Trading Symbol TSX:V GTC
COQUITLAM, BC, Nov. 1 /CNW/ - Bruce Livesey's unflattering article in the G&M's November Report on Business contains numerous inaccuracies and omissions. These will be detailed by Getty in the next few days. A few of the half-truths in the article are noted here for the sake of immediately correcting the record on some important points. Mr. Livesey states that John Lepinski, Getty's managing director, has refused all interview requests. This is true, as there are ongoing lawsuits. What Mr. Livesey does not disclose to his readers is that an extensive list of written questions was answered for him in detail. Virtually none of those written answers made it to print.
As an example of his half-true approach to investigative journalism, Mr Livesey tells how a director who joined the board in June, 2003 later became "alarmed" about the 2002 agreement whereby Getty acquired the Getty South deposit from Mr Lepinski's company. What Mr. Livesey does not tell his readers is that the so-called alarming agreement was put on the SEDAR.com public securities filings website as part of a March 4, 2003 filing, some three months before the transaction completed and 4 months before that director joined the Board. Mr. Livesey knew or should have known (but didn't say) that the new director's close associates were both at the shareholders meeting where the agreement was tabled and approved.
Much ado is made by Mr. Livesey about a 2004 negative opinion of a law firm hired by the newly dissident directors about the Getty South agreement and related matters. This early stage opinion was premised on factual errors. Moreover, Mr. Livesey was advised, but did not disclose, that another independent lawyer (hired by an underwriter in a $2 million financing in 2003) had reviewed the "alarming" Getty South agreement and raised no concerns about it. In the same fashion, Mr Livesey accepts without question the opinion of the first mining valuator hired by Getty who later flip-flopped on his original opinion. Mr. Livesey simply ignored the fact, of which he was aware, that a much larger and more prominent engineering firm provided a report disagreeing with the first valuator. He also conveniently fails to note that the stock exchange regulators who were in fact very closely following this dispute, did not accept for filing the flip-flop opinion from the valuator.
For Mr. Livesey to allow references to the Getty South property dispute to be likened to a "baby-BreX" is outrageously reckless and misleading and he knows it. The Getty South acquisition was booked in Getty's financial statements at a modest $1.08 million. All historical drilling data related to the project had been fully publicly disclosed. About $5 million had been spent on drilling, trenching and underground workings on the property by previous operators. The only legitimate debate has been about the reliability of the many and varying opinions over twenty years about what the ultimate size and grade of Getty South will prove to be. The latest NI 43-101 Getty South Report, filed on SEDAR on July 19, 2007, shows an independently estimated inferred resource of 28,160,000 tonnes grading 0.47% copper which, if substantiated, could represent as much as 145 million pounds of in-situ copper in Getty's 50% share.
Mr. Lepinski commented: "Getty continues to advance activities on its Highland Valley properties. As announced on August 24, 2007, following the recent finalization of both the Getty North and Getty South NI 43-101 resource reports completed by Vector Engineering Inc. under the direction of Mr. Craig L. Parkinson, P.G., an independent Qualified Person, Getty has engaged West Coast Environmental and Engineering to commence a pre-feasibility engineering study focused on potential cathode copper production. This work is well under way."
He continued: "This project work is far more important to Getty and its shareholders than Mr. Livesey's attempt to breathe new life into an old story. One is left to wonder why he thought the effort worthwhile."
This release includes certain statements that may be deemed "forward-looking statements". All statements in this release, other than statements of historical facts, especially those that address estimated resource quantities, grades and contained metals, are forward-looking statements because they are generally made on the basis of estimation and extrapolation from a limited number of drill holes and metallurgical studies. Although diamond drill hole core provides valuable information about the size, shape and geology of an exploration project, there will always remain a significant degree of uncertainty in connection with these valuation factors until a deposit has been extensively drilled on closely spaced centers which has occurred only in specific areas on the Getty Project. Although the Company believes the expectations expressed in its forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements should not be in any way construed as guarantees of the ultimate size, quality or commercial feasibility of the Getty Project or of the Company's future performance. Subsequent results and developments may differ materially from those postulated in the estimates and forward-looking statements. Other factors that could cause the Company's actual results and performance to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements include adverse market prices for metals, the conclusions of detailed feasibility and technical analyses, lower than expected grades and quantities of resources, mining rates and metal recovery rates and the fact that necessary capital may not be available to the Company on terms acceptable to it or at all. The need for compliance with extensive environmental and socio-economic rules and practices and the requirement for the Company to obtain government permitting can cause a delay or even abandonment of a mineral project. The Company is subject to the specific risks inherent in the mining business as well as general economic and business conditions. For more information on the Company, Investors should review the Company's annual Form 20-F filing with the United States Securities Commission and its home jurisdiction filings that are available at www.sedar.com.
Information Concerning Estimates of Measured, Indicated and Inferred
Resources
This news release also refers to reports that use the terms, 'indicated resources' and 'inferred resources'. Getty Copper Inc. advises investors that although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations (under National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects), the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of the mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves. In addition, 'inferred resources' have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an Inferred Mineral Resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre-feasibility studies, or economic studies except for Preliminary Assessment as defined under 43-101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.
The TSX Venture Exchange does not accept responsibility for the adequacy
or accuracy of this release.
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
----------------------------------------
Dr. Corby G. Anderson, President and COO