets in North America’s Prolific Regions

    No Comments

    Walker Lane Resources (TSXV:WLR) is executing an exploration strategy focused on advancing high-impact projects across premier North American mining jurisdictions. The company’s portfolio spans the prolific Walker Lane Gold Trend in Nevada, as well as key exploration assets in British Columbia, the Yukon, and Newfoundland.

    Near-term efforts are centered on two high-priority, drill-ready targets — Tule Canyon in Nevada and Amy in British Columbia — supported by the continued advancement of Silver Hart, Walker Lane’s flagship silver-lead-zinc asset in the Yukon, toward a development decision. All projects are accessible by road, enabling cost-effective exploration and streamlined logistics.

    Walker Lane Gold Trend location in Nevada

    With a lean capital structure, high-grade and scalable assets, and a clear path from discovery through to early-stage development, Walker Lane is well-positioned to unlock significant value and deliver strong returns for shareholders. The company represents a compelling growth opportunity in the junior mining sector.

    Company Highlights

    • Walker Lane Resources is focused on high-grade gold, silver and polymetallic exploration, with a balanced project pipeline across multiple Canadian and US jurisdictions.
    • Two flagship drill-ready projects – Amy (British Columbia) and Tule Canyon (Nevada) – are scheduled for 2025 drilling, each with compelling surface results, historical workings, and high-impact resource potential.
    • The Silver Hart project in the Yukon is being positioned for near-term production through innovative ore-sorting and small-scale open pit development, designed to generate early-stage cash flow.
    • Walker Lane holds approximately 1.3 billion shares in North Bay Resources (OTC:NBRI) and is entitled to option payments related to the sale of the Bishop Mill in California.
    • The Silverknife project in British Columbia is subject to an option agreement with Coeur Mining, with potential milestone payments and expenditures totaling over $6 million through 2028.
    • The company has an established pipeline of prospective exploration stage assets at Cambridge and Silver Mountain (Walker Lane, Nevada) and Logjam (Yukon).

    This Walker Lane Resources profile is part of a paid investor education campaign.*

    Click here to connect with Walker Lane Resources (TSXV:WLR) to receive an Investor Presentation

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

    Cartier Resources Closes Offering with Paradigm Capital and Concurrent Offering for Aggregate Gross Proceeds of $11,398,596

    No Comments

    THIS NEWS RELEASE IS NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWSWIRE SERVICES FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

    Cartier Resources Inc. (TSX-V: ECR) (‘ Cartier ‘ or the ‘ Corporation ‘) is pleased to announce that it has closed its previously announced private placement with Paradigm Capital Inc. (the ‘ Agent ‘) for aggregate gross proceeds of $8,395,176.11 (the ‘ Offering ‘) through a combination of: (i) 27,473,627 units of the Corporation issued on a charitable flow-through basis qualifying as ‘flow-through shares’ (within the meaning of subsection 66(15) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and section 359.1 of the Taxation Act (Québec)) (the ‘ Premium FT Units ‘) at $0.182 per Premium FT Unit for gross proceeds of $5,000,200.11; and (ii) 26,115,200 units of the Corporation (the ‘ Hard Dollar Units ‘) issued at $0.13 per Hard Dollar Unit for gross proceeds of $3,394,976.

    Each Premium FT Unit consists of one common share in the capital of the Corporation (each a ‘ Common Share ‘) and one common share purchase warrant (each a ‘ Premium FT Warrant ‘), and each such Common Share and Premium FT Warrant qualifies as a ‘flow-through share’ (within the meaning of subsection 66(15) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and section 359.1 of the Taxation Act (Québec)).

    Each Hard Dollar Unit consists of one Common Share of the Corporation and one common share purchase warrant (each a ‘ Hard Dollar Warrant ‘), and for certainty, each Common Share and Hard Dollar Warrant does not qualify as a ‘flow-through share’ .

    Each Premium FT Warrant and Hard Dollar Warrant entitles the holder thereof to acquire one Common Share of the Corporation (each a ‘ Warrant Share ‘) on a non-flow-through basis at an exercise price of $0.18 until April 23, 2030. The expiry of both the Premium FT Warrants and the Hard Dollar Warrants may be accelerated by the Corporation if the daily volume-weighted average trading price of the Common Shares on the TSX Venture Exchange (the ‘ TSXV ‘) exceeds $0.18 for a period of twenty (20) consecutive trading days, at any time during the period beginning on April 23, 2028 and ending on April 23, 2030 (the ‘ Acceleration Trigger ‘). Following an Acceleration Trigger, the Corporation may give notice in writing (the ‘ Acceleration Notice ‘) to the holders of the Premium FT Warrants and the Hard Dollar Warrants that such warrants will expire thirty (30) days following the date on which the Acceleration Notice is given.

    In addition, in connection with Agnico Eagle Mines Limited’s (‘ Agnico Eagle ‘) right to participate in certain equity offerings by the Corporation under an amended and restated investor rights agreement dated March 20, 2025, Agnico Eagle participated in a concurrent non-brokered private placement pursuant to which it purchased 23,103,226 units of the Corporation (the ‘ Units ‘) at $0.13 per Unit for additional gross proceeds $3,003,419.38 (the ‘ Concurrent Offering ‘). Each Unit consists of one Common Share and one Hard Dollar Warrant, which for certainty do not qualify as a ‘flow-through share’.

    The Corporation intends to use the proceeds arising from the Premium FT Units to incur eligible ‘Canadian exploration expenses’ that qualify as ‘flow-through mining expenditures’ (as both terms are defined in the Income Tax Act (Canada)) (the ‘ Qualifying Expenditures ‘) related to the projects of the Corporation in Québec. The Qualifying Expenditures will be renounced in favour of the subscribers of the Premium FT Units with an effective date no later than December 31, 2025 and in an aggregate amount of not less than the total amount of the gross proceeds raised from the issuance of the Premium FT Units. The gross proceeds from the Concurrent Offering will be used for exploration purposes, including a 100,000-metre diamond drill program on the Cadillac project, as well as for general and working capital purposes.

    The Concurrent Offering constitutes a ‘related party transaction’ as defined under Multilateral Instrument 61-101 – Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions (‘ MI 61-101 ‘), due to the fact Agnico Eagle had, prior to the Concurrent Offering, beneficial ownership of, or control or direction over, securities of the Corporation carrying more than 10% of the voting rights attached to all the outstanding voting securities of the Corporation. The Corporation is relying on Section 5.5(b) of MI 61-101 for an exemption from the formal valuation requirement under MI 61-101, as the Corporation is not listed on specified markets. The Corporation is relying upon the exemptions from the minority shareholder approval requirements pursuant to Section 5.7(1)(a) of MI 61-101 on the basis that neither the fair market value of the subject matter of, nor the fair market value of the consideration for, the transaction insofar as it involves interested parties (within the meaning of MI 61-101) in the Offering and/or the Concurrent Offering exceeds 25% of the Corporation’s market capitalization calculated in accordance with MI 61-101. No formal valuation or other prior valuation has been prepared in respect of the Corporation. A material change report will be filed by the Corporation less than 21 days in advance of the closing date of the Concurrent Offering as the final details thereof were not settled until shortly prior to the closing of the Concurrent Offering and the Corporation wished to close the Offering and Concurrent Offering in a timely manner for sound business reasons.

    On closing of the Offering and Concurrent Offering, Agnico Eagle beneficially owned, or exercised control and direction over, an aggregate of 120,126,170 Common Shares and 30,103,226 common share purchase warrants, representing approximately 27.22% of the issued and outstanding Common Shares on an undiluted basis and 31.87% of the issued and outstanding Common Shares on a partially-diluted basis.

    In consideration of the services rendered by the Agent in connection with the Offering, the Company paid the Agent a cash commission of $503,710.57 (representing 6.0% of the aggregate gross proceeds arising from the Offering) and issued 2,143 553 non-transferable compensation options (representing 4% of the total number of shares issued under the Offering) each exercisable for one (1) Common Share at a price of $0.13 until April 23, 2027.

    The securities issued under the Offering and Concurrent Offering are subject to a statutory four month and one day hold period under applicable Canadian securities laws expiring on August 24, 2025. The Offering and Concurrent Offering are subject to the final acceptance of the TSXV.

    This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of any of the securities in any state in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful. The securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the ‘ U.S. Securities Act ‘), or any U.S. state securities laws, and may not be offered or sold to, or for the account or benefit of, persons in the ‘United States’ or ‘U.S. persons’ (as such terms are defined in Regulation S under the U.S. Securities Act) absent registration under the U.S. Securities Act and all applicable U.S. state securities laws, or in compliance with an exemption therefrom.

    About Cartier Resources Inc.

    Cartier Resources Inc., founded in 2006, is an exploration company based in Val-d’Or. The Corporation’s projects are all located in Québec, which consistently ranks among the world’s top mining jurisdictions. Cartier is advancing the development of its flagship Cadillac project, consisting of the Chimo Mine and East Cadillac properties, and its other projects.

    Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information

    This news release contains ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of the applicable Canadian securities legislation that is based on expectations, estimates, projections, and interpretations as at the date of this news release. Any statement that involves discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, interpretations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance including in respect of the use of proceeds arising from the Offering and the Concurrent Offering and the tax treatment of the flow through shares (often but not always using phrases such as ‘expects’ or ‘does not expect’, ‘is expected’, ‘interpreted’, ‘management’s view’, ‘anticipates’ or ‘does not anticipate’, ‘plans’, ‘budget’, ‘scheduled’, ‘forecasts’, ‘estimates’, ‘believes’ or ‘intends’ or variations of such words and phrases or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘may’ or ‘could’, ‘would’, ‘might’ or ‘will’ be taken to occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information and are intended to identify forward-looking information. This forward-looking information is based on reasonable assumptions and estimates of management of the Corporation, at the time it was made, involves known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Corporation to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Although the forward-looking information contained in this news release is based upon what management believes, or believed at the time, to be reasonable assumptions, the parties cannot assure shareholders and prospective purchasers of securities that actual results will be consistent with such forward-looking information, as there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended, and neither the Corporation nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of any such forward-looking information. The Corporation does not undertake, and assumes no obligation, to update or revise any such forward-looking statements or forward-looking information contained herein to reflect new events or circumstances, except as may be required by law.

    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 news release. No stock exchange, securities commission or other regulatory authority has approved or disapproved the information contained herein.

    For more information, contact:

    Philippe Cloutier, P. Geo.
    President and CEO
    Phone: 819-856-0512
    Email: philippe.cloutier@ressourcescartier.com
    www.ressourcescartier.com

    Primary Logo

    News Provided by GlobeNewswire via QuoteMedia

    This post appeared first on investingnews.com
    by
    Read More