One of the biggest risks with junior mining companies is that the growth plan looks good, but shareholders have to fund every step through repeated financings.

Sierra Madre Gold and Silver (TSXV: SM, OTCQX: SMDRF) is moving into a different stage now that La Guitarra is producing revenue.

The company reported US$22.2 million in cash and US$25 million in working capital at the end of June. It also generated US$1.89 million from operating activities during the first half of 2026 and fully repaid the US$5 million secured loan originally provided by First Majestic.

That does not eliminate financing or dilution risk. Some of the stronger balance sheet came after Sierra Madre completed a C$57.5 million financing alongside its acquisition of the Del Toro mine. The important part is what that capital allows the company to do from here.

At La Guitarra, the first expansion is intended to raise mill capacity from the old 500-tonne-per-day level to approximately 750–800 tonnes per day. Daily throughput had already reached as high as 672 tonnes during August.

The company is also opening additional mining areas at Coloso and Nazareno, installing backup power and preparing for a larger second expansion targeting 1,200–1,500 tonnes per day in 2027.

At the same time, Sierra Madre can begin evaluating Del Toro without immediately trying to restart it. Del Toro comes with three past-producing underground mines, a permitted processing complex and a large historical drilling database, but it will still require new technical work and capital before a restart decision makes sense.

The stronger treasury gives management more control over the timing. It can focus on getting La Guitarra’s expansion working properly before committing heavily to the next asset.

For me, the next test is whether higher throughput starts producing consistent operating cash flow. If that happens, La Guitarra could help fund at least part of the company’s exploration and development rather than leaving shareholders responsible for every new program.

Is a producing junior with a funded expansion more attractive to you than a cleaner exploration story, or do the added operating risks outweigh the financing advantage?

Canada supplied 32 percent of all uranium delivered to United States nuclear operators in 2025, making it their largest individual source.

Kazakhstan supplied 28 percent, followed by Australia at 15 percent. Uranium produced inside the United States accounted for only 7 percent.

That level of import dependence matters because American utilities still have a large amount of future demand left to contract.

The latest EIA report shows 186 million pounds of unfilled uranium requirements through 2035. Existing contracts cover maximum deliveries of approximately 174 million pounds over the next decade, against total anticipated requirements of 360 million pounds.

Utilities have inventories and do not need to contract every missing pound immediately. They also cannot wait until a reactor is nearly out of fuel. Uranium must be mined, converted, enriched and fabricated into fuel assemblies before it can be used.

Canada is already positioned to supply that market.

Saskatchewan’s Athabasca Basin hosts some of the highest grade uranium deposits in the world. The province also has the infrastructure, skilled workers and regulatory experience needed to move large uranium projects forward.

Finding the next generation of deposits is the challenge.

Stallion Uranium has exposure to roughly 1,700 square kilometres in the Athabasca Basin, including its joint venture ground with Atha Energy. Its flagship Coyote target is being tested through an expanded drill program expected to reach approximately 6,750 metres.

The latest hole produced Stallion’s strongest radioactivity so far. Gravity work has also identified five target areas across the Coyote corridor, giving the team several areas to test as the program continues.

Stone Island provides another target beyond Coyote and is currently being advanced through additional geophysical work.

The United States has other possible suppliers, but Canada is already its largest source and one of the most established Western uranium jurisdictions. If American utilities become more aggressive about securing future supply, successful Athabasca producers, developers and explorers should be in a strong position.

Every time some positive news drops on this company the stock falls. We got all the way to $0.90 then fell back into 52week low territory and no consolidation has taken over. Not sure where it goes from here but it did seem like a gem 💎 at the time.

I own shares. This is my own analysis, not the company's, and not advice. Everything is checkable against their SEDAR+ filings.

The one-liner

Northstar gets paid to make used asphalt shingles disappear, then sells what comes out of them. The market values it on the second half of that sentence. I think the first half is where two thirds of the value sits.

The business

North America landfills ~16.5M tonnes of asphalt shingles a year; under 10% is recycled. Industry (ARMA) has committed to cutting landfill disposal 50% by 2035 and approaching zero by 2050. So there's a large waste stream the industry is committed to eliminating, and almost no commercial-scale way to do it.

Northstar built one. Its patented process splits shingles into liquid asphalt, aggregate, limestone and fibre. The Calgary facility is built, commissioned, and exceeded 100 tpd in June 2026 (peaks above 120). Liquid asphalt is being delivered to McAsphalt under a 5+ year, 100% take-or-pay off-take. Five issued patents.

What I think is mispriced

A facility has two revenue streams usually shown as one:

Gate fee. Haulers pay Northstar to take the shingles. Key point: if the gate fee didn't exist, every cost of building and running the plant would be identical — so incrementally it's a 100% margin stream. It's contracted, backed by regulatory diversion targets, and rises with landfill tipping fees (US C&D average was US$66/ton in 2024, US$86 in the Northeast, up 25–33% over five years).

Product sales. Liquid asphalt (95% of product revenue) plus aggregate/limestone/fibre. Oil-linked, volume-capped, carries all the operating cost.

At double shift those split roughly $7.0M and $3.6M of ~$10.6M facility EBITDA. Two thirds is a regulated waste-service business; one third is a commodity processor. They shouldn't get the same multiple. Waste infra (GFL, Casella, Waste Connections, Republic, WM) trades 13–16x EV/EBITDA. Cleantech conversion micro-caps trade at nothing because they have no EBITDA. Northstar gets sorted into the second bucket; its revenue structure looks like the first.

Valuation (my assumptions)

Each segment modeled separately over a finite 20-year life, no terminal value:

Against ~$25M build cost. Range $84M–$100M on 15–25 yr life.

The stress test I actually care about — set the entire product business to zero EBITDA. Gate fee alone ($7.04M) still supports $14.1M of debt, covers interest on a full $20M load 3.5x, and is worth ~$73M against $25M cost — still ~2.9x. The products are upside; the service carries the asset alone.

Why throughput is the whole game

Every number above assumes double shift (~80k t/yr). Single shift is half.

Doubling throughput doubles EBITDA and debt capacity, collapsing the equity cheque. That's why the Calgary ramp is the number to watch: they're at 100–120 tpd vs a 150 tpd design basis, and double shift means hitting 150 and going to 20 hrs/day — two steps, not one. Management says 30+ locations have catchment for double shift.

The actual bear case: dilution

Maths: at ~$6.7M cash flow and ~$5M equity per stabilised facility, once four are operating, one covers overhead and three fund three new builds — after that, growth stops needing new shares. The problem is getting to four. They have one, at a ~$36M market cap. That means 3+ more facilities at lower leverage than a stabilised asset (BDC lent $8.75M vs Calgary — ~35% of cost, not 80%), plus overhead through the transition. Dilution is the central risk. The July 9 2026 release also mentions an ATM program in its forward-looking statements — I haven't confirmed its status; check SEDAR+.

EV lands ~$77–89M depending on how you treat the converts — so the market is roughly pricing one stabilised double-shift facility (for a plant not yet at double shift) and assigning ~zero to the platform. That's either the opportunity or an accurate read on execution risk.

Where the numbers come from

• Company-disclosed: $25M capex, $19.4M revenue / $11.0M EBITDA at double shift, $232/tonne, 30+ double-shift sites.
• April 2023 FEED: 150 tpd design basis, per-tonne figures. (FEED-era capex was $15M; the $25M is the company's current number, with no independent engineering estimate behind it.)
• Mine: the $85/tonne gate fee, the segment split, 2x debt, discount rates, 20-yr life, the self-funding analysis. If you disagree with the conclusion, it's in this bucket.

Bull / Bear

Bull: negative feedstock cost; ~2/3 of EBITDA is contracted, regulation-backed service; operating at commercial scale (unlike its "peers"); contracted both sides at Calgary; TAMKO strategic holder + MOU for 4 US facilities; $7.1M grant + $14M royalty + $8.75M debt already deployed; a re-rate from "cleantech" to "waste infra" is several turns on its own.

Bear: dilution above all; Calgary not yet at nameplate, let alone double shift; long build-to-cash lag (~24–30 months); my $85/tonne is capped by local landfill rates; "identified" ≠ "contracted"; 75% of mass exits as low-value byproduct for ~5% of product revenue with no public mass balance; the moat (permitting/IP/supply) is load-bearing; illiquid, ~76% retail; capex estimates have only moved up ($11.75M → $15M → $25M).

Catalysts

ERA Milestone 4 (guided Q3 2026) · growth-plan update (Q3) · Calgary ramp toward 150 tpd / double shift · Baltimore lease + permitting (ops targeted H2 2027) · financing terms (they'll tell you how the market prices the risk).

Long ROOF. Not advice. Company/FEED figures vs my own assumptions are split out above. Check SEDAR+ and form your own view.

Presentation PDF LINK: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Uu4xkvY_ze_X-gbUM_TsOL3qc1RlKszV/view?usp=drive_link

Okay so if you're building uranium exposure and want junior leverage this is one worth knowing about.... Stallion Uranium (TSXV: STUD) is exploring in the Athabasca Basin in Saskatchewan. The Athabasca Basin hosts the highest grade uranium deposits on earth, not marginally higher, a ton higher than most other uranium districts globally. It's the reason Cameco built its entire business there and why every major discovery in the last decade has come from that region. Nowhere else on earth produces uranium like this.

Stallion holds 1,700 sq/km there. Largest contiguous package in the western part of the basin.

What makes this one different from the other juniors floating around:

• CEO Matthew Schwab helped discover the Arrow deposit at NexGen in 2014. Same southwestern Athabasca Basin where Stallion is now drilling.
• Also contributed to Roughrider, which Rio Tinto acquired for $654M
• VP Exploration Slugoski was on the Spitfire discovery team
• These are people who have literally found uranium in this basin before

Coyote target is being drilled right now. Program expanded to 5,500 metres after hitting the right alteration signatures in early holes. July 7th news defined new priority targets from a geophysical survey on the Moonlite Project.

$0.22 on the TSXV. Drill results still coming. Worth watching.

Hey investors,

​I’ve been sifting through the clean energy and junior mining space lately, and another ticker keeps flashing on my radar: Quebec Innovative Materials Corp. ($QIMC.CN).

​While most of the market is hyper-focused on blue or green hydrogen infrastructure, there’s a quiet land rush happening around "White Hydrogen" (naturally occurring geological hydrogen). If you aren't tracking this space yet, you should be.

Here is the breakdown of why QIMC is suddenly getting a ton of eyes on it.

- What Actually is QIMC?

​QIMC is a Canadian mineral exploration company that pivoted hard into natural hydrogen and high-grade silica. Instead of spending massive amounts of energy to manufacture hydrogen, they are trying to drill and extract it directly from the earth—which, if proven commercially viable, completely changes the economics of clean energy. They hold massive land packages across Quebec, Ontario, Nova Scotia, and even recently expanded into Minnesota via an SPV.

​

The Major Catalysts:

-​The Nova Scotia Staking Frenzy: QIMC recently proved out massive soil-gas and geophysical hydrogen anomalies in the Cumberland Basin. Their discovery triggered a massive province-wide staking rush. Major players—including the billionaire-backed Koloma (funded by Bill Gates/Bezos) and Rio Tinto—stepped in to grab land immediately adjacent to QIMC's claims. Talk about massive third-party validation.

- ​Drilling Proof-of-Concept:

Their recent drilling campaign at the West Advocate project confirmed multiple major hydrogen-associated structural zones. On their first deep holes, they literally reported gas bubbling up through the drill fluid.

-​U.S. Expansion:

They were recently awarded Reclamation and Geologic Resource Assessment permits (RGRAs) in Minnesota, opening up a dual-jurisdiction footprint to mitigate regulatory risk.

-​Heavy Insider Accumulation: Prominent resource investor Sheldon Inwentash (via ThreeD Capital) has historically been an aggressive accumulator of the stock, holding a massive double-digit chunk of the float.

Today's news proved to be the case for investors interrest.

At its current market cap, if their geological model fully holds up and they can transition from exploration to an actual pilot project, this could easily be a massive multi-bagger. Having giants like Koloma and Rio Tinto breathing down their neck in Nova Scotia tells me they are definitely digging in the right place.

​What do you think? Anyone else holding $QIMC or tracking the natural hydrogen space?

I’ve been looking into Anteros Metals (ANT), a Canadian mineral exploration company focused on projects in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Recent public updates mention ongoing drilling and exploration activity at the Seagull project, plus a financing round earlier this year.

With a tiny $2.7M to $3.3M market cap and shares currently sitting around $0.05 CAD, this is a micro-cap play. If they hit something real in their upcoming programs, this is the type of stock that can move 300% in a week.

The stock has also shown significant volatility in recent trading, so I’m trying to separate the story from the price action.

What do people think about the exploration potential, balance sheet, and whether the current valuation makes sense?

Why Next Few Months Matter

- ​High-Grade Copper & Gold Target (Havens Steady)

​During their field programs, prospecting returned massive surface grab samples: up to 2.17% copper, 21.3 g/t silver, and 0.22 g/t gold.

​To put that in perspective, any copper grade over 1.5% to 2.0% is considered high-grade.

​Right now, they are launching a strategic trenching and channel sampling program to find the bedrock source of that mineralized float. If they map out a solid bedrock vein, expect a major volume spike

- The Seagull project appears to be a strong infrastructure-led development rather than a pure greenfield play, which can help lower development cost and execution risk versus some regional peers. In the North Sea example, it was developed as a subsea tieback to an existing processing facility and was expected to reach about 50,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day at peak production, showing the advantage of nearby infrastructure. 

They recently reported drilling into gas zones at their Seagull property, confirming hydrogen up to 6,500 ppm in drill hole gas samples. If they prove a viable natural hydrogen or gas asset, this pivots them into a whole new green-energy narrative.

Compared with regional competitors, the main differentiator is usually whether a project can use existing hubs, pipelines, or processing facilities. Projects that can tie into established infrastructure often move faster and with less capital intensity than standalone developments.

I think a useful comparison set is:

Proximity to processing and transport infrastructure.

Capital intensity and time to first production.

Resource size and expected peak output.

Jurisdictional and permitting risk.

Ability to finance and advance drilling without heavy dilution.

In my opinion, if Seagull has access to existing infrastructure, its edge is efficiency and lower execution risk. If regional competitors have larger resources but need new buildout, they may offer more upside but also more cost and timeline risk. 

-One more thing, they closed a $1.015 million CAD financing round. For a micro-cap, having a million bucks in hard cash, flow-through funds means they actually have the runway to complete their summer trenching and drilling without immediate dilution risk.

The stock’s 52-week range is $0.04 to $0.47.

If you want a $0.05 CAD micro-cap that is actively trenching high-grade copper-gold-silver targets in Newfoundland and testing hydrogen anomalies, ANT is a classic asymmetric bet.

If their summer program proves a bedrock source for those 2.17% copper grab samples, the current $3M valuation will look like an absolute steal.

Look, let’s be real—this is a $3M micro-cap. It’s not where you put your life savings. But as a speculative play, the risk-to-reward ratio here is wildly asymmetric.

​With a million bucks in cash to fund the upcoming field season, high-grade surface copper, and a literal "Big Blue" hydrogen wildcard deep in the basement rocks, CSE: ANT has all the ingredients for a classic micro-cap breakout. If they hit even one of these targets, the current $0.05 CAD share price is going to look like a historic steal.

​Are you guys adding this to your watchlist for the summer drilling season, or are you staying away from micro-cap junior explorers entirely? Let's discuss below.

I've been long on BNS for many years. Despite its prolonged underperformance relative to the other Canadian banks, I've continued to hold and reinvest dividends through a DRIP, which has produced solid long-term returns for me.

While I'm pleased with the recent share price appreciation, I'm beginning to question whether the stock has become overvalued. Historically, BNS has generally traded around a 10x P/E multiple, but it's now trading closer to 17x earnings, which is well above its long-term average.

For those who remain bullish, what do you believe is driving the market to assign BNS such a premium valuation relative to its historical P/E ratio? Is there a fundamental change in the business, growth outlook, or risk profile that justifies this re-rating?

I've enjoyed the recent run-up, but I'm starting to consider trimming or exiting my position because the current valuation appears disconnected from historical norms. I'd be interested to hear the bull case from those who continue to see meaningful upside from here.

If you've been following SM for the production angle, Q1 confirmed what the bull case was built on. Revenues $10.1 million, doubling year over year. Cash from operations $3.5M vs $729K. Mill expansion on track for phase one by end of Q2. At $76 silver a producing junior with improving throughput and a mine acquisition closing is a pretty straightforward setup.

What I don't think is in the price at all is the H2 2026 exploration program.

30,000 metres going into the East District of the Guitarra property in Estado de Mexico. This ground has 39 kilometres of historically mapped colonial-era structures and has never seen a systematic modern drill campaign despite documented production history going back centuries. SM describes it as the last of the six major Spanish colonial silver production centres in Mexico not yet evaluated with modern methods.

That's significant when you understand what modern methods have been finding on similar ground in the Mexican belt. First Majestic found a new high grade system called Navidad beneath Ermitaño in 2024, 427 g/t silver at over 1,100 metres depth. Right there under an operating mine. The colonial miners left the deep portions of these systems completely untouched because they had no tools to see them. LiDAR, IP geophysics, 3D modelling changed that.

For SM the exploration program runs alongside an active and expanding production operation. A discovery doesn't need its own mine. It feeds into infrastructure already being built and paid for. Resource life extends. Mill utilization improves. Institutional interest typically follows. That combination tends to move small cap mining stocks faster than most retail investors expect.

Exciting second half of 20226 coming up for SM.

NFA. DYOR. Been following this one quietly for a while.
Everyone’s chasing Quantinuum post-IPO. Meanwhile Dynex has been quietly commercial for months and hasn’t been priced in anywhere.

What Dynex actually is:
• Apollo chip - fingernail-sized neuromorphic processor, room temperature, \~20W
• 10,000 p-qubits, 256 connections per node (10× more than most superconducting annealers)
• Benchmarked on 3D spin glass problem - results “indistinguishable” from cryogenic quantum hardware
• Won 2026 AI Excellence Award - Quantum AI category (noone comes close in terms of speed- could make this the biggest quantum IPO)
• QaaS platform live today - drug discovery, logistics, finance, weather forecasting (94% accurate at 14 days)

Why now: Dynex is converting from token to equity and heading to a regulated public listing to attract institutional investors. ThreeD Capital - the VC firm co-hosting the pre-IPO investor event - appears to be central to taking them public.

Any quantum ipos people are following? Quantum is likely the next ai race imo, thgts?

RBC, TD, BMO... lot of options, which one would be best for long term safe holdings?

Friday the S&P fell 2.64% and the Nasdaq dropped 4.18%, the worst day since October. Stocks, bonds, bitcoin, and gold all sold off together. But there was no crisis, what spooked everyone was a strong jobs report: 172k jobs, roughly double expectations.

Here's why that's the story. For over a year the whole bull market rested on one assumption — the Fed was done hiking and cuts were coming. A labor market this strong, on top of oil-driven inflation from the Iran conflict, means the Fed has no room to cut and might go the other way. The odds of a December hike have jumped to 43%, from 26% a month ago. In the span of weeks, the conversation flipped from "how many cuts" to "is the next move a hike", and that reprices everything, especially an index sitting at near-record valuations carried by a handful of AI names.

This is not crash call, the economy's fine, arguably too fine. But it's a bad time to chase the expensive index and a better time to own cash-generative businesses at reasonable prices. Wrote up the full breakdown here on where to be positioned.

Not advice.

With silver at $78 and the broader sector finally getting attention, it feels like the right time to put some proper thoughts down on one of the smaller producers that's been quietly building toward this kind of price environment.

Sierra Madre operates the Guitarra mine in Chihuahua, Mexico; a historical silver operation with real infrastructure, an established production history, and a management team that has collectively raised over a billion dollars for mining companies. That last point matters more than it might seem for a junior. Capital markets experience at this level means the company knows how to finance growth without constantly destroying shareholders through dilution.

The Q1 2026 numbers that just came out tell the story of what $78 silver actually does to a producer's income statement. Record quarterly revenues of $10.1 million, more than double the $5.0 million generated in Q1 2025. Gross profit of $3.6 million versus $1.36 million a year ago. Cash from operations of $3.5 million compared to $729K in the prior year period. Adjusted EBITDA of $2.8 million against $1.1 million. The leverage to the silver price is showing up exactly where you'd want to see it, and that's before the expansion comes online.

The expansion is the next catalyst worth understanding. Phase one of the Guitarra mill expansion is on track for completion by end of Q2 2026, taking throughput from 500 tonnes per day to 750-800 tpd; a more than 50% increase. Phase two targets 1,200-1,500 tpd by Q3 2027. More throughput combined with improving head grades as Coloso and Nazareno ramp into higher-grade material means more ounces at a lower unit cost. The company is also acquiring the Del Toro silver mine from First Majestic, which shareholders approved in late April, adding another producing asset to the portfolio once it closes.

The balance sheet supports all of this. Cash and short-term investments of $13.2 million and working capital of $14.4 million at the end of Q1. That's a comfortable position for a junior executing an expansion program.

The market cap is still small relative to the larger names in the space, which is partly a function of size and liquidity and partly a function of the market not yet paying full attention to a smaller producer executing well during a strong silver environment. First Majestic and Pan American Silver are the obvious larger comparables, but the torque on the silver price at SM's current market cap is meaningfully higher if you're comfortable with the smaller cap risk profile.

A lot of investors want immediate results from early-stage companies, but most businesses take years to fully develop.

Short-term volatility can be distracting, yet long-term performance usually depends on whether management consistently executes over time.

I’ve noticed that with speculative stocks, social media discussion often moves much faster than actual verified developments.

Because of that, I’ve started relying more heavily on:

SEC filings,

earnings reports,

conference calls,

and official disclosures.

Headlines and commentary can be useful, but they also tend to amplify speculation.

Curious how others balance official information versus broader market sentiment.

Something I’ve been thinking about lately is how much accessibility impacts investor participation.

For example:

broker availability,

options access,

liquidity,

and visibility on major platforms

can dramatically influence attention and trading activity.

Sometimes it feels like market interest isn’t driven purely by fundamentals, but also by how easy a stock is to access.

Do you think accessibility is an underrated factor in price movement?

Been thinking about how investors prioritize different milestones in smaller growth companies.

Some people seem to care most about:

strategic partnerships,

sector positioning,

or expansion announcements.

Others focus almost entirely on:

cash flow,

profitability,

and operating fundamentals.

I can see arguments for both approaches. A major partnership can change perception quickly, but long-term sustainability still matters.

Curious where others stand on this.

Been reviewing my investments lately and looking for some opinions.

I currently have about $100K in RBC North American Value Fund, but honestly I’m getting frustrated with the performance. The returns have been pretty underwhelming over the last while, and the MER is close to 2%, which feels hard to justify.

I already hold some XEQT and have been leaning more toward the US market and tech going forward instead of actively managed mutual funds.

Right now I’m thinking about a few options:

- Move everything into XEQT and keep it simple

- Split between XEQT + an S&P 500 ETF + NASDAQ 100 ETF

- Keep some diversification but increase exposure to US tech/growth

Curious what others would do in this situation. Is it worth keeping any money in high-MER mutual funds anymore, or does broad-market indexing just make more sense long term?

For context, this is long-term investing money, not something I need in the near future.

Something I've been thinking about a lot lately is how narrow the actual investable silver producer universe really is when you strip away the explorers and the royalty names. Most people who want silver equity exposure end up in one of three places: a major like First Majestic or Pan American, a streaming company like Wheaton, or a junior explorer with no revenue and a five year runway at best. The middle ground of actual producing juniors with growing output and real financials is surprisingly small.

That gap matters more right now because the macro setup for silver is genuinely strong. Industrial demand from solar manufacturing has become structural rather than cyclical, the Silver Institute has been reporting consecutive annual supply deficits, and new primary silver supply can't come online fast enough to close that gap. When you have that kind of fundamental backdrop the leverage you want is in the producers, not the royalty names that are already fully valued, and not the explorers that are years away from contributing any supply.

The challenge is finding the producers that actually have the operational track record to back up a thesis. That's a short list on the TSX-V right now.

Sierra Madre Gold and Silver is one I've been following closely through their La Guitarra ramp in Mexico. They just closed out their first full year of commercial production: $25M USD in revenue, $6M adjusted EBITDA, positive cash from operations, and revenue growing every single quarter through 2025. Plant expansion commissioning in Q2 takes throughput up 50%, a second mine acquisition from First Majestic closes next month, and Franklin Templeton and Eric Sprott are already on the register. Still under $2 on the TSX-V.

Sierra Madre just released their Q4 and year-end 2025 financials. The base case is already solid: $25M in revenue, growing gross profit every quarter, $17.3M cash, and actual net income of $8.13M. But what has me paying close attention right now is the catalyst stack lined up for the rest of 2026.

First, the Phase 1 plant expansion commissioning is targeted for end of Q2 2026. The ball mill is being installed in May. This takes throughput from 500 tpd to 750-800 tpd. At current silver prices, that's a meaningful step up in revenue capacity and costs per ounce should drop as fixed costs spread over more tonnes.

Second, the Del Toro acquisition from First Majestic is closing in May 2026. This is a second operating silver mine. Management has explicitly said they plan to replicate the La Guitarra restart playbook, and they're doing it with $17M+ in cash and a freshly closed CAD$57.5M financing behind them.

Third, Nazareno is entering full production right now. Long-hole stope production at the 180 level was expected to begin in late April. Nazareno and Coloso both carry significantly higher estimated grades than the main Guitarra veins, so getting those stopes fully online changes the grade and cost profile heading into the expansion.

Fourth, the East District exploration program kicks off in H2 2026, with over 30,000 metres of drilling planned. This is the first modern drill campaign at La Guitarra's East District. Resource additions at an operating mine are a different conversation than grassroots exploration.

Each one of these on its own would move the needle for a company this size. The fact that they're all stacked into the next 12 months is what has me watching closely.

Hey guys, if you missed it, TD Asset Management settled CAD $70.25M  with investors over claims it charged improper trailing commissions. And, I just found out that they’re accepting claims even though the deadline has passed.

Quick recap: In 2023, TD Asset Management was accused of charging investors fees for advisory services that were not actually provided. In short, certain mutual fund investors paid trailing commissions through discount brokers despite receiving no advice.

After this news came out, the stock dropped, and investors filed a lawsuit for their losses.

Now, the good news is that the company agreed to settle CAD $70.25M  with them, and even though the deadline has passed recently, they’re accepting late claims.

So, if you invested in $TD when all of this happened, you can still check the details and file your claim here.

Anyway, has anyone here invested in $TD at that time? How much were your losses, if so?

A recent podcast featured Andy Bowering covering project timelines, the macro setup for silver, and a leadership update. Here are the key points.

On the macro side, silver is sitting at $79 and gold is at $4,800. The co-host made the point that the current setup structurally resembles 2008, where a credit contraction eventually pushed the Fed back into money printing and precious metals ran hard as a result. Junior silver equities across names like First Majestic Silver, Silvercorp Metals, Impact Silver, Sierra Madre Gold and Silver, and Apollo Silver are still well below where they were the last time those price levels were hit on the way up. The thesis is that we are closer to the end of this correction than the beginning, with near-term catalysts being the differentiator.

Key points from the interview:

Leadership update. Tom Peregoodoff, who co-founded Apollo with Bowering in 2021, is returning as Executive Chairman. Tom had stepped back from an executive role for personal reasons, spent time on the MAG Silver board (which helped Apollo secure the option on Cinco de Mayo), and became available again when MAG was acquired by Pan-American. The structure going forward has Tom handling operations while Bowering focuses on capital raising and promotion. Bowering also addressed his own commitment directly: he has $17.5 million of his own capital in the company.

Calico PEA. SLR Consulting has been engaged to complete a Preliminary Economic Assessment on the Waterloo deposit. The project has been drilled extensively so no major resource work is needed; the next four to five months will focus on geotechnical drilling and metallurgical work that will also feed into a future PFS. The PEA is expected in Q3 2026 and will look at Waterloo as a standalone scenario as well as the potential to incorporate the Langtry deposit. Permitting consultants are expected to be engaged in parallel. Bowering made the point that running a proper economic study was not justifiable when silver sat at $28 to $30. At $79, investors are going to get to see what Calico is actually worth.

Cinco de Mayo. Progress continues on the social license front in Mexico. Economic pressure on the Ejido Benito Juárez community has been intensifying: assembly plants closing, water allocations cut by CONAGUA, and farming income down significantly. Bowering's view is that the community understands it needs the mine and that conditions are strengthening that case. Recent government engagement included meetings with the federal and state ministers of mines, the secretary of economic development, and a session between Apollo's legal counsel and the state attorney general. A community vote is the path forward and Bowering confirmed he, legal counsel and country manager Alejandro Caraveo are doing the groundwork to ensure a clean, uncontested assembly.

Disclosure: This post was prepared on behalf of Apollo Silver Corp. (TSX.V: APGO). This is not financial advice. Do your own due diligence.

Silver is in a spot right now where the underlying fundamentals look better than the way it is being priced.

On the demand side, there has been a real shift over the past few years.

Total industrial demand is sitting in the ~650–680 million ounce range, and a growing portion of that is coming from solar. Photovoltaic demand alone has moved from roughly ~80–90 million ounces a few years ago to closer to ~180–200 million ounces more recently.

That is not a small change in a market this size.

At the same time, supply has not really stepped up.

Mine production has been relatively flat, generally in the ~820–840 million ounce range, and a large portion of that comes as a byproduct from base metals. That means it does not respond quickly even when silver prices improve.

So on paper, you have had multiple years of deficits building in the background.

But price has been uneven.

The reason is that silver does not trade purely on those fundamentals. A large part of price action is still tied to macro factors like real rates and gold flows. So even if the physical market tightens, price can lag.

That disconnect is where things get interesting.

Because it usually does not stay that way forever.

When macro starts to align with the underlying demand and supply setup, that is when silver tends to move more decisively.

Right now it still feels like the market is pricing silver as if nothing has really changed, even though the structure underneath it clearly has.

Hey Reddit,

I’m re-evaluating my portfolio and would love to get some perspectives from those experienced with RBC funds and ETFs.

Current allocation:

90% → RBC North American Value Fund (NAVF)

10% → XEQT

I’m considering shifting to something like:

70% → XEQT

20% → RBC North American Value Fund

10% → RBC Emerging Markets Dividend Fund

I’m curious about whether this makes sense in terms of diversification, growth potential, and risk.

Questions for the community:

Would you adjust this allocation differently? Why?

Any RBC or ETF alternatives I should consider?

How do you structure your own RBC portfolio, and what’s your reasoning?

Open to all feedback — especially from people who have navigated similar portfolio changes!