Louis James of Casey Research needs to remember the basics: When In Hole, Stop Digging

Better a would-be whistleblower than a would-be geologist that 1) doesn't have a clue as to what he's talking about but 2) insists on bullshitting the people that pay his salary. Louis "lobito" James goes from bad to worse and deserves all that's coming to him. The quote below is from this month's Casey "International Speculator" as the shameless pumping asshole discusses his "term or the month", smearing, and tries (and utterly fails) to make a defence case for his bullshit pump Bayfield (BYV.v).

Bottom line, yes, beware of smearing, but also don’t let yourself get stampeded by critics seeking to make
names for themselves as would-be whistle-blowers.

Dude, don't you get it yet? It's your word, that of an unqualified stock pusher, against the BCSC. The freakin' BCSC made Bayfield correct its BS, nobody else. You lose, dumbass.

Bayfield Resources (BYV.v) smearing and Brent Cook's rebuttal

After last week's spat between Bayfield (BYV.v) and Brent Cook, today we get to see the reply by Brent Cook to Bayfield Resources (BYV.v), via his weekly "Exploration Insights" letter. We're also allowed to re-print the piece in the public sphere, so here it is. The assistance of 'LV' appreciated on this.

Exploration Insights
by Brent Cook
www.explorationinsights.com

Issue No. 152
July 31, 2011

Normally Exploration Insights is exclusive to subscribers and we appreciate that you don’t cut and paste or forward the timely information herein. However, as soon will become clear, the Rant in today’s letter is for general distribution and you are welcome to send it along to anyone you think may be interested its subject (if you would prefer a .pdf send us an email).

The Rant

US Based Newsletter Writer Clarifies Bayfield Ventures’ Clarification of Misinformation Regarding Potentially Confusing Drill Information that Bayfield Clarified in a Previous Confusing Release as Mandated by BCSC

On Tuesday, July 26 a US based newsletter writer was asked during this BNN interview (Tuesday, 11:50 EST) to comment on Bayfield Ventures’ (BYV.TSX-V) potentially confusing drill results. Subsequent to his comments, Bayfield distributed this news release in which they stated that factual errors were made by said newsletter writer in the discussion.

Let’s get factual

In their June 30 news release, Bayfield Ventures reported that the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC) required BYV to “clarify” certain details of its technical disclosure of previously released drill results. The “potentially confusing” information in question relates to BYV’s reporting of long intervals of mineralized drilling results that were created by diluting a few, sporadic high grade intercepts with lengthy intervals of lower grade (and even some barren) intercepts. This equates to a mathematical smearing of the isolated high grade intervals throughout a larger volume of low and possibly sub-economic material.  By smearing gold grades, the character of the geologic occurrence is misrepresented and can be confusing and/or misleading to the general public who, on the whole, don’t have the tools or experience to recognize this mathematical misrepresentation. (We have examined this issue many times here at Exploration Insights using the free drill interval calculator.)

That was the gist of the BNN conversation.  BYV was not represented as the “poster child” of smearing; rather, their recent press releases and the restatement required by the BCSC merely made them a timely example for a respected daily business show. 

With respect to the BCSC mandated clarification-- this addresses five drill holes from four separate news releases dated September 8, 2010 to June 27, 2011. Specifically*:

• Sept 8, 2010 RR10-18: BYV reported 81 meters grading 5.08 g/t Au, between 488 to 569 meters drill depth; this was restated to 13 meters of high-grade contained in three separate intervals (see table below).

• Dec. 14, 2010 RR10-52: (My personal favorite, with erratum to the BNN discussion where I misstated 80 meters, rather than 58) BYV reported 58 meters grading 1.84 g/t Au between 394 to 452 meters drill depth; this was restated as 1.1 meter grading 89.96 g/t Au, at 402.4 meters depth.
• Feb. 16, 2011 RR11-1: BYV reported 116.6 meters grading 1.05 g/t Au between 509 meters to 626 meters drill depth; this was restated as 20.8 meters containing three, isolated, high-grade intercepts.
• June 27, 2011 RR11-70: BYV reported 43.8 meters grading 1.02 g/t Au between 41.00 to 84.80 meters depth; this was restated as two separate higher grade intervals totaling 10.4 meters.
• June 27, 2011 RR11-71: BYV reported 79.5 meters grading 8.66 g/t Au between 15.50 meters to 95 meters depth; this was restated as 25.5 meters grading 26.7 g/t. Both drill holes 70 and 71 are good drill intercepts, the significance of which is dependent upon pending results from nearby holes.
• Yet to be restated: RR11-14: 56.9 meters grading 0.62 g/t between 275 to 328.3; should be two separate intervals of about 3 meters each grading 6.75 and 2.14 g/t.

*Note that we are only considering gold assays, as some of the earlier releases did not include silver assays.

(Fig. 1- One-year BYV chart showing news release dates for drill results that were subsequently “clarified”, and the apparent market reaction to original news releases)

Summarizing:

1.    81 meters becomes 13 meters beginning at 488 meters drill depth;

2.    58 meters becomes 1.1 meter beginning at a drill depth of 402 meters;

3.    116 meters becomes 20.8 meters beginning at a drill depth of 509 meters;

4.    79.5 meters becomes 26.5 meters beginning at a drill depth of 38 meters;

5.    43.8 meters becomes 10.4 meters beginning at a drill depth of 41 meters.

On July 19, some of these restated results from the June 30^th clarification news release were posted to BYV’s website in a cross-section, as represented below (Fig. 2). The section actually appears to run slightly east of north, so the section may not be truly perpendicular to the strike of the feature; the true width may be somewhat less than drill width. I have edited the cross-section by including the approximate location of the long “mineralized” intervals as originally reported by Bayfield on the drill trace against the restated intervals where possible. This graphic visualization helps put some context to the restated mineralized intervals.

(Fig. 2- Burns Block Cross Section showing drill hole trace and mineralized intervals. The red bars represent the actual location of the mineralized intervals as restated in the June 30 news release. The length of the red bar is proportional to the grade. I added the green on the drill trace to represent the approximate drill interval the mineralization in red was smeared across in previous news releases. Note 50-meter scale on drill trace. So, does the green convey a different impression of the mineralization than the red?)

A key takeaway from the cross section is that, with the exception of mineralization intersected in RR-70 and 71, these high grade intersections are deep and, based upon the presently available information, would not be exploited via open pit mining. It is also very obvious that some of the “clarified” results are very narrow, high grade hits that were mathematically smeared over greater drill length —specifically RR-52—just as the BCSC noted.

The other topic discussed in the BNN segment relates to continuity of grade. In the cross section above, and in previous releases, BYV suggests that their drilling has identified a high grade gold shoot with a down plunge length of about 600 meters. Basically, BYV has connected the red bars on the drill holes above and are interpreting that these form a continuous mineralized body. The distance extrapolated between drill holes is up to about 100 meters – this is a big distance to extrapolate in deposits of this type. It will take considerably more infill drilling to prove continuity.

Bayfields’ location map suggests to me that there may be other drill holes that cross their section of choice, but that are not included; however, there is insufficient information to be certain, or to know why BYV selected the holes they used (the drill map is here for anyone interested). If drill hole data relevant to interpreting continuity are missing, one needs to ask why potentially useful data are omitted. Regardless, at this stage I am dubious about grade continuity of this projected shoot-- only time will tell.

There does, however, appear to be sufficient drilling immediately east and west of Bayfields’ section to establish or negate continuity along strike (Fig. 3). In some instances, gold ore bodies have continuity down plunge or dip which can be matched along strike. Basically, if an ore body is extensive or continuous in one direction it can be in the other as well; therefore, it is possible that we can use that on-strike data to guess at the down plunge continuity.

(Fig. 3- North Drill Fence map extracted from complete map, showing drill hole locations. Note the number of holes per location. Red are “high grade” holes, orange are drilled with assays complete, and yellow with assays pending. What is in the holes immediately adjacent to those selected for BYV’s cross section?)

The cross section in Figure 2 above is only a paper-thin two dimensional slice through the earth lined up along the holes BYV selected. Bayfield has drilled many dozens of holes along east west lines, usually with several holes from the same location. In order to evaluate the 600-meter long ore shoot BYV is postulating, we need to establish the east-west strike length of this zone. Although difficult to tell from the map, it appears drill stations are between 10 and 50 meters apart along the east-west lines—a good distance to establish grade and structural continuity.

I am afraid, however, that the drill data is too poorly organized and presented to permit any conclusion regarding grade continuity along strike and therefore the potential tonnes and grade of the proposed shoot, or continuity therein. Bayfield should present us with a series of north-south cross sections similar to Figure 2, indicating the thickness of the section (showing the distance holes are projected into the section), using all the drill holes with down-hole assays in order to prove BYV have discovered something of value. Many companies at this stage of outlining a possible resource do this on corebox.net or through their own websites. It’s basic exploration and disclosure practice in Canada.

When and if Bayfield does present the public with sufficient cross sections and maps to make an assessment of the grade and continuity of Burns Block and the postulated shoot, we are certain the US based newsletter writer will be happy to publicly review the data and, if need be, reconsider his current assessment of the company.

Are we clear now?

Smear tactics

Brent Cook appeared on BNN TV today and talked about a subject we've been following fairly closely here recently, namely the "smearing" of drill results. That's the way the BS end of the junior mining world will try to make out they have more economic rock than is actually the case and in the process pull the wool over sheep eyes (hopefully, that category doesn't include you, kind reader).

Anyway, it's good instructive stuff and Cook even uses one of our fave smear-merchants, the Casey Research pumped Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v), as one of his examples. Go see the video on this link right here and learn a bit more than Lobito would want you to know.

UPDATE: Oh, too much fun. BYV.v replies in an NR. Handbags at dawn, ladies.

Casey Research pump jobs and smearing: How Gold Bullion Development Corp (GBB.v) and Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) use the same BS

We've done quite a lot to highlight the case of smearing over at Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) recently, with this post one of many. So when the following mail plopped into your author's mailbox this morning, it seemed best to share with a wider audience:

Hi Otto
 
Just read your blog entry about the BYV smearing issue. About time the BCSC reacts.
 
The BCSC should really look into another Casey pump job - GBB, Gold Bullion Development Corp.
 
Eye through some of their drill results and boy do they know how to make worthless rock look okay-ish.
 
Case in point, drill hole GR-10-173 - 80m @ 1.36 g/t (from 253 m to 323m depth). But take away that 1 m intercept at 322m depth grading 89.83 g/t and you're left with a worthless hole.
 
GR-11-200
GR-10-97
and lots of others.
 
Especially of interest should be the following release, considering hole GR-10-55 where GBB doesn't seem to report the short, high grade interval(s):
 
http://goldbulliondevelopmentcorp.com/html-pages/downloads/news-releases/2010-11-09PressReleaselogo.pdf
 
Maybe you could highlight this on your blog?
 
Best regards

Yes indeed kind mailer, we can highlight this on the blog. 

So in an amazing turn of events, we have two companies, Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) and Gold Bullion Development Corp (GBB.v), that use the same technique of smearing to make mediocre drilling results look good. And it just so happens that both these stocks have been pumped like crazy to a naïve world by the bullshit hype merchant Louis James of Casey Research (check here and here for the background to the Casey pumpjobs on GBB.v, noting how first Lobito tips off the premium customers of Casey and then gets the lower-level higher volume Intl Spec subscribers into the stock later...another scam laden modus operandi at the little shop of horrors).

So BCSC OSC and all your merry friends, you've clamped down on Bayfield's bullshit and maybe just maybe it's time to take a good look at this other operation doing the same thing over at GBB.v? And while you're at it, if you really want to clean up the street it really is about time you looked into the common denominator of these scams. If you need a hint, they work out of Vancouver and their boss just loves Argentine real estate.

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) gets top billing in this week's Northern Miner

As the reporter who wrote the note clearly lifted a ton of information from IKN without bothering to give any credit*, here's a full paste-out of the front page story in this week's Northern Miner (July 11 to 17) all about those scamsters at Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v). Glad to say those in-cahoots scumballs at Casey Research get theirs, too.

By the way, that dumbass lying scumbag Louis 'Little Wolf' James pumped BYV.v again today in his ridiculous monthly rag, calling the drill results that have been torn asunder by the BCSC "spectacular" and calling BYV.v as "even more likely" to be taken over...what a total pumphouse asshole that guy is.

Bayfield insiders sell as Rainy River area play overheats

BY MATTHEW ALLAN
Vancouver — A 400- by 800- metre claim block east of Rainy River Resources’ (rr-t) flagship gold project in northwestern Ontario is causing a big commotion at the project’s operator, Bayfield Ventures (byv-v).

Bayfield has drilled into a bonanza-grade mineralized zone at least twice since optioning the small sliver of land called the Burns Block in late 2007. This year, it plans to complete 100,000 metres of drilling in an attempt to prove that economic mineralization from Rainy River’s main OMD/17 zone extends onto its property.

To that end, Bayfield reported an eye-catching intersection last month grading 8.66 grams gold per tonne and 57.67 grams silver at 80 metres, starting from a downhole depth of just 16 metres, including a smaller bonanza-grade zone about halfway through. The results shot the company’s shares up 51%, from 59¢ to 89¢, on a record-high trading volume of 10.4 million shares on June 27, the day results were released.

The problem, at least according to the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC), is in the way Bayfield has reported its assays. On June 30, BCSC forced Bayfield to restate its latest drill results, as well as selected results dating back to September 2010, in order to “clarify certain details of its technical disclosure of drill results,” with Bayfield admitting, “The drill results are potentially confusing, as certain larger intervals were reported by diluting high-grade intercepts over longer intervals of lower-grade gold and silver mineralization.” The BCSC says the 80-metre intersection grading 8.66 grams gold and 57.67 grams silver is more accurately reported as a 26-metre intersection grading 26.7 grams gold and 170.69 grams silver, with most of that in turn coming from an 11-metre section grading 60.05 grams and 362.96 grams silver, starting from a depth of 48 metres.

The rest of the interval, says Exploration Insights newsletter writer and geologist, Brent Cook, is essentially “waste rock.” (Bayfield calls it a “broad halo of anomalous to multigram-level gold and silver mineralization.”) Indeed, when the 11-metre section is removed using a tool designed by Cook called the Drill Hole Interval Calculator, the remaining 68 metres of the drill hole have a residual grade of just 0.23 gram gold and 7.6 grams silver.

In a June 28 telephone interview with The Northern Miner from his office in Vancouver, Bayfield’s president Don Huston defended his company’s way of reporting the assays, arguing it is a regular practice to calculate an average of high- and low-grade sections, and that it was compliant with National Instrument 43-101. “I’m not trying to smoke anybody,” Huston said. “I’m showing that we have tonnage and grade equal to the $9 stock (Rainy River). And that’s a fact. . . should I report every metre, and show a chart twelve metres long?”

Huston acknowledged that the vast majority of the hole outside the high-grade zone graded below 0.4 gram gold, which is under Bayfield’s cut-off grade, and therefore not significant. He declined to comment on Cook’s methodology, but said he is familiar with it.

Huston maintains there is “good reason to believe” the mineralized zone found near surface in the latest hole RR11-71 is the same zone, or is connected to a high-grade zone found at the other side of the property in September 2010. That hole, RR10-18, returned an impressive 81 metres grading 5.08 grams gold, although most of that can be attributed to a 10-metre section grading 35.93 grams gold starting from a depth of 497 metres.

The holes are 350 metres away from each other on surface, but because of the variance in depth, the actual distance between the holes — and the potential length of the high-grade mineralized shoot — is approximately 600 metres.

According to Cook, who spoke to The Northern Miner about Bayfield’s latest results via telephone from just north of San Diego, “When you get these high-grade veins . . . usually they are nuggety, and Bayfield has showed pictures of coarse gold in the core, so you know it’s nuggety. So, the issue becomes one of continuity. How far can you project a high-grade intercept along strike or plunge? Usually not far.

“My sense of what they’ve got is maybe there is a rather small shoot that plunges from north to south that goes across what they’re drilling. Certainly, from the data we’ve seen, this is not a very disseminated deposit.”

Bob Marvin, Bayfield’s exploration manager and senior project geologist for Burns Block, acknowledges it has been “very difficult” to establish continuity of the high-grade shoot over a significant length. Speaking from Bayfield’s field camp near the Burns property, Marvin told The Northern Miner, “There’s absolutely no intention on our part, or certainly my part, to say that we see a lot of continuity, because clearly we have not. Now, whether that’s because we’ve missed or because there’s a true lack of continuity, I really think you’d have to go underground to establish.”

Marvin noted the high-grade shoot is contained within a well-established east–west trending zone of strong foliation, sericite alteration, locally intense deformation and highly variable pyrite mineralization. He pointed out drill hole RR10-15 may have picked up the shoot at a depth of 190 metres, with assays returning 9 metres of 12.88 grams gold, including a 3-metre section grading 31.71 grams gold. Many other holes have failed to demonstrate much continuity within high-grade zone, including hole RR10-9, which was drilled 25 metres along strike of the original high-grade discovery, hole RR10-18, and returned 20 metres of 1.2 grams gold, with the best interval within that intercept grading 9.93 grams gold over 2 metres.

According to Marvin, Bayfield has yet to prove much economically significant gold mineralization exists outside of the broader envelope that includes the high-grade shoot. “There is (some) evidence, but at this point, ninety-eight percent of every ounce if we were to do a resource would be within the zone.” Rainy River previously optioned a majority interest in the property from Bayfield in 2007, but dropped the option amid the financial crisis in November 2008 after drilling seven holes.

Rainy River’s namesake project boasts 4.1 million oz. gold in the measured and indicated category, in a conceptual open pit containing 115.5 million tonnes grading 1.11 grams gold, as well as 1.8 million oz. gold inferred. Besides hosting significant silver values, the deposit also has a underground resource estimated at 1.8 million tonnes measured and indicated, grading 4.82 grams gold for 290,800 oz. gold.

Having raised over $10 million in the past year, Bayfield should be well equipped in 2011 to drill out much of the Burns Block, and explore its nearby properties in the Rainy River area, including its C Block half a dozen kilometres to the west, and its B Block a few kilometres to the north.

Helping raise nearly half of Bayfield’s money was the Casey Research Group, which has been touting the stock as a potential takeover target since September 2010. The Casey Group’s monthly International Speculator newsletter has recommended its readers buy the stock no less than seven times in the subsequent nine months. Some of them must have listened, as three Casey employees (Marin Katusa, Marc Bustin and Joe Hung) found themselves the recipients of a $249,999 cash finder’s fee in October 2010, after helping Bayfield sell $5-million worth of stock in a flow-through private placement at $1.40 a share. The trio also received 178,572 finder’s warrants for their efforts.

Insider trading reports of Bayfield’s management show that no fewer than six insiders sold a combined total of approximately 589,000 shares shortly after the company released the first set of drill results that found the high-grade mineralized zone in late September 2010. The stock fell almost 65% in the following nine months, reaching a low of 50¢ in mid-June.

The latest round of drill results has proved little different, with four Bayfield insiders selling stock on the day the company released the assays. Huston sold 80,000 shares at 83¢ each; chairman Jim Pettit sold 90,000 shares at prices ranging from 87¢ to 94¢; exploration manager Marvin sold 64,000 shares around 83¢ apiece; and Burns Block project geologist Shane Hu sold all 25,500 of his shares at an average of 91¢ each. Huston and Pettit exercised options a week later to buy 50,000 shares and 200,000 shares, respectively, at 39¢ a share.

After their big leap on June 27 from 59¢ to an intraday high of $1.02, shares of the company have retreated back to a low of 66¢ on July 4. At presstime on July 5, they were trading up 5¢ to 71¢ on 327,000 shares traded. Bayfield has 62 million shares outstanding, 72 million if fully diluted.

*I mean, what do you think this is, some place that so-called professional reporters can get free DD that in tacit terms they claim as their own? seriously, go fuck yourself Matthew Allen and stick your fucking copyright up your unethical ass, motherfucker. That clear enough?

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) from IKN113

I'm getting queries and questions about the post on Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) yesterday, so rather than actually think on this fine Tuesday morning, here pasted out is the piece on BYV.v from IKN113, out last Sunday. 

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v), an exercise in red flags

I’d like you to go to the footnotes list and make a point of linking through to link (13) and then take a good read of its contents because it is a salutory reminder of what you, the retail investor, need to avoid in this sector. However here’s the top of the NR published by Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) last Thursday to make sure you at least get the gist of what’s going on:

Press Release Source: Bayfield Ventures Corp. On Thursday June 30, 2011, 7:50 pm EDT

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwire - June 30, 2011) - Bayfield Ventures Corp. (TSX VENTURE:BYV - News; FRANKFURT:B4N - News; the "Company") is issuing this news release as a result of a review by the British Columbia Securities Commission in order to clarify certain details of its technical disclosure of drill results on its Burns Block property and of its disclosure of resource estimates at Rainy River Resources' gold project adjacent to Bayfield's Burns Block.

Rainy River gold properties claims map: http://www.bayfieldventures.com/i/pdf/BYVRRArea.pdf

The Company restates certain drill intervals (listed below) reported in news releases dated September 8, 2010, December 14, 2010, February 16, 2011, and June 27, 2011. The original averaged gold and silver grades over these intervals are all correct and the total amount of gold and silver mineralization is the same; however the drill results are potentially confusing as certain larger intervals were reported by diluting high-grade intercepts over longer intervals of lower grade gold and silver mineralization.

The higher grade gold and silver intervals reported in the effected news releases identified above, and re-reported here, are enclosed within the much wider envelopes of anomalous level gold mineralization (and accompanying variable silver values). We therefore revise the portions of the previously reported intervals for which questions of potential economic viability cannot currently be assessed by Bayfield. Such an assessment would require identifying likely mining methods and establishing many other parameters that are well beyond the scope of our exploration project at this point in time.

The following is a list of the holes that report longer drill intercepts which are being restated:

- Previously reported larger intervals in hole RR10-18 (September 8, 2010 news release)

- Previously reported larger intervals in hole RR10-52 (December 14, 2010 news release)

- Previously reported larger intervals in hole RR11-1 (February 16, 2011 news release)

- Previously reported larger intervals in hole RR11-70 (June 27, 2011 news release)

- Previously reported larger intervals in hole RR11-71 (June 27, 2011 news release)

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) is a company I’ve mentioned on more than one occasion on the blog because it checks off so many of the boxes that shady junior mining companies check off. There’s the promotional aspect, the suspicious relationship it has with market moving commentators who have little or no idea about geology (and yes I know that’s true for me too but at least there’s no false pretences) and the cutely timed insider sales and rounds of financing that seem to benefit everybody bar the end user. The NR put out last week caps off a whole round of doubtful promotion that stretches back nine months, as BYV.v was forced by the BCSC to retract previous news releases it has made regarding its drill results. Please go and read the whole thing to get a fuller picture, but in a nutshell BYV.v has been slapped on the wrist for “smearing”. This is when a small, high grade intercept is used to make a larger width of the same drill core look like it’s all potentially mineable rock when in fact only a small part of what’s on offer could ever be construed as economically mineable. It’s a subject we looked at in IKN94, that piece also found its way onto the blog (14) and by sheer coincidence, the example used was that of BYV.v. I’ll leave you to check out that note at your own leisure (and if you have further questions I’m only too pleased to hear from you) but rather than do the same info twice over, I’d like to point out a couple of things about the latest BYV.v NR that has announced the forced retraction and adaptation of drill results. What follows is directly related to the dates of the news releases as they appear in the paste-out above.

• The September 8^th NR was the high point of a very aggressive promotional campaign for BYV.v that got many new investors into the stock. That day the company traded over 9m shares, which is many multiples more than its normal traded volume and without looking too far back into the company records is most likely a record. The share price peaked at $1.38 that day and to give an idea on the type of move it put in, the previous day it was trading at 83c.

• On the back of that Sept 8^th NR and market reaction, BYV.v just a couple of days later announced a $5m non-brokered private placement of flow-through shares priced at $1.40 (15).

• At the exact same time, company Chairman and CEO Jim Pettit decided it was a great time to do some insider selling and make over $100,000 on the sales he made in the next few days. Other insiders also cashed in at that time (15).

• Meanwhile, much the same pattern was repeated on December 14^th when the NR that day which has also been retracted due to ‘smearing’ of results saw BYV.v stock jump over 10% the next morning.

• The February 16^th NR also saw the stock jump over 10% by way of reaction, all on twice normal volumes. This was the very NR we covered in our IKN94 note about smearing (14).

• The share price reaction from the most recent June 27^th NR was even more dramatic, with the stock climbing over 50% and 6.9m shares changing hands. Just four days after an intraday peak of $1.02 that morning, BYV.v is now at 76c and fading fast.

But as well as this highly coincidental NR-plus-PPS-plus-Volume-plus-Promotion action, we should also note the way in which Bayfield has announced its correction last week. It has done so on the evening of June 30^th, at 7:50pm, when most all of the market is not paying attention and is unlikely to do so through Canada Day (July 1^st Friday) and perhaps even US Independence Day (July 4^th Monday), even though Canada’s markets are open for business tomorrow. That stinks, frankly. If it were an isolated case of convenient timing from a junior with a better track record of transparency that type of detail wouldn’t matter so much. But when it comes to a company like BYV.v, it matters a great deal.

It’s at times like these when your author reminds himself of the odds of a junior exploration company actually ever getting an asset into production (either via in house efforts or via selling it to a third party) and because those odds are so very small indeed, any small sign that a junior is out to mine the market (Mickey Fulp’s preferred expression) instead of the rock will always go down as a red flag. But when the signs come think and fast from a company and are backed up by dubious promotional techniques from dubious “research” houses, it’s difficult to imagine seeing the phrase CAVEAT EMPTOR writ any larger.

DYODD. I'm looking forward to Lobito...c'mon dude, pump it again, don't let us down. And oh yeah, full disclosure: No position in BYV.v (IKN highlights these scummy stocks for love, not money).

UPDATE: And the BYV.v insiders sell in droves just before the BCSC news hits! YOU HAVE TO BE SHITTIN' ME HERE, DUDES! Well, at least they're consistently scumbags, not just on every other day.

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v): It's so bad it's almost funny

This NR has to be contender for 2011 Junior Mining News Release of the Year.

And why this stock is still in the high 60s is beyond me. An utter scam, with Casey's nodding donkey Louis James pumper in chief. I can't wait to see what the bullshit liar Lobito has to say about BYV.v this  month, as he's obviously part of the problem, not part of the solution. Laughable.

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) and Brent Cook's drill interval calculator (from IKN94)

By popular demand (seriously, I've been told that this piece needs a blog-airing by subbers) here's an update on Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v), the bullshit scam run by the shady management team, ridden for his own gains by Mr Self-Service himself Marin Katusa of Casey Research and...utter surprise...pumped as TheNextBigThing by LouisLobitoJames of Casey Research. So rather than do any real work today here's what was written on the subject for IKN94 and published on Feb 20th (y'see the blog stopped for the vacay, but the Subscriber weeklies kept on rolling). Anyway, here's the piece on BYV.v and what's written below applies equally to the NR it came out with on Monday evening, as it's just the same vein drilled over and over again. Bulk mining my ass. Enjoy.

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) and Brent Cook’s drill interval calculator

We’ve mentioned it before, it’s got a permanent link over at the blog but today I want to take a few more lines to extol the virtues of using the Brent Cook/Corebox Drill Interval Calculator (find your way there this link), a most useful tool that we non-qualified geology laypeople* can use to get a better handle on the drill returns laid out in a company news release and it greatly helps in sorting out the wheat from the chaff.

So let’s take an example of chaff to show how it works, the company in question being the overhyped and underendowed Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) which is trying to make out that its neighbour play to Rainy River’s (RR.v) hot Ontario property is something that RR.v will have to buy out to make the area into an open pit gold mine. It’s total piffle, but as that’s never stopped a junior miner from promoting itself here we are.

What we’ve had from BYV from its ‘Burns Block’ property so far are intersections of a high grading vein or two that have been presented as a much wider mineralized body. This practice of ‘smearing’ a high grade intersection over a wider area is designed to give the impression that there’s a lot more economically viable rock under the ground than is actually the case and it’s just this type of sleight of hand that the Cook/Corebox calculator is good at rooting out. Here’s the cutting of last Thursday’s NR detailing the core returns:

What we see is that the hole in question, RR11-1, is presented as having intersected 116.6m of 1.05g/t gold that started at a downhole depth of 509.5m and finished at 626.1m. We then see that this intersection included three higher grading areas, in particular two parts of the total that were high grading stuff (0.7m of 21.6g/t gold and an eyecatching 2.2m 33.13g/t gold). Those kind of returns point to very nice rock of course, but if it’s from a simple vein system the absolute amount of economic gold contained is always going to be limited to the vein itself and ounces contained aren’t so likely to impress. But as we see, BYV is offering up the intersection as being a big, wide and far more easily and economically mineable 116m wide.

What the Cook/Corebox calculator does is show us the truth of the matter and here’s how it works in this example case. Go over to the Corebox website and in the top line of the box presented, plug in the length and the grade of the big interval. In this case the length is 116m and the grade is 1.05g/t. Next, in the lines of the box that follow add in any of the “including” parts you see fit from the NR. In our case we’re concentrating on the two high grade parts (0.7m at 21.6g/t and 2.2m at 33.13g/t) that BYV announced. Once all your info is in, hit enter for the last time and read off the “residual” at the bottom. This is the solution to the question and shows a) how much length is left after the inclusions are taken away and b) how much gold per tonne is in the rest of the drillcore.

In the case of BYV’s R11-1 core, once you take out the high grade parts you’re left with 113m grading 0.299g/t. Believe me, nobody cares about that grade of gold at that depth as it would be far too expensive to haul it to the surface, as even with gold at $1400/oz and 100% recoveries that rock is worth less than $14 a tonne.

So what BYV has at Burns is a decent but deep-lying vein. But it’s one that it continues to drill at differing depths to make for a flashy news release every now and again and it’s also one that’s being used to make its case for being an indispensible part of its neighbour’s plan to build an open pit gold mine. Yeah, right.

Oh look, somebody decided to bid up and buy BYV Weds AM before the Thursday AM NR. Sheer coincidence, of course. We avoid.

IKN March 2nd back. Since that week BYV has dropped back to the low 80s again, which shouldn't come as any surprise. DYODD, dude.

Louis James Was Right! Congratulations, Lobito!

He was right when he told you to load up the boat cos the buyout just had to happen (when the management was selling at $1+ and his best pal and mucker was flogging rounds of financing to the unwitting priced at $1.40)

He was right when he said "buy first tranche" (or whatever that weird Casey system uses as instruction words for its flock) at 80c.

And now Louis James, the neverwrong junior mining analyst at Casey gets to be right again! Yes indeedy, today Bayfield Ventures hit Louis "little wolf" James' 65c "buy second tranche" target price, proving just how smart he really is...because now you lucky Casey disciples get the chance to buy buy BUY! BYV.v stock all over again! 

What could possibly go wrong? DYODD, dudettes and dudes.

Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) is IKN's twittery friend

Is 'friend' what you say when somebody follows you on twitter, or is that just Feibu*? I forget the protocols and etiquettes of Webz2.0. Anyway, when your humble scribe finished up and sent his weekly missive last night he then trundled over to the IKN Twitter account to see what was going twit and a joyous little piece of news awaited him. The guys over at Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) have decided to be special followers of IKN as you can see here. 

This, thought your humble scribe, was wondrous news as I wrote at the time.....

"Great News! Bayfield Resources Ventures (BYV.v) has decided to follow IKN's tweet a/c! @Bayfield_BYV Do they follow Marin Katusa too?"

 ......and a great chance to pose a couple of questions to the team at BYV.v about how things are developing. So far I've sent them this question....

"A great chance to ask some Qs, no? Hey @Bayfield_BYV why all that luckily timed inside selling while running financing over $1?"

...and also this question. 

"Hey @Bayfield_BYV why so slow with ALL the drilling results? What's wrong, don't you want everyone to see all the info?"

 Sadly, they haven't replied as yet, but I'm sure they'll get round to it. Meanwhile, how's that stock doing, Lobito?

Hey...moving down towards 65c, Lobito! You're right again, Lobito! (gotta love lobito)



*Facebook in Spanish...seriously

The great thing about working for Casey Research....

...is that you're never ever wrong. Take for example the latest call on the self-fulfilling Casey prophecy, Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v), the pumpjob we've noted previously as the object of Marin Katusa's finder's fee commission wet dreams and rip-offs.

At the moment, Casey Louis 'Lobito' James' recommendation on the stock (this humble scribe is reliably informed) is that you should buy a "first tranche" (whatever that means, as they've already exhorted you to buy tranches at much higher prices) at 80c and a "second tranche" at 65c if it drops that low. So by noting the current price of 78c...

 ..... we are forced to conclude that:

1) If you buy today and the stock moves back to 80c, Lobito is right.
2) If you buy today and the stock stays below 80c, it's still a great buying opp for BYV and Lobito is right.
3) If you buy today and the stock drops, you get to buy again at 65c and Lobito is right

All the above is also true for those Casey subscribers who read Lobito's pearls of wisdom earlier in the week and snapped up those bargain shares at 82c and 85c. You see, Casey subbers, the fact that your investment has lost money is a mere illusion because we've already proven that your investment advisor is never wrong.

And what happens if BYV drops to under 65c, we hear you ask? Well we're not sure yet but chances are that Lobito will be able to slap an extra layer of superduper buying double tranche with chocolate sauce reco on your tushes....and he'll be right, of course.

UPDATE: Interesting comment left below by  "Casey Subber #19392118" (which presumably means something to them, as they're bound to have an index system):

I admit that I'm a fairly long-time Casey subber and the quality of their picks and confidence in their picks have fallen substantially over the past couple years. They stopped recommending any stocks for about a year because their "Spidey senses" felt a big correction was on its way and now that the market has gone up a ton they do this three tranche buying model. Hmm, guys, let's see. So, it is a good buy now for 1/3rd of my money but just in case the stock goes down you're telling me to buy more at that price. Oh, then if there is a "market meltdown" I should buy more at that point. What if I buy 1/3rd now and the price goes up? Oh wait, I know what happens. You post a double recommendation that says Take Profits/Buy First tranche for new subscribers. Again, what a ridiculous recommendation. Sounds like the foundation of a pyramid scheme.

I know Casey Research follows this blog so why don't you focus a bit more on finding good stocks with good fundamentals and a little less on your marketing. The only reason I still subscribe is I am locked in at your old rates and the subscription costs me next to nothing. I would never consider the new price of $1000 per year. Hah! What a joke.

So, Doug, David, Louis, Marin et al -- grow a set, get off the fernce and make a solid call like you used to.

Posted by Casey Subber #19392118 to IKN at 1:45 PM

I am once again reminded.....

Bayfield (BYV.v): Are the Casey pump boys who ran that $1.40 financing on BYV and pocketed those finder's fees available for comment?

No, seriously....Louis James might fall for scamming Katusa's crap, but...really......

Yep the 89.96g/t hit looks pretty, but the residual 45.5m is 0.16g/t gold!  And...errr...it's 400m underground, too. Want some help with a few strip rate calculations on an open pitter yet, Lobito?

Bayfield Drills 89.96 g/t Gold Over 1.1m Within 46.6m of 2.28 g/t Gold in Rainy River, NW Ontario

According to the NR, CEO Pettit of BYV (the same dude that was selling his shares hand over fist at the $1+ prices brought about by the Casey pumpjob that lined plenty of pockets inside Casey Research) is (quote) "very excited with the results" today. Presumably he gets all nervous on rollercoasters too.

Bayfield (BYV.v) insider selling continues

Bayfield Ventures Corp. (BYV)						As of November 19th, 2010
Filing Date	Transaction Date	Insider Name	Ownership Type	Securities	Nature of transaction	# or value acquired or disposed of	Unit Price
Nov 19/10	Nov 18/10	Pettit, Gaydon	Direct Ownership	Common Shares	10 - Disposition in the public market	-30,000	$0.810
Nov 19/10	Nov 15/10	Pettit, Gaydon	Direct Ownership	Common Shares	10 - Disposition in the public market	-28,301	$0.850

Mexican Owly comments on this development:

Casey Research, IKN and Bayfield Ventures

Your humble scribe fully recommends that you read this article published by Casey Research today. Please click through and read it all, but to give you a taste here's how it ends.

"We urge readers not to take seriously accusations made by anonymous internet bloggers and other questionable sources. If you have questions regarding any of our practices or policies, please contact us for the facts."

And when you're done, make sure that you also read the comment left under this post today as well. Hey, to save you the trouble here's what the commenter wrote (the link he left is the same one that's linked above, but best to leave the commenter's words verbatim methinks):

I emailed Casey research concerning your allegations. I recieved the following response.

http://www.caseyresearch.com/pdfs/20101108_101106RevisedPrsponsetoBlogger.pdf

In fact your allegations were not refuted and were in my view admitted too in this response. The excuse is given in point number two of the response that "all fees were publicly disclosed by the exchange". However as a subscriber I do not remember them telling me about this in the reco. The fact that they are recommending a stock that they are involved in and recieving renumeration for may not be illegal but it sure is greasy and slimy. I am cancelling all my subscriptions to casey research immediately. Otto I do not know if you have seen this response yet. If not can you take a look at it and respond.

I've nothing further to add to that commenter's words, but before we go, two points to make.

1) The reason this corner of cyberspace pulled up Louis James on that ANM.v thing isn't the straw man reason set up by Casey&Co in their note today. It was more because he told outright lies to try and cover his tracks with his boss, David Galland. Check the story here if you care.

2) Amazingly enough, Casey Research today totally forgets to enlighten us on Katusa's other PP cashmaker, the one that went horribly wrong for everyone except him and the $100k in cash he pocketed, CBM Asia (TCF.v). That story can be futher perused here. I wonder if Casey Research would be kind enough as to explain that one to its subscribers as well?

Oh lordy, it must really be pissing these guys off that their outright lies, unaccountable behaviour and moneymaking schemes are getting a bit of light shone on them. DYODD, dude.

Marin Katusa's scams and other Casey Research scamsters

Why allow anonymous commenters at IKN these days? This is why. An anon comment today woke your soporific author to the sidebet scam that Casey Research's Marin Katusa played with the Casey Research pumped Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v), the stock story we featured last week to show how all that insider selling went on while the Casey sheep were buying chunks on the promo pump gone wrong.

What Anon alerted this humble scribe to was this little filing. Here's the relevant excerpt:

BAYFIELD VENTURES CORP. ("BYV")
BULLETIN TYPE: Private Placement-Non-Brokered
BULLETIN DATE: October 21, 2010
TSX Venture Tier 2 Company


TSX Venture Exchange has accepted for filing documentation with respect to
a Non-Brokered Private Placement announced September 13, 2010:


Number of Shares:                3,571,429 flow-through shares


Purchase Price:                  $1.40 per share


Number of Placees:               26 placees


Finder's Fee:                    KBH Capital Corp. (Marin Katusa, Dr. Marc
                                 Bustin and Joe Hung) will receive a
                                 finder's fee of $249,999.96 and 178,572
                                 Finder's Warrants that are exercisable
                                 into common shares at $1.16 to October
                                 14, 2012.

So apparently this KBH Capital Corp made $250,000 off the recent Bayfield placement, as well as large chunks of incentive warrants. What's more, if you look at the placement terms and then do the math, it turns out that every single dollar of the $5m raised by BYV.v was placed via KBH Capital. In other words, the Casey sheep loaded up on everything sold by Bayfield and as a result put $250,000 into the pockets of Katusa, Bustin and Hung. so who are these characters running this scam? Ladies and gentlemen, IKN proudly presents...........

Marin Katusa, Senior Market Strategist, Casey Research.

Marc Bustin, Senior Research, Unconventional Oil and Gas, Casey Research.

Joe Hung, Research Analyst, Casey Research.

Yeah, funny dat innit? It just so turns out that KBH Capital Corp, the company that placed every single dollar of the $5m raised by Bayfield (BYV.v) in its last placement, is run by three people who work together at Casey Research. And Casey Research is the very same house of scams that pumped BYV.v to the moon on unrealistic expectations of nailed on buyout talks based on drill holes that might look flashy and good to start with but haven't held up to the light of better geological brains' analysis (and if you don't believe me on that, check the share price action and how insiders were so keen on getting out at the same time as Casey Research was getting its sheep in).

But just as a little extra, you remember how this scumball scamster Marin Katusa pumped CBM Asia (TCF.v) as the NextBigThing way back when and then squirmed and moaned and couldn't be bothered to admit his error afterwards? Well it turns out that a certain Dr. Marc Bustin was hired as a consultant to TCF.v at the same time as the Katusa pump job that went so disastrously wrong, which may also have something to do with a Marc Bustin who's a founder of a company called CBM Solutions. All one big happy scamster family, eh Marin?

It's incredible to watch these shysters at Casey Research and how they use their own subscription list to pump cash into their own back pockets so brazenly by reco'ing and enthusing on any old dog of a stock. 

DYODD, dude.

Bayfield (BYV.v) does the Casey Shuffle

We've already noted how in late August and early September Casey Research pumped Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) first to its "A list" of higher paying subscribers and then to its Proles List of normal paying subbers and while doing that, even had the gall to say to the high-paying list that they'd be reco'ing the stock to the other-bigger list in a few days time (and if that isn't blatant frontrunning I'd like to know what is, ladies and gentlemen of the BCSC/OSC).

But what we haven't tracked is the share price action in the stock since then, so here's the chart.

Oh look! Bayfield Ventures has slumped back to the low 80's already! What a shocker!

On the back of what looked and was promo'd as some good, mine-making slamdunk type holes, BYV zoomed into the stratosphere in early September. Then, amazingly, two things happened:

1) BYV.v ran a $5m bought deal placement at $1.40 per flow-through share (note: FT shares can be priced slightly higher thanks to tax break rules in Canada). My stars, wasn't that timed well!

2) The insiders decided it was a great time to start selling! Yes, amazingly enough the NRs that came out in machine-gun fashion in September was über bullish and the pumped-up bullshit coming from Casey&Co was all about "slam dunk takeovers" and such, but when push came to shove the people that REALLY know the significance of those early holes, i.e. the company CEO and the company exploration manager, were quick to want to bail out. Here's what insiders of BYV.v have done since the Casey-plus-drillhole hype hit the screens.

Jim Pettit Chairman & CEO

1655899 2010-06-14 2010-06-16 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +177,000 0.1200   277,000

1703457 2010-09-07 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -20,000 1.1000 257,000

1703458 2010-09-08 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -20,000 1.2100 237,000

1703459 2010-09-08 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  54 - Exercise of warrants +40,000 0.3000   277,000

1703460 2010-09-09 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -30,000 1.1000 247,000

1703461 2010-09-10 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -20,000 1.1800 227,000

1703462 2010-09-10 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +75,000 0.1200   302,000

1703466 2010-09-13 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -15,000 1.3000 287,000

1703471 2010-09-15 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -8,000 1.1400  279,000

1707288 2010-09-21 2010-09-24 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +104,900 0.1200   383,900

1707291 2010-09-21 2010-09-24 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +15,401 0.1250   399,301

1707293 2010-09-21 2010-09-24 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +13,000 0.2300   412,301

1719620 2010-10-12 2010-10-15 Direct Ownership :  11 - Acquisition or disposition carried out privately -10,000 1.0300 402,301

123,000 sold for $141,720

Warrants cost $12,000 to exercise

Options cost = $26,503 to make whole

Pre-tax cash profit:  $103,217

Change in full shares position since August: +300,000

Robert Marvin, Exploration Manager

1713344 2010-09-29 2010-10-05 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +100,000 0.4300   100,000

1713347 2010-09-29 2010-10-07 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -45,000 1.0500   55,000

1725305 2010-10-21 2010-10-27 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -55,000 0.9650   0

1725306 2010-10-26 2010-10-27 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market +25,000 0.8000   25,000

$43,000 to exercise

Sales $100,325

Buyback cost $20,000

Pre-tax cash profit:  $37,325

Nancy Ackerfeldt, Corp Sec

1699675 2010-09-07 2010-09-10 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +45,000 0.1200   100,000

1699678 2010-09-07 2010-09-10 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -10,000 1.1600   90,000

Exercise cost $5,400

Sales $11,600

Pre-tax cash profit:  $6,200

Donald Huston, President

1703415 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +75,000 0.1200   217,500

1703417 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +15,500 0.1200   233,000

1703419 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +44,000 0.1200   277,000

1703421 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +20,000 0.1200   297,000

1703424 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +25,000 0.1200   322,000

1703425 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +15,000 0.1250   337,000

1703429 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +13,000 0.2300   350,000

1703432 2010-09-14 2010-09-17 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -30,000 1.2700 320,000

1707155 2010-09-17 2010-09-24 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -20,000 1.2100 300,000

Options exercise cost $23,355

Sales brought in $62,300

Pre-tax cash profit:  $38,945
Change in full shares position since August: +157,500

Donald Myers, Director

1699690 2010-09-08 2010-09-10 Direct Ownership :  51 - Exercise of options +118,000 0.1200   168,731

1699692 2010-09-08 2010-09-10 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -35,000 1.1770 133,731

1699695 2010-09-09 2010-09-10 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -37,500 1.0833   96,231

1699696 2010-09-10 2010-09-10 Direct Ownership :  10 - Acquisition or disposition in the public market -7,500 1.1600   88,731

Options exercise $14.600

Sales  $90,518

Pre-tax cash profit:  $75,918

 3) The price slumps back post-bullshit hype closing yesterday at 82c, which is (for example) 32.3% lower than the point where company CEO Pettit sold 20,000 of his shares during his serial selling spree. Funny dat too, innit?

Again, if it were just one seller you'd be inclined to give benefit to doubt. But five insiders, all selling the same time on the same hyped-up pump from the scamsters at Casey Research, brought in especially to create the necessary liquidity? Gimme a break here, willyaz?

Casey Research frontruns its own sheep again

Here we go with another episode of the Casey scammers doing their thing. We bullet point.

1) Bayfield Ventures (BYV.v) is the name this time and three months ago Casey got his flock involved in a private placement on the thing (a full share and a warrant). Amazingly enough, the placement came out of lock-up on September 1st (see below).

2) Last Wednesday August 25th after BYV.v released news, Casey Research alerted its premium high paying clients about the stock and even went as far as to "suggest" that it would pump the stock to its proletariat subscribers in the September issue of its box standard monthly "International Spectator". At that time BYV.v traded at 54c.

3) And lo and behold! After opening at 57c today BYV.v suddenly got da pump from Casey Research and the stock jumped to close at 66c on nearly 10X average volume today. And let's recall, today is also the day that those placement shares pumped by Casey became free-trading.

Is this legal? I really don't know, but as I do know the BCSC is a regular reader round here I'm sure we'll find out sooner or later. But legal or not, it's a demonstration of the morals of an utter scoundrel. And of course, it's not the first time the Casey bullshitters have pulled this kind of scheme. Hey David Galland, feel like filing suit on me yet? I'd love it....make my day.

DYODD, dude