molycor gold corporation (tsxv: mor, frankfurt: m1v, otcpk: … · 2012. 4. 27. · chris porter,...

Investment Analysis for Intelligent Investors

Siddharth Rajeev, B.Tech, MBA, CFA Analyst

Chris Porter, B.Sc

Research Associate-Mining

January 19 , 2012

2012 Fundamental Research Corp. www.researchfrc.com Siddharth Rajeev, B.Tech, MBA, CFA

PLEASE READ THE IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES AT THE BACK OF THIS REPORT

Molycor Gold Corporation (TSXV: MOR, Frankfurt: M1V, OTCPK: MLYFF) – Positive PEA on Tami

Mosi Magnesium Project

Sector/Industry: Junior Exploration/Mining www.molycor.com

Market Data (as of January 19, 2012)

Current Price C$0.04

Fair Value C$0.64 (↑)

Rating* BUY

Risk* 5 (Highly Spec)

52 Week Range C$0.03 - C$0.12

Shares O/S 111,243,450

Market Cap $4.45 mm

Current Yield N/A

P/E (forward) N/A

P/B 1.03x

YoY Return -55.6%

YTD TSXV -32.0% *see back of report for rating and risk definitions

-

1,500,000

3,000,000

4,500,000

6,000,000

19-Jan-11 19-May-11 16-Sep-11 14-Jan-12

0.00

0.06

0.12

0.18

0.24

0.30

Investment Highlights

• A positive Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) was released for the 100% company owned Tami Mosi magnesium (Mg) project, Nevada.

• An updated inferred resource of 412 million tonnes with an average grade of 12.3% Mg, translating to 111 billion pounds of Mg (up from the previous estimate of 52 billion pounds).

• The PEA assumes a processing facility producing a total of 30,000 tonnes of 99.9% pure Mg ingot per year over a 30 year mine life.

• The base case scenario calculated a pre-tax NPV (@6%) of US$547 million with an IRR of 16% and a payback term of 5.9 years.

• The company has assembled a ‘Technical Advisory Committee’ comprised of five industry experts that will assist in developing the project.

• We continue to believe the project has excellent potential. However, the project is exposed to high risks. We believe the execution and construction of the processing plant design will be critical for MOR to be successful, especially as many of the technologies to be used have not been used in this configuration before.

• In September 2011, the company completed a non-brokered private placement and raised $0.24 million by issuing 3.98 million units at a unit price of $0.06.

• MOR currently has only $50,000 in cash - which is a concern. The company indicated it will pursue an equity financing in 2-3 months.

K ey Financial Data (FYE - O ctober 31)

(C $) 2010 2011 (9 mo)

Cash 362,555 68,100

W orking Capital 357,635 154,799

M ineral Assets 3,509,180 4,120,102

Total Assets 3,962,837 4,402,908

Net Loss (1,015,356) (415,448)

EPS (0.16) (0.004) Molycor Gold Corporation is focusing on the 100% company owned Tami Mosi magnesium project, Nevada. A Preliminary

Economic Assessment proposes a processing facility producing a total of 30,000 tonnes of 99.9% pure magnesium ingot per year over

a 30 year mine life. The property has an inferred resource of 412 million tonnes with an average grade of 12.3% Mg, translating to

111 billion pounds of Mg.

Molycor Gold Corporation (TSXV: MOR, Frankfurt: M1V, OTCPK: MLYFF) Page 2



Tami Mosi

Property

Positive PEA

In August 2011, the company released a positive Preliminary Economic Assessment for the 100% company owned Tami Mosi Property located near Ely, Nevada. The report was prepared by engineering consultants Wardrop Engineering. The PEA includes an updated resource estimate for the property which supersedes the previous estimate of 236.18 million tonnes grading 10.00% Mg (magnesium) containing 51.75 billion pounds of Mg, as detailed in our last report of August 2009. The new estimate includes 13 additional claims and gives an inferred resource of 412 million tonnes with an

average grade of 12.3% Mg, translating to 111 billion pounds of Mg using a 12% cut-

off grade.

Parameters assumed for the PEA include a mining operation of 294,000 tpa (tonnes per annum) of dolomite from the quarry, with an average grade of 12.6% Mg producing 30,000 tpa of Mg ingot. The base case scenario assumed for the PEA used a magnesium price of US$2.45 per pound (currently U$2.20/lbs) and calculated a pre-tax NPV (@6%) of US$547 million with an IRR of 16% and a payback term of 5.9 years. The following table provides a summary of the PEA.

Tami-Mosi Property PEA

Resources (tonnes) 412 million

Average grade 12.6%

Contained Mg (lbs) 111 billion

Total Mg produced (tonnes) 900,000

Average annual Mg production (tonnes) 30,000

Life of mine 30 years

Mg ingot grade 99.9%

Initial capital expendituresUS$424.6 M (inc 14%

contingency)

Long-term Mg price US$2.45/ lb

Operating cost US$1.28 / lb

NPV (pre-tax)US$547 M (PV@ 6%)

US$1,818 M (PV @ 0%)

Source: Company




As can be seen in Figure 1 below, the dolomite would be mined at an open-sided pit

near Ely and trucked 210 km to the proposed processing facility located near Wells. The proposed facility is strategically located to be in close proximity to the interstate highway, main railway line and existing gas and electricity lines. Management has indicated that they are in discussions with land owners and that there are numerous suitable locations available for development. The proposed vertically integrated facility will include a

magnesium plant, a ferrosilicon plant and a power plant. The processing facility will produce a total of 30,000 tonnes of 99.9% pure magnesium ingot per year for a 30 year mine life. It should be noted that after 30 years of mining, only 2% of the currently defined inferred resource will have been extracted from the deposit. In our

discussions with management, they stated that that the mill has actually been designed

with excess processing capacity and therefore, in practice, throughput could exceed the

stated rate.

Figure 1. Location of Tami-Mosi dolomite mine and proposed processing facility

Source: Company

Consultants Hazen Research Inc. completed a process development study which determined

the most suitable method of magnesium production for this project is the thermal

reduction process. This method comprises five primary phases described in the PEA as outlined on the following page.




1. Calcination of dolomite to dolime

2. Blending of the dolime with a reductant, such as ferrosilicon (FeSi)

3. Heating of the dolime-reductant mixture in a vessel under vacuum

4. Condensation of the liberated magnesium vapor

5. Melting, alloying and casting of the condensed magnesium.

The methods used for magnesium production are highly energy intensive. Our previous report of August 2009 stated that we believe it is important for MOR to explore options to mitigate the potential affects of high electricity consumption on the economics of any production.

For this reasons we are pleased to see the addition of a coal gasification power plant in

combination with a gas turbine in the proposed facility design. The power plant will produce 75 megawatts of power as well as syngas and processing steam required during the process. Coal will be delivered to the plant from the Powder River Coal Basin once a week using the existing rail road. Ferrosilicon will also be produced on site, which is generally the largest single cost during magnesium production. The thermal reduction method uses 75% ferrosilicon as the reductant. We believe this provides significant upside for the project as it will not only

reduce operating costs, but also allow MOR to control the composition of ferrosilicon,

and therefore, maximize efficiency of the process.

Figure 2. Processing site layout

Source: Company




The PEA was followed up in November by a second report prepared by Alpha Omega Engineering Inc. entitled “A Discussion Paper for Potential Areas of Improvement within Molycor Gold Corporation’s Tami-Mosi Magnesium Project and Possible Effects upon

Projected Profitability”

The report identified three main areas where MOR could potentially reduce the

US$1.28 per pound cost outlined in the PEA. The three areas are as follows; 1. Operational Improvements 2. Energy Reduction 3. Waste into Co-products By investigating the opportunity to generate revenues from waste products at an early stage in project development, we believe that MOR is in a good position to develop a favorably economic project. The PEA and additional studies show that the company has a strong emphasis on driving down operating costs. As stated above, it should also be noted that

the PEA used conservative estimates for the base case scenario, and therefore, we

believe that actual magnesium production could be larger than 30,000 tpa.

Funding Opportunity

Management has indicated that the company has an opportunity to get additional funding (up to 50%) for the project from the US government. The US Department of Energy has implemented a “Vehicle Technologies Funding Opportunity” which aims to develop “energy efficient and environmentally friendly technologies for highway transport vehicles”. An increased demand in magnesium is expected as car manufacturers use more of the material to construct light weight (and therefore more energy efficient) vehicles. We cannot comment on whether MOR will be able to secure this funding, but consider it to be significant up side if they are successful.

Overall, we continue to believe the project has excellent potential. The recently

announced PEA results reinforced our positive outlook on the project. However, the

project is exposed to high risks. We believe the execution and construction of the

processing plant design will be critical for MOR to be successful, especially as many of

the technologies to be used have not been used in this configuration before.

Future Development

Following production of the PEA, the company began baseline data collection, preliminary engineering studies, and metallurgical/processing test work to be included in a Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) for the project. Management expects the PFS to be completed by

the end of Q1-2013, with start of commercial magnesium production in Q4-2016. Management plans to drill three holes into a newly identified zone grading at 13.5% Mg to confirm grade and purity of the deposit in that area. Pending results of these holes, the company will drill an additional 12 holes in order to delineate a resource in the indicated




Engaging

Industry

Experts

category, which will then be used to advance the project to pre feasibility stage. The

potential to increase grade of the deposit from 12.3% Mg to 13.5% Mg could

potentially increase the NPV stated in the PEA.

The following chart shows the company's development timeline (as of November 2011).

Source: Company

The company has assembled a ‘Technical Advisory Committee’ comprised of five industry experts; Dr. Neale Neelameggham, Ralph Carter, Gavin Treanor, David Wakefield, and Rob Bailey. The members will advise and assist Molycor on matters relating to mining, power, magnesium and ferrosilicon production and will be compensated with a stock option plan and consultancy fees.

We believe this is a positive move by the company as it will assist them in developing an

efficient and profitable project.

Biographies of the committee members, as provided by the company are as follows; Dr. Neale Neelameggham is partner/owner of Ind LLC consulting on metal production and energy technology. He was one of the original engineers when the US Magnesium plant started up in 1972. Being newly retired with over forty years of experience in the magnesium industry, Dr. Neelameggham is recognized as a premier researcher and inventor/co-inventor in the magnesium field and holds 13 registered patents with over 14 papers and publications to his credit. He has several professional affiliations and is a permanent member of the Magnesium Committee of the Light Metals Division of the Metallurgical Society.




Beaverdell

Silver Project

Ralph Carter, BSc. Engineering, resides in Arizona with over 40 years of experience in the development and operations of Ferrosilicon plants. He was project manager and engineer for Alcoa at the Addy magnesium plant from 1989 – 2000 and responsible for evaluating, operating parameters, environmental controls and economic profitability. His previous employer for 20 years was Hanna Mining Company in Riddle, Oregon where he was the operations manager of the Ferrosilicon plant responsible for all activities at the mine and smelter where high quality product was produced. Mr. Wakefield is President of WAI International, Inc. assisting clients in market development, project development and financing within the energy and pollution control industries. His current projects include industrial and small-medium scale Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle facilities (IGCC); innovative systems for coal-fired plants to improve efficiency and reduce emissions; industrial site redevelopment and application of bio-based lubricants. He has over thirty eight years in the electric power and process industries. His expertise encompasses independent power generation and electric utility equipment. This is combined with experience in systems supply, maintenance, operations, consulting and project development. He has extensive experience in all aspects of the energy and pollution control industries. Mr. Wakefield served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Econo – Power International Corporation which he founded in 1990. This company identified and significantly upgraded coal gasification systems and separate sulfur removal systems to offer clean, economic and environmentally friendly syngas for power and industrial fuel. He co-holds patents and patents-pending for the combined system and various other patents on the use and application of air-blown gasification. Rob Bailey, BS Metallurgical Engineering, owns and operates a light metals consulting business, B. S. Metallurgy, Inc. He has worked within the US, Europe, Australia and China, demonstrating technical and managerial skills. Having published a number of journal articles, Mr. Bailey’s expertise is recognized and respected throughout the light metals industry. Functioning as a light metals broker, Mr. Bailey brings a proven track record in marketing and technical sales. A member of numerous technical societies, Mr. Bailey is the current Chairman of the Magnesium Division for the American Foundry Society. Gavin Treanor is an Aerospace Engineer and was a principal in a Chinese merchant banking firm for over ten years focused on global sourcing of current and strategic metals for Chinese clients. He has been the lead on international financial structures and assisted companies in securing capital, developing assets and various merger and acquisition structures. Drilling took place in July/August 2011, on the 100% company owned Beaverdell Silver project located near Beaverdell, British Columbia. Drilling comprised 16 diamond drill holes for a total of 2,457 meters, aiming to identify




Windpass

Property

depth extensions of known surface mineralization found through outcrop sampling in 2010. Holes were collared to the south of the Duncan-Bounty and Kokomo-Tiger surface showings. Significant results include hole DDH-7 which intersected 1.5 meters of 3.62% zinc, 52.0 g/t silver, and 3.25 g/t gold, and hole DDH-13 which intersected 0.52 meters of 59.7 g/t silver and 1.74 g/t gold.

Table 2. Drilling results from 2011 drilling at the Beaverdell silver project

Source: Company

The company is in the process of compiling these results in order to assess the relationship between the surface showings and the mineralized intercepts at depth. The company is planning an additional drill program to further investigate at least three separate quartz-sulphide vein systems that have been identified in the Kokomo-Tiger mineral zone. In late 2009, the company completed a small amount of exploration on the 100% company owned Windpass property, located near Little Fort, British Columbia. Drilling consisted of 12 BQ sized diamond drill holes, four of which were targeted along the east-west trending Weather Station zone identified by surface chip samples in the first half of 2009.




Flap Gold

Project

Magnesium

Outlook

Significant results include hole WP09DDH5, which intersected 1.52 meters of 15.85 g/t gold, and hole WP09DDH6 which intersected 0.61m of 19.65 g/t gold.

Table 3. 2009 drilling highlights at the Windpass property

Hole No. From

(m)To (m)

Width

(m)Au (g/t)

WP09DDH1 156.91 158.50 1.58 2.19

Inc. 178.31 179.83 1.52 2.32

234.70 236.22 1.52 1.69

WP09DDH2 147.83 149.35 1.52 1.08

WP09DDH3 43.89 44.20 0.31 2.65

WP09DDH5 91.75 93.27 1.52 15.85

WP09DDH6 44.80 45.40 0.61 19.65

WP09DDH7 47.85 49.38 1.52 1.06 Source: Company

The company plans to complete a surface exploration program consisting of rock chip samples and trenching aiming to expand the potential mineralized zone. In 2009/2010, the company completed 771 meters of trenching and 4 reverse circulation drill holes on the Flap Gold project located near Kelowna, British Columbia. The property is held jointly 50/50 by MOR and Goldrea Resources Corp. (TSXV: GOR). Drilling was designed to off-set a potential nugget effect of mineralization by using a larger drill core size to get a more accurate representation of the grade. Positive results from this drilling include hole RDH09-02 which intersected 3.05 meters of 1.45 g/t gold, and hole RDH09-03 which intersected 4.57 meters of 0.47 g/t gold. Management has stated that they are currently reviewing the property to assess an appropriate exploration program. We continue to maintain a neutral to positive outlook on magnesium - especially because magnesium is as strong as steel and 40% lighter than aluminum. Its high strength to weight ratio, durability, resistance to impact, and casting characteristics allow it to be used for a wide range of applications. Please refer our previous report for details on the fundamentals (supply and demand drivers) of magnesium. Global magnesium production increased by a CAGR of 4.6% during 2000 - 2009. In 2010, the global mine production was 5.58 million metric tons, slightly higher than 2009 production of 5.51 million metric tons. China continues to be the number one producer - producing about 58% of global supply. Turkey, Russia and North Korea are the other top producers (shown in the chart below).




China

58%

Turkey

11%

N. Korea

6%

Russua

5%

Others

20%

China

Turkey

N. Korea

Russua

Others

Magnesium prices hit record highs in 2008 (the average price was US$3.5/lb) and dropped to US$2.3/lb in 2009. The current price is hovering around US$2.20 - $2.30/lb. The following chart shows prices since 1990.

Magnesium Metal Price (US$/lb)

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

199019911992

19931994199519961997

19981999200020012002

20032004200520062007

200820092010

Source: USGS

Magnesium producers in the West continue to face tough competition from those in China. Magnesium production in China is based on a thermal process, known as the Pidgeon process, while most of the production in the West is based on an Electrolytic Process. The




Financials

Valuation

lower cost of production and labor costs in China have enabled producers in China to sell magnesium at a much cheaper price than Western producers. The significant price difference has negatively impacted several Western producers. Relatively cheaper and abundant raw materials sources, access to coal/coke gas, and lower labor costs are the primary reasons why producers in China have been able to maintain lower costs than their counterparts in the West. Tami Mosi's favorable location and infrastructure will be an advantage for MOR. The U.S. currently imports more than 50% of its consumption - therefore, a new Mg producer in the U.S. will be welcomed by the U.S. government. We expect long-term demand growth for the metal in diecasting applications will be the major price driver. We believe that its unique characteristics make magnesium a not so easily substitutable metal. We have raised our long-term average from US$1.69/lb to US$2.12/lb - which is the weighted average of the average price in 2000-05 and 2006-10. We assigned a 75% weight to the 2006-10 average as we believe that prices in the second half of the decade are a better indicator of long-term prices. As of July 31, 2011, the company had $0.07 million in cash. Working capital was $0.15 million. The company reported a net loss of $0.42 million (EPS: -$0.00) in the first nine months of FY2011 (ended July 31, 2011). We estimate the company had a burn rate (spending on operating and investing activities) of $0.13 million per month in the first nine months of FY2011, versus $0.05 million per month in the 12-month period of FY2010. The following table shows the company’s cash and liquidity position at the end of July 2011.

(C $) 2010 2011 (9 mo)

Cash 362,555 68,100

Working Capital 357,635 154,799

Current Ratio 5.9 3.5

LT Debt / Assets - -

Cash from financing activities 606,778 835,140

Monthly Burn Rate (including exploration costs) (54,415) (125,511) Subsequently, in September 2011, the company completed a non-brokered private placement and raised $0.24 million by issuing 3.98 million units at a unit price of $0.06. Each unit consisted of a common share and a common share purchase warrant (exercise price - $0.12 per share; expiry date - February 26, 2013).

MOR currently has only $50,000 in cash - which is a concern. The company indicated it

will pursue an equity financing in the next 2-3 months.

Stock options and warrants: We estimate the company has 3.74 million stock options (weighted average exercise price of $0.16) and 42.22 million warrants (weighted average exercise price of $0.12) outstanding. None of them are currently "in the money".

Tami-Mosi magnesium property: Our Discounted Cash Flow model gave a negative NPV (net present value) based on our base-case scenario assumptions below.




Resource (tonnes) 8,820,000

Grade 12.3%

Recovery 81%

Recovered Mg (in lbs) 1,937,282,568

Mine Life (years) 30

Magnesium Price (US$/lb) $2.12

LOM Operating Costs (US$/lb) $1.28

Long-term C$/US$ 1.10

Capital Cost $424,066,000

Discount rate 11.49%

Net Present Value (C$) -$106,036,458

No. of Shares (diluted) 111,243,450

Fair Value per Share (C$/share) -$0.95

DCF Summary

Note that this is a conservative estimate as we only used 2% of the currently defined inferred resources (as per the PEA). We also used a conservative grade of 12.3% versus the PEA's 12.6%.

Our valuation is highly sensitive to long-term Mg price forecasts - as shown in the table below.

Mg Price (US$/lb) DCF Value ($)

-$0.95

$1.50 -$2.20

$1.75 -$1.70

$2.00 -$1.20

$2.12 -$0.95

$2.25 -$0.69

$2.50 -$0.19

$2.75 $0.32 Our real options valuation is $6.10 per share. Real options models capture the value associated with commodity price volatility and management's ability to abandon/pursue projects - which is why the model gave a positive valuation.




Rating

Risks

Estd.Value of Minerals if extracted today ($) $977,165,327

Annualized Standard Deviation of Mineral prices 12%

Capital Investment (C$) $424,066,000

Time to Maturity 5

Riskfree Rate 3.25%

Stock Price $977,165,327 T.Bond rate 3.25%

Strike Price $424,066,000 Variance 0.01

Expiration (in years) 5 Annualized div yield 0%

d1 = 3.792

N(d1) = 1.000 Value of Option ($) $678,378,135

d2 = 3.519 No. of Shares 111,243,450N(d2) = 1.000 Value per share $6.10

Real Options Valuation

Inputs relating to the underlying asset

Output

The average of our DCF and real option’s valuations is $2.57/per share to which we

apply a 75% discount to account for the fact that our DCF model gave a negative

result.

Empress Mo Property – We have continued to value the company's interest in this project at a multiple of $0.03/lb (the average valuation for early stage Mo projects).

Our revised fair value on MOR is $0.64 per share, up from our previous estimate of $0.40 per share. The following table shows a summary of our revised valuation.

Valuation Summary (C$) Fair Value

Tami-Mosi

DCF -$0.953

Real Options $6.098

Average (after discount) $0.643

Empress Mo Property $0.001

Working Capital $0.000

Net Fair Value $0.6443

We reiterate our BUY rating and raise our fair value estimate from $0.40 to $0.64 per

share.

The following risks, though not exhaustive, may cause our estimates to differ from actual results:

• The success of drilling, expansion and determination of favorable resource estimates are important long-term success factors for the company.

• The value of the company depends heavily on commodity prices. • Access to capital and share dilution. • The execution and construction of the processing plant design will be critical for

MOR to be successful, especially as many of the technologies to be used have not been used in this configuration before.

We rate the company’s shares a RISK of 5 (Highly Speculative).




Fundamental Research Corp. Equity Rating Scale:

Buy – Annual expected rate of return exceeds 12% or the expected return is commensurate with risk Hold – Annual expected rate of return is between 5% and 12% Sell – Annual expected rate of return is below 5% or the expected return is not commensurate with risk Suspended or Rating N/A— Coverage and ratings suspended until more information can be obtained from the company regarding recent events. Fundamental Research Corp. Risk Rating Scale:

1 (Low Risk) - The company operates in an industry where it has a strong position (for example a monopoly, high market share etc.) or operates in a regulated industry. The future outlook is stable or positive for the industry. The company generates positive free cash flow and has a history of profitability. The capital structure is conservative with little or no debt. 2 (Below Average Risk) - The company operates in an industry where the fundamentals and outlook are positive. The industry and company are relatively less sensitive to systematic risk than companies with a Risk Rating of 3. The company has a history of profitability and has demonstrated its ability to generate positive free cash flows (though current free cash flow may be negative due to capital investment). The company’s capital structure is conservative with little to modest use of debt. 3 (Average Risk) - The company operates in an industry that has average sensitivity to systematic risk. The industry may be cyclical. Profits and cash flow are sensitive to economic factors although the company has demonstrated its ability to generate positive earnings and cash flow. Debt use is in line with industry averages, and coverage ratios are sufficient. 4 (Speculative) - The company has little or no history of generating earnings or cash flow. Debt use is higher. These companies may be in start-up mode or in a turnaround situation. These companies should be considered speculative. 5 (Highly Speculative) - The company has no history of generating earnings or cash flow. They may operate in a new industry with new, and unproven products. Products may be at the development stage, testing, or seeking regulatory approval. These companies may run into liquidity issues, and may rely on external funding. These stocks are considered highly speculative.

Disclaimers and Disclosure

The opinions expressed in this report are the true opinions of the analyst about this company and industry. Any “forward looking statements” are our best estimates and opinions based upon information that is publicly available and that we believe to be correct, but we have not independently verified with respect to truth or correctness. There is no guarantee that our forecasts will materialize. Actual results will likely vary. The analyst and Fundamental Research Corp. “FRC” does not own any shares of the subject company, does not make a market or offer shares for sale of the subject company, and does not have any investment banking business with the subject company. Fees were paid by MOR to FRC. The purpose of the fee is to subsidize the high costs of research and monitoring. FRC takes steps to ensure independence including setting fees in advance and utilizing analysts who must abide by CFA Institute Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct. Additionally, analysts may not trade in any security under coverage. Our full editorial control of all research, timing of release of the reports, and release of liability for negative reports are protected contractually. To further ensure independence, MOR has agreed to a minimum coverage term including an initial report and three updates. Coverage can not be unilaterally terminated. Distribution procedure: our reports are distributed first to our web-based subscribers on the date shown on this report then made available to delayed access users through various other channels for a limited time. The performance of FRC’s research is ranked by Investars. Full rankings and are available at www.investars.com. The distribution of FRC’s ratings are as follows: BUY (68%), HOLD (8%), SELL (4%), SUSPEND (20%). To subscribe for real-time access to research, visit http://www.researchfrc.com/subscribe.php for subscription options. This report contains "forward looking" statements. Forward-looking statements regarding the Company and/or stock’s performance inherently involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from such forward-looking statements. Factors that would cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, continued acceptance of the Company's products/services in the marketplace; acceptance in the marketplace of the Company's new product lines/services; competitive factors; new product/service introductions by others; technological changes; dependence on suppliers; systematic market risks and other risks discussed in the Company's periodic report filings, including interim reports, annual reports, and annual information forms filed with the various securities regulators. By making these forward looking statements, Fundamental Research Corp. and the analyst/author of this report undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the date of this report. A report initiating coverage will most often be updated quarterly while a report issuing a rating may have no further or less frequent updates because the subject company is likely to be in earlier stages where nothing material may occur quarter to quarter. Fundamental Research Corp DOES NOT MAKE ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, AS TO RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM USING THIS INFORMATION AND MAKES NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE. ANYONE USING THIS REPORT ASSUMES FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHATEVER RESULTS THEY OBTAIN FROM WHATEVER USE THE INFORMATION WAS PUT TO. ALWAYS TALK TO YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR BEFORE YOU INVEST. WHETHER A STOCK SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN A PORTFOLIO DEPENDS ON ONE’S RISK TOLERANCE, OBJECTIVES, SITUATION, RETURN ON OTHER ASSETS, ETC. ONLY YOUR INVESTMENT ADVISOR WHO KNOWS YOUR UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES CAN MAKE A PROPER RECOMMENDATION AS TO THE MERIT OF ANY PARTICULAR SECURITY FOR INCLUSION IN YOUR PORTFOLIO. This REPORT is solely for informative purposes and is not a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any security. It is not intended as being a complete description of the company, industry, securities or developments referred to in the material. Any forecasts contained in this report were independently prepared unless otherwise stated, and HAVE NOT BEEN endorsed by the Management of the company which is the subject of this report. Additional information is available upon request. THIS REPORT IS COPYRIGHT. YOU MAY NOT REDISTRIBUTE THIS REPORT WITHOUT OUR PERMISSION. Please give proper credit, including citing Fundamental Research Corp and/or the analyst, when quoting information from this report. The information contained in this report is intended to be viewed only in jurisdictions where it may be legally viewed and is not intended for use by any person or entity in any jurisdiction where such use would be contrary to local regulations or which would require any registration requirement within such jurisdiction.

molycor gold corporation (tsxv: mor, frankfurt: m1v, otcpk: … · 2012. 4. 27. · chris porter,...

Documents