We bought Seabridge in the summer of 2010 @ $28.36 After this news today the price finally picked up, helped by rising gold prices as well. For the first time since June last year, the price broke true $32.50 again. This stock has totally missed  out on the rally gold had from August to December. Quote from CEO Rudi Fronk in September 2009 (when gold was about $1000) (Singular Research Annual “Best of the Uncovereds” Conference)

If you were to go out, the most common — the most common ETF to buy today is an instrument called GLD that you can buy on the New York Stock Exchange. GLD is backed by physical gold in a vault that’s monitored by a big investment banking — a big bank. You buy one share of GLD today, you’ll pay about $98 a share. And what you get, supposedly, is a tenth of an ounce of physical gold stored somewhere in a vault on your behalf. What makes GLD go up? Only the price of gold. That’s it. There are no other ways to move the price. You buy one share of Seabridge today, each one of our shares is now backed by 1.6 ounces of gold in the ground. And I’ll be the first to admit there is a difference of gold in the ground versus gold in a vault. But the ratio there of 16 times the amount of gold, compared to paying $97 a share of GLD versus $30 a share of Seabridge, you can see the leverage we provide.

You can see the share price has not benefited at all, with gold being above $1300 for a while now and the companies fundamentals have improved even more. Seabridge Gold is still a solid BUY! Do not expect quick results, but you can expect they will start looking around for a buyer for KSM in the next years (1-5 years) China sits on huge amounts of US$ and with QE1, QE2, talks of QE3 (and realy crazy people like Ben Bernanke probably are thinking about QE4 till QE-infinite)  the Chinese  might want to start spending it. So expect something in that order.

Seabridge News Release (source: company website):

Toronto, Canada…An independent mineral resource model for Seabridge Gold’s Iron Cap Zone at its 100% owned KSM project estimates a new indicated resource containing 5.1 million ounces of gold and 1.7 billion pounds of copper immediately adjacent to the Mitchell deposit. The indicated resource is flanked by a halo of inferred resources containing an additional 3.4 million ounces of gold and 1.3 billion pounds of copper. The Iron Cap resource estimate was prepared by Resource Modeling Inc. (“RMI”) of Stites, Idaho and will be incorporated into an updated Preliminary Feasibility Study (“PFS”) scheduled for completion in April 2011. The NI 43-101 compliant global resource estimate is as follows:

A new global resource estimate for the KSM project, including the Mitchell, Sulphurets and Kerr zones, will be released shortly.

Seabridge Gold President and CEO Rudi Fronk said “the Iron Cap resource has exceeded our expectations. Our objective was to book a five million ounce gold resource in all categories. In fact, we have achieved more than five million ounces of indicated resources with a superior copper grade which should help us optimize mine plans to maintain a favorable copper head grade. We expect that most of the indicated resource should qualify as reserves in our new PFS and improve the economics for the KSM project.”

RMI estimated gold and copper grades using inverse distance weighting methods within geologically constrained gold and copper grade domains that were constructed for the Iron Cap zone. The grade models were validated visually and by comparisons with nearest neighbor models. The estimated block grades were classified into indicated and inferred mineral resource categories based on mineralized continuity that was determined both visually and statistically (i.e. variogram ranges) together with the proximity to drill hole data. To facilitate comparisons with previous resource estimates, recoverable gold equivalent grades were calculated using the same $650 gold price with a 70% recovery rate and a $2.00 copper price with an 85% recovery rate. The cutoff grade for resource tabulation was set at 0.50 grams per tonne (g/t) gold equivalent, also consistent with the cutoff grade used for previous KSM resource estimates.

The resource model for Iron Cap incorporates data from a total of 51 core holes (41 drilled by Seabridge in 2010 plus 10 holes drilled by previous operators) totaling about 17,700 meters. Grades from the 10 holes drilled by previous operators were compared with nearby holes drilled by Seabridge.  The grades of the older holes were found to be comparable with the newer holes.  For example, the average gold grade of the old and new holes within 50 meters of one another was 0.43 and 0.45 g/t, respectively.  RMI reviewed the quality assurance/quality control protocols and results from Seabridge’s 2010 drilling program and has deemed that the number and type of gold and copper standard reference materials (standards, blanks, and duplicates) were reasonable. Based on the performance of those standard reference materials, RMI believes that the Seabridge drill samples are reproducible and suitable for estimating mineral resources. RMI constructed a preliminary block model in August 2010 using ten historic and eight 2010 Seabridge drill holes that had been completed as of that date.  After the 2010 drilling campaign was completed, RMI compared the grades from 33Seabridge core holes that were completed after the preliminary block model had been constructed.  This comparison showed that the newly obtained drill hole intervals were slightly higher in grade (gold, copper, silver, and molybdenum) than the estimated preliminary model blocks.  The infill drilling program also validated and expanded the volume of mineralization that was established by the initial ten drill holes.

Gold resource estimates included herein were prepared by Resource Modeling Inc. under the direction of Michael Lechner, who is independent of Seabridge and a Qualified Person as defined by National Instrument 43-101. Mr. Lechner is a highly regarded expert in his field and frequently undertakes independent resource estimates for major mining companies. Mr. Lechner has reviewed and approved this news release. The independent technical report detailing the Iron Cap resource model, plus updated resource estimates for the Mitchell, Sulphurets and Kerr zones will be filed on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

Exploration activities by Seabridge Gold at KSM have been conducted under the supervision of William E. Threlkeld, Registered Professional Geologist, Senior Vice President of the Company and a Qualified Person as defined by National Instrument 43-101. An ongoing and rigorous quality control/quality assurance protocol was 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 were 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 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 reserves and mineral resources by 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). Seabridge cautions that the foregoing list of factors that may affect future results is not exhaustive.

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.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

“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

Seabridge News Release:

Toronto, Canada – An updated, independent mineral resource model for Seabridge Gold’s 100% owned Courageous Lake project in Canada’s Northwest Territories has (i) significantly increased the measured and indicated gold resources (ii) improved the average grade of the resource and (iii) increased the size of the deposit. The next step is to incorporate the updated resource model, prepared by Resource Modeling Inc. (“RMI”) of Stites, Idaho, into a new Preliminary Assessment (“PA”) scheduled for completion in April 2011.

The new NI 43-101 compliant resource estimate prepared by RMI is as follows:

Seabridge Gold President and CEO Rudi Fronk said the new model “incorporates data from 49 diamond core holes drilled in 2010 totaling about 22,000 meters. The focus of the 2010 drilling program was to upgrade inferred resources to higher categories. Using the same cut-off grade as the 2007 resource model, measured and indicated gold resources have increased by 60% while the average grade of these categories improved by 5%. Nearly all of that gain came from upgrading previously defined inferred resources to measured or indicated categories. In addition, the 2010 drilling found new inferred resources and increased the average grade of the inferred by 13% from the 2007 estimate. The new resource model and a substantially higher gold price should significantly enhance project economics in the April 2011 PA. The 2008 PA was based on $690 gold. In the current environment, we believe that Courageous Lake could be a highly robust gold project.”

For a detailed summary of the 2007 resource model see http://www.seabridgegold.net/NFeb28-07.pdf and for the 2008 PA see http://www.seabridgegold.net/NMar10-08.pdf.

The new resource model constructed for the Courageous Lake deposit now incorporates data from a total of 560 holes drilled by Seabridge, Noranda and Placer Dome totaling 150,584 meters. Gold mineralization within the Courageous Lake deposit is hosted in the upper part of an assemblage of Archean age felsic pyroclastic rocks, just below a transition zone to volcanoclastic and sedimentary rocks.

Similar to the 2007 estimate (also completed by RMI), block model gold grades for this latest Courageous Lake model were estimated using a multiple pass inverse distance weighting interpolation procedure. The 2010 drilling program was highly successful with the new drill hole assay data showing that (i) the 2007 model was a reasonable predictor of “ore and waste” and that (ii) a back analysis of comparing the 2010 drill hole intersections against the 2007 block model demonstrates a net gain of contained gold. In addition to using mineral zone wireframes to constrain the estimate of block grades, a dynamic anisotropic search strategy was used to select eligible composites. The search ellipse was allowed to dynamically conform to the hanging and footwall contacts of the key mineral zones, providing for a more geologically consistent and realistic distribution of in situ block gold grades. Individual assay grades were capped for each zone prior to compositing the assay data and interpolating block grades. The estimated block grades were classified into Measured, Indicated, and Inferred Mineral Resource categories using distance to drilling data and the number of drill holes used to estimate the block grades. For the principal mineral zones (3-5) Measured Resources were defined for blocks estimated by one or more drill holes within 7.5 meters of the block. For those same principal mineral zones, Indicated Resources were defined by blocks estimated by two or more drill holes with at least one sample within 30 meters of the block. Inferred Mineral Resources were defined by blocks estimated by at least one drill hole with a maximum allowable assay projection distance of 65 meters. It is RMI’s opinion that the new resource model is globally unbiased and locally reflects the grade of nearby drill hole composites.

The following table provides global resource estimates from the new model at various gold cutoff grades:

The cutoff grade for resource tabulation was set at 0.83 grams per tonne, consistent with cut-off grade used for previous Courageous Lake resource estimates. In all likelihood, the cut-off grade that will be employed in the 2011 PA will be lower than 0.83 grams per tonne due to higher gold prices.

Gold resource estimates included herein were prepared by Resource Modeling Inc. under the direction of Michael Lechner, who is independent of Seabridge and a Qualified Person as defined by National Instrument 43-101. Mr. Lechner is a highly regarded expert in his field and frequently undertakes independent resource estimates for major mining companies. Mr. Lechner has reviewed and approved this news release. The independent technical report detailing the new Courageous Lake resource model will be filed on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

Exploration activities by Seabridge Gold at the Courageous Lake gold project have been conducted under the supervision of William E. Threlkeld, Registered Professional Geologist, Senior Vice President of the Company and a Qualified Person as defined by National Instrument 43-101. A rigorous quality control/quality assurance protocol was employed during the 2010 Courageous Lake drill program including blank and certified reference standards inserted by the Company in every batch of assays. Repeats and re-splits of the sample rejects were analyzed at a rate of not less than one sample in every 25 for each type. Samples were assayed at Acme Laboratories, Vancouver, B.C. using fire assay atomic adsorption methods for gold and total digestion ICP methods for other elements. Cross-check analyses were conducted at a second external laboratory on at least 10% of the samples.

Seabridge holds a 100% interest in several North American gold 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 reserves and mineral resources by 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 but many of them relate to estimates and projections prepared in 2007 and 2008. 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) the amount of future production over any period; (iii) cumulative pre-tax net cash flow of the proposed mining operation; (iv) capital costs; (v) operating costs, including credits from the sale of other metals; (vi) mining rates; (vii) mine life; (vii) planned expenditures; and (viii) upgrading inferred resources. 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 independent consultants’ current beliefs as well as various assumptions made by them and information available to them on the date the statements are made. 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) metals recovery rates, (xi) reasonable contingency requirements; (xii) receipt of regulatory approvals on acceptable terms; and (xiii) 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 cumulative pre-tax net cash flow, which are based on other forward-looking statements and assumptions. The cost information is also prepared using earlier 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 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 including those described in the December 31, 2009 Corporation’s Annual Information Form filed with SEDAR in Canada (available at www.sedar.com) 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). Seabridge cautions that the foregoing list of factors that may affect future results is not exhaustive.

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.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

“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

Despite good news and solid high gold prices, Seabridge shares remain about level for months now. When you have a look at the companies fundamentals, the current share price is ridiculously low. Seabridge is a good buy below $29.00 ; our longer term target (e.g. 2-3 years) for Seabridge is $80.00

Seabridge Gold News Release:

Toronto, Canada… Seabridge Gold announced today that it has completed the sale of its remaining interest in the Noche Buena project to Minera Penmont, S. de R.L. de C.V. (“Penmont”) for US$10.12 million in cash (see News Release dated October 28, 2010). Penmont is a joint venture between Fresnillo plc. and Newmont USA Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Newmont Mining Corporation. Dahlman Rose & Co., LLC acted as advisors to Seabridge for this transaction.

Seabridge holds a 100% interest in several North American gold 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.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

“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

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.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

“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

Today Seabridge announces that Resource Modeling Inc., an independent consulting firm will process the results of the 2010 drill program. Be bought Seabridge at $28,36 in June. Yesterday it closed at $28,50 not much gain, but our views of Seabridge have not changed at all. Our target for Seabridge is $75,00 below $29,90 we still consider this “miner” a buy.

News Release:

Toronto, Canada…Positive results from the final 21 diamond drill holes completed in this year’s program at Courageous Lake’s FAT deposit have likely upgraded a substantial portion of the deposit’s inferred resources to higher categories. The drill data will now be provided to Resource Modeling Inc., an independent consulting firm, and a new NI-43-101 compliant resource estimate is expected in January 2011. Complete assay results and descriptions for these 21 holes can be found at www.seabridgegold.net/CLdrill2010.pdf.

Seabridge President and CEO Rudi Fronk said “the 2010 program was an unqualified success. All of the holes that reached their target intersected resource grade mineralization. We believe this program has likely upgraded a substantial portion of the FAT deposit’s inferred resource and also potentially increased its size and grade. Our objective is to incorporate the new resource model into an updated NI 43-101 compliant Preliminary Assessment scheduled for the second quarter of 2011. We are planning another program for next year to upgrade any remaining in-pit inferred resources in preparation for a planned 2012 Preliminary Feasibility Study which would estimate mineral reserves.”

The Courageous Lake project consists of 27,263 hectares (67,366 acres) covering 53 kilometers (33 miles) of a greenstone belt in Canada’s Northwest Territories, including the two kilometer long FAT deposit which has estimated gold resources as set out below (see news release of February 28, 2007 for details):

In March 2008, Seabridge released the results of a Preliminary Assessment (see news release dated March 10, 2008) in which the independent consultants concluded that an open-pit mining operation, with on-site processing, was the most suitable development scenario for the Courageous Lake project. A base case scenario was developed proposing a 25,000 tonne per day operation (9.125 million tonne per year throughput) resulting in a projected 11.6 year operation with average estimated annual production of 500,500 ounces of gold at an estimated average cash operating cost of US$435 per ounce recovered. The base case scenario utilized measured, indicated and inferred resources in the mine plan. Initial capital costs for the project were estimated at US$848 million, including a contingency of US$111 million. The total cost of gold production (including cash operating costs and total capital costs over the life of the mine) was estimated at US$590 per ounce.

At a gold price of US$690 per ounce, the base case cumulative pre-tax net cash flow over the life of the project was estimated at US$500 million. At a gold price of US$800 per ounce, the cumulative pre-tax net cash flow over the life of the project was estimated at US$1.13 billion and at US$1,000 gold pre-tax cumulative net cash flow was estimated at US$2.27 billion.

Seabridge notes that the Courageous Lake 2008 Preliminary Assessment incorporated inferred mineral resources which are considered too geologically speculative to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. Therefore, Seabridge advises that there can be no certainty that the estimates contained in the Preliminary Assessment will be realized.

National Instrument 43-101 Disclosure

The 2010 Courageous Lake exploration program was conducted under the direction of William E. Threlkeld, Senior Vice President of Seabridge and a Qualified Person under National Instrument 43-101. Mr. Threlkeld has reviewed and approved this news release.

A rigorous quality control/quality assurance protocol was employed during the 2010 Courageous Lake drill program including blank and certified reference standards inserted by the Company in every batch of assays. Repeats and re-splits of the sample rejects were analyzed at a rate of not less than one sample in every 25 for each type.  Samples were assayed at Acme Laboratories, Vancouver, B.C. using fire assay atomic adsorption methods for gold and total digestion ICP methods for other elements.  Cross-check analyses were conducted at a second external laboratory on at least 10% of the samples.

Seabridge holds a 100% interest in several North American gold 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 reserves and mineral resources by 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 but many of them relate to estimates and projections prepared in 2007 and 2008. 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) the amount of future production over any period; (iii) cumulative pre-tax net cash flow of the proposed mining operation; (iv) capital costs; (v) operating costs, including credits from the sale of other metals; (vi) mining rates; (vii) mine life; (vii) planned expenditures; and (viii) upgrading inferred resources. 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 independent consultants’ current beliefs as well as various assumptions made by them and information available to them on the date the statements are made. 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) metals recovery rates, (xi) reasonable contingency requirements; (xiii) receipt of regulatory approvals on acceptable terms; 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 cumulative pre-tax net cash flow, which are based on other forward-looking statements and assumptions. The cost information is also prepared using earlier 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 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 including those described in the December 31, 2009 Corporation’s Annual Information Form filed with SEDAR in Canada (available at www.sedar.com) 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). Seabridge cautions that the foregoing list of factors that may affect future results is not exhaustive.

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.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

“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

One of the newest members of our portfolio is Seabridge Gold. We think this stock is still undervalued big-time, and keep it in our portfolio, below US$29,50 Seabridge is still a good buy. Our longer term target for Seabridge Gold is $US 75,00

Seabridge Gold Press Release:

Toronto, Canada…Seabridge Gold announced today that it has filed its Third Quarter Financial Statements and Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2010 on SEDAR (www.sedar.com). To review these documents on the Company website, please see http://www.seabridgegold.net/2010-Q3-Report.pdf.

Highlights

• Drill programs completed at Courageous Lake and KSM
• Drilling at KSM confirms Iron Cap as new large gold-copper deposit with the potential to improve project economics
• New metallurgical test work increases concentrate grades and reduces grinding costs for KSM ore
• Courageous Lake drilling continues to increase confidence in the resource and finds potential expansions
• Residual interest in Noche Buena project to be sold for US$10.12 million

Financial Results

During the three month period ended September 30, 2010 Seabridge posted a net loss of $527,000 ($0.01 per share) compared to a loss of $1,135,000 ($0.03 per share) for the same period last year. During the 3rd quarter, Seabridge invested $19,867,000 in mineral interests, primarily at KSM and Courageous Lake, compared to $13,450,000 during the same period last year. At September 30, 2010, net working capital was $27,319,000 compared to $9,140,000 at December 31, 2009. In addition, at September 30, 2010 the Company had $11,000,000 invested in a two-year Canadian bank guaranteed note at interest rates higher than its short term investments.

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 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.

Statements relating to the estimated or expected future production and operating results and costs and financial condition of Seabridge, planned work at the Corporation’s projects and the expected results of such work are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical facts and are generally, but not always, identified by words such as the following: expects, plans, anticipates, believes, intends, estimates, projects, assumes, potential and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements also include reference to events or conditions that will, would, may, could or should occur. Information concerning exploration results and mineral reserve and resource estimates may also be deemed to be forward-looking statements, as it constitutes a prediction of what might be found to be present when and if a project is actually developed. These forward-looking statements are necessarily based upon a number of estimates and assumptions that, while considered reasonable at the time they are made, are inherently subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties which could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements, including, without limitation: uncertainties related to raising sufficient financing to fund the planned work in a timely manner and on acceptable terms; changes in planned work resulting from logistical, technical or other factors; the possibility that results of work will not fulfill projections/expectations and realize the perceived potential of the Corporation’s projects; uncertainties involved in the interpretation of drilling results and other tests and the estimation of gold reserves and resources; risk of accidents, equipment breakdowns and labour disputes or other unanticipated difficulties or interruptions; the possibility of environmental issues at the Corporation’s projects; the possibility of cost overruns or unanticipated expenses in work programs; the need to obtain permits and comply with environmental laws and regulations and other government requirements; fluctuations in the price of gold and other risks and uncertainties, including those described in the Corporation’s December 31, 2009 Annual Information Form filed with SEDAR in Canada (available at www.sedar.com) and 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). Forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs, estimates and opinions of the Corporation’s management or its independent professional consultants on the date the statements are made.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

“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

Toronto, Canada – An initial assessment of drill data and mine planning from KSM’s new Iron Cap zone suggests that (i) a significant minerals reserve can be expected from the Iron Cap zone in a new Preliminary Feasibility Study (“PFS”) scheduled for completion next April; (ii) these additions to reserves, immediately adjacent to the Mitchell zone, could support a significant increase in annual production; and (iii) a potential expansion in mine size should substantially improve project economics.

Seabridge President Rudi Fronk said that “we have now completed 41 core holes and supporting engineering work at Iron Cap. We have concluded that Iron Cap could make a substantial increase to KSM reserves. We are therefore examining a redesign of the KSM project for a graduated increase in throughput to 180,000 tonnes per day, a 50% increase from the PFS released on March 31, 2010. In our view, the grade, continuity, metallurgy and location of the Iron Cap zone should enable us to achieve this production expansion over time while substantially improving projected internal rates of returns and net asset values. As a result, we now expect to submit our Environmental Assessment Application following completion of a new PFS in April 2011.”

Since 2008, KSM has been following the same harmonized Federal/Provincial environmental assessment process which yesterday resulted in the approval of the nearby Mt Milligan gold-copper project by the Government of Canada. After two rounds of public consultation on KSM undertaken by the Federal Government, no significant concerns have been raised and Seabridge is therefore confident that KSM, like other well designed projects, will be approved on its technical merits.

In July 2010, Seabridge released the results of its first eight core holes drilled at Iron Cap (see News Release dated July 26, 2010). Based on these promising results and five previous drill holes, Seabridge expanded the Iron Cap drill program in an effort to define a measured and indicated resource which could be converted to reserves. An additional 33 holes totaling 12,200 meters were drilled this season (see attached map for hole locations). Results of these holes will be announced shortly.

The 100% owned KSM project, located near Stewart, British Columbia, Canada, is one of the world’s largest undeveloped gold/copper projects. Proven and probable reserves for the KSM project (see news release dated March 31, 2010 for details) using a gold price of US$850 per ounce and a copper price of US$2.25 per pound are as follows:

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. Mr. Threlkeld has reviewed and approved this news release. 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.

Source: Company Website

Toronto, Canada… Seabridge Gold announced today that it has agreed to sell its remaining interest in the Noche Buena project to Minera Penmont, S. de R.L. de C.V. (“Penmont”) for US$10.12 million in cash. Closing is expected within the next 30 days. Penmont is a joint venture between Fresnillo plc. and Newmont USA Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Newmont Mining Corporation.

As background, in late 2008 Seabridge sold its 100% working interest in the Noche Buena project to Penmont for US$25 million in cash and a commitment by Penmont to pay Seabridge a further US$5 million upon commencement of commercial production from Noche Buena and a 1.5% net smelter royalty payable on all production from Noche Buena sold for US$800 per ounce of gold or greater. On closing of this transaction, Seabridge will no longer have any interests in the Noche Buena project.

Seabridge President and CEO Rudi Fronk said: “The cash proceeds will be used to continue advancing our core projects, KSM and Courageous Lake, towards feasibility. One of the elements of our strategy is to fund our core projects through the sale of non-core assets such as Noche Buena in order to minimize common share dilution. We hope to make further asset sales over the next several months. Our aim is to increase our proven and probable gold reserves, which now stand at 30.2 million ounces, while maintaining a low number of outstanding shares, which now totals 42.3 million fully-diluted,” he said.

Seabridge holds a 100% interest in several North American gold 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. KSM is one of the world’s largest undeveloped gold/copper projects. Proven and probable reserves for the KSM project (see news release dated March 31, 2010 for details) using a gold price of US$850 per ounce, a copper price of US$2.25 per pound are as follows:

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.

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.
Source: Company website

Toronto, Canada – The first 11 holes drilled this season by Seabridge Gold on the FAT deposit at its 100% owned Courageous Lake gold project have exceeded expectations, increasing confidence in the current resource and potentially expanding it. The Courageous Lake project is located in Canada’s Northwest Territories. Drilling continues with another 30 holes planned for this summer.

Seabridge President Rudi Fronk noted that the primary objective of this year’s Courageous Lake program is to enhance the value of the project by upgrading its existing resources so that they can qualify as reserves in a planned Preliminary Feasibility Study. “The results to date indicate that we are having success upgrading inferred resources to higher categories. Mineralization is where we expect it to be, demonstrating that our resource model is predictive. Furthermore, grades are somewhat better than predicted by the model and we are also finding new mineralized zones. Overall, the data suggests that resource ounces and perhaps grade could increase as a result of this program, in addition to upgrading resource categories.”

The FAT deposit is located geologically in the Slave Province. The deposit’s name is an acronym for its dominant rock type, Felsic Ash Tuff. This gold occurrence, hosted by Archean rocks, was formed in a rhyolite/dacite dome complex that measures about 2km along strike and about 800m of stratigraphic section in width. Although tuffaceous rocks are the most common in the deposit there are also clear intervals of clastic and chemical sedimentary rocks and a few late intrusives.

In constructing a geological model for resource estimation, unique stratigraphic intervals were defined and labeled as domains 1 though 9 and domain 14. Each domain contains specific and unique tuff and sedimentary units arranged in particular stratigraphic sequences. The defined geological domains are relics of the depositional environment in which they were formed. Consequently, within these domains the style of hydrothermal alteration, vein occurrences and sulfide mineralogy are consistent across the length and breadth of each specific domain. Distribution of gold within a domain and the surrounding rock is treated differently from other domains in resource modeling. Although ten separate geological domains have been recognized in the FAT deposit, domains 3, 4 and 5 contain about 80% of the gold in the deposit.

Results of the first 11 core drill holes from the current program are as follows:

Geologic descriptions of the 11 holes are as follows:

CL-081:  Drilled at an azimuth of 98^o and an inclination of minus 52^o and designed to test the down-dip projection in domain 5 and fill a gap in domain 4. The only lithology encountered in the hole was felsic tuff. Alteration of the tuff varied significantly with the most common being sericite and carbonates. The geology encountered in domain 4 consisted of coarse tuff and intense sericite-silica alteration characteristic of this zone with better grades than expected in the resource model (4.0 g/t versus 2.5 g/t). Textures, alteration and sulfide minerals in domain 5 were indicative of gold mineralization but grades were lower than expected in the model.

CL-082:  Drilled at an azimuth of 277^o and an inclination of minus 60^o and designed to in-fill gaps in domains 3 and 4. Due to ground conditions, the hole deviated immediately and did not fully test these targets. The entire hole was in felsic tuff with variable intensity of sericite and carbonate alteration. An unexpected mineralized zone was encountered in domain 2 beyond the limits of our resource model for this domain. The upper part of domain 3 was intersected in the drill hole yielding mineralization and geology consistent with the model.

CL-083:  Drilled at an azimuth of 98^o and an inclination of minus 47^o and designed to upgrade near surface inferred resources in domains 5 and 4 and to test domain 3 to a depth of 200 meters. The grade encountered was significantly higher than predicted, with slightly narrower zones. Alteration and rock types were consistent with the model, including moderate to intense sericite alteration and intervals of intense silicic alteration, especially in domain 4. The bottom 33.0 meter interval grading 3.18 grams per tonne likely represents the eastern margin of domain 3, with grades better than expected.

CL-084: Drilled at an azimuth of 98^o and an inclination of minus 55^o and designed to upgrade shallow inferred blocks in domains 4 and 5 at relative elevations between 200 and 350 meters. Felsic tuff was the only lithology encountered in this drill hole with moderate to intense sericite and silica alteration. The upper 110 meters of the hole corresponded to rock types associated with domain 5 but with much less lithological variation, which may indicate the up-dip limits of this zone. In the deeper part of the drill hole, the felsic tuff is characteristic of domain 4 with well developed imbricated lapilli and distinctive primary quartz phenocrysts. Grade is distributed at the bottom and the top of zone 4 and in minor intervals through the center of the zone.

CL-085:  Drilled to replace hole CL-082 at an azimuth of 274^o with inclination of minus 65^o. This hole also deviated from plan and did not fully test the target in domains 3 and 4. Geology of this hole was as predicted, felsic tuff with low to moderate intensity sericite alteration and few quartz veins with associated silicic alteration. The same unexpected mineralized zone found in hole CL-082 was encountered and is interpreted to be domain 2. Grade was also intercepted on the upper margin of domain 3 (14.4 meters at 2.19 gpt) which was not predicted in the resource model.

CL-086:  Drilled at an azimuth of 277^o and an inclination of minus 65^o and designed to fill inferred gaps in domains 3 and 4 and test the down dip potential of domain 5. In domain 3, the tuffs were less intensely altered and sulfide content was low, indicating that this zone is weakening to the north. The eastern portion of domain 4 showed the strongest alteration and sulfides with the remainder of the domain being more erratic. Domain 5 was characterized by patchy alteration and sulfides in felsic tuffs, which may indicate the down-dip limits of this zone.

CL-087:  Drilled at an azimuth of 95^o and an inclination of minus 50^o and designed to fill a potential gap of blocks in domain 5 (represented in the current model as waste) and an inferred gap in domain 4. The bottom of zone 5 was intercepted at the predicted depth and was characterized by fine-grained felsic tuff with a restricted size range of lapilli fragments. Moderate intensity sericite and silica alteration was accompanied by vein-controlled carbonate alteration. Results from this hole indicate that zone 5 is pinching up-dip. Below 200m the drill hole passed into domain 4 with the typical lapilli tuff units containing primary quartz eyes. Sericite and silica alteration is not intense, with the key mineralization in this part of domain 4 found near the base of the zone.

CL-088: Drilled at an azimuth of 277^o and an inclination of minus 54^o and designed to convert inferred blocks in domains 2, 3, 4 and 5. Typical FAT lithologies were intersected in this hole, primarily variably altered felsic tuff with minor intercalations of sedimentary rocks. Domain 2 was better than expected. Domain 3 showed continuing strong mineralization along its margins but the core was weaker than expected. Domain 4 alteration and mineralization were weaker than expected but still maintained a high-grade core. Domain 5 was consistent with expectations.

CL-089:  Drilled at an azimuth of 98^o and an inclination of minus 50^o and designed to fill a gap of shallow inferred blocks in domains 5 and 4. Lithologies of domain 5 are as expected, with decreased sericite and silica alteration and increased chlorite-carbonate alteration. These results indicate that domain 5 has pinched out up-dip. Domain 4 was encountered where expected showing intense sericite and silica alteration. The alteration intensity decreases toward the top of domain 4.

CL-090:  Drilled at an azimuth of 98^o and an inclination of minus 54^o and designed to upgrade blocks in domain 5 and 4. The lithologies of domain 5 were encountered from 263 to 300 meters, exactly as predicted. Grades were as expected. Domain 4 started a few meters earlier than expected at 314 meters and continued to the end of the hole. The unexpected start of domain 4 may link up with portions of domain 4 above and below that were too far apart to be interpolated previously. The other mineralized intercepts in domain 4 correspond well with the model.

CL-091:  Drilled at an azimuth of 277^o and an inclination of minus 57^o and designed to upgrade inferred resources in domains 3, 4 and 5 at relative depths of 170 meters, 300 meters and 370 meters respectively. Domain 3 was intersected slightly deeper than expected at 161 meters, due to some intercalated sediments. Mineralization was expected to be spotty as this domain is weakening to the north. Domain 4 was intercepted where expected, with lithology and alteration indicative of domain 4. Overall results for this zone exceeded expectations, with wider intercepts and better grades. Domain 5 was much weaker than expected both in alteration and grades but a full cut of the zone was not achieved due to some deviation in the hole.

The above reported drill holes were designed to intersect the true width of the FAT deposit.

The Courageous Lake project consists of 27,263 hectares (67,366 acres) covering 53 kilometers (33 miles) of a greenstone belt in Canada’s Northwest Territories, including the two kilometer long FAT deposit which has estimated gold resources as set out below (see news release of February 28, 2007 for details):

In March 2008, Seabridge released the results of a Preliminary Assessment (see news release dated March 10, 2008) in which the independent consultants concluded that an open-pit mining operation, with on-site processing, is the most suitable development scenario for the Courageous Lake project. A base case scenario was developed proposing a 25,000 tonne per day operation (9.125 million tonne per year throughput) resulting in a projected 11.6 year operation with average estimated annual production of 500,500 ounces of gold at an estimated average cash operating cost of US$435 per ounce recovered. The base case scenario utilized measured, indicated and inferred resources in the mine plan. Initial capital costs for the project were estimated at US$848 million, including a contingency of US$111 million. The total cost of gold production (including cash operating costs and total capital costs over the life of the mine) was estimated at US$590 per ounce.

At a gold price of US$690 per ounce, the base case cumulative pre-tax net cash flow over the life of the project was estimated at US$500 million. At a gold price of US$800 per ounce, the cumulative pre-tax net cash flow over the life of the project was estimated at US$1.13 billion and at US$1,000 gold pre-tax cumulative net cash flow was estimated at US$2.27 billion.

Seabridge notes that the Courageous Lake Preliminary Assessment incorporated inferred mineral resources which are considered too geologically speculative to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. Therefore, Seabridge advises that there can be no certainty that the estimates contained in the Preliminary Assessment will be realized.

National Instrument 43-101 Disclosure

The 2010 Courageous Lake exploration program is being conducted under the direction of William E. Threlkeld, Senior Vice President of Seabridge and a Qualified Person under National Instrument 43-101. Mr. Threlkeld has reviewed and approved this news release.

An ongoing and rigorous quality control/quality assurance protocol is being employed during the 2010 Courageous Lake drill program including blank and certified reference standards inserted by the Company in every batch of assays. Repeats and re-splits of the sample reject are analyzed at a rate of not less than one sample in every 25 for each type. Samples are being assayed at Acme Laboratories, Vancouver, B.C. using fire assay atomic adsorption methods for gold and total digestion ICP methods for other elements. Cross-check analyses are being conducted at a second external laboratory on at least 10% of the samples.

Seabridge holds a 100% interest in several North American gold 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 reserves and mineral resources by category please visit the Company’s website at http://www.seabridgegold.net/resources.php.

Source: Company website

New fourth KSM zone could significantly improve project economics

Toronto, Canada – Results from the first eight holes drilled by Seabridge at the Iron Cap target have confirmed a new, large potentially bulk minable deposit at KSM which could substantially improve project economics. Results to date include wide intercepts of gold, copper and silver grades above the KSM average. Infill drilling will now proceed at Iron Cap with the aim of establishing new proven and probable reserves to be included in mine plans for the project.

Seabridge President Rudi Fronk commented that “results from our eight holes and five holes drilled by previous operators  have identified a new deposit that is at least 900 meters in strike length, 400 meters wide and up to 350 meters thick,  located immediately adjacent to the Mitchell zone [see attached maps]. What is most encouraging is that Iron Cap appears to have zones of higher grade copper which could be blended with ore from Mitchell to maintain our 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.” Results from Seabridge’s initial eight holes from Iron Cap are as follows:

Geologic descriptions of the eight holes are as follows:

IC-10-006: Eastern part of Iron Cap zone, drilled at azimuth 135^º with an inclination of minus 70^º. The drill pierced thermally and hydrothermally altered sedimentary rocks with narrow intrusive and breccia bodies. Silicic alteration with intense quartz veinlets indicative of shattering by fluid pressure characterizes the rocks in this drill hole. Sulfide minerals are abundant and concentrated in the quartz veinlets.

IC-10-007: North central part of Iron Cap, orientated at azimuth 135^º and a minus 80^º inclination. This hole collared in shattered and veined silicically altered and thermally metamorphosed sedimentary rocks. It passed into a shattered and veined intrusion with intense silica alteration. Numerous intervals of silica altered breccia with abundant sulfide minerals were recognized within the intrusion.

IC-10-008: Central part of Iron Cap, drilled at azimuth 135^º and a minus 80^º inclination. Extensive silica alteration of tuffaceous and sedimentary rocks was encountered in the upper part of the drill hole. Deeper sections of the hole contained quartz-sericite altered intrusion and silica altered breccia.

IC-10-009: North central part of Iron Cap, drilled at azimuth 135^º and a minus 80^º inclination. The hole encountered diorite to monzonite intrusion through most of its length. To about 174 meters, alteration intensity increases beginning with moderate-intensity chlorite alteration grading to intense silica and potassic alteration. Below 174 meters, intensity of silica alteration remains consistent to the end of the hole, with veining and sulfide abundance decreasing at depth.

IC-10-010: North central part of Iron Cap, drilled at azimuth 135^º and a minus 80^º inclination. The drill hole encountered breccia through most of its length. The breccia generally has intensely altered fragments in a matrix of silica and sulfide minerals, with occasional zones of intense veining superimposed on the brecciated rock.

IC-10-011: Northeast part of Iron Cap, orientated at azimuth 135^º with an inclination of minus 70^º. The drill hole collared in brecciated rock, passed into a section of silicically altered pyritic sedimentary rocks and then into a fine grained intrusion. The breccia and intrusive rocks are dominantly sericite altered. The highest grade gold zone straddles the contact between the intrusion and sedimentary rocks.

IC-10-012: Far northeast part of Iron Cap, drilled at azimuth 135^º and a minus 70^º inclination. The upper parts of this drill hole are alternating intervals of sedimentary and tuffaceous rocks with diorite intrusion. Alteration is principally silica with abundant stockwork veins. The lower third of the drill hole encountered silicic and pyritic sedimentary rocks and very fine grained felsic volcanic rocks.

IC-10-013: North central part of Iron Cap, orientated at azimuth 135^º and minus 80^º inclination. The entire drill hole displays low intensity alteration in a porphyritic intrusive rock. The upper third of the hole is dominated by silicic alteration with patchy potassic alteration. Below a distinct fault zone in the hole, the lower 2/3 is altered in alternating intervals to chlorite-rich and silica-rich alteration assemblages.

The above reported drill holes were designed to intersect the true width of the Iron Cap zone.

The 100% owned KSM project, located near Stewart, British Columbia, Canada, is one of the world’s largest undeveloped gold/copper projects. Proven and probable reserves for the KSM project (see news release dated March 31, 2010 for details) using a gold price of US$850 per ounce and a copper price of US$2.25 per pound are as follows:

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. Mr. Threlkeld has reviewed and approved this news release. 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.

Source: Company Website