[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

Seabridge Gold Drilling Expands Iron Cap: Resource Estimate Expected Shortly. Results Suggest Potential to Discover Higher Grade Deposit at Depth.

Today Seabridge Gold announced that a new resource estimate is expected shortly. The data of all 46 drilling holes will now be provided to Resource Modeling Inc., an independent consulting firm, and the first NI-43-101 compliant resource estimate for Iron Cap is expected in January 2011. We bought Seabridge Gold in June of this year @ $28.36 Today the stock closed @ $27.79 this means a 2% loss.  We think the coming estimate will finally give the share price the firm push forward we have been waiting for.  For the time being we keep our targeted price at $75

Seabridge News Release:

Toronto, Canada – Results from the final 33 core holes drilled by Seabridge this year at Iron Cap have confirmed (i) consistent gold, copper and silver mineralization which is likely to generate an increase in resources and reserves at KSM; (ii) an expanded size of the deposit; (iii) higher average metal values than KSM’s current reserves which have the potential to enhance project economics; and (iv) a highly prospective new exploration target which could have dynamic implications for KSM.  For assay results and hole descriptions see www.seabridgegold.net/NDec9-10-table.pdf and for a drill hole location map see www.seabridgegold.net/NDec9-10-maps.pdf.

A total of 46 core holes have now been drilled at Iron Cap. Every hole has intersected ore grade mineralization over significant widths. The drill data will now be provided to Resource Modeling Inc., an independent consulting firm, and the first NI-43-101 compliant resource estimate for Iron Cap is expected in January 2011. The drill hole spacing in the heart of the Iron Cap deposit should be sufficient to allow a significant portion of this resource to be classified as measured and indicated which could enable it to qualify as reserves in the updated Preliminary Feasibility Study (“PFS”) scheduled for April 2011.

In the Seabridge news release dated July 26, 2010, the size of the Iron Cap deposit was estimated to be at least 900 meters in strike length, 400 meters wide and up to 350 meters thick. The results from the last 33 holes now confirm a deposit which has a strike length of at least 1,300 meters, a width of at least 600 meters and an average thickness of 350 meters. In addition to the down dip potential, Iron Cap remains open on strike to the northeast and southwest.

Analysis of drill data indicates that the Iron Cap resource is likely to have a higher metal value than the average KSM grade. For example, Hole 40, which is mineralized from top to bottom, contains a 128.5 meter interval grading 1.04 grams per tonne gold and 0.37% copper. What is most encouraging is that Iron Cap’s higher grade copper zones could be blended with ore from the Mitchell zone to maintain the targeted 0.20% average copper grade to the mill. This average head grade is important because it generates a higher grade concentrate without sacrificing recoveries, which in turn commands better smelter returns and reduces shipping costs. The current mine plan calls for the early development of the more distant Kerr and Sulphurets zones to maintain copper head grades to the mill. Sequencing Iron Cap before Kerr and Sulphurets could have multiple potential benefits including lower operating and capital costs, deferring significant expenditures and extending mine life.

The Iron Cap deposit is a separate but related mineral system within the KSM district. It is structurally above the Mitchell deposit in the panel of rocks between the Mitchell and Sulphurets thrust faults. Iron Cap differs from the Mitchell deposit in that several intrusions make up the host rock. This higher temperature environment and its associated potassic alteration have resulted in the higher metal value at Iron Cap. There is the potential for an undiscovered, deeper core zone characterized by potassium feldspar, magnetite and bornite which could be expected to contain significantly higher metal values than the shallower levels tested so far at Iron Cap. This year’s drill results suggest that this potential core zone may exist below the current limits of the Iron Cap deposit. Seabridge intends to pursue this target in next year’s program.

Exploration activities at KSM are being conducted by Seabridge personnel under the supervision of William E. Threlkeld, Senior Vice President of Seabridge and a Qualified Person as defined by National Instrument 43-101. An ongoing and rigorous quality control/quality assurance protocol is being employed during the 2010 program including blank and reference standards in every batch of assays. Cross-check analyses are being conducted at a second external laboratory on 10% of the samples. Samples are being assayed at Eco Tech Laboratory Ltd., Kamloops, B.C., using fire assay atomic adsorption methods for gold and total digestion ICP methods for other elements.

Seabridge holds a 100% interest in several North American gold resource projects. The Company’s principal assets are the KSM property located near Stewart, British Columbia, Canada and the Courageous Lake gold project located in Canada’s Northwest Territories. For a breakdown of Seabridge’s mineral resources by project and resource category please visit the Company’s website at http://www.seabridgegold.net/resources.php.

All reserve and resource estimates reported by the Corporation were calculated in accordance with the Canadian National Instrument 43-101 and the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy Classification system. These standards differ significantly from the requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.

This document contains “forward-looking information” within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation and “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. This information and these statements, referred to herein as “forward-looking statements” are made as of the date of this document. Forward-looking statements relate to future events or future performance and reflect current estimates, predictions, expectations or beliefs regarding future events and include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to: (i) the amount of mineral reserves and mineral resources; (ii) any potential for the increase of mineral reserves and mineral resources, whether in existing zones or new zones; (iii) the amount of future production; (iv) further optimization of the PFS including metallurgical performance; (v) completion of and submission of the Environmental Assessment Application; and (vi) potential for engineering improvements. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “plans”, “projects”, “estimates”, “envisages”, “assumes”, “intends”, “strategy”, “goals”, “objectives” or variations thereof or stating that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking statements.

All forward-looking statements are based on Seabridge’s or its consultants’ current beliefs as well as various assumptions made by them and information currently available to them. These assumptions include: (i) the presence of and continuity of metals at the Project at modeled grades; (ii) the capacities of various machinery and equipment; (iii) the availability of personnel, machinery and equipment at estimated prices; (iv) exchange rates; (v) metals sales prices; (vi) appropriate discount rates; (vii) tax rates and royalty rates applicable to the proposed mining operation; (viii) financing structure and costs; (ix) anticipated mining losses and dilution; (x) metallurgical performance; (xi) reasonable contingency requirements; (xii) success in realizing further optimizations and potential in exploration programs and proposed operations; (xiii) receipt of regulatory approvals on acceptable terms, including the necessary right of way for the proposed tunnels; and (xiv) the negotiation of satisfactory terms with impacted First Nations groups. Although management considers these assumptions to be reasonable based on information currently available to it, they may prove to be incorrect. Many forward-looking statements are made assuming the correctness of other forward looking statements, such as statements of net present value and internal rates of return, which are based on most of the other forward-looking statements and assumptions herein. The cost information is also prepared using current values, but the time for incurring the costs will be in the future and it is assumed costs will remain stable over the relevant period.

By their very nature, forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, both general and specific, and risks exist that estimates, forecasts, projections and other forward-looking statements will not be achieved or that assumptions do not reflect future experience. We caution readers not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements as a number of important factors could cause the actual outcomes to differ materially from the beliefs, plans, objectives, expectations, anticipations, estimates assumptions and intentions expressed in such forward-looking statements. These risk factors may be generally stated as the risk that the assumptions and estimates expressed above do not occur, but specifically include, without limitation: risks relating to variations in the mineral content within the material identified as mineral reserves or mineral resources from that predicted; variations in rates of recovery and extraction; developments in world metals markets; risks relating to fluctuations in the Canadian dollar relative to the US dollar; increases in the estimated capital and operating costs or unanticipated costs; difficulties attracting the necessary work force; increases in financing costs or adverse changes to the terms of available financing, if any; tax rates or royalties being greater than assumed; changes in development or mining plans due to changes in logistical, technical or other factors; changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined; risks relating to receipt of regulatory approvals or settlement of an agreement with impacted First Nations groups; the effects of competition in the markets in which Seabridge operates; operational and infrastructure risks and the additional risks described in Seabridge’s Annual Information Form filed with SEDAR in Canada (available at www.sedar.com for the year ended December 31, 2009 and in the Corporation’s Annual Report Form 40-F filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on EDGAR (available at www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml info@seabridgegold.net

When relying on our forward-looking statements to make decisions with respect to Seabridge, investors and others should carefully consider the foregoing factors and other uncertainties and potential events. Seabridge does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time by Seabridge or on our behalf, except as required by law.


“Rudi Fronk”
President & C.E.O.

For further information please contact:
Rudi P. Fronk, President and C.E.O.
Tel: (416) 367-9292 • Fax: (416) 367-2711
Email: info@seabridgegold.net

Source: Company website

Comments Closed

Comments are closed.