Author

admin

Browsing

KEY HIGHLIGHTS:

  • MIE has successfully completed testing, confirming suitability of Santa Maria Eterna silica sand for high quality, antimony-free glass manufacturing.
  • Initial material quality is extremely high allowing for minimal upgrades to achieve the technical requirements for solar glass manufacturing.

Homerun Resources Inc. (TSXV: HMR,OTC:HMRFF) (OTCQB: HMRFF) (‘Homerun’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce that the Company has received a Lab Scale Treatment Test Report from Minerali Industriali Engineering Srl (‘MIE’ and MIE Report) (see press release from November 18th, 2025) of the high purity, low iron silica sand from Santa Maria Eterna, Belmonte, Bahia, Brazil, confirming its application for the manufacture of antimony-free solar glass. This work is a key third-party deliverable under the Company’s ongoing Bankable Feasibility Study.

As previously announced, Homerun has completed a 43-101 compliant Technical Report with Mineral Resource Estimate containing a preliminary resource of 25.56 Mt Measured and 38.35Mt Inferred of high-purity silica sand (>99.6% SiO2). This Mineral Resource Estimate is from only one of the three assets controlled by Homerun in the District.

Please view NI 43-101 Technical Report here: https://homerunresources.com/ni-43-101-belmonte/

The MIE Report starts with a characterization of the unwashed raw silica sand, which confirms the inherent low-contaminant nature of this unique material, with purity of 99.7% and only 24ppm of Iron/Fe.

Two sets of tests are conducted: (1) the basic solution, consisting of wet screening; and (2) the complete solution, consisting of attrition washing and grain size classification, gravimetric separation and magnetic separation. XRF analysis was performed on all treatment outputs:

  1. The basic solution showed a reduction of almost all residual contaminants within the desired range (Iron/Fe was reduced to 14 ppm), and only one contaminant was slightly above the desired range (Titanium/Ti).
  2. The complete solution test showed 100% compliance on the first stage (attrition washing and screening), with Iron/Fe reduced to 8ppm and all other contaminants well below acceptable ranges.

These results are encouraging, confirming that very simple silica sand processing techniques meet or exceed the required specifications.

‘These results confirm our initial expectations, that mother nature has performed most of the work needed to make the Santa Maria Eterna silica sand a very unique material, giving Homerun an important competitive edge in the production of antimony-free solar glass,’ stated Armando Farhate, COO of Homerun.

About Minerali Industriali Engineering Srl (https://www.mineraliengineering.it/)

With over 100 years of experience in the mining processing sector, Minerali Industriali Engineering is the ideal partner for the treatment of non-metallic ores, especially for the wet and dry dressing of silica sand. Solution 360: MIE offers a treatment solution for raw materials from the very first step, the geological survey of the deposit and analysis of relevant samples, to the final realization of the turnkey plant, passing from the engineering and design of each single treatment process and machine. MIE can also support its customers during the start-up stage and through personnel training. Cooperating with the leading credit institutions, we are also available to study financial solutions with our customers.

About Homerun (www.homerunresources.com / www.homerunenergy.com)

Homerun Resources Inc. (TSXV: HMR,OTC:HMRFF) is building the silica-powered backbone of the energy transition across four focused verticals: Silica, Solar, Energy Storage, and Energy Solutions. Anchored by a unique high-purity low-iron silica resource in Bahia, Brazil, Homerun transforms raw silica into essential products and technologies that accelerate clean power adoption and deliver durable shareholder value.

  • ⁠Silica: Secure supply and processing of high-purity low-iron silica for mission-critical applications, enabling premium solar glass and advanced energy materials.
  • Solar: Development of Latin America’s first dedicated 1,000 tonne per day high-efficiency solar glass plant and the commercialization of antimony-free solar glass designed for next-generation photovoltaic performance.
  • Energy Storage: Advancement of long-duration, silica-based thermal storage systems and related technologies to decarbonize industrial heat and unlock grid flexibility.
  • ⁠Energy Solutions: AI-enabled energy management, control systems, and turnkey electrification solutions that reduce costs and optimize renewable generation for commercial and industrial customers.

With disciplined execution, strategic partnerships, and an unwavering commitment to best-in-class ESG practices, Homerun is focused on converting milestones into markets—creating a scalable, vertically integrated platform for clean energy manufacturing in the Americas.

On behalf of the Board of Directors of
Homerun Resources Inc.

‘Brian Leeners’

Brian Leeners, CEO & Director
brianleeners@gmail.com / +1 604-862-4184 (WhatsApp)

Tyler Muir, Investor Relations
info@homerunresources.com / +1 306-690-8886 (WhatsApp)

FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE

The information contained herein contains ‘forward-looking statements’ within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. Forward-looking statements relate to information that is based on assumptions of management, forecasts of future results, and estimates of amounts not yet determinable. Any statements that express predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not statements of historical fact and may be ‘forward-looking statements’.

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

Corporate Logo

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/277724

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

One would think that running a profitable legal marijuana industry would be just about the easiest thing in the world, but don’t tell that to the Democrat leadership of Minnesota, which allowed wokeness and apparent corruption to grind their legalization rollout into dust.

Wherever one lands on the benefits or increasingly evident harms of marijuana legalization, once a state decides to do it, it has a responsibility to do it in a way that most benefits all the citizens. Of course, Gov. Tim Walz and the Minnesota Democrats made it all about social equity.

The 2023 legalization legislation mandated that for a year and a half, only Indian reservations could obtain licenses, a form of reparations similar to when New York mind-numbingly mandated that only people with previous marijuana convictions could open stores.

The upshot is that today, several dispensaries in the state have no product and others have a dwindling supply. One dispensary operator told me with a sigh, ‘We might get a new supply next week.’

And that’s not all, because the state has not approved enough licenses for transporting the product, much of it is sitting at farms, unable to get to market.

But the worst part of this, one very much related to the current scandal over fraud committed by Somali groups supposedly feeding kids, is that the legislation provides millions of dollars in grants and loans to start weed shops based on wokeness and DEI.

For example, the CanStartUp program ‘is a loan program available to new cannabis microbusinesses,’ in which a non-profit hands out the taxpayer cash ‘with priority given to social equity applicants.’

‘Social Equity Applicants,’ can be roughly read to mean no White guys.

Dr. Scott Jensen, one of several Republicans seeking to stop Walz from winning a third term next year, said it is part of a pattern with Walz and his cronies.

‘The Walz team has repeatedly been characterized by a willingness to play political hardball by picking winners and losers, focusing on preserving voting blocks, rewarding loyalty over competence, ignoring employee input, and squashing transparency,’ Jensen told me.

John Nagel, a former state trooper running as a Republican against Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., had a harsher assessment.

‘Minnesota Democrats are recreating the exact conditions that led to the Feeding Our Future scandal, only this time they’re doing it inside the state’s new marijuana industry,’ he said. ‘When you look at the pattern, it’s unmistakable. The same political class that let Feeding Our Future flourish is now designing the cannabis market using the same toolkit—DEI language as political cover, nonprofit intermediaries with insider ties, and almost no accountability.’

He’s got a point. Why does Minnesota need to hand out millions of dollars to nonprofits to teach people how to sell weed? It’s not hard, just hang up a sign and ring up the sales.

This kind of corruption is nothing new. In the 1920s, Democratic Party machines gave out no-show patronage jobs down at the docks. Today, they hand out needless multimillion-dollar DEI contracts. It’s the same game.

The job of the government is to make things run efficiently for all citizens, not to infuse every project or policy with DEI initiatives that are little more than payoffs to loyal voter groups. Nationwide, the amount of money shelled out for this nonsense is in the billions.

In the wake of the Feeding our Future scandal, it is obvious that the nonprofits involved in this DEI weed initiative must be investigated. How can anyone now trust that the money isn’t being abused?

The cherry on top of this abysmal situation is that the inability of legal dispensaries to serve their clientele is driving people back to the black market, which will result in increased marijuana arrests, the very thing this legislation was meant to prevent in the first place.

It’s honestly amazing.

Meanwhile, few people here in the Land of 10,000 Lakes even know any of this is happening, because the local news media, which simply calls this all a ‘logistics problem,’ acts more like accomplices than arbiters of truth.

Walz and the Democrats in Minnesota have no more benefit of the doubt when it comes to shady laws that shower money on DEI-driven nonprofits. It’s time to see where these millions of dollars to train up the next generation of cannabis workers really went.

Perhaps the state can show that spending these millions of dollars had some positive result for Minnesota, but right now, it seems far more likely that the money just went up in smoke.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Bold Ventures Inc. (TSXV: BOL) (the ‘Company’ or ‘Bold’) is pleased to announce the closing of a non-brokered private placement offering of the Company for 4,200,000 Flow Through Units (the ‘FT Units’) at a price of $0.09 per FT Unit (the ‘FT Offering’). The Offering was fully subscribed for gross proceeds of $378,000.

The Company paid a cash finder’s fee of $30,240 to an eligible finder, and issued 336,000 compensation warrants (the ‘Compensation Warrants‘) to two eligible finders. Each Compensation Warrant entitles the holder to acquire one common share of the Company at $0.09 until December 10, 2027.

The securities issued are subject to a hold period expiring on April 11, 2026.

The Offering

Each FT Unit comprises one common share of the Company priced at $0.09 and one half (1/2) of a common share purchase warrant. One full common share purchase warrant (a ‘Warrant’) and $0.12 will acquire an additional common share until December 10, 2027. The gross proceeds from the FT Offering will be used for Canadian Exploration Expenses (within the meaning of the Income Tax Act (Canada) (the ‘Tax Act‘)) which qualify as a ‘flow-through critical mineral mining expenditure’ for purposes of the Tax Act related to the exploration program of the Company to be conducted on the Company’s properties located in Ontario and Quebec, with $270,000 allocated to the Company’s properties in Ontario and $108,000 allocated to the Company’s property in Quebec. The Company will renounce such Canadian Exploration Expenses with an effective date of no later than December 31, 2025.

Bold Ventures management believes our suite of Battery, Critical and Precious Metals exploration projects are an ideal combination of exploration potential meeting future demand. Our target commodities are comprised of: Copper (Cu), Nickel (Ni), Lead (Pb), Zinc (Zn), Gold (Au), Silver (Ag), Platinum (Pt), Palladium (Pd) and Chromium (Cr). The Critical Metals list and a description of the Provincial and Federal electrification plans are posted on the Bold Critical and Battery Minerals page.

About Bold Ventures Inc.

The Company explores for Precious, Battery and Critical Metals in Canada. Bold is exploring properties located in active gold and battery metals camps in the Thunder Bay and Wawa regions of Ontario. Bold also holds significant assets located within and around the emerging multi-metals district dubbed the Ring of Fire region, located in the James Bay Lowlands of Northern Ontario.

For additional information about Bold Ventures and our projects please visit boldventuresinc.com or contact us at 416-864-1456 or email us at info@boldventuresinc.com.

‘Bruce A MacLachlan’ 
Bruce MacLachlan 
President and COO 
‘David B Graham’
David Graham 
CEO  
Direct line: (705) 266-0847 

Email: bruce@boldventuresinc.com

 

 

Neither 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.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements: This Press Release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, which may cause actual results to differ materially from the statements made. When used in this document, the words ‘may’, ‘would’, ‘could’, ‘will’, ‘intend’, ‘plan’, ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’ and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such statements reflect our current views with respect to future events and are subject to such risks and uncertainties. Many factors could cause our actual results to differ materially from the statements made, including those factors discussed in filings made by us with the Canadian securities regulatory authorities. Should one or more of these risks and uncertainties, such actual results of current exploration programs, the general risks associated with the mining industry, the price of gold and other metals, currency and interest rate fluctuations, increased competition and general economic and market factors, occur or should assumptions underlying the forward looking statements prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described herein as intended, planned, anticipated, or expected. We do not intend and do not assume any obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as required by law. Shareholders are cautioned not to put undue reliance on such forward-looking statements.

NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWSWIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION
IN THE UNITED STATES

Corporate Logo

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/277697

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Milestone Advances U.S. and Secures Location for Flagship Texas Facility Supporting Domestic Critical-Minerals Supply Chains

VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESS Newswire / December 11, 2025 / CoTec Holdings Corp. (TSXV:CTH,OTC:CTHCF)(OTCQB:CTHCF) (‘CoTec’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to note today’s press release by HyProMag USA, LLC (‘HyProMag USA’), its U.S.-based joint venture rare earth permanent magnet recycling and manufacturing company.

HyProMag USA announced it has finalized the lease agreement for its proposed rare-earth magnet recycling and manufacturing facility in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas.

Julian Treger, Chief Executive of CoTec commented: ‘Finalizing the Texas Facility lease represents another major milestone in HyProMag USA’s mission to deliver a secure, sustainable rare-earth magnet supply chain in the United States. With the site secured and local partnerships in place, we’re moving decisively toward completing financing, construction and the first commercial-scale production of recycled magnets in the United States.’

HyProMag USA’s first facility (the ‘Texas Facility’ or the ‘Project’) will be located at Ironhead Commerce Center, Building 1, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denton County, Texas. The Project site is strategically located next to critical infrastructure, the BNSF intermodal rail link and the Alliance airport. The milestone marks the next phase in HyProMag USA’s Project expansion and underscores its commitment to building a fully domestic, circular supply chain for rare-earth magnets critical to revitalizing U.S. industry and to provide a long-term domestic supply of critical minerals.

The Texas Facility will leverage the patented Hydrogen Processing of Magnet Scrap (‘HPMS’) technology – developed by the Magnetic Materials Group at the University of Birmingham with over 25 years of R&D and exclusively licensed to HyProMag Limited, a 50% partner in HyProMag USA, to recover and remanufacture rare earth magnets from end-of-life products. HyProMag USA targets commissioning the Texas Facility by mid-2027, subject to final permitting and financing, and anticipates creating approximately 90 to 100 skilled jobs in magnet manufacturing, engineering and advanced materials processing. HyProMag USA has collaborated closely with the Town of Northlake to advance the Texas Facility. Additionally, HyProMag USA has also established and expanded its feedstock-supply partnership with Intelligent Lifecycle Solutions (ILS), a global electronics recycling company, which has commenced stockpiling magnet-bearing materials to support commissioning of HyProMag’s U.S. operations.

HyProMag USA will occupy 50 percent of Building 1 at Ironhead Commerce Center, approximately 128,000 square feet. The Texas Facility will serve as the central hub of HyProMag USA’s hub-and-spoke short-loop network, which includes planned pre-processing facilities in Nevada and South Carolina. The Project’s modular design allows for faster replication across the U.S., providing a more scalable blueprint for restoring rare-earth magnet production and reducing reliance on overseas sources.

For further information, please refer to HyProMag USA’s press release, available at: www.hypromagusa.com

A fly over of the facility’s location can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8RHkZSfo0Y

About HyProMag USA

HyProMag USA, LLC is owned 50:50 by CoTec Holdings Corp. (TSXV:CTH,OTC:CTHCF)(OTCQB:CTHCF) and HyProMag Limited. HyProMag Limited is 100% owned by Maginito Limited which is owned on a 79.4%/20.6% basis by Mkango Resources Ltd. (AIM/TSX-V: MKA) and CoTec.

For more information, please visit www.hypromagusa.com

HyProMag USA Feasibility Study

The independent Feasibility Study on the development of a state-of-the-art rare earth magnet recycling and manufacturing operation in the United States includes the Texas Facility, and two pre-processing facilities located in South Carolina and Nevada respectivelyi . In March 2025, HyProMag USA announced the expansion of the detailed engineering phase to include three HPMS vesselsii and that it was initiating concept studies for further expansion and complementary ‘Long Loop’ recyclingiii . The Texas Facility’s annual production is expected to be 750 metric tons per annum of recycled sintered NdFeB magnets and 807 metric tons per annum of associated NdFeB co-products (total payable capacity – 1,557 metric tons NdFeB within five years of commissioning) over a 40-year operating life. It is expected the Texas Facility will provide significant optionality to supply the U.S. market with additional NdFeB alloy powder while assisting in revitalizing the U.S. magnet sector with the creation of 90-100 skilled magnet manufacturing jobs.

In March 2025, HyProMag USA announced the results of an independent ISO-Compliant product carbon footprint study which confirmed an exceptionally low CO2 footprint of 2.35 kg CO2 eq. per kg of NdFeB cut sintered block productiv .

In August 2025, HyProMag USA announced ILS had formally commenced its stockpiling of feedstock initiative pursuant to the recently announced feedstock supply and pre-processing site share agreement between HyProMag USA and ILS.

In September 2025, HyProMag USA announced the commissioning of a concept study to evaluate the expansion of its operations into Nevada and South Carolina in collaboration with ILSv and the commissioning of a concept study to evaluate long-loop recycling with Worley Group Incvi .

About CoTec

CoTec Holdings Corp. (TSXV:CTH,OTC:CTHCF)(OTCQB:CTHCF) is redefining the future of resource extraction and recycling. Focused on rare earth magnets and strategic materials, CoTec integrates breakthrough technologies with strategic assets to unlock secure, sustainable, and low-cost supply chains for the United States and its allies.

CoTec’s mission is clear: accelerate the energy transition while strengthening U.S. economic and national security. By investing in and deploying disruptive technologies, the Company delivers capital-efficient, scalable solutions that transform marginal assets, tailings, waste streams, and recycled products into high-value critical minerals.

From its HyProMag USA magnet recycling joint venture in Texas, to iron tailings reprocessing in Québec, to next-generation copper and iron solutions backed by global majors, CoTec is building a diversified portfolio with long-term growth, rapid cash flow potential, and high barriers to entry. The result is a game-changing platform at the intersection of technology, sustainability, and strategic materials.

For more information, please visit www.cotec.ca

For further information, please contact:

Braam Jonker – (604) 992-5600

Forward-Looking Information Cautionary Statement

Statements in this press release regarding the Company and its investments which are not historical facts are ‘forward-looking statements’ which involve risks and uncertainties, including statements relating to the Texas Facility, Feasibility Study, potential future employment and production, the entering of the lease agreement for the Texas Facility and management’s expectations with respect to its current and potential future investments, including HyProMag USA, and the benefits to the Company which may be implied from such statements. Since forward-looking statements address future events and conditions, by their very nature, they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Actual results in each case could differ materially from those currently anticipated in such statements, due to known and unknown risks and uncertainties affecting the Company, including but not limited to resource and reserve risks; environmental risks and costs; labor costs and shortages; uncertain supply and price fluctuations in materials; increases in energy costs; labor disputes and work stoppages; leasing costs and the availability of equipment; heavy equipment demand and availability; contractor and subcontractor performance issues; worksite safety issues; project delays and cost overruns; extreme weather conditions; and social and transport disruptions. For further details regarding risks and uncertainties facing the Company please refer to ‘Risk Factors’ in the Company’s filing statement dated April 6, 2022, a copy of which may be found under the Company’s SEDAR profile at www.sedar.com. The Company assumes no responsibility to update forward-looking statements in this press release except as required by law. Readers should not place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements and information contained in this news release and are encouraged to read the Company’s continuous disclosure documents which are available on SEDAR at www.sedarplus.ca .

Neither 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.

i https://www.cotec.ca/news/hypromag-usa-feasibility-study-demonstrates-robust-economics-and-the-opportunity-to-develop-a-major-new-domestic-source-of-recycled-rare-earths-magnets-for-the-united-states

ii https://cotec.ca/news/hypromag-usa-expands-detailed-engineering-phase-to-include-three-hpms-vessels-and-initiates-concept-studies-for-further-expansion-and-complementary-long-loop-recycling

iii Conventional leach, extraction purification and precipitation process

iv https://cotec.ca/news/hypromag-usas-iso-compliant-product-carbon-footprint-study-confirms-exceptionally-low-co2-footprint-of-235-kg-co2-eq-per-kg-of-ndfeb-cut-sintered-block

v https://hypromagusa.com/hypromag-usa-to-commission-scoping-study-to-triple-capacity/

vi https://hypromagusa.com/hypromag-usa-project-update-for-its-rare earth-magnet-recycling-and-manufacturing-plants-in-the-united-states/

SOURCE: CoTec Holdings Corp.

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

News Provided by ACCESS Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Senate Democrats have tried to tie the looming expiration date for Obamacare subsidies to the affordability issues slamming households, but Senate Republicans argue that their counterparts are manufacturing it to score political points next year.

The phrase ‘sticker shock’ became a common rallying cry from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., during and after the government shutdown that he used to illustrate what Americans could experience if the Biden-era credits were to expire.

‘Our bill is the only bill that will prevent this crisis from happening,’ Schumer said. ‘It’s the last train out of this station. We urge our Republican colleagues, for the sake of the American people, to get on that train.’

But Senate Republicans contend that Democrats’ proposal to extend the subsidies for another three years is designed to fail and provide the party with a political weapon entering into the 2026 midterm election cycle.

‘I think the Democrats politically embrace this affordability issue, and then them asking for a three-year extension does nothing but throw gasoline on the fire of affordability of healthcare,’ Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told Fox News Digital.

Marshall is one of several Senate Republicans who have put together an alternative plan to Schumer’s strategy. His ‘Marshall Plan’ marries Democrats’ desire to extend the subsidies for a year with Republicans’ demands that the credits be done away with in favor of health savings accounts (HSAs).

Republicans are instead running with a plan from Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, the chairs of the Senate health and finance panels, that would abandon the enhanced subsidies in favor of HSAs. That proposal is also expected to fail, leaving the Senate with little time to move ahead with an alternative before the subsidies expire.

Still, there are ongoing talks between both sides of the aisle to find a compromise. Republicans contend that Schumer is acting as a roadblock to those talks, instead sidelining members reaching across the aisle in favor of a workable solution.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., told Fox News Digital that Republicans were equally concerned about ‘sticker shock,’ and he argued that Cassidy and Crapo’s plan would go a long way to keeping prices low for Americans.

But he acknowledged the political reality that Democrats wanted to use healthcare as a cudgel in the coming months.

‘I think that’s the concern that a lot of us have on our side of the aisle, is that there’s a group of Democrats that don’t want to fix this problem, and they want to use it as a political product,’ he said. ‘I think there’s a group of us on our side of the aisle that really would like to fix it, along with some Dems. I just don’t know if there’s enough Dems to come along and to take what we think is a reasonable approach on this.’

Other Republicans told Fox News Digital that the subsidies, which were passed and then enhanced during the COVID-19 pandemic under former President Joe Biden, are just another addition to a 15-year-long affordability crunch brought on by the passage of Obamacare.

Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., told Fox News Digital that Obamacare has ‘always been pricey,’ and that Democrats were attempting to inject $83 billion in taxpayer money directly to insurance companies with their proposal.

‘Democrats have always tried to hide that fact by sending more and more money to insurance companies during COVID,’ he said. ‘They did it again with these Biden COVID bonus subsidies, and they set an expiration date, which is coming up at the end of this month. That’s what this is all about.’

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., told Fox News Digital that healthcare ‘has been an ongoing train wreck since Obamacare,’ and that Democrats jammed the subsidies through Congress without Republican input and set up the fast-approaching cliff.

‘I mean, they’re just doubling down on the stupid,’ Schmitt said.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is facing her first major test before the House of Representatives on Thursday.

Noem is appearing before the House Homeland Security Committee for a hearing on worldwide threats, an event that is meant to be annual but has not happened in multiple recent years.

She’s set to testify alongside National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent and Michael Glasheen, Operations Director of the FBI’s National Security Branch.

‘I’m sure she’ll talk about border, I’m sure she’ll talk about drugs, I’m sure she’ll talk about China, hopefully an update on what’s happening with cybersecurity. I mean it’s a very important hearing. I’m glad she’ll be there,’ House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital.

It’s Noem’s first major national security-focused hearing before the House of Representatives since taking charge of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) earlier this year.

It comes as lawmakers on Capitol Hill warn about the potential for hostile countries like Venezuela, Iran and China exploiting U.S. vulnerabilities in national security. 

‘I’m always concerned about that. I’ve been concerned about that for years. I mean, thousands of known and suspected terrorists came across the southern border over the last four years. Luckily, it’s been closed up, but they’re still here,’ Garbarino said.

‘I’m gonna look forward to hearing from the FBI, you know, what’s being done, what they’re doing to track down the people that are already here.’

Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, lawmakers will likely grill Noem about the activities of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents carrying out President Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration.

‘We don’t get much information, in the interim, from the administration. You write letters, and what you get back is an acknowledgment of the letter, but very little facts,’ said Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the top Democrat on the committee. ‘Obviously, the administration’s stand on immigration is not one that we agree with, especially how they’re doing it.’

He accused ICE agents of treating people with ‘total disrespect’ because they ‘look Hispanic.’

‘I think that she has to address it,’ Thompson said.

Noem’s appearance comes hours after Axios reported that she and border czar Tom Homan had a falling out behind the scenes, though the outlet also reported that neither are in danger of losing their positions any time soon.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump pushed back on a rumor that he was looking to replace Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and told reporters that he believes she has been ‘fantastic.’

‘I read a story recently that I’m unhappy with Kristi — I’m so happy with her… We have a border that’s the best border in the history of our country. Why would I be unhappy? She’s fantastic, actually,’ Trump told reporters during a roundtable with business leaders on Wednesday.

The president’s remarks follow a recent report from MS Now stating that a White House official said that Noem was on ‘very thin ice.’ The report claimed that Trump was looking to replace Noem as early as January, and that White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller was leading the push to replace her.

According to the report, Miller and other White House officials were frustrated with Noem because they were displeased with the pace at which she was working to build new detention centers. Additionally, the report claimed that several governors had called Trump to voice complaints about Noem’s handling of FEMA and disaster relief funds.

On Monday, the White House firmly denied the report and accused MS Now of running a false narrative.

‘Everything about this is total Fake News. Secretary Noem is doing a great job implementing the President’s agenda and making America safe again. MS Now continues to beclown themselves by inventing narratives that simply are not true,’ White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement.

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin also weighed in on the report in an exclusive statement to Fox News Digital, saying, ‘I can’t speak for the president, but I’ve seen more credible reporting on Big Foot.’

During the roundtable on Wednesday, Trump also shut down rumors that he was dissatisfied with War Secretary Pete Hegseth over the controversial U.S. military strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats. Trump said his feelings about Hegseth’s work were ‘very much the opposite’ of what was being reported and he called the war secretary ‘phenomenal.’

Trump joked that he would ‘have to think about’ Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, who was sitting at the table, before going on to praise him. The president similarly praised Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Education Secretary Linda McMahon.

Fox News Digital’s Anders Hagstrom, Preston Mizell and Bonny Chu contributed to this report.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Company Highlights:

  • Upside Case shows US$972M post tax NPV5, 59.3% IRR, with a 1.4 year payback at a US$3,900/oz gold price

  • 1.31M GEOs produced over a 15.3 year mine life, averaging approximately 85,700 GEOs/yr (94,000 GEOs/yr over Years 1-5) at a co-product AISC of US$1,390/GEO

  • Initial capital expenditure of US$195.3M for an open pit, heap leach mine and SART plant, including owner’s costs, contingency and initial working capital requirements

  • Average annual free cash flow of US$47.6M at $2,300/oz gold price (US$104.5 at $3,900/oz) driven by 0.73 g/t AuEq life of mine head grade, low strip ratio (0.3:1) and low sustaining capital

  • Indicated resource of 240Mt grading 0.63 g/t AuEq for 4.9M GEOs (0.38g/t gold, 13.78g/t silver, 0.10% copper), and an Inferred resource of 24Mt grading 0.52 g/t AuEq for 0.4M GEOs (0.28g/t gold, 13.67g/t silver, 0.09% copper), providing significant upside opportunities if property boundary constraints lifted

Vancouver, British Columbia–(Newsfile Corp. – December 11, 2025) – Heliostar Metals Ltd. (TSXV: HSTR,OTC:HSTXF) (OTCQX: HSTXF) (FSE: RGG1) (‘Heliostar‘ or the ‘Company‘) is pleased to announce strong economics in an updated Prefeasibility Study (‘PFS’) for its 100% owned Cerro del Gallo project located in the state of Guanajuato, Mexico.

Heliostar CEO, Charles Funk, commented, ‘The Cerro del Gallo Prefeasibility Study demonstrates a mine that fits perfectly with Heliostar’s growth trajectory to larger, lower cost operations. The project has low CAPEX, shows strong free cash flow at a conservative gold price and significant resource upside. With this study the value of Cerro del Gallo to Heliostar has now been established, having been delayed due to our initial focus on operations following the acquisition of the mines and properties in November 2024. This study confirms Cerro del Gallo as an important development project in the Heliostar portfolio, and the Company plans to continue technical work, permitting and community engagement to advance the project to a feasibility level. Organic growth from Ana Paula first, and later from Cerro del Gallo, is planned to launch Heliostar to 300,000 ounces of annual gold equivalent production by the end of the decade.’

The technical report supporting this news release will be available on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca) and on the Company’s website (www.heliostarmetals.com) within the next 45 days. The Cerro del Gallo technical report that is the subject of this news release will use United States dollars (USD or US$) unless otherwise noted.

Cerro del Gallo Prefeasibility Study Overview

The Prefeasibility Study is based on the current reserve base of 2.27M GEOs of Probable Mineral Reserves as shown in the Mineral Reserves Update effective July 31, 2025.

The study outlines a 15.3 year mine life, producing 85,700 koz gold equivalent ounces (‘GEOs’) per year at an average total cash cost of $1,252/GEO and an all-in sustaining cost (AISC) of $1,390 GEO, and costing $195.3M in initial capital expenditures (‘CAPEX’) to bring into production. At the base case gold price of $2,300 per ounce, this results in an after-tax NPV of $424M, an IRR of 33.1% and a payback period of 2.3 years.

The Cerro del Gallo project is envisaged as a 6 million tonne-per-year open-pit mining operation using conventional drill, blast, load, and haul methods, with mining activities performed by a contractor-supplied fleet. Ore will be crushed using a multi-stage crushing circuit, including conventional crushing and High Pressure Grinding Roll (‘HPGR’), and stacked on a lined heap-leach pad. Leaching will use conventional cyanide solution application. Pregnant solution will be processed through an adsorption, desorption and recovery (‘ADR’) circuit for gold recovery, producing gold doré on-site. Copper and silver dissolved in solution will be recovered through a sulphidization, acidification, recycling, and thickening (‘SART’) circuit and shipped to smelters.

A dedicated waste rock storage facility will be located adjacent to the open pit, sized according to life-of-mine requirements, with engineered drainage and environmental controls. Processing residues will consist primarily of leached material on the heap-leach pad; therefore, no conventional tailings storage facility will be required. Site infrastructure will include an upgraded connection to the national power grid, a reliable water supply from permitted local wells, and supporting buildings such as a maintenance shop, warehouse, administration offices, security facilities, and expanded camp accommodations for operational staff.

Key Highlights

Forecast Production Highlights
Ore Feed 6,000 Ktpa
Strip Ratio 0.32:1 W:O
Grade – LOM 0.73 g/t AuEq
Grade – Years 1-5 0.80 g/t AuEq
Life of Mine Produced 1,310 Koz GEO
Processing Rate 16,438 Tpd
Process Recovery (Gold / Silver / Copper) 59.4 / 49.3 / 61.8 %
Life of Mine 15.3 Years
Annual Production – LOM 85.7 Koz GEO
Annual Production – Years 1-5 94.2 Koz GEO

 

Forecast Financial Highlights
Average Cash Costs (US$ per GEO) 1 $1,252 /oz
Average AISC (US$ per GEO) 1 $1,390 /oz
Total Initial Capital Cost $195.3 M
Total Sustainable Capital Cost $160.3 M
Total Life of Mine Capital Cost 2 $355.6 M

 

  1. Non-International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) measures. All-in sustaining costs (AISC) were first issued by the World Gold Council (WGC) in 2013 with an updated Guidance note issued in 2018.
  2. Includes US$132.0 million reclamation expenditure at the end of the mine life.
 Forecast Return Estimates based on Gold Price 1, 2
   US$2,300/oz 3  US$3,900/oz 4
 IRR 33.1%  59.3%
 NPV @ 5% discount $423.9M  $972.4M
 Payback 2.3 years  1.4 years

 

  1. All other key parameters set at base assumptions, including the 5% discount rate used. More detailed analysis will be presented in the full technical report.
  2. After tax return estimates.
  3. Base gold price assumption used in the technical report.
  4. Comparison gold price of US$3,900 with reference to US$4,198 London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) PM gold price on trading day December 9, 2025.

Cannot view this image? Visit: https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_001.jpg

Figure 1 – Isometric View of Cerro del Gallo Resource with Reserve Pit Shell

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_001full.jpg

Cannot view this image? Visit: https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_002.jpg

Figure 2 – Cross Section through Cerro del Gallo Resource with Reserve Pit Shell

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_002full.jpg

Forecast Operating Cost Estimates

Operating costs at the Cerro del Gallo Project will benefit from the simplicity of a truck and shovel open pit mine, very low strip ratio, and access to low-cost grid power and regional infrastructure. The crush-agglomerate-heap-leach-ADR-SART flowsheet utilizes industry standard equipment and processes. It supports efficient processing of the Cerro del Gallo ore with moderate reagent use and no requirement for milling or conventional tailings storage.

Estimations of total cash costs average US$1,252/GEO, with AISC of US$1,390/GEO over the 15.3-year mine life. Revenue credits from copper and silver recovered through the SART circuit further strengthen operating margins and contribute to a robust, long-life cost profile.

Total Operating Cost Summary

Operating Costs Operating Cost
(US$/GEO)
Operating Cost
(US$/t ore)
Total mining $274.02 $3.79
Total processing $658.44 $9.12
Total site general and administrative $65.61 $0.91
Smelter, Refinery and Transport $68.55 $0.95
Cash operating costs $1,066.62 $14.77
Production taxes $80.29 $1.11
Royalties $105.12 $1.46
Total cash costs $1,252.03 $17.33
Sustaining capital costs $138.2 $1.91
Total AISC $1,390.23 $19.25

 

Forecast Capital Cost Estimates

The initial capital cost for the project is estimated to be $195.3M including $15.6M for initial working capital (60 days) and $22.3M in total contingency. The total initial required capital expenditure will benefit from proximity to infrastructure and the assumption of a contractor-supplied fleet. Sustaining capital costs are primarily related to completion of a powerline to the site and three leach pad expansions. The cost estimate is based on more advanced work that will progress into a feasibility study, however, it includes a contingency of 17.5% of the total cost.

The Company’s LOM plan allocates US$132.0M for reclamation work at the end of the mine life.

Forecast Capital Cost Summary

Capital Costs Initial
(US$M)
Sustaining
(US$M)
Total LOM
(US$M)
Mining Costs $1.4 $1.4
Mobile Equipment $3.9 $3.9
Site & Utilities General $10.2 $10.2
Power Generation & Site Distribution $11.0 $11.0
Crushing Circuit $28.8 $28.8
Agglomeration $4.9 $4.9
Stacking System $6.8 $6.8
Heap Leach Solution $21.1 $21.1
SART Plant $20.3 $20.3
Recovery Plant $13.3 $35.1 $48.4
Reagents $2.5 $2.5
Laboratory $2.9 $2.9
Total direct costs $127.2 $35.1 $162.3
Spare Parts $5.7 $5.7
Initial Fills $0.9 $0.9
Contingency $22.1 $8.8 $30.9
Indirect Costs $6.5 $6.5
Other Owner’s Costs $3.6 $3.6
EPCM $13.8 $13.8
Working Capital (60 days) $15.6 -$15.6
Closure and reclamation $132.0 $132.0
Total indirect costs $68.2 $125.2 $193.4
Total Costs (excluding IVA) $195.3 $160.3 $355.6

 

Economic Analysis

The economic analysis shows a base case after-tax net present value at a discount rate of 5% of US$423.9M, an after-tax internal rate of return of 33.1%, and a payback period of 2.3 years at US$2,300/oz gold. The projected mine life is 15.3 years in the PFS. Approximately 1,310k GEOs (888 koz gold, 22.2 Moz silver and 59 kT copper) are projected to be produced and sold over the life of the mine.

Summary Economic Results

Project Valuation Overview Units After Tax Before Tax
Total cash flow US$ M $724.1 $1,166.9
Average annual cash flow US$ M $47.6 $76.3
Average annual cash flow – Years 1-5 US$ M $77.6 $104.7
NPV @ 5.0% (base case) US$ M $423.9 $699.4
Internal rate of return % 33.1% 44.9%
Payback period Years 2.3 1.8
Payback multiple x 4.4 6.5

 

Metal Prices

The gold market has experienced significant upward price movement in the past few years. The gold price at the effective date of the technical report is about 83% above the base case gold price used in the study.

The sensitivity analysis presents gold price scenarios up to US$4,100/gold ounce (near spot prices) to understand the potential impact of continued gold price movements. From the base case price of $2,300/oz, a change in the average gold price of 10% (US$230/gold ounce) would change the after-tax NPV5% by approximately US$76.2M.

The economics of the Prefeasibility Study are most sensitive to changes in gold price and grade and less sensitive to operating costs and initial capital costs.

Gold Price Sensitivity Analysis

Gold Price
(US$/oz Gold)
Net Cash Flow
(US$M)
After-Tax NPV
@ 5.0% Discount Rate
(US$ M)
IRR
(%)
Payback Period
(years)
Payback Multiple
900 -$43.38 -$60.62 9.5 0.8
1,100 $66.08 $9.89 6.1% 5.6 1.3
1,300 $176.64 $79.94 12.4% 3.9 1.8
1,500 $286.0 $148.8 17.3% 3.1 2.3
1,700 $395.4 $217.6 21.6% 3.5 2.8
1,900 $505.3 $286.8 25.7% 2.9 3.4
2,100 $614.7 $355.4 29.5% 2.6 3.9
2,300 $724.1 $423.9 33.1% 2.3 4.4
2,500 $833.5 $492.5 36.7% 2.0 4.9
2,700 $942.8 $561.0 40.1% 1.9 5.4
2,900 $1,052.2 $629.6 43.5% 1.8 5.9
3,100 $1,161.6 $698.2 46.8% 1.7 6.4
3,300 $1,270.9 $766.7 50.0% 1.6 6.9
3,500 $1,380.3 $835.3 53.2% 1.5 7.4
3,700 $1,489.66 $903.85 56.3% 1.4 7.9
3,900 $1,599.03 $972.41 59.3% 1.4 8.5
4,100 $1,708.40 $1,040.97 62.3% 1.3 9.0

 

Cannot view this image? Visit: https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_003.jpg

Figure 3 – Planned Cerro del Gallo Site Layout

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_003full.jpg

Cannot view this image? Visit: https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_004.jpg

Figure 4 – Cerro del Gallo Process Flow Sheet

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_004full.jpg

Cannot view this image? Visit: https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_005.jpg

Figure 5 – Cerro del Gallo Planned Production Schedule

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/277693_7638a1be94ca1834_005full.jpg

Next steps

The next steps by Heliostar at Cerro del Gallo will focus on conversion of resources to reserves and additional resource growth.

This plan includes additional resource and reserve drilling, updating geological interpretations, metallurgical testing and trade off studies. Positive changes to the gold price have resulted in an increase to the potential size of the reserve. Additional metallurgical analysis and data points are required on the deposit to support this increase.

The Company intends to drill with a focus on increasing both mineral resources and reserves and to improve the geological interpretation for the deposit. Mineralization remains open to the north and at depth. The north is considered a high potential target for reserve growth but historically was not drilled due to surface access limitations. The drill density decreases at depth as noted in Figure 2 with in-fill drilling having potential to improve resource classifications. Further, mineralization is open at depth with potential to expand resources.

Subject to confirming the extent of the mineral resource at Cerro del Gallo, the Company intends to refine the planned process flowsheet, start preparing permitting and social plans and commence work to prepare a feasibility study. Development of Cerro del Gallo is planned after Ana Paula has been commissioned and is in production.

Mineral Resource Estimates

Mineral Resources for the Cerro del Gallo deposit were updated as part of the 2025 Prefeasibility Study and are summarized in the accompanying table. The Mineral Resources have an effective date of July 31, 2025, and are reported on an in-situ basis in accordance with the 2014 Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.

Mineral Resources Statement

Classification Material 
Type
NSR Cutoff Tonnes (kt) Grade Contained Metal
Au 
g/t
Ag 
g/t
Cu
%
AuEq 
g/t
Gold 
(koz)
Silver (koz) Copper 
(t)
AuEq (koz)
Indicated Oxide $11.81 10,733 0.41 17.92 0.09 0.60 141 6,184 9,659 207
Mix Oxide $10.66 13,613 0.28 11.12 0.08 0.50 123 4,867 10,890 219
Mix Sulfide $11.81 70,066 0.40 13.70 0.09 0.68 901 30,862 63,060 1,532
Sulfide $11.23 145,572 0.38 13.77 0.11 0.62 1778 64,447 160,129 2,902
Total 239,984 0.38 13.78 0.10 0.63 2,944 106,359 243,739 4,859
Inferred Oxide $11.81 2,042 0.19 21.08 0.09 0.40 12 1,384 1,838 26
Mix Oxide $10.66 1,604 0.14 16.12 0.07 0.40 7 831 1,123 21
Mix Sulfide $11.81 10,501 0.28 13.75 0.11 0.57 95 4,642 11,552 192
Sulfide $11.23 10,300 0.33 11.74 0.07 0.51 109 3,888 7,210 169
Total 24,448 0.28 13.67 0.09 0.52 224 10,746 21,722 408

 

Notes to accompany Mineral Resources table:

  1. Mineral Resources are reported within a resource shell constrained by the property boundary using the 2014 CIM Definition Standards.
  2. Mineral Resources have an effective date of 31 July 2025. The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Timothy O. Kuhl, Reg Mem SME and Principal Geologist with Mine Technical Services.
  3. An NSR is used for reporting Mineral Resources by material type. NSR cutoffs of $11.81 for Oxide, $10.66 for Mixed Oxide, $11.81 for Mixed Sulfide and $11.23 for Sulfide were used. The NSR is determined based on estimated processing costs of US$9.10/t, general and administrative costs of US$0.90t, production taxes and royalty costs of US$1.40/t. Metal prices of US$2,500/oz Au, US$30.50/oz Ag, and US$4.60/lb Cu were used in calculating the NSR. In addition, a gold recovery of 74%, a silver recovery of 60% and a copper recovery of 17% were used for Oxide material; a gold recovery of 68%, a silver recovery of 73% and a copper recovery of 62% were used for Mixed Oxide material; a gold recovery of 61%, a silver recovery of 58% and a copper recovery of 73% were used for Mixed Sulfide material; and a gold recovery of 53%, a silver recovery of 35% and a copper recovery of 59% were used for Sulfide material in the NSR calculation.
  4. Based on the stated metal prices and recoveries, the gold equivalent grades were calculated as AuEq = Au Grade + (((Cu Price in US$/lb * 22.0462 * Cu Recovery and Payable) / (Au Price in US$/g * Au Recovery and Payable)) * Cu Grade) + (((Ag Price in US$/g * Ag Recovery and Payable) / (Au Price in US$/g * Au Recovery and Payable)) * Ag Grade). The average overall payables from the smelter and refineries were estimated at 98.8% for gold, 90.1% for silver, and 88.2% for copper.
  5. Tonnage and grade estimates are in metric units.
  6. Mineral Resource tonnage and contained metal have been rounded to reflect the accuracy of the estimate, and numbers may not add due to rounding.

Mineral Reserve Estimates

Mineral Reserves for the Cerro del Gallo deposit as part of the 2025 Prefeasibility Study have an effective date of July 31, 2025, are reported at the point of delivery to the leach facility, and are stated in accordance with the 2014 CIM Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves.

The Mineral Reserves estimate is based on a 6 Mtpa open-pit mining operation, with ore processed through the established crushing, agglomeration, heap-leach, ADR, and SART circuits. The resulting Mineral Reserves statement is provided in the following table.

Mineral Reserves Statement

Classification Material 
Type
Tonnes (kt) Grade Contained Metal
Au 
g/t
Ag
 g/t
Cu
%
AuEq 
g/t
Gold 
(koz)
Silver (koz) Copper 
(t)
AuEq (koz)
Probable Oxide 9,198 0.46 18.46 0.08 0.65 137 5,459 7,714 193
Mix Oxide 4,411 0.42 10.74 0.09 0.64 59 1,524 4,115 91
Mix Sulfide 38,761 0.50 15.26 0.10 0.80 629 19,020 37,354 995
Sulfide 39,524 0.53 15.00 0.12 0.78 670 19,064 45,557 997
Total 91,893 0.51 15.25 0.10 0.77 1,495 45,066 94,740 2,275

 

Notes to accompany Mineral Reserves table:

  1. Mineral Reserves are reported at the point of delivery to the process plant, using the 2014 CIM Definition Standards.

  2. Mineral Reserves have an effective date of 31 July 2025. The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. Jeffrey Choquette, P.E., of Hard Rock Consulting.

  3. An NSR cutoff of $12.50/t was used for reporting the Mineral Reserves which is based on estimated processing costs of US$9.10/t, general and administrative costs of US$0.90t, production taxes and royalty costs of US$1.40/t. Metal prices of US$2,200/oz Au, US$26.50/oz Ag, and US$4.00/lb Cu were used in calculating the NSR. In addition, a gold recovery of 74%, a silver recovery of 60% and a copper recovery of 17% were used for Oxide material, a gold recovery of 68%, a silver recovery of 73% and a copper recovery of 62% were used for Mixed Oxide material, a gold recovery of 61%, a silver recovery of 58% and a copper recovery of 73% were used for Mixed Sulfide material and a gold recovery of 53%, a silver recovery of 35% and a copper recovery of 59% were used for Sulfide material in the NSR calculation.

  4. Based on the stated metal prices and recoveries, the gold equivalent grades were calculated as AuEq = Au Grade + (((Cu Price in US$/lb * 22.0462 * Cu Recovery and Payable) / (Au Price in US$/g * Au Recovery and Payable)) * Cu Grade) + (((Ag Price in US$/g * Ag Recovery and Payable) / (Au Price in US$/g * Au Recovery and Payable)) * Ag Grade). The average overall payables from the smelter and refineries were estimated at 98.8% for gold, 90.1% for silver and 88.2% for copper.

  5. Mineral Reserves are reported within the ultimate reserve pit design.

  6. Tonnage and grade estimates are in metric units.

  7. Mineral Reserve tonnage and contained metal have been rounded to reflect the accuracy of the estimate, and numbers may not add due to rounding

Qualified Persons

The technical report for the Cerro del Gallo Project will be prepared for Heliostar Metals Ltd. by Mr. Ted Eggleston, Ph.D., RM SME, PGEO, Mr. Tim Kuhl, MSc, RPG, RM-SME, Mr. Jeffrey Choquette, P.E., Mr. Marvin Silva, PhD, PE, PEng., Mr. Todd Minard P.E., Mr. Travis Manning, P.E., QP, Mr. Carl Defilippi, RM SME, and Ms. Dawn Garcia, CPG. Each of these Qualified Persons has reviewed and approved the technical information contained in this news release in their area of expertise and are independent of the Company.

Qualified Persons with Respect to this News Release

Gregg Bush, P.Eng. and Mike Gingles, the Company’s Qualified Persons, as such term is defined by National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects, have reviewed the scientific and technical information not derived from the updated technical reports and included in this news release in the Company Overview, Commentary by the Company on Relevant Matters and Commentary by the Company on Next Steps and Permitting sections for each property and have approved the disclosure herein.

Data Verification

The Qualified Persons for the technical reports verified the data in the report for their areas of expertise and concluded that the information supported Mineral Resource estimation, and could be used in mine planning and economic analysis. The verification completed by each Qualified Person is discussed in each technical report and included site visits, and could include data audits, evaluation of the suitability of data for use in estimation and mine planning, quality assurance and quality control checks, review of available technical and economic study data, review of data collection and evaluation methods, review of production data including reconciliation where available, review of actual cost data for operations, and review of third-party inputs to forecasts.

The Company’s Qualified persons verified the information that was not derived from the technical reports. The data verification included site visits, data audits, review of available study data, review of data collection and evaluation methods, review of production data including reconciliation where available, review of actual cost data for operations, and review of third-party inputs to forecasts, and consideration of the Company’s plans for the projects.

About Heliostar Metals Ltd.

Heliostar is a gold mining company with production from operating mines in Mexico. This includes the La Colorada Mine in Sonora and the San Agustin Mine in Durango. The Company also has a strong portfolio of development and exploration stage projects in Mexico and the USA. These include the Ana Paula project in Guerrero, the Cerro del Gallo project in Guanajuato, the San Antonio project in Baja Sur, all in Mexico and the Unga project in Alaska, USA.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:

Charles Funk
President and Chief Executive Officer
Heliostar Metals Limited
Email: charles.funk@heliostarmetals.com
Phone: +1 844-753-0045
Rob Grey
Investor Relations Manager
Heliostar Metals Limited
Email: rob.grey@heliostarmetals.com
Phone: +1 844-753-0045

 

Neither 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.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This news release contains ‘forward-looking statements’ and ‘forward-looking information’ (together, ‘forward-looking statements’) within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements and are based on the opinions and estimates of management as of the date hereof. Forward-looking statements in this release include, but are not limited to: the economic potential or projections of the PFS, including, but not limited to, estimates of capital and operating costs, mine life, throughput, grades, recoveries, production rates, payback period, NPV and IRR; statements regarding expected timing, scope and cost of planned exploration, drilling, metallurgical and engineering programs, or any future work or social programs generally; the anticipated timing of completion of a Feasibility Study; expectations concerning permitting, submission and approval of amendment applications; the timing and potential development of an underground decline or early-works program; the potential for additional mineralization at depth and future exploration success or improvements in resource classification; the availability of the PFS within the prescribed deadline, the Company’s plans regarding financing arrangements, including the potential for a project finance facility; the expectation that cash flow from existing operations may fund future development; projections of future metal prices; the potential for Cerro Del Gallo to be placed into production and the timing thereof; and other statements regarding the Company’s future plans, strategies, objectives, expectations and intentions.

Forward-looking statements are based on a number of assumptions considered reasonable by management at the time of making such statements, including, without limitation: the accuracy of the PEA assumptions and parameters; that required permits and approvals will be obtained on reasonable terms and within expected timeframes; the availability of financing for exploration and development activities on acceptable terms; that projected metallurgical recoveries and operating costs will be achieved; that community and governmental support for operations will continue; the reliability of certain assumptions and known risks; and general stability in economic and market conditions, exchange rates and commodity prices.

Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied. Such risks include, without limitation: the preliminary nature of the PFS; risks related to exploration, development, permitting and operating activities; cost escalation and inflation; geopolitical or economic uncertainty or force majeure events; changes in metal prices and exchange rates; financing and liquidity risks; community and environmental risks; reliance on contractors and third parties; title, tax and legal risks; and those risks set out in the Company’s continuous disclosure filings available on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca).

There can be no assurance that the Cerro del Gallo Project will be developed into a producing mine or that the results of the PFS will be realized. The purpose of the forward-looking statements is to provide information about management’s current expectations and plans and may not be appropriate for other purposes. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this release. Except as required by applicable securities laws, the Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

No Production Decision: The Company cautions that it has not made a production decision with respect to the Cerro del Gallo Project. Any such decision would only be made following completion of a Feasibility Study, the arrangement of project financing, and receipt of all necessary permits and approvals.

Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors

Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability, and U.S. investors are cautioned that terms such as ‘Measured,’ ‘Indicated’ and ‘Inferred Mineral Resource’ are recognized and required by Canadian regulations but may not be comparable to similar terms used in U.S. reporting standards.

Non-IFRS Financial Measures

This news release includes certain non-International Financial Reporting Standards (‘IFRS’) performance measures, including cash costs (‘Cash Costs’) and all-in sustaining costs (‘AISC’). These measures are not standardized financial measures under IFRS and may not be comparable to similar measures used by other issuers. They are provided as additional information to investors and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures prepared in accordance with IFRS. Cash Costs and AISC are common financial performance measures in the gold mining industry but do not have any standardized meaning under IFRS. The Company believes that, in addition to conventional measures prepared in accordance with IFRS, certain investors use these metrics to evaluate the economic performance of mining projects and their potential to generate operating earnings and cash flow.

AISC is calculated in accordance with the guidelines published by the World Gold Council (‘WGC’) in 2013, as updated in 2018, which define AISC as the sum of total cash costs, sustaining capital expenditures, and corporate general and administrative costs, among other items. Other companies may calculate this measure differently due to variations in underlying principles and policies applied. Note that in respect of AISC metrics disclosed herein, corporate general and administrative expenses have not been included, as such economics are presented at the project level.

Corporate Logo

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/277693

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

There are two Obamacare proposals destined for failure on Thursday as the deadline to extend Biden-era subsidies inches closer, and both Senate Republicans and Democrats hope that a bipartisan path forward can be paved after the dust settles.

Senate Democrats are going full speed ahead with their three-year extension of the Obamacare enhanced premium subsidies, which Republicans are expected to block over a lack of reforms in a plan that they have nearly all charged as unserious.

And the GOP’s plan, which would abandon the subsidies altogether in favor of health savings accounts (HSAs), is expected to be blocked by Senate Democrats over the inclusion of anti-abortion restrictions and concerns that healthcare premium prices would still skyrocket.

But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle hope that once the plans go down in flames, they can begin the work of crafting a bipartisan solution.

‘I think the question would be, are there the Democrats who, outside of their leadership, are actually interested in the solution, and not just an issue? You know, who want to work with some Republicans,’ Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told Fox News Digital.

‘I can’t predict what’s going to happen, but there’s still a fairly high level of interest among members on our side, and I think some on the Dem side too,’ he continued. ‘But I think that, at least for now … I’m guessing they’ve been asked to stand down, you know, let them, let them get their messaging vote on it, and we’ll see what happens.’

Bipartisan negotiations have been ongoing in the background, but both sides have opted to go with partisan plans instead. Should both fail, it leaves them little time to address the issue before Congress leaves Washington, D.C., next week until the New Year. 

‘I would hope that we could still negotiate in the near term,’ Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said. 

Republicans argue that the subsidies are riddled with fraud and have drawn a red line on more stringent enforcement of the Hyde Amendment, which prevents taxpayer dollars from funding abortions.

Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, who has been working with Republicans on a plan, said that the Hyde Amendment argument was ‘not going to happen’ with his Democratic caucus colleagues.

‘Their insistence on that, and maybe that will go away, but their insistence on that basically means these premium increases are going to hammer the American people, and frankly, I don’t understand why — this should be a bipartisan,’ King said. ‘Let’s get together and figure this thing out.’

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital he hoped that the failed votes ‘brings everybody to the negotiating table, and then we’ll get serious about a bipartisan solution.’

But Cornyn believed that it would likely be a problem that lawmakers would deal with in January, after the subsidies expire.

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans argue that Schumer and Senate Democrats are using their plan as a political cudgel, painting the GOP into a corner on a position that they won’t support, and then using it down the line in the 2026 midterms should the subsidies expire.

‘There’s a very simple solution for them. If they really believe that is the Democratic strategy, they can defeat it by simply voting for this measure,’ Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told Fox News Digital.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

On almost every page of The Socialist Calculation Debate and the Relevance of Economic Knowledge, I found myself thinking, “I can’t believe a monograph like this still needs to be written in the year 2025,” but here we are. 

A self-described “democratic socialist” has just been elected mayor of arguably the world’s most important city. The Trump administration is buying ownership stakes in large corporations, which leaves me wondering what Republicans who ran against socialism believe “socialism” is. But maybe I shouldn’t be surprised: the right has long embraced border socialism. Why not take increasing control over the material and intellectual means of production?

Peter J. Boettke, Rosolino A. Candela, and Tegan L. Truitt explain in a welcome and important contribution to the Cambridge “Elements” series, launched by Cambridge University Press to disseminate focused scholarly works that are a little too long to be journal articles and a little too short to be books (I reviewed Austrian Perspectives on Entrepreneurship, Strategy, and Organization for AIER in 2021). 

The authors emphasize a point that Austrian economists have reiterated for decades, but that does not seem to have made its way into the mainstream literature. The “calculation problem” is not a computational problem. It’s an epistemic problem. It isn’t that it was too hard to gather the necessary data and do the required calculations in 1920 (when Ludwig von Mises published “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth”) or 1945 (when F.A. Hayek wrote “The Use of Knowledge in Society”) or 1985 (when Don Lavoie published Rivalry and Central Planning: The socialist calculation debate reconsidered). Nor was it difficult in December 2022, when generative AI was in its infancy and I introduced a Southern Economic Journal symposium on the 100th anniversary of “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth” and the 75th anniversary edition of “The Use of Knowledge in Society” with an article titled “Economic planning must be polycentric, not monocentric.” The problem is that the data don’t exist unless the means of production are bought and sold in free markets – which means that modern technosocialists enamored with generative AI as the technology that will finally solve the calculation problem are missing the point. Oskar Lange called the market a “computing device of the pre-electronic age,” but he is making a category mistake. The market is much more than this.

How do we know? Prices aren’t just what we get when we crunch numbers correctly. They embody the judgments people make in real time in response to real tradeoffs and genuine uncertainty. To borrow a phrase from Deirdre McCloskey, prices are conjective: they represent a social consensus emerging from shared bets on what something is worth given Hayek’s “particular circumstances of time and place.” And yet they confront us as immutable and seemingly objective facts about the social world. Collard greens were $3.99, and ham hocks were $6.06 at Publix earlier this afternoon, representing not an objective fact about the universe but our best guess at a social consensus about all the ways people could use those collard greens and ham hocks a few days before Thanksgiving. With market prices, the people who run Publix can ex ante estimate whether they can buy collard greens and ham hocks and then sell them at a markup sufficient to turn a profit. They can also ex post evaluate their ex ante estimates and learn whether they have wasted resources. 

Importantly, prices are not just “data.” They are conjectures about value that resolve the problem of economic rivalry, which Lavoie defined in Rivalry and Central Planning as “the clash of human purposes.” Those human purposes “clash” because people have fundamentally different ideas about what it means to live well, and they converse about it by “higgling and bargaining” in the marketplace. The process itself generates knowledge that cannot otherwise exist. Economic knowledge cannot be stored in spreadsheets and processed by supercomputers. Entrepreneurial judgment has no algorithmic substitute. Economic knowledge, to borrow from James M. Buchanan’s classic essay, is defined in the process of its emergence.

Their analysis, though brief, is historically rich, as they describe how liberal politics and classical and neoclassical economics emerged side by side. Thinkers from Smith through Mill (and beyond) understood that markets are embedded in a social, cultural, and legal milieu of property, contract, and consent that makes voluntary exchange – and meaningful economic knowledge – possible. It is rooted in the most fundamental of liberal rights: the right to say “no, thank you.”

The Socialist Calculation Debate and the Relevance of Economic Knowledge gives added depth to the history of economic thought over the last century by exploring how the themes in the calculation debate appear in Ronald Coase’s work on transaction costs originating in his classic article “The Nature of the Firm,” the UCLA property rights school, and public choice. Drawing on the economists Ennio Piano and Louis Rouanet, they explain that the choice between managerial hierarchies and spot markets is a kind of economic calculation that entrepreneurs and managers cannot do without private property and the possibility of exchange.

So why does socialism still attract enthusiastic adherents, especially among educated elites one might think would know better? As Boettke et al. argue, socialism survives in part because these educated elites have not actually grappled with Mises’s economic calculation argument and mistakenly believe that it is a computational problem. However, knowledge does not just exist “out there” waiting to be found and analyzed. It emerges in exchange itself.

It also survives because people have redefined it — not as “common ownership and control of the means of production,” but as “a set of egalitarian, redistributive normative commitments.” For the true believer, socialism’s desirability isn’t a hypothesis we can test with theoretical or empirical inquiry. It’s an axiom that produces a series of “if only” statements that commit what the philosopher, Adam Smith scholar, and The End of Socialism author James R. Otteson calls the “nice if” fallacy. If only people were better. It would be nice if everyone had better, cheaper health care. If only they weren’t so rich. And so on. Boettke, Candela, and Truitt remind us that these hopes and ifs, no matter how nice, keep running aground on the fact that central planning creates Planned Chaos.