Retraction Of Statements In News Release

May 7, 2020

Vancouver, British Columbia – May 7, 2020 – Kingman Minerals Ltd. (TSX-V:KGS) (FSE:47A1) (“Kingman” or the “Company”) retracts specific statements within the press release dated May 5, 2020, in keeping with NI 43-101 standards, and following guidance provided by the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC), the Regulation Services Provider. This news release was not pre-filed with IIROC.

The news release dated May 5, 2020 was based entirely on scientific and technical information and results from previous operators. The requirements of NI 43-101, 3.2 (a) to (c) – Written Disclosure to Include Data Verification, were not addressed in full and no cautionary language was provided. Several references, including the title, are made to high grade results without disclosing the type and interval of the samples. Several references to “ore” are made.  The term “ore” is a restricted term only to be used when referencing mineral reserves per CIM definitions.  Furthermore, the requirements of NI 43-101, 2.4 (a) to (g) – Disclosure of Historical Estimates, are not adequately addressed. Specifically, the “Table 1 - Mineral reserve calculations for the Rosebud claim block does not clearly indicate that this is a historical estimate. Incomplete disclosure of the requirements of NI 43-101, 2.4, is disclosed furtheron in the news release. In addition, the Company retracts the following disclosure: “Therefore, the historical estimates should not be relied upon.” – disclosure that is of so low of confidence level that is “should not be relied upon cannot be disclosed. 

The Company would also like to clarify the disclosure of historical estimates in adherence to Policy 2.4 (a) to (g) of NI 43-101 as follows:

An issuer may disclose an historical estimate, using the original terminology, if the disclosure

  1. identifies the source and date of the historical estimate, including any existing technical report;
    The historical mineral reserve calculations were extracted from Bayrock, L.A., 1985, Geology and Mineral Reserves of the Rosebud and Music Mountain Claims, Mohave County, Arizona: prepared for Stellar Resource Corp., 34p.
  2. comments on the relevance and reliability of the historical estimate;
    While the estimations prepared by Bayrock are considered relevant, they were written before NI 43-101 regulations and are therefore not NI 43-101 compliant. The assay values have not been verified and would require additional underground sampling for verification. The Bayrock (1984) drilling data has not been verified but appears reasonable considering the width and grade of the vein in the underground workings are consistent with several more recent reports, one of which is NI-43-101 compliant (Harrington, 2005, for Kent Exploration Inc.). Additional drilling in the vicinity of the Bayrock drilling would be required to verify the above data.
  3. to the extent known, provides the key assumptions, parameters, and methods used to prepare the historical estimate;
    The method used by Bayrock to arrive at his “Total Oxide Mineral of the Rosebud Claim Blocks” (Table 1) calculations in the Rosebud mine was to plot the ore blocks on a longitudinal section of the mine workings. Using the assay values obtained from numerous continuous chip or channel samples, he calculated the US$/short ton value of each block using a minimum mining width of 3 feet. The calculations were based on approximately 75 samples collected underground in the Rosebud mine. The calculations for the Rosebud Veins and Southwick Extension in Table 1 were an extrapolation based on the average values at surface and in the workings and extended through the known extent of all the veins mapped on the surface within the claim block. Bayrock’s criteron for “inferred” is material “whose existence can be assumed”.  The criterion for “indicated” is material “which has one to two sides defined and the rest postulated.”
  4. states whether the historical estimate uses categories other than the ones set out in sections 1.2 and 1.3 and, if so, includes an explanation of the differences;
    As far as Kingman and Kingman’s Qualified Person, Brad Peek, are aware, the historical estimate did not use categories other than those set out in sections 1.2 and 1.3 of NI43-101.
  5. includes any more recent estimates or data available to the issuer;
    No more recent mineral resource or mineral reserve estimates are known to exist.
  6. comments on what work needs to be done to upgrade or verify the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves;
    In order to upgrade or verify Bayrock’s historical estimate as current mineral resources or reserves, the Company would be required to complete additional underground sampling in the Rosebud mine workings and drilling in the vicinity of the mine.
  7. states with equal prominence that
    1. a qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves; and
    2. the issuer is not treating the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves.
    Neither Kingman nor Kingman’s Qualified Person, Brad Peek, have done sufficient work to classify the estimations as current NI 43-101 compliant mineral resources or mineral reserves.

Lastly, the disclosure “the large tonnage of inferred mineralization showed potential for a medium to large scale mining operation. The price of gold in 1985 when Bayrock made this determination was $317.42 per ounce.” is overly promotional and potentially misleading as it is not supported by a current PEA, PFS or FS demonstrating the technical feasibility and economic viability of the project, nor does the quotation of the gold price from 1985 provide balanced disclosure as it does not address current costs of extraction.


All other information in these news releases remains as stated.

The technical information contained in this news release has been reviewed and approved by Bradley C. Peek, MSc and Certified Professional Geologist who is a Qualified Person with respect to Kingman’s Mohave Project as defined under National Instrument 43-101.

About Kingman

Kingman Minerals Ltd. is currently engaged in the business of precious metal mineral exploration for the purpose of acquiring and advancing non grass roots mineral properties located in mining friendly jurisdictions of North America.

For further information please contact:
Sandy MacDougall, Chairman & Director
(604) 685-7720

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. This news release may contain forward-looking information which is not comprised of historical facts. Forward-looking information involves risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events, results, performance, prospects and opportunities to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Forward-looking information in this news release includes statements regarding, among other things, the completion transactions completed in the Agreement. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking information include, but are not limited to, regulatory approval processes. Although Kingman believes that the assumptions used in preparing the forward-looking information in this news release are reasonable, including that all necessary regulatory approvals will be obtained in a timely manner, undue reliance should not be placed on such information, which only applies as of the date of this news release, and no assurance can be given that such events will occur in the disclosed time frames or at all. Kingman disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable securities laws.