Eric Sprott bought more Goldgroup Mining shares on September 28, 2026. His slice of the company got smaller the same day. Both facts are in one early-warning release. A headline that keeps only the first fact is the one that misleads. A company he controls, 2176423 Ontario Ltd., bought 994,300 units in a private placement. The price was US$3.65 a unit. The consideration was $3,629,195, which is 994,300 times 3.65. Each unit is one common share and half a warrant. A whole warrant can buy one more share at US$5.10 for 18 months.
Before that purchase the release put him at 10,934,746 shares and 3,963,063 warrants. That was about 8.1 percent of the shares, and about 10.7 percent if those warrants are counted. After it, the same release put him at 12,154,046 shares and 4,460,213 warrants. That was about 7.2 percent of the shares, and about 9.6 percent with the warrants. The partially diluted stake fell about 0.6 percentage points from the last early-warning report, and it fell below 10 percent. He and his company ceased to be insiders of Goldgroup Mining.
This piece has one theme. More shares were not a bigger claim. The Eric Sprott investment is real money and a real name. It is not a bigger vote inside the firm, because the financing around his cheque was much larger than the cheque. Gold investors who treat a famous buyer as a green light are reading a press line, not the percentages under it. The percentages are the story.
Nothing here says buy or sell Goldgroup Mining stock, or any other gold stock. A famous holder can be early, late, or diluted. You can lose money. The release itself says he may buy more or sell, depending on the market and on his plans. That sentence is a door in both directions.
Read the release in the order it was written
The first sentence is the one that travels. Sprott bought. The price is specific. The warrant is specific. People who follow gold stocks see the name and stop. The next paragraphs undo the simple story. The share count he controls went up. The percent of the company he controls went down. Both can be true when the company issues more shares than he buys. That is dilution. It is not a trick of wording. It is the arithmetic of a placement.
Check the warrant line first, because it ties out. Half of 994,300 is 497,150. Add that to the old warrant count of 3,963,063 and you get 4,460,213. That is exactly the new warrant total in the release. This purchase explains the warrants. It does not, by itself, explain the shares. The old share count plus 994,300 is 11,929,046. The release’s new share count is 12,154,046. The gap is 225,000 shares. The public text does not say where those 225,000 shares came from. Do not invent a second trade to make the page neat. Notice the gap, and do not build a myth on a total you cannot reconcile.
The percent changes are labeled “approximately.” Do not treat 8.1 and 7.2 as if they were counted to the share. They are enough to show the direction. He owns more paper. He owns a smaller fraction. On a partially diluted basis the release says the drop from the prior early-warning report was about 0.6 percentage points, to under 10 percent. That last fact is why the report exists. In Canada, a holder who crosses 10 percent, up or down, generally has to file. Falling out of that club is a legal event. It is not a vote of no confidence, and it is not a victory lap.
The purpose line is standard and still worth reading slowly. The units are held for investment. He has a long-term view. He may acquire more securities, on the market or in private, or he may sell, on the market or in private, depending on conditions and on a change of plans. Long-term view plus a right to sell is not a promise to hold through your horizon. It is the ordinary language of these filings. Gold investment 2026 that treats boilerplate as a vow will be surprised the first time the vow is not kept.
His cheque was a small piece of a large deal
A market-data summary of the financing said Goldgroup Mining closed a placement on September 25, 2026. It issued 33,382,326 units at $3.65, for gross proceeds of about $121.8 million. Each unit was a share plus half a warrant. Each whole warrant can buy a share at $5.10 until March 25, 2028. Sprott’s release, three days later, describes units at the same price, with a warrant at the same strike, for 18 months. It is the same deal, not a second secret one. His 994,300 units are about 3 percent of 33.4 million units. His roughly US$3.6 million is about 3 percent of a US$122 million raise, if the currencies match, which the unit price says they do.
Three percent of a raise is participation. It is not sponsorship of the whole raise. Other buyers took the rest. An earlier company announcement, on September 8, had talked about a US$75 million placement, with US$60 million already committed by resource investors. The closed deal, on the later tally, was larger. Deals grow. They also change. Use the closed unit count when you measure dilution. Use the early announcement only as a sign that a financing was already in motion before the September 28 headline.
Here is the dilution in plain fractions. Using the release’s approximate percents, his old 10.9 million shares were about 8.1 percent, which implies a share base near 135 million. His new 12.2 million shares were about 7.2 percent, which implies a share base near 169 million. The difference is on the order of 34 million shares. That is the same neighborhood as the 33.4 million units reported as issued. The percentages are rounded, so the implied counts are rounded. The picture is not. The company printed a very large number of new shares. He bought a thin slice of them. Everyone’s percent fell. His fell by less than it would have if he had bought nothing. It still fell.
A holder who bought nothing in that placement gave up a larger fraction. A holder who bought as much, in percent terms, as Sprott did, offset only part of the hit. That is the useful reading for gold mining stocks in general, not a special rule for one ticker. When a company you own sells a pile of new shares, your silence is a vote to be smaller. His purchase was a choice to be less small. It was not a choice to be bigger than before.
What “ceased to be an insider” does and does not mean
Insider, in this filing, is a threshold word. Above 10 percent on the partially diluted count he used, he was inside the early-warning regime. Below it, he and 2176423 Ontario Ltd. ceased to be insiders. The release says that in so many words. It does not say he quit the stock. He still reports 12,154,046 shares and more than 4.4 million warrants. That is a large holding in absolute terms. It is a minority holding in percent terms. Both descriptions are accurate. Only one of them fits a headline.
Losing the insider tag changes the paperwork more than it changes the geology. Insiders file trades on a clock. A holder under the line can still own a fortune and can trade with less of that public trail, inside the rules that apply to everyone else. Investors who use insider reports as a live feed should expect the feed to get quieter even if the man still holds the shares. Quieter is not the same as sold. If you need to know his next move, this filing tells you that you may not get the same notices. That is a reason to rely less on him, not a reason to copy the last trade.
It also cuts the other way. Some readers see “no longer an insider” and assume a falling out with the board. The document does not say that. It says the diluted stake went under 10 percent because the share base grew. A legal label moved because the denominator moved. Gold mining companies and their large holders cross this line in both directions all year. The line is 10 percent. It is not a measure of affection.
A warrant is not a share until it is paid for
Each unit included half a warrant. Sprott’s new warrants, on the math that ties out, number 497,150 from this deal, and his total warrants are now 4,460,213. A whole warrant is a right, for 18 months, to buy one share at US$5.10. It is not a share today. It becomes a share only if he pays $5.10 later, and only if he chooses to. If the stock is well below $5.10 when the right expires, the right can expire worthless. If the stock is well above $5.10, the right is valuable, and exercising it creates still more shares.
That second path is more dilution, later, for everyone. The release’s partially diluted percent already assumes his warrants are exercised. It does not assume every other investor’s warrants are exercised. Read that limit. The 9.6 percent is “assuming the exercise of such Warrants,” meaning his. A full count of every warrant from a 33-million-unit deal would add on the order of 16.7 million more shares if all were exercised. His diluted percent would be lower in that fuller picture. The filing is not hiding that so much as using the standard personal test. Do not quote 9.6 percent as his share of a fully diluted company. Quote it as his share if his warrants, and not the rest of the world’s, are turned into stock.
The strike also tells you something about the price he did not pay. He paid US$3.65 for the unit, which is a share plus half a warrant. He did not pay US$5.10 for a share today. The higher number is an option on a higher price. People who say “Sprott bought at $5.10” are reading the wrong line. People who say the warrant is free money are also wrong. Half a warrant was part of what the $3.65 bought. Strip it out and the share portion cost less than $3.65 only in a model. On the wire, the price of the package is $3.65. Use the package.
A private placement is not the open market
He did not lift the offer on the exchange in this filing. He bought units from the company, in a placement, at a set price. That is primary capital. The money goes to the company, not to a stranger who wanted out. That can be good, if the company uses the cash better than the dilution hurts. It can be bad, if the cash is raised because the treasury was thin, or if it is spent on plans that slip. The early-warning text does not itemize the use of proceeds. A famous buyer does not fill that blank. Gold stocks to watch, if the phrase means anything here, are the ones where you can find the use of cash in a company document, not the ones where a known name appears in a headline.
Placement buyers often get a warrant because they are taking stock that may be restricted for a time, and because the company wants the deal full. The public buyer on the exchange the next morning may not get that warrant. Comparing Sprott’s US$3.65 package to a Canadian-dollar quote on the TSX Venture, without a currency and without the warrant, is a bad comparison. A later venture quote near C$4.62, on a third-party list in early October, is a different currency and a different bundle. Do not subtract those two numbers and call the gap a discount. Confirm the live symbol too. After the Gold Resource arrangement, the company’s site shows TSXV: GORO and NYSE American: GORO. Older pages still say GGA. The wrong symbol is the wrong price.
There is a second Sprott filing culture that confuses people. He buys small pieces of many juniors, and he sometimes buys large pieces of a few. A single US$3.6 million ticket, inside a portfolio of that kind, can be a line item. Inside one investor’s account it can look enormous. Scale is relative. His 12 million shares matter to a company with a share base near 170 million. They do not, by themselves, tell you how large the idea is inside his own book. The release does not publish his net worth or his other gold stocks. Guessing that this is “the” Sprott bet is a story the filing does not tell.
why is Eric Sprott investing in Goldgroup Mining
The document gives the only motive it is willing to give. The units are held for investment purposes. He has a long-term view. That is thin, and it is still the text. He has spent decades as a public gold bull and as a buyer of mining equity. People infer that he likes the assets, the team, or the metal. Inference is not a filing. He did not, in this release, say he bought because of a mine in Oaxaca, a restart in Sonora, or a project in the United States. If that is your thesis, it has to come from the company’s records, not from his name.
The company, in a sponsored interview distributed at the start of October, describes four wholly owned precious-metals assets in Mexico and the United States. Two mines producing now, Don David in Oaxaca and Cerro Prieto in Sonora. San Francisco, fully permitted, with a company target to restart mining in the first quarter of 2027. Back Forty, a development project in the United States. The same sponsored piece says the portfolio is aimed at a path toward 250,000 ounces a year of gold-equivalent output. That figure is the company’s vision in a paid segment. It is not a reserve statement, and it is not Sprott’s reason, unless he says so. Sponsored words are the company’s advertisement. Treat them as advertisement.
A serious reason to study the firm, separate from him, is that it is trying to be a producer with more than one mine, in more than one country, after a merger with Gold Resource. Diversified production is a different risk from a single drill hole. It is not a low risk. Mexico and the United States do not share one permit system, one tax rate, or one community history. Two producing mines can fund a restart, or they can disappoint together if grades slip or costs rise. The merger can have added assets and also added share count. This placement added still more share count. The operating story and the dilution story are both live. His cheque does not choose between them.
Why, then, did he write it. The honest answer is that a long-term holder often buys part of a financing so his percent does not fall as far, and so he keeps a relationship with the deal. That is a treasury choice as much as a geological one. It fits the numbers. He did not buy the whole book. He bought enough to show up, and not enough to stop the dilution of his own stake. If you need a deeper motive, you do not have it from this page. Gold investment 2026 is full of people who supply the motive themselves and then call it his.
is Goldgroup Mining a good investment
This article will not award that label. A good investment is a match between a security, a price, and a person who can hold the risk. The security here is a Canadian-listed producer, also on the NYSE American, with operating mines, a restart plan, a development project, and a fresh pile of shares. The price moves. The person is you. Eric Sprott’s purchase does not complete that match.
Ask whether the business can earn cash at a gold price you are willing to live with, after the new share count. A company that raises about $122 million has bought time, or a project, or both. Time is worth a lot if the alternative was a desperate raise later. It is worth less if the new shares claim a large cut of mines that were already going to throw off cash. You cannot know which from his filing. You can know that any per-share measure from before September is stale. Earnings per share, resources per share, and net asset value per share all need the new denominator. Using the old one is how a stock looks cheaper than it is.
Ask what the cash is for, in a document that is not an interview. Restarting a mine costs money before it makes money. Building a development project costs more. Paying down debt is a third use. General corporate cash is a fourth. Each use has a different way to fail. A restart can slip past the first quarter of 2027. A development asset can sit permitted and unbuilt. Debt paid down is the least romantic and sometimes the most useful. If you cannot find the use, you are not yet looking at an investment. You are looking at a ticker with a patron.
Ask about the gap between the company’s aim and the mines’ recent actual ounces. A path toward 250,000 gold-equivalent ounces is a destination the company has advertised. Destinations slip. They also get diluted on a per-share basis even when the ounces arrive, if more shares are issued to get there. “Is Goldgroup Mining a good investment” becomes a better question when it is “are the next ounces enough, per new share, at a gold price I stress at lower levels, after costs.” That question does not fit on a billboard. It is the one that matters.
Jurisdiction belongs in the same pass. Operating in Mexico means permits, communities, security, and tax rules that a Toronto quote does not capture. Operating in the United States means a different set, not a free pass. A diversified map reduces the chance that one blocked road ends the firm. It increases the chance you are underwriting two political stories at once. Neither point is a reason to buy or to sell. Both are reasons the word “good” is doing too much work.
should investors buy Goldgroup Mining stock
Some investors will, and this filing is a weak reason to join them. The strong reasons, if they exist, are in production, costs, the restart schedule, the development case, the use of the new cash, and the price versus those facts after dilution. The weak reason is that a celebrated gold investor bought about 3 percent of a unit deal and ended with a smaller percent of the company. Copying the weak reason is how people outsource a decision they did not do.
If you already own it, the filing is a prompt to re-do the per-share math, not a prompt to add blindly because he added. Your old percent of the company is smaller unless you bought the placement too. That is true even if you like the assets more than you did in August. Affection does not offset a larger share count. Check whether your thesis was per ounce or per share. Most retail theses are per share, whether they admit it or no.
If you do not own it, the filing is a prompt to open the financials, not a shortcut past them. Size any interest as if the famous name might sell, because the release says he might. Size it as if the restart slips, because restarts do. Size it as if gold is lower for a while, because a producer’s cash flow is a gold-price machine with costs attached. Canadian gold stocks feel that machine directly. A producer feels it in the next quarter. A developer feels it in the value of a mine that is not yet built. This firm, on its own description, is some of both.
Position size is the part the headline never includes. A stake you can hold through a dropped quarter is a different object from a stake that forces a sale. Gold mining stocks move more than gold. A single name moves more than a basket of gold mining stocks. Goldgroup Mining stock is one name. It is not a substitute for the metal, and it is not a substitute for a spread of gold stocks. If the only reason you would buy is the Sprott line, you do not yet have a size. You have a headline.
What his purchase does not say about gold itself
A man can buy a miner because he likes gold, or in spite of a dull week in gold, or because a financing calendar forced the decision. One ticket does not update the gold price. It does not prove that 2026 will be a good year for the metal. It does not cancel a bank’s caution, and it does not confirm a bank’s optimism. Gold investment 2026 is a separate argument about rates, the dollar, central banks, and real yields. This filing is an argument about one company’s share count. Mixing them is how a stock tip borrows the grandeur of a monetary thesis it did not earn.
The warrant strike is a small tell in that mix. A right to pay US$5.10 later is interesting if you think the shares will be higher. It is dead paper if they will not. He accepted that right as part of a package. He did not, in this text, publish a target. Investors who backfill a target are writing his press release for him. Do not. The package price is US$3.65. The later price is a choice he has not yet made.
There is a fashion in gold stocks to treat one buyer as a bellwether. Sometimes a bellwether is early and right. Sometimes he is early and the equity raise is what you remember, not the gold price. The discipline is to separate the metal chart from the share register. If you want gold, a coin or a bar does not issue 33 million new units. If you want a miner’s operating leverage, you are accepting the register, the costs, and the country. Sprott’s name sits on the register. It does not sit on your coin.
How to use a famous holder without obeying him
Use the filing as a fact sheet. Date, price, unit shape, old percent, new percent, insider status, and the boilerplate on buying or selling. That is a clean page. It takes ten minutes. It will save you from a headline. Then go to the company’s own closing notice for the placement and read the use of proceeds, the fees, and any hold period. If those lines are dull, good. Dull is where the cost of capital lives. Then read the latest production and cost figures, and divide the value you care about by the new share count, not the old one.
Use him as a prompt list, not as a portfolio. He has owned many gold mining companies. Some did well. Some did not. A list of his names is not a screened set of quality. It is a list of places he put chips. Chips are sized to his bankroll and his taste for risk. Your bankroll is smaller, and your time horizon may be a tuition bill or a retirement draw. Copying the names without copying the size is the common error. You cannot copy the size. You do not know it.
Watch what would falsify the cheerful reading. The cheerful reading is that a disciplined gold investor bought more, so the assets are attractive and the cash will be used well. It would look worse if the cash sits idle, if the restart moves to the right, if costs jump, or if another large placement arrives before the new ounces do. It would look different, not automatically better, if he files again as a buyer. It would look different, not automatically fatal, if he sells. The release already reserved that right. A sale would be information. It would not be a moral event.
Watch the share count more than the man. The next time Goldgroup Mining stock moves 10 percent, ask whether the share count moved too. A rising price on a rising share count can be a weaker per-share story. A falling price on a stable share count can be a better entry than a rising price on a flood of paper. This is ordinary. It feels unfair only if you wanted the famous name to do the arithmetic.
Dilution is a tax you can estimate
You do not need his identity to estimate the tax. If a firm with about 135 million shares issues about 33 million new ones, the old holder who does not participate keeps about 135 divided by 168, or about 80 percent, of their former claim on the assets. They did not sell. They were made smaller. If the new cash raises the value of the assets by more than that haircut, they can come out ahead. If it does not, they paid a tax for a story. The whole investment question is that comparison. His presence does not change the fraction.
His own haircut was milder because he participated. Going from about 8.1 percent to about 7.2 percent is keeping roughly nine-tenths of the old claim, not four-fifths. He paid cash for that difference. Whether that cash earns its keep depends on what the company does with the whole $122 million, not with his $3.6 million. You cannot isolate his dollars inside the treasury. They mixed. The use of the pool is the use that matters.
Per-share investors should redo three ratios after every large placement. Ounces per share, if you have a current resource or reserve you trust. Cash flow per share, using a gold price you stress downward, not only today’s price. Cash on the balance sheet per share, so you see the raise you just paid for. If you skip this because a respected man bought, you have chosen a narrator over a numerator. Narrators are persuasive. Numerators are the shares you actually own.
There is a nastier version of the tax, and it is the next raise. A company that has just taken in a large sum should not need another one soon, if the sum matched the plan. If another placement is announced before the restart or the development step is funded, the September deal was a bridge, not a solution. Bridges are sometimes necessary. They are rarely what the first headline admitted. Put that test on a calendar. Do not put his photo on it.
The merger sits underneath the placement
Goldgroup Mining, as presented now, is not the same small vehicle some older write-ups still describe. The Gold Resource combination changed the asset list and the ticker. Production at Don David and Cerro Prieto is the base the company points to. San Francisco is the near-term operating hope. Back Forty is the longer build. A placement of this size, so soon in the life of that combination, can mean the plan is being funded. It can also mean the combination’s promises were more expensive than the old share count could carry. Both readings are open. The early-warning report does not pick one.
Mergers and placements stack their dilution. Shareholders of the older Goldgroup absorbed the merger’s share issue. Shareholders of the combined firm then absorbed this unit issue. Anyone who judges the stock on a chart that starts before those events, and who does not adjust for shares, is judging a different company. Price memory is not ownership memory. Your cost base can be real and your fraction of the mines can still be smaller than the chart suggests.
That is also why “Canadian gold stocks” is too wide a bucket to hold this news. Canada is where many of the shares are listed and where Sprott files. The rocks in this story, on the company’s account, are in Mexico and the United States. A Toronto listing does not make a Mexican mine Canadian geology. It makes the disclosure Canadian. Disclosure is a gift. It is not the ore. Read the SEDAR+ early-warning report, which the release says will be on the company profile, and then read the technical reports for the mines. The phone number in the release will get you his office. It will not get you a compliant resource.
A note on the 225,000-share gap
Return to the number that does not tie, because neat stories skip it. Prior shares, 10,934,746. Units in this purchase, 994,300. Sum, 11,929,046. Stated shares now, 12,154,046. Difference, 225,000. Warrants tie to the half-warrant on the 994,300 units and only to that. So the release is internally tight on the instrument it describes, and internally loose on the share total by a quarter of a million shares. That can have a boring cause. A small buy between the last early-warning snapshot and this one. A counting date that is not the minute before the wire. A holding through another account that the summary folded in. It can have a less boring cause. You do not know. What you know is that you should not describe his buying as exactly 994,300 shares of change in the beneficial total. The release’s own totals say the beneficial share count rose by 1,219,300. Say that, and say the placement piece of it.
This is how high-integrity reading works on a short wire. You do not accuse. You do not sand the edge off to make a cleaner moral. You show the arithmetic and you stop where the document stops. Investors who need every share explained before they trust a percent can look up the early-warning report on SEDAR+. Until they do, the percent drop is solid enough to carry the theme, and the 225,000 is a flag, not a scandal. Flags are useful. Scandals that you invent are not.
What gold investors can fairly conclude
They can conclude that Sprott still wanted exposure after a big dilution event, and that he paid US$3.65 for a unit to keep some of it. They can conclude he was not willing, or not able, or not offered the chance, to buy enough to keep his old percent. The filing does not say which. They can conclude his diluted stake is under the insider line, so the public trail may thin. They can conclude the company sold a very large number of units and took in a very large amount of cash, and that this, not the celebrity, is the capital-structure event of the week.
They cannot conclude that the stock is cheap. They cannot conclude that the stock is dear. They cannot conclude that the restart will hit the first quarter of 2027, or that 250,000 ounces is a plan rather than a hope. They cannot conclude that other gold stocks should be bought because he bought one. A single Eric Sprott investment is one line in one filing. The sector is hundreds of lines. Pattern-matching a career onto one close is flattery.
They can use the episode as a template. When the next gold miner announces that a known buyer “added,” read the percent before and after. Read the size of the whole placement. Read whether the buyer ceased to be an insider because he sold or because the company printed shares. Those three checks take longer than the headline and shorter than a bad trade. They are the whole craft. The name at the top is the lure. The denominator is the work.
A calendar, not a signal
Between now and the warrant expiry in March 2028, the facts that would change the meaning of this cheque are ordinary and checkable. Does San Francisco start mining on anything like the company’s stated timetable. Do the producing mines hold their output and their costs. Does Back Forty move from a sentence in an interview to a funded step, or does it stay a sentence. Does the cash from the placement show up in the balance sheet and then leave toward those uses, or does another raise arrive first. Does he file as a buyer again, or as a seller, or not at all, now that the insider duty has lapsed.
None of those is a price target. Together they are a way to keep the September 28 release in its place. It was a true report of a purchase. It was also a true report of a smaller claim. Gold investors who remember only the purchase will meet the share count again later, in every per-share figure the company publishes. Gold investors who remember both will not need his next headline to tell them what happened.
If you own a basket of Canadian gold stocks, this one name should not set the basket’s mood. A placement at one producer does not say that the sector is starved or flush. It says this issuer chose equity, in size, at US$3.65 plus a warrant. Other issuers will choose debt, or will not choose at all, because their mines already pay the bills. Compare capital needs. Do not compare fame.
The close
Eric Sprott added to his Goldgroup share count. He did not add to his weight in the company. The release is clear if you read past the verb “acquired.” About 994,300 units, at US$3.65, with half a warrant struck at US$5.10. A beneficial total that rose by more than that unit count, by 225,000 shares the text does not explain. A percent that fell from about 8.1 to about 7.2, and from about 10.7 to about 9.6 if you count his warrants. A stake that slipped under 10 percent, so he ceased to be an insider. A long-term view, and a written right to sell.
What that means for gold investors is narrower than the headline hopes. It means a well-known buyer took a small piece of a large financing, and the financing was the event. It means more shares in a strong name can still be a weaker claim. It means insider status is a filing rule, not a blessing. It means Goldgroup Mining stock has a new share count, a new pile of cash, and a set of operating promises that his purchase does not prove. It does not mean you should buy. It does not mean you should sell. It means you should do the division. Old percent, new percent, cash in, shares out. The man is famous. The division is the point.
A note on sources and limits
Ownership figures, the unit price of US$3.65, the consideration of $3,629,195, the warrant at US$5.10 for 18 months, the before-and-after share and warrant counts, the approximate percents, the loss of insider status, and the “investment purposes” language are from Eric Sprott’s September 28, 2026 early-warning news release, as posted by Goldgroup Mining and on the wire. The 225,000-share gap is this article’s subtraction from those stated totals, not a number the release explains. The closed placement of 33,382,326 units and gross proceeds of about $121.8 million, with warrants to March 25, 2028, is from a market-data summary of the company announcement, not from the Sprott release itself. The September 8, 2026 figure of a US$75 million placement is from the company’s earlier announcement, before the larger close. Asset descriptions and the 250,000-ounce pathway are from a company-sponsored interview and are not treated as independent reserves or as Sprott’s stated reasons. The TSX Venture price reference is a third-party quote in Canadian dollars and is not the placement price. Tickers GORO on the TSX Venture and the NYSE American are as the company site presents them after the Gold Resource arrangement. This is not a solicitation and not advice to buy or sell any security. Financings dilute. Mines slip. You can lose money.