Feb 2015 - Meadow Bay Gold Corporation

Report
December, 2011
THE ATLANTA GOLD & SILVER PROJECT
The First Million is Always the Hardest
V
Ounces
TSX:MAY
OTCQX:MAYGF
20M:GR
February 2015
Disclaimer
TERMS OF USE AND DISCLAIMER - This presentation is being provided for the sole purpose of providing the recipients with background information about Meadow Bay Gold
Corporation (“Meadow Bay”). Meadow Bay has made reasonable efforts to ensure that the information contained in this presentation is accurate as of the date hereof, however,
there may be inadvertent or unintentional errors. No representation, warranty or guarantee, express or implied, is made as to the fairness, accuracy, completeness or correctness
of information contained in this presentation, including the accuracy, likelihood of achievement or reasonableness of any forecasts, prospects, results or statements in relation to
future matters contained in this presentation. The views and information provided herein are based on a number of estimates and assumptions that are subject to significant
exploration, business, economic, regulatory and competitive uncertainties. See “Forward Looking Statements” below. Meadow Bay is not liable to any recipient or third party for
the use of or reliance on the information contained in this presentation.
This presentation provides information in summary form only, is not intended to be complete and does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any
security. It is not intended to be relied upon as advice to investors or potential investors and does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the investment
objectives, financial situation or needs of any particular investor. Meadow Bay is not acting as agent or advisor and encourages the use of independent consultants, as necessary,
prior to entering into transactions.
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS – Except for the statements of historical fact contained herein, certain information presented constitutes "forward-looking information"
within the meaning of Canadian securities laws and “forward-looking statements” under United States securities laws (hereinafter referred to as “forward-looking statements”).
Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “plans”, “expects”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”,
“intends”, “aims”, “anticipates”, “will”, “projects”, or “believes” or variations (including negative variations) of such words and phrases, or statements that certain actions, events,
results or conditions “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved. By their very nature, forward-looking statements are subject to numerous risks and
uncertainties, some of which are beyond our control. Forward looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates of management at the date the statements are made,
as well as a number of assumptions made by, and information currently available to, Meadow Bay concerning, among other things, anticipated geological formations, potential
mineralization, future plans for exploration and/or development, potential future production, drilling exposure, and exploration budgets and timing of expenditures, all of which
involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievement of Meadow Bay to be materially different from
any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to vary materially from results
anticipated by such forward looking statements include, among others, risks related to the Company’s limited operating history, current and future exploration activities, the
Company’s need for significant additional capital, changes in government legislation, changes in ownership interest in a project, conclusions of economic evaluations, changes in
project parameters as plans continue to be refined, future prices and volatility of gold, silver and other metals, environmental risks and hazards, infrastructure and/or operating
costs, labor and employment matters, availability of financing, permitting availability, government regulation, changes in equity markets, the uncertainties involved in interpreting
geological data, the validity of the Company’s title to its properties, increases in costs and exchange rate fluctuations, the Company’s dependence on key personnel, as well as
those factors discussed in the sections “Caution Regarding Historical Results”, “Forward-Looking Information”, "Risk Factors" and elsewhere in Meadow Bay 's Annual Information
Form (AIF) dated July 6, 2012, available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.
Although Meadow Bay has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially, there maybe other factors that cause results not to be as
anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate as actual results and future events could differ materially from those
anticipated in such statements. Meadow Bay disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information,
future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable law. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and trading in securities
of Meadow Bay should be considered highly speculative.
All scientific and technical information contained in this presentation has been prepared by, or under the supervision of Dana Durgin, P.Geo., a Qualified Person as defined by
National Instrument 43-101, standards of disclosure for mineral projects, and independent consultant to the Company.
2
Why Meadow Bay?
 Favorable Jurisdiction
 NI 43-101 Compliant Mineral Resource
 Significant Exploration Upside Potential
 Proven Leadership Team
 Infrastructure in Place
 Nominal Royalty Burden
 Clean Capital Structure
3
Nevada – Elephant Country
A prolific mining jurisdiction
 Seven 20M+ oz gold deposits
 6.1M oz of gold production in 2011
– over 80% of US production
 152M oz of gold mined from 1835
to 2008
 Nevada ranks #6 of 93 in 20112012 Fraser Institute Global Survey
(#1 for infrastructure)
 22 major processing facilities in the
state – companies investing over
$6B on infrastructure
4
Atlanta Gold & Silver Project Summary
 12 patented and 49 unpatented lode claims acquired from former owner
 Additional claim staking has expanded the land position to an excess of
12,000 acres
 Past open pit production – 110,000 oz gold, 800,000 oz silver from 1.5 million
tons
 Recently completed mineral resource estimate within existing pit area
 Offers excellent expansion potential
 Virgin untested exploration target ready to drill
 No environmental or cultural restrictions on open pit mining – existing
infrastructure includes 3-phase electricity to the mine, roads and abundant
water
 Royalty to vendor – 3% NSR royalty capped at 4,000 ounces gold
5
Key Personnel
Robert Dinning – CEO, President & Chairman is a Chartered Accountant and a lifetime member of
the Alberta Institute of Chartered Accountants. Mr. Dinning has over 40 years of experience in the
financial and resource industry and an involvement in publically traded companies since 1971. MR.
Dinning is also President and CEO of Simba Energy Inc, an Oil and Gas exploration company listed on
the TSX Venture, and is Chairman of Paramount Gold and Silver Corp, an AMEX and TSX listed
exploration company. Mr. Dinning is also an officer or director of three other publically traded
companies.
Charles (Bill) Reed – Director is a professional geologist with 40 years in the mining business. He
was the Chief Geologist and co-founder of Paramount Gold and Silver and is credited with discovering
the San Miguel project in Mexico. Bill was previously the Chief Geologist for Hecla Mining and worked
with Echo Bay and Kennecott prior to that.
Dr. Douglas Oliver – Vice President of Exploration is a career geologist with 30 years experience
in mineral exploration. He received his Bachelor’s degree in Geology from Rutgers University and has
an MBA from the University of Texas at Austin and a PhD in Tectonics from Southern Methodist
University. Doug is responsible for implementing the exploration program at the Atlanta Mine.
6
The High Desert
 Atlanta is located in
northeastern Lincoln County,
Nevada
 Located 4.5 hours north of Las
Vegas or 5 hours southwest of
Salt Lake City
 Ely and Pioche are the closest
cities in Nevada
 Area is high desert with warm
summers and cold, dry winters
7
History of the Atlanta Project
 Gold was first discovered in the Atlanta Mining District in the 1860s
Several generations of exploration and small-scale production
 Standard Slag / Bobcat JV put Atlanta in production from 1975 to 1985
800 tpd mill produced 110,000 ounces of gold and 800,000 ounces of silver from
1.5 million tons of ore
 Gold Fields Resources optioned the project from 1990 to 1991
Conducted geochemical sampling, geophysics and drilled 56,021’ in 82 core and
RC holes
 Kinross Gold optioned the project from 1997 to 1998
Drills 54,225’ in 80 RC holes and conducts a resource estimate – the historic
resource comprises 6.2M tons Indicated grading 0.054 opt Au and 3.0M tons
Inferred grading 0.041 opt Au for 338,520 and 125,959 contained ozs Au,
respectively. (Note: This resource in non-compliant).
 Meadow Bay acquires the project in March 2011
8
Gold Price & Atlanta History
Gold Fields
Exploration
Standard Slag /
Bobcat JV
Kinross
Exploration
$315/oz Au
Source: Capital IQ. Data as of 10/16/12.
9
Meadow Bay Gold
Acquisition
$355/oz Au
$1,405/oz Au
$290/oz Au
Enter Meadow Bay Gold
Meadow Bay Gold acquired the Atlanta Mine in March 2011
 Desert Hawk Resources entered into purchase option agreement for
the Atlanta Mine in Fall of 2010, but was unable to finance the
purchase price
 Meadow Bay Capital closed financing of $11.3 million and acquired
Desert Hawk Resources for stock
 Meadow Bay Capital paid $6 million to underlying owner of Atlanta
Mine for 100% ownership (3% NSR royalty is capped at 4,000
ounces Au)
 Meadow Bay Capital re-named itself Meadow Bay Gold
 Desert Hawk Resources is a wholly-owned US subsidiary of Meadow
Bay Gold
10
Extensive Land Position
 Initial acquisition
consisted of 13
patented and 49
unpatented claims
 Atna Resources 135 NBI
claims were purchased
in June 2011 for
$250,000 and 400,000
shares of Meadow Bay
(subject to 3% NSR
royalty)
X
 Meadow Bay has staked
over 800 claims within
the Atlanta District
 Control of the entire
Atlanta District with a
land position exceeding
of 12,000 acres
11
X
= Dropped Claims
Infrastructure Already in Place
Existing infrastructure
 County-maintained roads
connect project to major
highways
 Deeded 15-mile electrical power
line is operational to the site with
private substation
 Private water well and pipeline
delivers ample water to project
 Modular building purchased to
provide crew quarters during the
exploration phase
 Old Mill Building and Crusher
Complex in process of being
removed
12
Gold Mineralization – The Atlanta Fault Zone
Primarily hosted in silicified breccias within Atlanta Fault zone
 Atlanta Fault zone separates Tertiary volcanic rocks from Paleozoic
sedimentary rocks – strikes to the north and dips steeply to the
west
 ~100’ wide breccia zone was repeatedly silicified and re-brecciated
during gold mineralization
 Past mining focused on the shallow and higher-grade portions of
the Atlanta Fault zone
 1.5M tons averaging 3 gpt Au and 39 gpt Ag were mined from 1975
to 1985 (recovery was by milling and agitated leach with cyanide)
13
Looking South at Main Deposit Pit Wall
Silicified Fault
Breccia
Underlying
Dolomite
/Limestone
14
High grade
Overlying
Volcanics
60
‘ benches
Gold Mineralization – The Atlanta Porphyry
Intrusive Porphyry-hosted Mineralization
 Previously unrecognized intrusive
porphyry occurs to the southwest of
the historic Atlanta pit
 Gold and silver mineralization is both
thicker and higher grade around the
margins of the intrusive
 The geometry and extent of the
intrusive have not yet been
constrained – currently has dimensions
of 300m east-west and 400m northsouth
Paleozoic
Sedimentary
Rocks
Tertiary
Volcanics
Fault Zone
Porphyry Core Sample
Porphyry
2.54 gpt Au
15
Atlanta Drilling Program
2011/2012 Program
 21 Diamond Drill
core holes completed
in 2011 provided
much need geologic
information
2011/2012 Drilling Highlights (43 Holes, 34,919 ft.)
Drill Hole
Area
Total Depth (m)
From (m)
To (m)
Width (m)
Au g/t
Ag g/t
DHRC-11-01C
Atlanta Pit
123.14
74.68
96.01
21.33
2.00
21.4
DHRC-11-03C
Jasperoid Breccia West of Pit
170.99
150.88
170.69
19.81
2.52
52.8
DHRC-11-04C
Margin of Quartz Latite Porphyry
365.76
198.12
260.60
62.48
1.58
2.8
269.75
301.75
32.00
0.79
29.7
Jasperoid Breccia SW of Pit
 18 RC holes in 2011
expanded resource
around the Atlanta
Pit
DHRC-11-06C
Quartz Latite Porphyry
317.60
228.60
292.61
64.01
1.11
18.8
DHRC-11-07C
Jasperoid Breccia NW of Pit
292.91
202.69
292.91
90.22
0.95
25.4
DHRC-11-09C
Jasperoid Breccia SW of Pit
256.49
172.21
188.98
16.77
0.49
16.8
196.60
231.65
35.05
2.86
35.1
DHRC-11-10C
Jasperoid Breccia South of Pit
160.93
76.20
114,30
38.10
1.80
24.0
 4 RC holes in late
2012 began
exploration of a new
higher-grade area
northwest of Atlanta
Pit
DHRC-11-11C
Quartz Latite Porphyry
447.45
266.70
301.75
35.05
0.18
52.9
Quartz Latite Porphyry
324.61
350.52
25.91
0.74
2.8
Jasperoid Breccia SW of Pit
411.48
437.39
25.91
1.92
21.6
16
Quartz Latite Porphyry
DHRC-11-10R
Jasperoid Breccia South of Pit
144.78
108.23
129.57
21.34
1.75
11.4
DHRC-11-N02
Jasperoid Breccia NW of Pit
339.85
208.84
314.02
105.18
2.00
13.5
DHRC-11-N03
Quartz Latite Porphyry
377.95
263.72
321.65
57.93
3.83
21.1
DHRC-11-N04
Quartz Latite Porphyry
385.57
329.27
350.61
21.34
2.77
9.4
DHRC-11-N05
Quartz Latite Porphyry
396.24
312.50
371.95
59.45
1.66
9.7
Current Mineral Resource Estimate
Completed January 2013
 Incorporates both historical drilling conducted by Kinross and Gold Fields as well as
recent drilling by Meadow Bay
 Performed by Gustavson Associates of Colorado
 683,600oz eAu Measured + Indicated and 618,700oz eAu Inferred at 0.015 opt Au cut-off
* - Gold-equivalent ounces based upon 53:1 gold/silver ratio
17
The First Million Ounces are Always the Hardest
Meadow Bay Gold is committed to expanding the resource at
Atlanta
 #1: In-fill and step-out drilling
on the Atlanta Shear Zone
 Drilling in late 2012 #01 – 250’ @ 2.52 gpt eAu
#02 – 150’ @ 1.16 gpt eAu
#03 – 115’ @ 2.22 gpt eAu
#04 – 75’ @ 3.34 gpt eAu
 All holes ended in
mineralization and are NOT
included in current resource
 #2: Define the limits of the
Atlanta Porphyry
 Geophysics suggests it
remains open
18
IP Survey Results – Atlanta Porphyry
Atlanta
Porphyry
19
Reconnaissance Exploration Targets
Exploration has discovered new target areas at Atlanta
Atlanta Fault Trend – Northward
projection of the Atlanta Fault
remains untested
 Geophysics indicates that the
Atlanta Fault continues under
shallow cover for 12,000 ft beyond
the pit area
Recon Exploration Targets
Atlanta Fault Trend
Northern
Mag Low
 Potential for repeat of the Atlanta
Shear Zone mineralization
Northern Mag Low – Circular
magnetic low occurs 6,000’ north
of the Atlanta Porphyry
 Potential for repeat of the Atlanta
Porphyry mineralization
20
Western
Knolls
Reconnaissance Exploration Targets
Exploration has discovered new target areas at Atlanta
Western Knolls – A virgin
exploration target located 5 km
west of the +1 million ounce
Atlanta Deposit.
Recon Exploration Targets
 Broad area of silicified and altered
volcanic rocks
Atlanta Fault Trend
Northern
Mag Low
 Initial rock-chip samples contained
anomalous gold and pathfinder
elements
 Exploration includes geologic
mapping, soil sampling and
geophysics (magnetics and IP)
21
Western
Knolls
Western Knolls Rock Geochemistry
Western Knolls –
Rock-chip and soil
geochemistry has
revealed an area of
greater than 2 square
kilometers with
anomalous gold, silver,
antimony and arsenic
 Values up to 5.6 gpt Au
and 140 gpt Ag
 Virgin, untested
exploration targets
located in +1 million
ounce gold districts in
Nevada are increasingly
rare
22
IP Survey Results – Western Knolls (Porphyry Analog?)
Untested Targets
Untested
Target
23
Untested
Target
The Plan Forward
 Permitting – Complete Environmental Assessment for Plan of Operation
with the BLM for second-phase drilling and begin baseline studies for long
lead-time permits
 Gravity Survey – Insight into targets at Western Knolls
 Metallurgy – Additional ore characterization by Kappes, Cassiday &
Assoc.
 GIS Database – Continued expansion of database in conjunction with
Sunrise Engineering
 Definition Drilling – In-fill and step-out drilling on the Atlanta Porphyry
 Exploration Drilling – Initial drilling on the northern Atlanta Fault and on
geophysical targets in the Western Knolls
 PEA – Begin initial mine planning and capital/operating cost estimation
24
Capital Structure & Royalty Burden
Current Outstanding:
Common Shares Issued
66.5 Million
Share Price (02/12/15)
C$0.14
Market Cap
MAY trades on TSX, OTCQX ($US) and Frankfurt
C$10.00 Million
Cash Balance
C$0.5 Million
Royalty Burden:
Royalty Holder
Relevant Area
Bobcat
Atlanta Mine
Atlanta Porphyry
3%
Capped at 4,000 oz gold
Atna Resources
Northern Mag Low
3%
Of current targets, only Northern Mag Low
falls within Atna NSR
Exxon Minerals
Tailings
3%
Exxon royalty not likely to be triggered as
there are no current plans to develop or in
any way disturb the tailings facility
25
NSR
Expected Economic Impact
Why Meadow Bay?
 Favorable Jurisdiction
 Existing Mineral Resource
 Significant Exploration Upside Potential
 Proven Leadership Team
 Infrastructure in Place
 Nominal Royalty Burden
 Clean Capital Structure
26
Contact Information
Meadow Bay Gold Corporation
Robert Dinning, CEO
210– 905 West Pender Street
Vancouver BC Canada V6C 1L6
Tel
+1-604-641-4450
Fax
+1-855-557-4622
Email
[email protected]
Danny Gravelle
Investor Relations
1-949-481-5396
Email: [email protected]
27

similar documents