15.5 Year Mine Life to Average
Approximately 80k Gold Equivalent
Ounces1 of Production Per Annum
TORONTO, Dec. 18, 2019 /CNW/ - Argonaut Gold
Inc. (TSX: AR) (the "Company", "Argonaut Gold" or
"Argonaut") is pleased to announce the results of a pre-feasibility
study ("PFS") for its 100% owned Cerro del Gallo project ("CDG" or
the "Project") located 30 kilometres east of Guanajuato City, Guanajuato, Mexico. The National
Instrument 43-101 Technical Report will be filed and available
within 45 days on www.sedar.com and the Company's website at
www.argonautgold.com. All dollar amounts are expressed in
United States dollars, unless
otherwise specified.
Key highlights from the PFS include:
- An after-tax internal rate of return ("IRR") of 20.0% and a net
present value at a 5% discount rate ("NPV5%") of $175 million assuming $1,350 gold and $16.75 silver.
- CDG increases Argonaut's gold Mineral Reserves by 48% and
Measured and Indicated gold Mineral Resources by 36%.
- CDG is a heap leach project in Mexico, which complements Argonaut's existing
and proven skillsets, having successfully developed, constructed
and operated precious metals mines in Mexico for the past decade.
- CDG is a low-cost asset, with estimated cash costs of
$597 per gold ounce sold and all-in
sustaining costs ("AISC") of $677 per
gold ounce sold, respectively (see Non-IFRS Measures section).
Pete Dougherty, President &
CEO stated: "CDG increases Argonaut's Proven and Probable gold
Mineral Reserves by 48% and, through the work detailed in the PFS,
provides Argonaut with a low operating cost, heap leach project
with an after-tax NPV5% of $175
million at $1,350 gold and
$16.75 silver and $222 million at $1,450 gold and $18.00 silver. We believe this PFS
demonstrates that CDG is a long-life, low-cost asset in an
attractive mining jurisdiction, Guanajuato, Mexico. CDG fits well within
our team's abilities as another open pit heap leach project in
Mexico and is an asset that
supports our transformation strategy from being a high-cost
producer to a lower-cost producer."
___________________
|
1
|
Gold equivalent
ounces ("GEOs") are based on a conversation ratio of 80:1 for
silver to gold. Copper was not included in the GEO
calculation.
|
The PFS assumed $1,350/oz gold,
$16.75/oz silver and $6,000/t copper. The PFS yields average
annual production of approximately 64,000 gold ounces, 1.3 million
silver ounces and 2,400 tonnes of copper or 1,237,000 GEOs over a
15.5-year mine life. Estimated cash costs and all-in
sustaining costs ("AISC") are $597
per gold ounce sold and $677 per gold
ounces sold respectively (see Non-IFRS Measures section). The
economic summary is presented in Table 1:
Table 1: Economic Analysis Summary
Production
Data
|
|
|
Life of Mine
(LOM)
|
15.5
|
Years
|
Mine Throughput
per day
|
16,667
|
Tonnes/day
|
Mine Throughput
per year
|
6,000,000
|
Tonnes/year
|
Total Tonnes to
Crusher
|
91,754,000
|
Tonnes
|
Grade Au
(Avg.)
|
0.56
|
g/t
|
Grade Ag
(Avg.)
|
13.25
|
g/t
|
Grade Cu
(Avg.)
|
0.09
|
%
|
Contained Au,
oz
|
1,638,000
|
Ounces
|
Contained Ag,
oz
|
39,099,000
|
Ounces
|
Contained Cu,
tonnes
|
85,782
|
tonnes
|
Metallurgical
Recovery Au (Overall)
|
60%
|
|
Metallurgical
Recovery Ag (Overall)
|
52%
|
|
Metallurgical
Recovery Cu (Overall)
|
43%
|
|
Average Annual
Gold Production
|
64,000
|
Ounces
|
Average Annual
Silver Production
|
1,301,000
|
Ounces
|
Average Annual
Copper Production
|
2,400
|
tonnes
|
Total Gold
Produced
|
987,000
|
Ounces
|
Total Silver
Produced
|
20,146,000
|
Ounces
|
Total Copper
Produced
|
37,000
|
tonnes
|
LOM Strip Ratio
(W:O)
|
0.63
|
|
Operating Costs
(Average LOM)
|
|
|
Mining
|
$1.72
|
/Tonne
mined
|
Mining
|
$2.81
|
/Tonne
processed
|
Processing &
Support
|
$6.99
|
/Tonne
processed
|
G&A
|
$0.71
|
/Tonne
processed
|
Total Operating Cost
|
$10.51
|
/Tonne
processed
|
Total By-Product
Cash Cost
|
$597
|
/Ounce Au
|
AISC
|
$677
|
/Ounce Au
|
Capital Costs
(Excluding IVA )
|
|
|
Initial
Capital
|
$134
|
million
|
LOM Sustaining
Capital
|
$39
|
million
|
Total LOM Capital
|
$173
|
million
|
Working Capital
& Initial Fills
|
$11
|
million
|
Closure
Costs
|
$37
|
million
|
Construction
Time
|
18
|
months
|
Financial
Analysis
|
|
|
Gold Price
Assumption
|
$1,350
|
/Ounce
|
Silver Price
Assumption
|
$16.75
|
/Ounce
|
Average Annual
Cashflow (Pre-Tax)
|
$49
|
million
|
Average Annual
Cashflow (After-Tax)
|
$39
|
million
|
Pre-Tax
IRR
|
25.8%
|
|
After-Tax
IRR
|
20.0%
|
|
Pre-Tax
NPV5%
|
$290
|
million
|
After-Tax
NPV5%
|
$175
|
million
|
Pay-Back Period
(Years based on After-Tax)
|
4.5
|
Years
|
The Company has evaluated the NPV5% of the Project at various
sensitivities, including gold and silver prices. Table 2
illustrates the PFS after-tax NPV5% sensitivity to various gold and
silver price assumptions:
Table 2: After-Tax Sensitivity IRR and NPV Analysis
Gold and Silver
Price Variations
|
IRR
|
NPV5%
|
Au
$/oz
|
Ag
$/oz
|
|
|
$1,150
|
$14.25
|
12.7%
|
$81M
|
$1,250
|
$15.50
|
16.5%
|
$128M
|
$1,350
|
$16.75
|
20.0%
|
$175M
|
$1,450
|
$18.00
|
23.2%
|
$222M
|
$1,550
|
$19.25
|
26.3%
|
$269M
|
Mineral Resource Estimate
A conceptual pit was generated in order to constrain the
tabulation of Mineral Resources. A gold price of $1,600 was used along with other cost, recovery
and slope parameters for the conceptual pit. Mineral
Resources were estimated in the conceptual pit using a 0.25 g/t GEO
cut-off grade for oxide material types and 0.30 g/t GEO cut-off
grade for sulphide material types. Table 3 summarizes the undiluted
Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources and Inferred Mineral
Resources.
Table 3: Mineral Resource Estimate
Resource
Category
|
Tonnes
(millions)
|
Au
(g/t)
|
Ag
(g/t)
|
Cu
%
|
Au ozs
(000's)
|
Ag ozs
(000's)
|
Cu t
(000's)
|
Measured
|
121.6
|
0.49
|
13.1
|
0.10
|
1,899
|
51,086
|
121
|
Indicated
|
80.4
|
0.37
|
10.8
|
0.08
|
965
|
28,017
|
66
|
Measured &
Indicated
|
201.9
|
0.44
|
12.2
|
0.09
|
2,864
|
79,103
|
187
|
Inferred
|
5.1
|
0.43
|
11.9
|
0.09
|
71
|
1,947
|
5
|
|
Note:
|
Mineral Resources
that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic
viability. It is reasonably expected that the majority of the
Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral
Resources with continued exploration. The Mineral Resources
tabulated in Table 3 are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.
|
|
|
Numbers may not total
due to rounding.
|
Mineral Reserve Estimate
The Mineral Reserve estimate for the CDG open pit was
constrained with estimates of gold price, silver price, process
recovery, operating costs, pit slope angles and refining/transport
costs.
The Mineral Resource block model for the CDG deposit was then
used to determine optimal mining shells and pit phasing.
Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources were included in the
pit optimization process. Inferred Mineral Resources were
treated as waste.
Detailed pit and phase designs were created based on the pit
optimization results. These designs incorporated geotechnical
parameters as well as ramp accesses and formed the basis of the
Mineral Reserve estimate.
GEO cut-off grades of between 0.30 g/t and 0.31 g/t for oxide
materials and 0.34 g/t and 0.39 g/t for sulphide materials were
used to calculate the Mineral Reserve estimate for CDG.
Cut-off grades are based on $1,200
gold and $14.50 silver. The PFS
Mineral Reserve estimate is summarized in the Table 4:
Table 4: Mineral Reserve Estimate
Reserve
Class
|
Tonnes
(millions)
|
Au
(g/t)
|
Ag
(g/t)
|
Cu
%
|
Au ozs
(000's)
|
Ag ozs
(000's)
|
Cu t
(000's)
|
Proven
|
70.4
|
0.59
|
13.7
|
0.10
|
1,326
|
31,088
|
67,691
|
Probable
|
21.3
|
0.46
|
11.7
|
0.08
|
313
|
8,012
|
17,821
|
Proven &
Probable
|
91.8
|
0.56
|
13.3
|
0.09
|
1,638
|
39,099
|
85,782
|
|
Notes:
|
Mineral Reserves are
based on the mine production schedule.
|
|
Numbers may not total
due to rounding.
|
Mineral Processing, Metallurgical Testing and Recovery
Methods
Metallurgical testing in 2018 and 2019 was completed at Kappes
Cassiday & Associates ("KCA"). KCA's laboratory conducted
test work on four main categories of ore types: Oxide, Mixed Oxide,
Mixed Sulphide and Sulphide. The metallurgical test work
included head analyses (assay and multi-element), agglomeration,
percolation, compacted permeability, bottle roll and column leach
on conventionally and high-pressure grinding roll ("HPGR") crushed
material. Comminution test work was performed by an external
laboratory, Hazen Research Incorporated.
Test work results have indicated that the CDG ore is amenable to
heap leaching for the recovery of gold, silver and
copper.
CDG ore is estimated to contain an average of 0.09% copper based
on the mine plan used for the PFS. A portion of this copper
is cyanide soluble and is expected to be extracted in the heap
leach circuit. The cyanide soluble copper increases the
cyanide consumption. A SART (sulfidation, acidification,
recycle, thickening) plant that releases cyanide associated with
the copper cyanide complex, allowing it to be recycled back to the
leach process as free cyanide, is included. The resulting
copper and silver precipitate will be sold, bringing additional
revenue to the project.
The ore will be mined by truck and shovel open-pit mining,
fine crushed using a system incorporating cone and HPGR crushers,
agglomerated with cement and conveyor stacked on the heap leach
pad.
Ore will be leached with a dilute cyanide solution at a high
solution application rate for the first 40 days and a lower
application rate for the remaining 80 days for a total leach cycle
of 120 days. The gold, silver, and copper bearing solution
will be collected in the pregnant solution pond and pumped to the
SART plant. Pregnant solution will be acidified with sulfuric
acid, then copper and silver will be precipitated as sulphides by
the addition of sodium hydrosulphide. The precipitate will be
thickened and filtered to produce a copper-silver filter cake for
shipment to a smelter. The copper stripped barren solution
from the SART plant will then be processed in a carbon ADR plant to
recover gold. The gold will be periodically stripped from the
carbon using a desorption process. The gold will be plated on
stainless steel cathodes, removed by washing, filtered, dried and
then smelted to produce a doré bar.
Engineering and design of the processing plant was undertaken by
KCA for complete crushing, leaching, and recovery
systems.
The projected field gold, silver and copper recoveries are
summarized in Table 5.
Table 5: Recoveries by Material Type
Ore Type
(HPGR)
|
Feed
Distribution
LOM Average
|
Projected Field
Recoveries
|
Au,
%
|
Ag,
%
|
Cu%
|
Weathered
(Oxide)
|
9.2%
|
74
|
60
|
22
|
Mixed
Oxide
|
5.8%
|
70
|
79
|
46
|
Mixed
Sulphide
|
38.0%
|
59
|
59
|
59
|
Fresh
(Sulphide)
|
47.0%
|
58
|
40
|
34
|
Life of Mine (LOM)
Average
|
60
|
52
|
43
|
Mine Plan and Production
Schedule
CDG has been planned as an open-pit, truck and shovel
operation. The truck and shovel method provides reasonable
cost benefits and selectivity for this type of deposit.
While it is assumed that the CDG property will be mined using a
mining contractor, it has been planned as an open-pit mine using
91-tonne haul trucks and 13 cubic meter front-end loading
equipment. Final equipment selection will be determined by
the contractor and may differ from the equipment specified in the
PFS; however, it is assumed that the size and amount of equipment
will be similar.
Table 6 illustrates the proposed CDG mining plan.
Table 6: Proposed Mining Plan
Description
|
Unit
|
Value
|
Mine Production Life
(incl. pre-prod)
|
yr
|
15.5
|
Process Diluted Ore
Feed
|
Mt
|
91.8
|
Diluted Gold Grade
(head grade)
|
g/t
|
0.56
|
Contained
Gold
|
koz
|
1,638
|
Diluted Silver Grade
(head grade)
|
g/t
|
13.3
|
Contained
Silver
|
koz
|
39,099
|
Diluted Copper Grade
(head grade)
|
%
|
0.09
|
Contained
Copper
|
kt
|
85,782
|
Waste
|
Mt
|
57.8
|
Total
material
|
Mt
|
149.5
|
Strip Ratio
(W:O)
|
t:t
|
0.63
|
Mining will begin in the year preceding full operations and
continue for 15.5 years. Ore will be sent from the pit
directly to the crusher prior to heap leaching. A small
stockpile may be maintained near the crusher so that trucks may
dump and return to mining operations in the event of unexpected
crusher down time. Table 7 summarizes the life of mine
material movement by year for both the mine and the processing
facility:
Table 7: Mine Production Schedule
Year
|
Ore
Tonnes
Mined
(K tonnes)
|
Waste
Tonnes
Mined
(K tonnes)
|
Total
Tonnes
Mined
(K tonnes)
|
Strip
Ratio
|
Au
Grade
(g/t)
|
Au
Recovered
(000s oz)
|
Ag
Grade
(g/t)
|
Ag
Recovered
(000s oz)
|
Cu
Grade
(%)
|
Cu
Recovered
(tonnes)
|
Pre-Production
|
386
|
1,907
|
2,292
|
4.95
|
0.17
|
N/A
|
22.2
|
N/A
|
0.16
|
N/A
|
1
|
4,363
|
612
|
4,974
|
0.14
|
0.48
|
44
|
14.2
|
1,226
|
0.06
|
1,100
|
2
|
5,960
|
978
|
6,938
|
0.16
|
0.56
|
68
|
13.7
|
1,509
|
0.08
|
2,114
|
3
|
5,980
|
2,114
|
8,094
|
0.35
|
0.58
|
61
|
13.7
|
1,321
|
0.09
|
2,196
|
4
|
6,012
|
2,508
|
8,520
|
0.42
|
0.56
|
66
|
14.0
|
1,500
|
0.09
|
2,573
|
5
|
6,051
|
2,489
|
8,540
|
0.41
|
0.54
|
64
|
14.3
|
1,539
|
0.09
|
2,566
|
6
|
5,882
|
2,391
|
8,274
|
0.41
|
0.57
|
66
|
13.2
|
1,418
|
0.09
|
2,477
|
7
|
6,104
|
1,197
|
7,302
|
0.20
|
0.64
|
73
|
13.8
|
1,396
|
0.09
|
2,581
|
8
|
6,117
|
2,887
|
9,004
|
0.47
|
0.71
|
82
|
13.7
|
1,348
|
0.09
|
2,357
|
9
|
5,820
|
5,792
|
11,612
|
1.00
|
0.60
|
71
|
15.8
|
1,546
|
0.11
|
2,765
|
10
|
6,347
|
9,660
|
16,008
|
1.52
|
0.53
|
62
|
13.0
|
1,247
|
0.09
|
2,312
|
11
|
5,668
|
11,430
|
17,098
|
2.02
|
0.44
|
51
|
12.9
|
1,231
|
0.11
|
2,574
|
12
|
6,107
|
7,032
|
13,139
|
1.15
|
0.46
|
52
|
11.1
|
1,043
|
0.10
|
2,500
|
13
|
6,016
|
3,764
|
9,781
|
0.63
|
0.54
|
60
|
12.1
|
1,058
|
0.10
|
2,477
|
14
|
6,000
|
1,992
|
7,992
|
0.33
|
0.58
|
65
|
12.8
|
1,111
|
0.10
|
2,502
|
15
|
6,000
|
882
|
6,882
|
0.15
|
0.55
|
63
|
12.0
|
1,021
|
0.09
|
2,193
|
16
|
2,942
|
144
|
3,086
|
0.05
|
0.54
|
41
|
10.0
|
632
|
0.09
|
1,388
|
Total
|
91,754
|
57,780
|
149,534
|
0.63
|
0.56
|
987
|
13.3
|
20,146
|
0.09
|
36,667
|
Capital Costs
The capital cost estimate includes all expenditures for process
facilities, infrastructure, construction indirect costs, mine
contractor mobilization and owner mining capital costs assuming
contract mining for a planned 15.5-year mine life. Major
construction at site is expected to take place over an 18-month
period. Total life-of-mine capital cost is $184.6 million, including $11.1 million in working capital and first fills,
and not including reclamation and closure costs, IVA (value added
tax) or other taxes. All IVA is assumed to be fully
refundable. Table 8 details the high-level capital cost
estimate:
Table 8: Summary of Life of Mine Capital Costs
Description
|
Cost
($M)
|
Pre-Production
Capital
|
$ 134.2
|
Working Capital &
Initial Fills
|
$ 11.1
|
Sustaining Capital –
Mine & Process
|
$ 39.2
|
Total excluding
IVA
|
$
184.6
|
Operating Costs
Mine operating costs have been estimated based on contractor
proposal rates. The PFS operating cost estimate includes the
costs required to mine, handle and transport ore to the crusher,
crush, agglomerate, stack and process the ore to gold doré and
silver-copper filter cakes and general and administrative
expenses. The life-of-mine unit costs are summarized in Table
9:
Table 9: Life of Mine Unit Cost Estimate
Description
|
LOM Cost
($/t Processed)
|
Mine
|
$ 2.81
|
Process & Support
Services
|
$ 6.99
|
Site G &
A
|
$ 0.71
|
Total
|
$
10.51
|
Environmental Studies, Permitting and Social Impact
According to Mexican regulations, a project such as CDG requires
the preparation, evaluation and approval of three distinct studies
by the General Directorate of Impact and Environmental Risk (DGIRA)
of SEMARNAT (Mexico´s environmental authority). These studies
are: the environmental impact statement (MIA), the
environmental risk assessment (ERA), and the justified technical
study for land use change (ETJ).
Depending on the level of risk and scope, these documents may be
evaluated separately, or by filing in a unified technical document
for land use change (DTU). Argonaut retained the services of
Hermosillo-based firm MC Terra to
prepare the corresponding DTU for Cerro del Gallo. The CDG
DTU was filed at DGIRA on April
26th, 2019. By law, DGIRA can take up to 60
business days for their review and can add another 60 days to the
process at their discretion. DGIRA elected to extend the CDG
review time by the additional 60 days. Argonaut currently
expects a decision in Q1 2020.
Contribution, Work and Qualified Persons
Carl Defilippi, RM SME, of KCA
was the overall author of the Report and was responsible for
processing and infrastructure and associated costs, environmental
issues and the financial analysis. Mr. Defilippi is an
independent Qualified Person under NI 43-101. Mr. Defilippi
visited the site on 4 September 2019. During the visit, Mr.
Defilippi inspected drill core, reviewed locations of process and
infrastructure facilities and met with local personnel to discuss
the Project.
Mr. Thomas L. Dyer, PE of MDA is responsible for statement of
Proven and Probable mineral reserves, mining methods, and mining
capital and operating costs. Mr. Dyer is an independent
Qualified Person under NI 43-101. Mr. Dyer visited the site
in June, 2010. During his visit, Mr. Dyer reviewed core and
the proposed mining and dumping sites.
Brian Arkell, VP Exploration for
Argonaut Gold, is responsible for geological and exploration
information along with validation of the drill hole and assay data.
Mr. Arkell, a non-independent Qualified Person, has visited site on
numerous occasions in 2018 and 2019, reviewed surface geology,
drill core and RC cuttings, sampling and assaying procedures, as
well as preparation of the geological and resource models.
Todd Minard, P.E. (Nevada and
California), of Golder Associates
Inc. is responsible for the design of the heap leach facility (HLF)
and waste rock dump (WRD). Mr. Minard, an independent
Qualified Person, visited the site in February 2014 and October 2019. While on
site Mr. Minard conducted visual examination of the HLF and WRD
ground conditions and identified candidate liner bedding sources
that will be evaluated in a future geotechnical investigation.
Mr. Neb Zurkic, president of Zurkic Mining Consultants (ZMC), is
responsible for the Mineral Resource Estimate. Mr. Zurkic, an
independent Qualified Person, conducted a three-day site visit in
July 2018 in order to examine drill
core, RC drill cuttings, and to examine the onsite
geology.
There is no affiliation between Mr. Defilippi, Mr. Dyer, Mr.
Minard, Mr. Zurkic and Argonaut, except that of an independent
consultant / client relationship. Mr. Arkell is the VP of
Exploration for Argonaut.
The effective date of the Mineral Resource is October 24, 2019. The effective date of the
Mineral Reserve is December 16,
2019. The effective date of the Technical Report is
December 18, 2019.
Non-IFRS Measures
The Company has included certain
non-IFRS measures including "Cash cost per gold ounce sold" and
"All-in sustaining cost per gold ounce sold" in this press release,
which are presented in accordance with International Financial
Reporting Standards ("IFRS"). Cash cost per gold ounce sold
is equal to production costs less silver sales divided by gold
ounces sold. All-in sustaining cost per gold ounce sold is
equal to production costs less silver sales plus general and
administrative, exploration, accretion and other expenses and
sustaining capital expenditures divided by gold ounces sold.
The Company believes that these measures provide investors
with an improved ability to evaluate the performance of the
Company. Non-IFRS measures do not have any standardized
meaning prescribed under IFRS. Therefore they may not be
comparable to similar measures employed by other companies.
The data is intended to provide additional information and should
not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of
performance prepared in accordance with IFRS. Please see the
most recent management's discussion and analysis for full
disclosure on non-IFRS measures.
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-looking
Statements
This press release contains certain
"forward-looking statements" and "forward-looking information"
under applicable Canadian securities laws concerning the business,
operations and financial performance and condition of Argonaut Gold
Inc. ("Argonaut" or "Argonaut Gold"). Forward-looking statements
and forward-looking information include, but are not limited to
mine life of the various mineral projects of Argonaut; the ability
to obtain permits for operations; synergies; the realization of
mineral reserve estimates; the timing and amount of estimated
future production; costs of production; and financial impact of
completed acquisitions; the benefits of the development potential
of the properties of Argonaut; the future price of gold, copper,
and silver; the estimation of mineral reserves and resources;
success of exploration activities; the ability to take advantage of
forward sales agreements profitably and currency exchange rate
fluctuations. Except for statements of historical fact relating to
Argonaut, certain information contained herein constitutes
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are
frequently characterized by words such as "plan," "expect,"
"project," "intend," "believe," "anticipate", "estimate" and other
similar words, or statements that certain events or conditions
"may", "should" or "will" occur. Forward-looking statements are
based on the opinions and estimates of management at the date the
statements are made, and are based on a number of assumptions and
subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and other factors
that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from
those projected in the forward-looking statements. Many of these
assumptions are based on factors and events that are not within the
control of Argonaut and there is no assurance they will prove to be
correct.
Factors that could cause actual results to vary materially from
results anticipated by such forward-looking statements include
access to water to meet planned solution flow rates, estimates of
future capital and operating costs, variations in ore grade or
recovery rates, variations in ore and waste rock density, changes
in market conditions, risks relating to the availability and
timeliness of permitting and governmental approvals, risks relating
to international operations, fluctuating metal prices and currency
exchange rates, changes in project parameters, the possibility of
project cost overruns or unanticipated costs and expenses, labour
disputes and other risks of the mining industry, failure of plant,
equipment or processes to operate as anticipated.
These factors are discussed in greater detail in Argonaut's most
recent Annual Information Form and in the most recent Management's
Discussion and Analysis filed on SEDAR, which also provide
additional general assumptions in connection with these statements.
Argonaut cautions that the foregoing list of important factors is
not exhaustive. Investors and others who base themselves on
forward-looking statements should carefully consider the above
factors as well as the uncertainties they represent and the risk
they entail. Argonaut believes that the expectations reflected in
those forward-looking statements are reasonable, but no assurance
can be given that these expectations will prove to be correct and
such forward-looking statements included in this press release
should not be unduly relied upon. These statements speak only as of
the date of this press release.
Although Argonaut has attempted to identify important factors
that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ
materially from those described in forward-looking statements,
there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results
not to be anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no
assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be
accurate, as actual results and future events could differ
materially from those anticipated in such statements. Argonaut
undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements if
circumstances or management's estimates or opinions should change
except as required by applicable securities laws. The reader is
cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking
statements. Statements concerning mineral reserve and resource
estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward-looking
statements to the extent they involve estimates of the
mineralization that will be encountered if the property is
developed. Comparative market information is as of a date prior to
the date of this document.
About Argonaut Gold
Argonaut Gold is a Canadian gold company engaged in exploration,
mine development and production. Its primary assets are the
El Castillo mine and San Agustin mine, which together form the El
Castillo Complex in Durango,
Mexico and the La Colorada
mine in Sonora, Mexico.
Advanced exploration projects include the San Antonio project in Baja California Sur, Mexico, the Cerro del
Gallo project in Guanajuato,
Mexico and the Magino project in Ontario, Canada. The Company also has
several exploration stage projects, all of which are located in
North America.
SOURCE Argonaut Gold Inc.