re: Ann: Kin Mining to Acquire Leonora Gold P... G'day gse and...

re: Ann: Kin Mining to Acquire Leonora Gold P... G'day gse and Auto. Thanks for your posts. You have both always posted things as you see them in a well-balanced critical way, and its posters like you both that make stock discussion forums worthwhile, rather than just a blind back slapping exercise.

Auto, I'm aware that those older NAV slides were put together at a time of higher gold prices and use a low cut-off grade and I was careful not to exclude those variables. However my main reason for posting those cross sections was to show how the ore bodies are still open at depth which is where Trevor Dixon believes there is still a lot of upside in those assets. Even using higher cut off grades (resulting in smaller pits), these ore bodies are still open at depth.

I understand the point you make about cash costs, and all I can say to that is that NAV's model was very different including the construction of an expensive mill. I am unsure what you refer to as AISC but I'm assuming it is something to do with All In Cash Costs? If this is the case then you need to look at NAV as an entire company and not just their Leonora assets. This then gets back to the question as to why did NAV go under? Was it due to these Leonora assets or was it due to Bronze Wing? (which had also killed its previous company). My thoughts on this is that it was Bronze Wing and its associated costs which in turn contributed to NAV blowing out their 'All In Costs' to produce gold from any of their operations, together with a fair amount of excess in their administration costs.

Auto re your statement: "Nav proved its projected costs /desktop studies vs reality where mies apart so this would also cause me worry ." What proof is that? Again do you mean because NAV went into administration? If that is the case, again I would say NAV proved that focusing on Bronze Wing was a company killer which I believe is also why NAV's ex-MD Tom Sanders quit the company as he thought the same. Auto you do raise good points and variables for me to research further and as an ex-NAV holder you have obviously followed the exploration and potential development of these assets closer than I have previously. I still very much like what I see via my research on NAV's Leonora assets and do believe they can be a company making acquisition for KIN who are significantly smaller than NAV was and would have quite a different approach to monetising these assets.

Gse, I don't believe KIN had to buy something to raise more cash, though raising cash is obviously required with this acquisition. I think KIN would had to have raised cash at some stage like any junior does, it would just have been a far lesser amount if the current acquisition were not in play. I believe the few $mill over the purchase price you refer to is just to meet the first year's expenditure requirements across the mining leases being acquired.

gse, I also hope that the new money required is not the start of a major ongoing dilution event and all our advice to the KIN board looks to avoid such a scenario and do nothing which is prejudicial to current shareholders. Obviously this is what has spooked the market and caused the resulting current sp. I still believe that if a suitable funding arrangement is secured then the sp will bounce back strongly and then some.

Cheers guys.