Drilling Begins on High-Grade Gold & Silver Targets
A copy of this announcement can be accessed on the ASX website, the investor section of Barton's website, or directly by clicking here.
Authorised by the Managing Director of Barton Gold Holdings Limited.
For further information, please contact:
About Barton GoldBarton Gold is an ASX, OTCQB and Frankfurt Stock Exchange listed Australian gold developer targeting future gold production of 150,000ozpa with 1.7Moz Au & 3.1Moz Ag JORC Mineral Resources (64.0Mt @ 0.83 g/t Au), brownfield mines, and 100% ownership of the region's only gold mill in the renowned Gawler Craton of South Australia.*
Competent Persons Statement & Previously Reported InformationThe information in this announcement that relates to the historic Exploration Results and Mineral Resources as listed in the table below is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by the Competent Person whose name appears in the same row, who is an employee of or independent consultant to the Company and is a Member or Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy ( AusIMM ), Australian Institute of Geoscientists ( AIG ) or a Recognised Professional Organisation (RPO). Each person named in the table below has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and types of deposits under consideration and to the activity which he has undertaken to quality as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code 2012 (JORC).
The information relating to historic Exploration Results and Mineral Resources in this announcement is extracted from the Company's Prospectus dated 14 May 2021 or as otherwise noted in this announcement, available from the Company's website at www.bartongold.com.au or on the ASX website www.asx.com.au. The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the Exploration Results and Mineral Resource information included in previous announcements and, in the case of estimates of Mineral Resources, that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates, and any production targets and forecast financial information derived from the production targets, continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the applicable Competent Persons' findings are presented have not been materially modified from the previous announcements.
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking InformationThis document may contain forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are often, but not always, identified by the use of words such as "seek", "anticipate", "believe", "plan", "expect", "target" and "intend" and statements than an event or result "may", "will", "should", "would", "could", or "might" occur or be achieved and other similar expressions. Forward-looking information is subject to business, legal and economic risks and uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among other things, risks relating to property interests, the global economic climate, commodity prices, sovereign and legal risks, and environmental risks. Forward-looking statements are based upon estimates and opinions at the date the statements are made. Barton undertakes no obligation to update these forward-looking statements for events or circumstances that occur subsequent to such dates or to update or keep current any of the information contained herein. Any estimates or projections as to events that may occur in the future (including projections of revenue, expense, net income and performance) are based upon the best judgment of Barton from information available as of the date of this document. There is no guarantee that any of these estimates or projections will be achieved. Actual results will vary from the projections and such variations may be material. Nothing contained herein is, or shall be relied upon as, a promise or representation as to the past or future. Any reliance placed by the reader on this document, or on any forward-looking statement contained in or referred to in this document will be solely at the readers own risk, and readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements due to the inherent uncertainty thereof.
* Refer to Barton Prospectus dated 14 May 2021 and ASX announcement dated 4 March 2025. Total Barton JORC (2012) Mineral Resources include 909koz Au (30.8Mt @ 0.92 g/t Au) in Indicated category and 799koz Au (33.2Mt @ 0.75 g/t Au) in Inferred category, and 3,070koz Ag (34.5Mt @ 2.80 g/t Ag) in Inferred category as a subset of Tunkillia gold JORC (2012) Mineral Resources.
SOURCE: Barton Gold Holdings Limited
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Entrepreneur
9 hours ago
- Entrepreneur
How to Oust a Difficult Co-founder Legally and Smoothly
There are a number of reasons that a co-founder may want to part ways with another co-founder. There are also legal considerations to keep in mind when co-founders separate. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. Imagine this. Jean and John, who met at a startup incubator, founded a company together. But as they grew, Jean realized that she and John weren't aligned on many things, including what the company's future should look like. Neither John's goals nor his behavior reflected the company's mission, so Jean ousts John from the business. Reasons for a co-founder's departure There are a number of reasons that a co-founder may want to part ways with another co-founder. 1. Lack of dedication A startup that wants to scale for a big exit typically requires founders who dedicate long hours for little pay (at least at the beginning). While some founders, like Jean, are willing to do that, some, like John, are not. Jean was willing to put in as many hours as it took to meet her responsibilities. John, on the other hand, arrived late and left early, demonstrating that he wasn't dedicated to his role — or the company. 2. Difficult to work with Some founders are simply difficult to work with. They're not collaborative, they're closed off to others' input or they belittle or micromanage their employees. While in the office, John's attitude was one of superiority. He felt that certain tasks were below him and that others should do the "heavy lifting." He criticized his employees at every opportunity, lowering morale and eventually pushing a very dedicated, key employee out of the company. 3. Lack of alignment with vision While a dream team of co-founders might be committed and great as colleagues, they might have different visions about the company's future. For example, they may disagree on a pivot other founders believe is necessary. Jean wanted to focus on R&D to ensure ongoing innovation, but John was focused on expanding the company. In addition to his behavior, this lack of alignment caused so much tension that Jean started the process of terminating her co-founder. Related: So Your Co-Founder is Threatening to Quit Unless You Give Them More Equity. What Should You Do? Legal considerations In addition to mistakes that can be made during the termination process, there are several legal considerations to keep in mind when co-founders separate. 1. Complying with employment law Founders are almost always employees by law. When terminating an employee, keep in mind — and meet — the legalities of termination, including filing certain paperwork and notices, and meeting deadlines for paying the final paycheck, for example. When the tension between Jean and John began, Jean documented each instance so she had relevant backup at the time of John's termination. 2. Is your relationship buttoned up? Make sure you are not giving an ousted co-founder leverage. Breaking promises or not protecting the company legally in its founding documents on IP assignments or confidentiality obligations means that they now have valuable IP the company needs. 3. Do you have the legal right? It's critical to ensure that a co-founder has the legal right to terminate another co-founder. If they do not, they should take the necessary steps to secure those rights; it might not be as simple as telling them they are fired. For example, the company's bylaws might allow a co-founder to be terminated only if the board votes to do so. The ousting founders need to make sure they can — and do — get board support. When John's performance began to decline, Jean consulted with the company's board to ensure the board was informed from the outset. More legal considerations: What NOT to do While there are considerations to make so as not to run into legal issues, there are also considerations for what NOT to do. 1. Don't think about a separation agreement A legally binding separation agreement can get you a release of claims, potentially non-disparagement terms and other benefits for the company, including agreements to not sue. Investors will want to see this if at all possible in diligence. It's worth some money to get this. As soon as John's performance started suffering and other employees began complaining about his behavior, Jean consulted an employment attorney to prepare the paperwork necessary for a separation agreement, enabling the process to be completed without worrying about a potential lawsuit. 2. Forget to cut off access to systems To prevent an ousted co-founder from accessing company information post-termination, ensure that they can no longer access the company's systems. Disgruntled employees with access to company data can cause major problems. Once John was officially "out," all access to company information was cut off; Jean knew that, if given the opportunity, John would have tried to access certain data once he exited the company. 3. Bash the ousted founder to employees, investors and other stakeholders Sometimes in trying to explain the ousted founder's departure, founders will resort to speaking negatively about them; this opens the company to defamation liability. It can also reflect badly on the company and the founding terms. Finally, it can lead to the ousted founder becoming more hostile toward the company. Despite their differences, Jean maintained reasonable levels of professionalism. Although the process was stressful for her, her team and ultimately the company, John's ouster and the reasons behind it remained within the executive leadership team. Related: 4 Sane Strategies for Maintaining Healthy Co-Founder Relationships Ramifications of skirting the law All of this advice hinges on the remaining founders meeting the requirements to legally terminate a co-founder. When they don't, there are ramifications. 1. Incurring penalties and legal claims First, by not complying with employment laws, penalties can be incurred, and legal claims are given to the ousted founder; these can add up. For example, in California, if all wages aren't paid on the final day of employment, the ousted founder is entitled to a penalty equal to one full day of wages for every day until they are fully paid (up to 30 days). Jean's diligence in consulting a startup attorney prepared her for the separation. In addition to the separation agreement, Jean presented John with his final paycheck at the termination meeting. 2. Post-termination negotiations If you don't button up your relationship with the founder prior to termination, you will be stuck post-termination negotiating for what you need. At this point, you are unlikely to have much leverage. 3. No separation agreement If you fail to get a separation agreement, investors may push on you in diligence to get one later; this is often difficult. Also, you may subject the company to claims that would have been released if money was offered as severance at the outset. Note that a founder may sign a separation agreement quickly if it's offered with a positive message and incentives. The absence of an up-front offer can result in litigation, and demands may increase. The bottom line While there are myriad factors that contribute to the ousting of a company founder, it behooves those on the company side to make appropriate preparations to avoid legal troubles. Ready to break through your revenue ceiling? Join us at Level Up, a conference for ambitious business leaders to unlock new growth opportunities.
Business Wire
13 hours ago
- Business Wire
WELL Health Announces Voting Results for Election of Directors
VANCOUVER, British Columbia--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- WELL Health Technologies Corp. (TSX: WELL) (OTCQX: WHTCF) (the ' Company ' or ' WELL '), a digital healthcare company focused on positively impacting health outcomes by leveraging technology to empower healthcare practitioners and their patients globally, is pleased to announce that at its annual general meeting held June 30, 2025 (the ' Meeting '), all of the nominees for election as directors of the Company referred to in its notice of meeting and information circular dated May 28, 2025 for the Meeting were elected. A total of 67,105,724 common shares representing 26.52% of the outstanding common shares of the Company were voted by proxy at the Meeting. Voting results for the election of directors at the Meeting were as follows: Resolution Vote Type Total Votes % Voted Kenneth Cawkell For Against Withheld 55,319,811 0 11,776,033 82.45% 0% 17.55% John Kim For Against Withheld 63,350,632 0 3,745,212 94.42% 0% 5.58% Sybil E Jen Lau For Against Withheld 65,493,814 0 1,602,030 97.61% 0% 2.39% Thomas Liston For Against Withheld 58,911,074 0 8,184,770 87.80% 0% 12.20% Tara McCarville For Against Withheld 58,713,637 0 8,382,207 87.51% 0% 12.49% Hamed Shahbazi For Against Withheld 49,082,859 0 18,012,985 73.15% 0% 26.85% Expand The results of other matters considered at the Meeting are reported in the Report of Voting Results as filed on SEDAR+ ( filed on July 4, 2025. WELL HEALTH TECHNOLOGIES CORP. Per: 'Hamed Shahbazi' Hamed Shahbazi Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and Director About WELL Health Technologies Corp. WELL's mission is to tech-enable healthcare providers. We do this by developing the best technologies, services, and support available, which ensures healthcare providers are empowered to positively impact patient outcomes. WELL's comprehensive healthcare and digital platform includes extensive front and back-office management software applications that help physicians run and secure their practices. WELL's solutions enable more than 42,000 healthcare providers between the US and Canada and power the largest owned and operated healthcare ecosystem in Canada with more than 210 clinics supporting primary care, specialized care, and diagnostic services. In the United States WELL's solutions are focused on specialized markets such as the gastrointestinal market, women's health, primary care, and mental health. WELL is publicly traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange under the symbol 'WELL' and on the OTC Exchange under the symbol 'WHTCF'. To learn more about the Company, please visit:
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Yahoo
3 ASX Penny Stocks With Market Caps Over A$70M
As Australian shares anticipate a modest rise, the market is buzzing with activity, influenced by global indices like the S&P 500 reaching new heights. Amidst this backdrop, penny stocks continue to capture investor interest for their potential growth opportunities at accessible price points. While the term "penny stocks" might seem outdated, these smaller or newer companies can offer significant value when they possess strong financials and clear growth paths. Name Share Price Market Cap Financial Health Rating Alfabs Australia (ASX:AAL) A$0.37 A$106.04M ★★★★☆☆ EZZ Life Science Holdings (ASX:EZZ) A$2.23 A$105.2M ★★★★★★ GTN (ASX:GTN) A$0.62 A$118.24M ★★★★★★ IVE Group (ASX:IGL) A$2.82 A$434.79M ★★★★★☆ Southern Cross Electrical Engineering (ASX:SXE) A$1.80 A$475.94M ★★★★★★ Sugar Terminals (NSX:SUG) A$0.99 A$363.6M ★★★★★★ Navigator Global Investments (ASX:NGI) A$1.71 A$838.04M ★★★★★☆ Accent Group (ASX:AX1) A$1.41 A$847.67M ★★★★☆☆ Bisalloy Steel Group (ASX:BIS) A$3.75 A$177.94M ★★★★★★ CTI Logistics (ASX:CLX) A$1.80 A$144.98M ★★★★☆☆ Click here to see the full list of 474 stocks from our ASX Penny Stocks screener. Here's a peek at a few of the choices from the screener. Simply Wall St Financial Health Rating: ★★★★★☆ Overview: Amcil Limited is a publicly owned investment manager with a market cap of A$358.12 million. Operations: The company generates its revenue primarily from investments, amounting to A$9.74 million. Market Cap: A$358.12M Amcil Limited, with a market cap of A$358.12 million, primarily generates its revenue from investments totaling A$9.74 million. Despite negative earnings growth of -7.5% over the past year, Amcil's short-term assets (A$12.3M) comfortably exceed its short-term liabilities (A$2.9M). The company is debt-free and benefits from a seasoned management team with an average tenure of 9 years and an experienced board averaging 8.1 years in tenure. However, its dividend yield of 3.52% is not well covered by earnings or free cash flows, and long-term liabilities (A$49.8M) surpass short-term assets. Jump into the full analysis health report here for a deeper understanding of AMCIL. Assess AMCIL's previous results with our detailed historical performance reports. Simply Wall St Financial Health Rating: ★★★★☆☆ Overview: Accent Group Limited operates in the retail, distribution, and franchise sectors for lifestyle footwear, apparel, and accessories across Australia and New Zealand, with a market cap of A$847.67 million. Operations: Accent Group generates its revenue primarily from two segments: Retail, which accounts for A$1.30 billion, and Wholesale, contributing A$475.92 million. Market Cap: A$847.67M Accent Group Limited, with a market cap of A$847.67 million, operates in the retail sector with substantial revenue streams from its Retail (A$1.30 billion) and Wholesale (A$475.92 million) segments. Despite recent negative earnings growth, the company is trading at a significant discount to its estimated fair value and offers high-quality earnings with well-covered interest payments on debt. Recent strategic initiatives include a partnership with Frasers Group to launch Sports Direct in Australasia, providing access to global brands and potential expansion opportunities. However, challenges include increased debt levels and lower net profit margins compared to last year. Navigate through the intricacies of Accent Group with our comprehensive balance sheet health report here. Assess Accent Group's future earnings estimates with our detailed growth reports. Simply Wall St Financial Health Rating: ★★★★☆☆ Overview: ImpediMed Limited is a medical technology company that manufactures and sells bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) technology medical devices in the United States and Europe, with a market cap of A$79.00 million. Operations: The company generates revenue of A$11.54 million from its medical segment. Market Cap: A$79M ImpediMed Limited, with a market cap of A$79 million, operates in the medical technology sector and generates A$11.54 million in revenue from its medical devices. The company is debt-free and has seen a reduction in losses over the past five years, although it remains unprofitable with no forecasted profitability within three years. Analysts expect significant stock price appreciation despite high volatility and limited cash runway under current conditions. The board and management are relatively new, indicating potential strategic shifts but also posing risks due to their lack of experience. Recent participation at an industry conference highlights ongoing engagement with key stakeholders. Click here and access our complete financial health analysis report to understand the dynamics of ImpediMed. Examine ImpediMed's earnings growth report to understand how analysts expect it to perform. Click this link to deep-dive into the 474 companies within our ASX Penny Stocks screener. Want To Explore Some Alternatives? We've found 16 US stocks that are forecast to pay a dividend yeild of over 6% next year. See the full list for free. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Companies discussed in this article include ASX:AMH ASX:AX1 and ASX:IPD. This article was originally published by Simply Wall St. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
