Author

admin

Browsing

A young Brazilian hiker who fell hundreds of meters from the ridge of a towering Indonesian volcano and was trapped there for almost four days was found dead on Tuesday, Brazil’s government said. For days, millions of people in Brazil had watched, posted and prayed as rescuers tried to locate her.

The tourist, 26-year-old Juliana Marins, began summiting on June 21 Mount Rinjani, an active 3,726-meter (12,224-foot) volcano on the Indonesian island of Lombok, with a guide and five other foreigners when she fell some 600 meters (1,968 feet), Indonesian authorities said.

“No signs of life were found,” said Mohammad Syafii, head of Indonesia’s National Search and Rescue Agency.

Marins’ family in Brazil confirmed her death.

The Indonesian rescue team said it found Marins’ body beside a crater using a thermal drone after four days of intensive searches complicated by extremely harsh terrain and weather.

The difficult conditions and limited visibility delayed the evacuation process, Syafii said, as the rescue team climbed carrying Marins’ body to Sembalun basecamp but would have to wait until Wednesday for transport to a police hospital.

Brazil’s Foreign Ministry called her death a tragedy and said that the country’s embassy in Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, had coordinated the rescue with local authorities.

Marins’ ordeal has riveted her home country, Brazil, with millions following the dramatic search-and-rescue efforts since news broke of her fall.

Authorities did not say when exactly she died.

Adding to the frenzy in Brazil over her ordeal, Brazil’s embassy in Jakarta had accused the Indonesian government of fabricating Marins’ rescue and misinforming her family that she had been located and given food and water just hours after her fall.

There was no immediate response from the Indonesian government on that claim.

Indonesia’s island of Lombok lies east of Jakarta and neighbors the island of Bali. Mount Rinjani, the country’s second-tallest peak, is a popular destination for trekkers.

In an Instagram post, Marins’ family thanked the many Brazilians who had prayed for their daughter’s safety.

Marins, a dancer who lived in Niteroi, outside Rio de Janeiro, had been traveling across Asia since February, her family said. She had visited the Philippines, Vietnam and Thailand before reaching Indonesia.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

The United Kingdom is to purchase 12 F-35A jets, which are capable of carrying nuclear weapons, from the United States.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer will make the announcement during Wednesday’s NATO summit, as he calls on NATO members to do more to support the alliance.

“The UK’s commitment to NATO is unquestionable, as is the alliance’s contribution to keeping the UK safe and secure,” Starmer will say, according to Downing Street.

“But we must all step up to protect the Euro-Atlantic area for generations to come.”

The announcement follows repeated criticisms by US President Donald Trump that NATO countries are not spending enough on defense.

The fifth-generation fighter aircraft, built primarily by US manufacturer Lockheed Martin, is one of the most advanced fighter jets on the planet – but it is also one of the most expensive.

The decision to acquire aircraft with the capacity to carry nuclear weapons also represents a major strengthening of Britain’s nuclear posture.

It means that in addition of UK’s existing sea-borne nuclear deterrent, the country will also now join NATO’s dual capable aircraft nuclear mission.

“In an era of radical uncertainty we can no longer take peace for granted,” Starmer will say.

According to the British government, the decision will support 20,000 jobs in the F35 program in the UK, with 15% of the global supply chain for the jets based in Britain.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Sports merchandising giant Fanatics is aiming to build a training camp for athletes to prepare them for life off the field.

More than two dozen NBA, NFL and NHL players participated in the company’s Athlete Immersion Program this past weekend as part of Fanatics Fest in New York City. The program included three days of workshops on business, entrepreneurship, tech and more.

“This definitely opened my eyes,” said Cole Anthony, a guard for the NBA’s Memphis Grizzlies. “I’m already trying to do things on the business side with my partners, my family. It just motivates me more.”

The “coaches” for the business boot camp included Fanatics founder Michael Rubin, Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, Apollo Global cofounder and Philadelphia 76ers managing partner Josh Harris, Raising Cane’s founder Todd Graves, ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro and Boardroom cofounder and CEO Rich Kleiman.

Aaron Donald, who retired from the NFL’s Los Angeles Rams in 2024 after winning the Super Bowl, has already begun a new career in business, including an ownership stake in sports nutrition company Ready. But Donald, likely a future Hall of Famer, said he was blown away by the all-star team of business leaders.

“I think it’s one of hell of an opportunity,” said Donald. “I’m in a room with guys running companies worth billions of dollars. How many opportunities are you going to get to do that? You have to take advantage of all of those opportunities and knowledge.”

Fanatics launched the Athlete Immersion Program in 2023 and this year is partnering with Boardroom, a media and advisory company cofounded by Kleiman and NBA superstar Kevin Durant.

“I think it’s great to be able to give them a bit of a blueprint,” said Kleiman. “Being able to put them in the room with people that have the answers, that have done it, that lead industries. I think you get so much power and opportunity just from the information you get from watching, from learning and from being in these rooms and understanding how to move.”

Kleiman pointed to former NBA player Junior Bridgeman, who made less than $3 million during his 12-year career in the league, but built a net worth of more than $1 billion after retirement primarily through investments in Wendy’s, Pizza Hut and Chili’s franchises and then later through Coca-Cola distribution.

“What he did, he’s exceptional,” said Kleiman of Bridgeman, who died in March. “He wasn’t just a name. He actually built an operational team, built them up, oversaw them, and he was a tycoon of a business mind.”

Fanatics Chief People Officer Toretha McGuire said the program is focused on helping athletes use their playing days, what they describe as their “1.0 career” to fuel their “2.0 career.”

It’s an experience similar to a business school with lectures, case studies and projects, in which each athlete creates their own limited-edition clothing line with vintage sports apparel company Mitchell & Ness, a subsidiary of Fanatics.

“They go through a base business case, we teach them business fundamentals, we take them through the Fanatics business case where we bring them to 2021 where Michael [Rubin] did a final capital raise and we basically say, ‘What would you have done?’” McGuire said.

Most professional athletes retire from playing when they’re still young, she added.

“The opportunities they have in their 1.0 careers in terms of access and expanding their networks are going to be very critical,” she said.

Graves, who founded the popular fried chicken chain Raising Cane’s, spoke on a panel about the realities and challenges of entrepreneurship

“If you absolutely want to start a business, imagine how hard it is, multiply that by infinity to be able to make it work,” he said. “You have to be passionate, you have to be in the details 100%. And you have to know what you don’t know, right? So that is bringing in great people to try and grow it.”

The Athlete Immersion Program is meant to be a continuous learning opportunity through which players receive support, education and networking opportunities from Fanatics and Boardroom before and after they begin their business journey.

The next session will be held in December for WNBA, NWSL and MLB athletes in the offseason.

For Anthony, who was recently traded to the Grizzlies from the Orlando Magic, it’s also shown him the real parallels between competing in sports and competing in business.

“The common thing with everyone who has spoken to us and I’ve been able to talk to one-on-one is that every person I met here has been a grinder,” he said. “They make whatever it is they are passionate about, or what they are working on their priority. I think that’s just dope to hear from other people I can relate to in that sense.”

A decade ago, reports suggested 16% of NFL players ultimately filed for bankruptcy — a sign of the type of financial strain many professional athletes face and a cautionary tale of life after the game.

But today, many of the people participating in the Fanatics curriculum believe opportunities like the Athlete Immersion Program can change the narrative — and their financial future.

For Donald, who will be remembered as one of the greatest defenders in NFL history, the focus now is finding the greatest opportunities for the next chapter of his life.

“It would be silly for me to stop the hard work, discipline, the structure that got me to a certain point,” he said. “I’m trying to build generational wealth for my kids.”

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Seventy-five years ago this week, more than 135,000 North Korean troops invaded South Korea, starting a war that cost millions of lives and left scars that linger to this day.

Yet, the Korean War has been forever overshadowed by World War II, a much larger conflict that ended less than five years earlier. Even the US Army refers to Korea as “the Forgotten War” – despite more than 36,000 American lives lost.

Sixteen nations, including the United States, sent combat troops in aid of South Korea under the United Nations Command. Chinese troops intervened on the North Korean side.

War broke out on June 25, 1950, when North Korean forces stormed across the 38th parallel dividing North and South Korea. An armistice signed on July 27, 1953, stopped the conflict, but the war never officially ended because there was no peace treaty.

While the twists and turns of today’s US-North Korea relationship have put a spotlight on the Korean War’s legacy, it is still a widely overlooked conflict.

Here are six things you might not know about the Korean War:

The US Army once controlled one of the world’s most secretive cities

It’s almost impossible for Americans to travel to North Korea or its capital city Pyongyang. US passport holders are not allowed to go there without special permission from the US State Department.

But for eight weeks in 1950, Pyongyang was under control of the US Army.

On October 19 of that year, the US Army’s 1st Cavalry Division along with a division of South Korean soldiers captured the North Korean capital, according to US Army histories.

The US forces quickly made themselves at home, according to the histories.

By October 22, the US Eighth Army had set up its advance headquarters in what was the headquarters building for North Korean leader Kim Il Sung.

A picture from the time shows an American intelligence officer sitting at Kim’s desk with a portrait of Soviet Union leader Joseph Stalin hanging on the wall behind him.

But the US military’s occupation of Pyongyang was short-lived. When Chinese troops entered the war in late November 1950, they quickly pushed south and vanquished US forces from Pyongyang by December 5.

The US dropped more bombs on North Korea than on the entire region during WWII

Most images of the Korean War are of ground battles fought in places like the Chosin Reservoir and Incheon. But much of the destruction wreaked on North Korea by the US military was done in a relentless bombing campaign.

During the three years of the Korean War, US aircraft dropped 635,000 tons of bombs – both high explosive and incendiary – on North Korea. That’s more than the 500,000 tons of bombs the US dropped in the Pacific in the entirety of the Second World War, according to figures cited by historian Charles Armstrong in the Asia-Pacific Journal.

Journalists, international observers and American prisoners of war who were in North Korea during the war reported nearly every substantial building had been destroyed. By November 1950, North Korea was advising its citizens to dig holes for housing and shelter.

North Korea didn’t keep official casualty figures from the bombings, but information obtained from Russian archives by the Wilson Center’s Cold War International History Project put the number at more than 280,000.

Gen. Curtis LeMay, the father of US strategic bombing and the architect of fire raids that destroyed swathes of Japanese cities in World War II, said this of the American bombing of North Korea:

“We went over there and fought the war and eventually burned down every town in North Korea anyway, some way or another.”

Armstrong said that bombing of North Korea has effects that linger to this day.

“The DPRK (Democratic Republic of Korea) government never forgot the lesson of North Korea’s vulnerability to American air attack, and for half a century after the Armistice continued to strengthen antiaircraft defenses, build underground installations, and eventually develop nuclear weapons to ensure that North Korea would not find itself in such a position again,” Armstrong wrote.

North Korea convinced the Soviet Union and Joseph Stalin to let the war happen

When World War II ended, control of the Korean Peninsula – occupied by defeated Japanese troops – was divided between the Soviet Union in the north and the United States in the south.

Kim Il Sung, the leader of North Korea, wanted to unite the two Koreas under communist rule and sought permission of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin to do so by force, according to records from the Wilson Center.

Upon Kim’s first request to invade in March 1949, Stalin was wary and did not want to be pulled into a conflict with the United States, which still had occupation troops in South Korea.

But when those troops were pulled in the summer of 1949, Stalin’s opposition softened, and by April 1950 the Soviet leader was ready to hear Kim out again when the North Korean leader visited Moscow.

Stalin told Kim that the USSR would back the invasion, but only if Kim got communist China to approve too.

Emboldened by communist China’s victory over Nationalist forces in 1949 – in a civil war in which Washington did not intervene – Chinese leader Mao Zedong agreed and offered to be a backup force for North Korean troops in the eventuality the US intervened.

With that, Kim had the green light to invade.

The Korean War saved Taiwan from a potential communist takeover

In 1949, communist China was amassing forces along its coast to invade Taiwan, the island to which Chiang Kai-shek and his Nationalist forces had fled after losing to Mao and the communists in the Chinese Civil War.

But the outbreak of the Korean War put a big roadblock in the way of communist China’s plans – the US Navy. Fearful of the fighting in Korea spreading across East Asia, President Harry Truman dispatched US warships to the waters between China and Taiwan.

The US State Department tells how close Taiwan, now a self-governed democaracy that Beijing still claims as part of China, came to a potential communist takeover.

“In late 1949 and early 1950, American officials were prepared to let PRC (People’s Republic of China) forces cross the Strait and defeat Chiang, but after the outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950, the United States sent its Seventh Fleet into the Taiwan Strait to prevent the Korean conflict from spreading south,” reads a passage from the department’s Office of the Historian.

“The appearance of the Seventh Fleet angered the Chinese communists, who transferred their troops poised for an invasion of Taiwan to the Korean front,” it reads.

By October 19, 1950, 12 divisions of communist Chinese troops, more than a quarter-million men, were in North Korea, according to a Brookings Institution account.

Those Chinese troops would inflict horrific losses on the US and South Korean troops they faced, eventually driving them out of North Korea completely.

But China also suffered massive losses; more than 180,000 of its troops were killed.

The first jet-vs-jet dogfight

Jet fighters entered military service in World War II with the introduction of the German Messerschmidt 262. But the jet fighters didn’t go head-to-head in a “Top Gun”-style dogfight until the Korean War.

Records seem to agree that first dogfight occurred over Sinuiju in North Korea, near the Yalu River, and its border with China on November 8, 1950. The Americans, flying F-80 Shooting Star jets, were confronted by MiG-15s, Soviet-made jets that were probably being piloted by Soviet pilots from bases in China.

According to a report from the historian of the US Air Force’s 51st Fighter Wing, eight to 12 MiGs came after an American flight of four F-80s that day. In a 60-second encounter with one of those MIGs, Air Force 1st Lt. Russell Brown hit a MiG-15 with fire from his jet’s cannon and saw it explode in flames, becoming the first jet fighter pilot to score a kill in a dogfight, the report says.

But others dispute that account, with a report from the US Naval Institute (USNI) saying that Soviet records show no MiGs were lost that day.

What is certain is that the next day, November 9, 1950, US Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Amen, flying an F9F fighter off the aircraft carrier USS Philippine Sea, shot down a MiG-15 during airstrikes against bridges on the Yalu River.

Soviet records confirm the MiG-15 loss that day, according to the USNI report.

Later in the war, the US introduced the F-86 jet to the Korean conflict. That plane won fame in battles against the MiG-15 in what was know as “MiG Alley,” the area along the Korea-China border, where the Soviet pilots flew out of bases on the Chinese side.

The National Museum of the US Air Force in Ohio explains MiG Alley this way:

“Large formations of MiGs would lie in wait on the Manchurian side of the border. When UN aircraft entered MiG Alley, these MiGs would swoop down from high altitude to attack. If the MiGs ran into trouble, they would try to escape back over the border into communist China. (To prevent a wider war, UN pilots were ordered not to attack targets in Manchuria.) Even with this advantage, communist pilots still could not compete against the better-trained Sabre pilots of the US Air Force, who scored a kill ratio of about 8:1 against the MiGs.”

The United States never declared war

Though millions of lives were lost during the fighting on the Korean Peninsula between 1950 and 1953, they were technically casualties of what was called a “police action.”

Under the US Constitution, only the US Congress can declare war on another nation. But it has not done so since World War II.

When North Korea invaded the South in 1950, US President Harry Truman sent the US military to intervene as part of a combined effort approved by the United Nations Security Council.

“Fifteen other nations also sent troops under the UN command. Truman did not seek a formal declaration of war from Congress; officially, America’s presence in Korea amounted to no more than a ‘police action,’” reads a passage from the US National Archives.

And those police actions have become the norm for US military intervention ever since. The Vietnam War, the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo, all have seen US troops enter combat under congressional authorizations for the use of military force (AUMF), according to the US House of Representatives website.

Though the AUMF had been around since the beginning of the republic, “after World War II … AUMFs became much broader, often granting Presidents sweeping authority to engage America’s military around the world,” the US House website says.

“The war was the first large overseas US conflict without a declaration of war, setting a precedent for the unilateral presidential power exercised today,” Emory University law professor Mary Dudziak wrote in a 2019 opinion column for the Washington Post.

“The Korean War has helped to enable this century’s forever wars,” Dudziak wrote.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Copper miners with productive assets have much to gain as supply and demand tighten.

In May 2024, the copper price hit a new all-time high of US$10,954 per metric ton (MT) on the London Metal Exchange and US$5.20 per pound on the COMEX on the back of increasing demand and growing supply concerns.

Copper is one of the most important resources for the energy transition. However, in recent years, demand for the red metal has outpaced mining supply. While construction and electrical grids have long been major markets for copper, today the rise in demand for electric vehicles, EV charging infrastructure and energy storage applications are emerging drivers of copper consumption.

Another trend driving future copper demand is the rapid urbanization in the Global South, as rural populations migrate to cities, putting pressure on electricity grids.

Due to the challenges associated with finding, developing, permitting and mining copper deposits, the higher demand is being met by slow growth of new supply. Mines that are in operation tend to be quite large and operate for decades as copper producers concentrate on mine expansions and brownfield projects aimed at extending mine lifetimes.

Given those factors, investors should keep an eye on the world’s top copper miners and their operations.

This list of the 10 largest copper-mining companies in the world is ranked by attributable copper production for 2024.

1. BHP (ASX:BHP,NYSE:BHP,LSE:BHP)

Copper production: 1.46 million metric tons

BHP is one of the world’s largest mining companies, and its global portfolio of assets includes significant copper mining operations in Chile, Australia and Peru.

According to the company’s quarterly operational review data, the mining giant reported consolidated copper production of 1.46 million metric tons across the calendar year 2024.

Its most significant copper asset is the Escondida mine, the world’s largest copper mine. BHP holds a 58 percent stake in the Chilean operation, which, according to MDO data, produced 2.04 billion pounds of copper in 2024. The company wholly owns the Pampa Norte operations in Chile, which produced 586 million pounds of copper in 2024.

BHP also owns the Olympic Dam polymetallic mine, the largest mine in Australia. The South Australian mine hosts one of the world’s largest copper deposits as well as the largest uranium deposit. In 2023, BHP expanded its portfolio in the state with its acquisition of OZ Minerals and its Prominent Hill and Carrapateena copper operations.

2. Codelco

Copper production: 1.44 million metric tons

The Chilean state-owned Codelco is the world’s third-largest producer with copper production of 1.44 million metric tons in 2024. According to its 2024 annual report, its copper output increased 1.2 percent from 1.42 million metric tons in 2023.

Its largest asset is the Chuquicamata mine located in Northern Chile, between 2017 and 2021 annual production was in the 700 million to 850 million pound range. However, lower grades in recent years have led to production falling below 600 million pounds. In 2024, Chuquicamata increased slightly to 637 million pounds.

The mine transitioned from an open pit to an underground mine beginning in 2019. In its report, the company stated that phase one of its continuity infrastructure project had reached 73 percent completion and that plans for the second phase were undergoing feasibility studies.

The company’s other significant Chilean mines include El Teniente, Quebrada Blanca and Andina.

3. Freeport-McMoRan (NYSE:FCX)

Copper production: 1.26 million metric tons

Freeport-McMoRan is consistently ranked among the world’s top copper producers, and its share of copper production from its mines totaled 1.26 million metric tons of copper in 2024. The company reported producing 4.21 billion pounds, or 1.9 million metric tons, of the red metal, calculated on a 100 percent basis for all operations except its Morenci joint venture.

The largest contributor to its output is the Grasberg copper-gold mine in Indonesia. The mine itself is a joint venture between Freeport and state-owned Indonesia Asahan Aluminum, with the entities holding interests of 48.76 percent and 51.24 percent respectively. According to MDO, copper output for the mine in 2024 totaled 1.8 billion pounds.

Grasberg has undergone a transition from an open pit to an underground block cave, and expansion work continues at the site. As of the close of 2024, the mine had 469 open drawbells.

Additionally, Freeport holds a 55 percent stake in the Cerro Verde copper-molybdenum complex in Peru. The mine routinely produces between 800 million and 1 billion pounds of copper and is expected to be in operation until 2052.

Its largest US based operation is its 72 percent owned Morenci mine in Arizona, which produced 700 million pounds in 2024. It also owns the Safford and Sierrita mines in the same state.

4. Glencore (LSE:GLEN,OTC Pink:GLCNF)

Copper production: 951,600 metric tons

Mining major Glencore’s copper production dipped by 6 percent in 2024 to 951,600 metric tons from the 1.01 million metric tons produced in 2023. The company’s 2024 annual report attributed the decline to lower planned production at its Antapaccay and Collahuasi mines due to factors including lower grades, water constraints and geotechnical challenges.

Located along Chile’s coast, Collahuasi is the company’s largest operation, a 44/44/12 joint operation between Glencore, Anglo American (LSE:AAL,OTCQX:NGLOD) and Japan’s Mitsui & Co. (OTC Pink:MITSF,TSE:8031). The mine produced 558,600 metric tons of copper in 2024.

The partners are working to build a large-scale desalination plant designed to help overcome water shortage issues. The plant reached 86 percent completion in 2024 and is expected to begin operating in 2026. Once open, it will provide 1,050 litres of desalinated water per second to the mine via a 194 kilometer pipeline.

Other significant copper-producing assets in the company’s portfolio include Antamina in Peru, Mount Isa in Australia and the Katanga Complex in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

5. Southern Copper (NYSE:SCCO)

Copper production: 883,462 metric tons

A majority-owned, indirect subsidiary of Grupo Mexico (OTC Pink:GMBXF), Southern Copper recorded 883,462 metric tons of total copper production for 2024, a 6.9 percent increase over 2023. In the company’s 2024 results, the company attributed the increase to higher production across all operations, with a 10.7 percent increase from its Peruvian assets and a 4.3 percent increase from Mexican production.

The company operates major copper mines in Peru and Mexico and has exploration projects in Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico and Peru.

Its largest copper-producing asset is the Buenavista mine in Northern Mexico, which sits atop one of the world’s largest porphyry copper deposits. According to MDO, the site produces approximately 700 billion to 750 billion pounds of copper per year.

Its other copper operations include the Cuajone and Toquepala mines in Peru and the La Caridad mine in Mexico.

6. Anglo American (LSE:AAL,OTCQX:NGLOD)

Copper production: 772,700 metric tons

British miner Anglo American reported a 6.5 percent decrease in copper production to 772,700 metric tons from 826,200 metric tons in 2023.

The company attributed the decline to lower recovery and grades at the Collahuasi and Los Bronces operations in Chile, noting that the planned closure of the Los Bronces processing plant also impacted production. The company holds a 44 percent stake in Collahuasi and 50 percent in Los Bronces.

In addition to Collahuasi, the company also owns a 60 percent stake in the Quellaveco mine in Peru, with Mitsubishi owning the remaining 40 percent. The open pit mine started operating in 2022 and, according to MDO, produced 675 million pounds of copper in 2024.

It also owns a 50 percent stake in the El Soldado mine in Chile, which it operates in partnership with Mitsui, which holds a 30 percent stake, and Mitsubishi Materials (OTC Pink:MIMTF), which holds the remaining 20 percent. Data from MDO shows that the mine produced 48,200 metric tons of copper in 2024.

7. KGHM Polska Miedz (FWB:KGHA.F)

Copper production: 729,700 metric tons

Poland’s KGHM Polska Miedz Group has operations in Europe, North America and South America, and says that it controls over 40 million metric tons of copper ore resources worldwide. In 2024, KGHM produced 729,700 metric tons of copper, a slight increase from the 710,900 metric tons of copper produced in 2023.

According to MDO, KGHM’s largest operation is the Polkowice-Sieroszowice mine in Western Poland. The mine has been in operation since 1968 and produces approximately 430 million to 440 million pounds of copper annually.

The company’s Polish operations also include the Rudna mine, which produced 338 million pounds of copper last year, and the Lubin mine, which produced 156 million pounds.

Other options under the KGHM banner include the Robinson mine in Nevada, United States, and the 55 percent owned Sierra Gorda mine in Chile.

8. CMOC Group (OTC Pink:CMCLF,HKEX:3993)

Copper production: ~502,600 metric tons

CMOC Group is a new addition to the top 10 after its copper production jumped significantly in 2024, with its share of production from its joint venture copper-cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo totaling approximately 502,600 metric tons. On a 100 percent basis, the company reported annual copper production of 650,161 metric tons.

The majority of CMOC’s copper production came from its Tenke Fungurume copper-cobalt mine, an 80/20 joint venture with the state-owned mining firm Gecamines. According to MDO data, the mine has experienced significant growth over the past few years, ramping up from 400 million pounds of copper in 2020 to 618 million pounds in 2023. In 2024, Tenke Fungurume’s copper production soared to 992 million pounds, or 450,138 metric tons.

Its other DRC mine is Kisanfu, a 71/24/5 joint venture with Chinese battery manufacturer Contemporary Amperex Technology (SZSE:300750) and the DRC government. The mine produced 200,013 metric tons of copper cathode in 2024, up substantially from 114,000 in 2023.

9. Antofagasta (LSE:ANTO)

Copper production: 448,800 metric tons

Antofagasta’s share of copper production from its four joint venture operations in Chile totaled 448,800 metric tons in 2024.

The company’s largest operation is its 60 percent owned Los Pelambres mine, a joint venture with Mitsubishi. According to MDO, Los Pelambres’ copper production totaled 320,000 metric tons in 2024, up from 300,000 the previous year.

Its Centinela mine is another significant producer, with 224,000 metric tons of copper mined in 2024. The company is constructing a second concentrator at Centinela that, once it comes online in 2027, should add 144,000 metric tons of copper production annually and extend Centinela’s mine life by 15 years to 2051.

The company’s other Chilean joint ventures are the Antucoya and Zaldivar mines.

10. Teck (TSX:TECK.A,TECK.B,NYSE:TECK)

Copper production: 358,910 metric tons

Rounding out the top 10 is Canada’s Teck, which increased consolidated copper production by 50 percent in 2024, reaching 446,000 metric tons. On an attributable basis, the copper company’s production totaled 358,910 metric tons in 2024.

Much of the gain came from the ramp-up of the Quebrada Blanca mine in Chile. The mine started production in 2023 and produced just 122 million pounds of copper that year. 2024 saw a significant advancement, with the mine producing 458 million pounds of the red metal.

Teck holds a 60 percent ownership stake in the mine, while Japan’s Sumitomo (OTC Pink:SSUMF,TSE:8053) controls a 30 percent stake and Chile’s state-run Codelco owns the final 10 percent.

Teck also owns the Highland Valley mine in British Columbia, Canada. The mine is one of the largest open pit mines in Canada and produced 226 million pounds of copper in 2024.

Other copper operations in the Teck portfolio include Antamina in Peru and Carmen de Andacollo in Chile.

Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Germany and Italy are facing mounting domestic pressure to repatriate more than a third of their gold reserves — worth an estimated US$245 billion — currently held in New York by the US Federal Reserve.

Germany and Italy hold the world’s second and third largest gold reserves, trailing only the US. A substantial portion of this metal is stored overseas, primarily in Manhattan’s Federal Reserve Bank.

This longstanding arrangement, based largely on postwar financial realities and New York’s role as a major global gold-trading hub, is now being questioned by officials and commentators across Europe’s political spectrum.

Fabio De Masi, a former member of European Parliament now affiliated with Germany’s new left-wing populist BSW party, told the Financial Times there are “strong arguments” to bring more of Germany’s bullion back home.

Taxpayers Association of Europe (TAE) President Michael Jäger echoed the same sentiments last month: ‘Trump wants to control the Fed, which would also mean controlling the German gold reserves in the US,’ he told Reuters.

‘It’s our money, it should be brought back.’

Similar calls are being echoed in Italy, where economic commentator Enrico Grazzini recently warned that “leaving 43 per cent of Italy’s gold reserves in America under the unreliable Trump administration is very dangerous for the national interest.’ He was writing in Il Fatto Quotidiano ahead of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s visit to Washington.

Fueling this renewed concern are statements made by US President Donald Trump, who earlier this month warned that he may have to “force something” if the US Federal Reserve does not lower interest rates.

Trump has also made direct appeals to the Department of Energy to stimulate oil production, signaling what critics interpret as increasing politicization of independent institutions like the Fed.

The TAE has urged both Germany and Italy to reconsider their reliance on the Fed. “We are very concerned about Trump tampering with the Federal Reserve Bank’s independence,” Jäger said. “Our recommendation is to bring the (German and Italian) gold home to ensure European central banks have unlimited control over it at any given point in time.”

Public skepticism over the safety of foreign gold holdings is not new.

In Germany, a grassroots movement that began in 2010 eventually prompted the Bundesbank to repatriate 674 metric tons of gold from New York and Paris between 2013 and 2017. The operation, which cost 7 million euros, resulted in half of Germany’s reserves being stored domestically by 2020. Nevertheless, 37 percent of its gold remains in the US.

Meloni’s Brothers of Italy party once echoed similar sentiments while in opposition, pledging in 2019 to bring Italy’s gold back home. But since assuming power in 2022, Meloni has largely gone silent on the issue.

Skepticism about US stewardship is not limited to political rhetoric.

According to the World Gold Council’s latest survey on central bank gold reserves, 43 percent of the central banks surveyed plan to increase their gold holdings in the coming year — a record high.

The overwhelming majority of respondents (95 percent) expect global central bank gold reserves to keep rising, citing gold’s performance during crises, its inflation-hedging capabilities and its role as a diversifier. Notably, 59 percent of central banks surveyed reported holding at least part of their gold reserves domestically, up from 41 percent in 2024.

Although the Bank of England remains the most popular vaulting location, the World Gold Council’s survey reveals growing caution over US custodianship: only 7 percent of respondents said they planned to increase domestic storage last year, but the figure jumped significantly in 2025.

New bill calls for US gold audit

Adding another layer of complexity is the push in Washington for greater transparency about America’s gold reserves. House Bill 3795, introduced by Representative Thomas Massie and backed by three co-sponsors, calls for the first comprehensive audit of US gold holdings in over six decades.

The bill would mandate a full inventory and assay of gold stored at Fort Knox, West Point and the Denver Mint, as well as a forensic accounting of all transactions involving US gold over the last 50 years.

“The question as to who actually owns the bars outright is really the most crucial question. And if it is shown that America does not actually own the gold, if the gold is there, but America does not own it, (or) if it has been pledged or leased or swapped or otherwise encumbered in any way … this would be a huge, huge detriment to the US and the global economy.”

Cortez emphasized that prior audits of US gold reserves have been insufficient.

“These aren’t audits that have been done on the metal itself, but rather the storage containers that the metal is supposedly stored in,’ he said. “Owners or operators of a depository who functioned like this would go to jail.”

He also pointed out that much of the gold held by the US government is impure by modern market standards, having been melted down from older coinage. That means even if the bars are there, refinement questions will remain.

While Trump has not explicitly endorsed HB 3795, he has expressed interest in the issue, stating, ‘We’re actually going to Fort Knox to see if the gold is there. Because maybe somebody stole the gold. Tons of gold.’

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Lode Gold Resources Inc. (TSXV: LOD) (OTCQB: LODFF) (‘Lode Gold’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce that it has engaged experienced capital markets and strategic advisors to support the advancement of its Fremont Mine in Mariposa, California. These advisors will assist in securing strategic investors and partners as the Company moves into the next phase of development.

As part of its current development strategy, Lode Gold is also engaging with mining contractors and progressing with engineering evaluations aimed at optimizing the mine plan and initiating permitting. The Company’s evaluation is focused on three key priorities:

  • High-grading during early production years to enhance initial project economics
  • Scaling production to over 100,000 ounces per year in later phases

‘Our objective is to take a disciplined and scalable approach to developing the Fremont Project,’ said Wendy T. Chan, CEO and Director at Lode Gold. ‘By securing the right strategic partnership, we will focus on various technical initiatives to optimize project economics, expedite permitting and get to production in near term. Being in a jurisdiction that is now increasingly aligned with domestic resource development, Fremont presents an interesting investment opportunity.’

The Fremont Mine is an advanced-stage exploration and development asset, on 100% private and patented land. It is located in Mariposa, an Opportunity Zone designated to attract investments with tax incentives provided by Trump’s Administration. The 2023 Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) outlined positive project economics at a gold price of USD $1,750, based on an annual production rate of approximately 130,000 ounces. More recently, an NI 43 -101 compliant mineral resource estimate (MRE 2025) was completed with a new geological model that separately evaluated vein and stockwork mineralization. Only 8% of the total mineral resource, filed at SEDAR+ (April 2025) has been extracted, mostly in the first 250 m. At a 1 g/t cut-off, the average true width is 53 m (at 3 g/t cut-off, the width is 16.8 m).

Upcoming Near Term 2025-2026 Catalysts:

  • Rehabilitation of 2 km underground workings
  • Expedite access to two adits, out of a total of 14
  • Channel sampling to upgrade resources to M&I
  • Metallurgy and Recovery Studies
  • Geotechnical work and rock mechanics assessments
  • Drilling 3,000 m to initiate Pre-Feasibility Study
  • Completion of Pre-Feasibility Study (underground bulk mining and other optimized methods will be evaluated)

About Lode Gold

Lode Gold (TSXV: LOD) is an exploration and development company with projects in highly prospective and safe mining jurisdictions in Canada and the United States.

In Canada, its assets in Yukon sit on the southern portion of the prolific Tombstone Belt. It covers 99.5 km2 across a 27 km strike.  Over 4,500 m have been drilled with confirmed gold endowment and economic drill intercepts over 50 m. There are four reduced-intrusive targets (RIRGS), in addition to sedimentary-hosted orogenic exploration gold.

In New Brunswick, Lode Gold, through its subsidiary 1475039 B.C. Ltd. (soon to be spun out into Gold Orogen), has created one of the largest land packages with its Acadian Gold Joint Venture, consisting of an area that spans 445 km2 with a 44 km strike. It has confirmed gold endowment with mineralized rhyolites.

In preparation for the spin-out, NI 43 101 technical reports have been prepared for all assets in Yukon and New Brunswick in 2024.

In the United States, the Company is focused on its advanced exploration and development asset, the Fremont Mine in Mariposa, California. According to the NI 43- 101 Compliant 2025 MRE, the asset contains 1.3 Moz at 4.4 g/t (3 g/t cut-off) with an average true width: 16.8 m.

Fremont was previously mined at 10.7 g/t. During gold mining prohibition in WWII, its mining license was suspended. Only 8% of the resource identified in the 2025 MRE has been extracted. This asset has exploration upside and is open at depth (three step-out holes at 1,300 m hit structure and were mineralized) and on strike. This is a brownfield project with over 43,000 m drilled, 23 km of underground workings and 14 adits. The project has excellent infrastructure and is close to electricity, water, roads, railhead and port.

Recently, the Company completed an internal scoping study, with a strategic pivot to 100% underground mining. Previously, in March 2023, the Company completed an NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment (‘PEA’) with an open pit and underground combination mine. The NI 43-101 technical reports are available on the Company’s profile on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca) and the Company’s website (www.lode-gold.com).

Qualified Person Statement

The scientific and technical information contained in this press release has been reviewed and approved by Jonathan Victor Hill, Director, BSc (Hons) (Economic Geology – UCT), FAusIMM, and who is a ‘qualified person’ as defined by National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (‘NI 43-101’).

ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY
Wendy T. Chan 
CEO & Director

Information Contact:

Winfield Ding 
CFO
info@lode-gold.com
+1-(604)-977-GOLD (4653)

Jenna Mosher 
Investor Relations
jenna@lode-gold.com
+1 (604) -977-GOLD (4653) 

Cautionary Note Related to this News Release and Figures

This news release contains information about adjacent properties on which the Company has no right to explore or mine. Readers are cautioned that mineral deposits on adjacent properties are not indicative of mineral deposits on the Company’s properties.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information

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 includes ‘forward-looking statements’ and ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation. All statements included in this news release, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements including, without limitation, statements with respect to the use of proceeds, advancement and completion of resource calculation, feasibility studies, and exploration plans and targets. Forward-looking statements include predictions, projections and forecasts and are often, but not always, identified by the use of words such as ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘plan’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘potential’, ‘target’, ‘budget’ and ‘intend’ and statements that an event or result ‘may’, ‘will’, ‘should’, ‘could’ or ‘might’ occur or be achieved and other similar expressions and includes the negatives thereof.

Forward-looking statements are based on a number of assumptions and estimates that, while considered reasonable by management based on the business and markets in which the Company operates, are inherently subject to significant operational, economic, and competitive uncertainties, risks and contingencies. These include assumptions regarding, among other things: the status of community relations and the security situation on site; general business and economic conditions; the availability of additional exploration and mineral project financing; the supply and demand for, inventories of, and the level and volatility of the prices of metals; relationships with strategic partners; the timing and receipt of governmental permits and approvals; the timing and receipt of community and landowner approvals; changes in regulations; political factors; the accuracy of the Company’s interpretation of drill results; the geology, grade and continuity of the Company’s mineral deposits; the availability of equipment, skilled labour and services needed for the exploration and development of mineral properties; currency fluctuations; and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate and actual results, and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company’s expectations include a deterioration of security on site or actions by the local community that inhibits access and/or the ability to productively work on site, actual exploration results, interpretation of metallurgical characteristics of the mineralization, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, future metal prices, availability of capital and financing on acceptable terms, general economic, market or business conditions, uninsured risks, regulatory changes, delays or inability to receive required approvals, unknown impact related to potential business disruptions stemming from the COVID-19 outbreak, or another infectious illness, and other exploration or other risks detailed herein and from time to time in the filings made by the Company with securities regulators, including those described under the heading ‘Risks and Uncertainties’ in the Company’s most recently filed MD&A. The Company does not undertake to update or revise any forward-looking statements, except in accordance with applicable law.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/256755

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

(TheNewswire)

TORONTO, ON TheNewswire – June 25, 2025 –Silver Crown Royalties Inc. (‘Silver Crown’, ‘SCRi’, the ‘Corporation’, or the ‘Company’) (Cboe:SCRI; OTCQX:SLCRF; FRA:QS0) reports that all resolutions proposed to shareholders at the annual general meeting of shareholders (held on June 24, 2025) were approved, including the election of all of the director nominees listed in the management information circular for the meeting. Please refer to the report of voting results filed under SCRi’s profile at www.sedarplus.ca for further details.

Voting as to each of the director nominees was as follows:

DIRECTORS

VOTES FOR

VOTES WITHHELD

Peter Bures

201,149

100%

0

0%

Peter Schloo

201,149

100%

0

0%

Peter Simeon

201,149

100%

0

0%

Philip van den Berg

201,149

100%

0

0%

ABOUT Silver Crown Royalties INC.

Founded by industry veterans, Silver Crown Royalties ( Cboe: SCRI | OTCQX: SLCRF | BF: QS0 ) is a publicly traded, silver royalty company. Silver Crown (SCRi) currently has four silver royalties of which three are revenue-generating. Its business model presents investors with precious metals exposure that allows for a natural hedge against currency devaluation while minimizing the negative impact of cost inflation associated with production. SCRi endeavors to minimize the economic impact on mining projects while maximizing returns for shareholders. For further information, please contact:

Silver Crown Royalties Inc.

Peter Bures, Chairman and CEO

Telephone: (416) 481-1744

Email: pbures@silvercrownroyalties.com

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This release contains certain ‘forward looking statements’ and certain ‘forward-looking information’ as defined under applicable Canadian and U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements and information can generally be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as ‘may’, ‘will’, ‘should’, ‘expect’, ‘intend’, ‘estimate’, ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘continue’, ‘plans’ or similar terminology. The forward-looking information contained herein is provided for the purpose of assisting readers in understanding management’s current expectations and plans relating to the future. Forward-looking statements and information are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determinable and assumptions that, while believed by management to be reasonable, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Forward-looking information is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual actions, events or results to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information, including but not limited to: the impact of general business and economic conditions; the absence of control over mining operations from which SCRi will purchase gold and other metals or from which it will receive royalty payments and risks related to those mining operations, including risks related to international operations, government and environmental regulation, delays in mine construction and operations, actual results of mining and current exploration activities, conclusions of economic evaluations and changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined; accidents, equipment breakdowns, title matters, labor disputes or other unanticipated difficulties or interruptions in operations; SCRi’s ability to enter into definitive agreements and close proposed royalty transactions; the inherent uncertainties related to the valuations ascribed by SCRi to its royalty interests; problems inherent to the marketability of gold and other metals; the inherent uncertainty of production and cost estimates and the potential for unexpected costs and expenses; industry conditions, including fluctuations in the price of the primary commodities mined at such operations, fluctuations in foreign exchange rates and fluctuations in interest rates; government entities interpreting existing tax legislation or enacting new tax legislation in a way which adversely affects SCRi; stock market volatility; regulatory restrictions; liability, competition, the potential impact of epidemics, pandemics or other public health crises on SCRi’s business, operations and financial condition, loss of key employees. SCRi has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers are advised not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements or information. SCRi undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking information except as required by applicable law. Such forward-looking information represents management’s best judgment based on information currently available.

This document does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, securities of the Company in Canada, the United States or any other jurisdiction. Any such offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to buy the securities described herein will be made only pursuant to subscription documentation between the Company and prospective purchasers. Any such offering will be made in reliance upon exemptions from the prospectus and registration requirements under applicable securities laws, pursuant to a subscription agreement to be entered into by the Company and prospective investors. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, the reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

CBOE CANADA DOES NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS NEWS RELEASE.

Copyright (c) 2025 TheNewswire – All rights reserved.

News Provided by TheNewsWire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

The S&P MidCap 400 SPDR (MDY) is trading at a moment of truth as its 5-day SMA returns to the 200-day SMA. A bearish trend signal triggered in early March. Despite a strong bounce from early April to mid May, this signal remains in force because it has yet to be proven otherwise. Today’s report will show how to quantify signals and reduce whipsaws using the percentage difference between two SMAs.

First note that MDY is lagging SPY and QQQ because its 5-day has yet to cross above its 200-day. The latter two saw bullish crosses in mid May, over a month ago. A bullish breakout in MDY would reflect broadening upside participation, which would be bullish for stocks. The PerfChart below shows SPY and QQQ with year-to-date gains. MDY and IWM are down year-to-date. 

 

***********************

TrendInvestorPro continues to follow the leading uptrends and recent breakouts in metals-related ETFs. These include gold, silver, palladium, platinum, copper and associated miners. Tech-related ETFs are also leading and featured in our reports/videos. Click here to learn more and get full access to our research.

***********************

The chart below shows MDY hitting its moment of truth as the 5-day SMA (black line) bumps against the underside of the 200-day SMA (blue line). A bearish cross occurred in late February and this signal has yet to be reversed. However, I am not watching for a simple 5/200 cross. Instead, I want to see the 5-day SMA clear the 200-day SMA by a certain percentage. This is a signal threshold.

The indicator window shows Percent above MA (5,200,1), which measures the percentage difference between the 5 and 200 day SMAs. See the TIP Indicator Edge Plugin for details. I placed signal thresholds at +3% and -3% to reduce whipsaws. A bullish signal triggers with a move above +3% and a bearish signal triggers with a move below -3%. At the very least, this indicator value is still negative and bearish. A move above 0 would reflect a positive 5/200 cross, while a move above +3% would trigger a bullish trend signal. This indicator is part of the TIP Indicator Edge Plugin for StockCharts ACP.

The signal threshold levels depend on your personal preferences and trading styles. Tighter thresholds generate earlier signals, but with more whipsaws. Wider thresholds reduce whipsaws, but increase signal lag. This is always the tradeoff. I prefer plus/minus 1 percent when using the 5/200 cross for SPY. I widened these thresholds to plus/minus 3 percent for MDY because it is more volatile.

TrendInvestorPro continues to follow the leading uptrends and recent breakouts in metals-related ETFs. These include gold, silver, palladium, platinum, copper and associated miners. Tech-related ETFs are also leading and featured in our reports/videos. Click here to learn more and gain immediate access.