Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Metals Exploration Bankruptcies
The past several years have not been kind to commodities exploration companies. The price of gold dropped to $1,051/oz. in November 2015, a level that had not been seen since 2009. Although the price of gold rebounded somewhat in January and February of this year to just over $1,200/oz., the price has steadily decreased after peaking at $1,921/oz. in August 2011. The price of silver has also decreased dramatically, with its price off 60% from its 2011 highs. Copper has not escaped this trend, and was recently selling for just over half of its 2011 price.
The difficult pricing environment has taken a toll on exploration companies. These companies often require large capital investments to cover the significant costs of mineral rights acquisitions, heavy equipment purchases and leases, securities regulatory compliance, environmental compliance and mine development expenses. When borrowings are underwritten in a strong commodities pricing environment, as was the case during the bull market that ended in 2011, prolonged price decreases can make it difficult to service that debt. Also, many exploration companies' potential revenues are largely speculative because they have no operating cash flows. Weak metals prices can derail such companies' long term strategies, which often rely on partnering with established production companies or selling proven properties.
With little or no cash flow and without viable exit strategies, many exploration companies are now insolvent or nearly insolvent and struggling. Over the past several years, a number of gold exploration companies have filed for bankruptcy protection in the U.S., including Veris Gold Corp. (Jun. 9, 2014, Chapter 15 Case No. 14-51015, Bankr. D. Nev.); Allied Nevada Gold Corp. (Mar. 10, 2015, Chapter 11 Case No. 15-10503, Bankr. D. Del.); Midway Gold Corp. (Jun. 22, 2015, Chapter 11 Case No. 15-16835, Bankr. D. Colo.); Santa Fe Gold Corp. (Aug. 26, 2015, Chapter 11 Case No. 15-11761, Bankr. D. Del.); and Atna Resources, Inc. (Nov. 18, 2015, Chapter 11 Case No. 15-22848, Bankr. D. Colo.). Absent a prolonged rebound in the price of gold and other minerals, more mining and exploration companies are sure to follow.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at customercare@alm.com or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?