Is there any Gold in the Toukhmanuk Mine in Armenia, worth mining?

Van Krikorian's TOUKHMANUK Gold Project is BANKRUPT

2018-03-05T23:38:00.001-05:00

While visiting the PDAC, the international mining convention in Toronto, I met representatives of the Armenian Government at the Lydian booth. It was confirmed to me that Global Gold's project in Armenia is BANKRUPT.

I have always said that the 2 million ounce GOLD resource that Van Krikorian was promoting at TOUKHMANUK was a complete fraud.

Global Gold Corp is now defunct and delinquent and no longer files any financial statements.

Don't be fooled by the $3.00 price quote, GBGD has rolled-back its shares 251x and now has approximately 386,000 shares outstanding. The company has transferred all its assets to its officers and directors and left $20 million in debts behind. Now its flagship asset is bankrupt, leaving behind unpaid salaries and unpaid bills in Armenia.

GAME OVER: Van Krikorian and Global Gold Corp (GBGD)

2018-01-18T05:25:00.001-05:00

It's time to say goodbye to Global Gold Corp (pink: GBGD) and its sketchy President, Van Krikorian.

After years of defrauding employees and suppliers in the Republic of Armenia out of hundreds of thousands of dollars, swindling joint venture partners out of over US$12MM, and partially embezzling and money laundering these proceeds, its time to say goodbye to Global Gold Corp (pink: GBGD) and its President, CEO, Chairman, Director and Corporate Counsel, Van Krikorian.

On December 4, 2017, GBGD through the fraudulent actions of its President, Mr. Van Krikorian along with the complicit support of its Board of Directors, transferred all of GBGD's assets and claims to its officers and directors, consolidated its shares 251:1, ceased becoming a reporting issuer, and went dark, leaving behind US$20,917,023 in liabilities, broken promises. dreams and a trail of fraud.

I am sure that this tale is not over. With the assets of GBGD in the hands of Van Krikorian and his accomplices, they may try to scam more people with their questionable Armenian mining assets. They may attempt to sell these assets to unsuspecting investors or unscrupulous stock promoters to make a few more bucks. But for now:

GAME OVER

Van Krikorian

The SEC did not get you for your fraudulent actions (yet),

but the Russians you scammed money from might be more successful.

The FRAUD at GBGD by VAN KRIKORIAN Continues

2017-11-04T07:00:00.000-04:00

Global Gold Corp (PINK:GBGD) is $20,917,023 in debt, so what does Mr. Van Krikorian, the President, CEO and Director of the Company do? He conspires with his fellow directors and officers of the company to reclassify $6,463,255 of that debt, which is owed to them, as secured promissory notes, to the detriment of its other creditors and secured creditors.

Van Krikorian announced on November 1, 2017, in the company's June 30, 2017, 10-Q report, that these secured promissory notes were issued on July 1, 2017, and interest and principal were due on September 1, 2017. What was the security granted to Mssrs Van Krikorian, Drury Gallagher, Ian Hague, Nicholas Aynilian, Lester Ceasar and Jan Dulman? Everything. And now these newly issued secured promissory notes are in DEFAULT.

These officers and directors have been involved with the Company almost from the beginning where the stock climbed to a high of $3.80 in May 2006 and now rests on its deathbed at $0.015.

The strange thing about this transaction is that the assets of the Company were previously pledged to CRA on $2.2 million in Secured Fixed Rate Convertible Notes issued in 2012 and guaranteed by GBGD. But scorpions are scorpions and GBGD declared the $7 million in equity investment and loans that GBGD received from CRA for its Toukhamnuk Gold Mine as a fraud, kicked CRA out and signed a new deal with Linne Mining and Industrial Minerals in 2013.

After defrauding Linne Mining and Industrial Mineral out of $5,956,028 Linne is now suing GBGD's subsidiary in bankruptcy court in Armenia for USD$39 million.

In response to all these debts and bankruptcy threats, Mr. Van Krikorian conspires with his fellow officers and directors to secure all the assets of the Company in their personal names to take all the benefits for themselves, while leaving behind an empty shell of broken dreams, promises and debt.

Fraud at Toukhmanuk See My new Website

2017-09-08T10:20:00.002-04:00

Visit my new website on Fraud at Toukhmanuk and the Armenian GKZ

GBGD Fraud @ Toukhamuk Gold Project Republic of Armenia
http://www.toukhmanuk-gbgd-fraud.com

GBGD re-listed on the OTCQB with USD$20,350,985 in Debt

2017-06-19T10:04:00.002-04:00

Global Gold Corp (GBGD) shares have finally been re-listed on the OTCQB from the PINK sheets. GBGD shares were dropped because it failed to timely file their year-end and quarterly financial statements.

Now that the F/S are filed, here are some highlights for GBGD:

The company has $54,164 in cash and $20,350,985 in debts
Its Armenian subsidiary (Mego Gold LLC) that owns their Toukhmanuk Gold Mine has been declared bankrupt by Armenia's Cassation Court
JV partner Linne Minning at Toukhmanuk, has filed a creditor claim of $30,000,000 in the bankruptcy of Mego Gold
They need $5,000,000 to fund their Marjan Project in southern Armenia

What can one say about a company run by Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, President, CEO, Director and Lawyer, and Mr. Ian Hague, Director and Principal of hedge fund Firebird LLC (www.fbird.com)?

Mr. Ian Hague had made director loans to Global Gold which amounted to $5,052,262, including interest. In order to clean up the books of the company, in 2010 Mr. Hague converted his cash advances to shares of the company at $0.15 now worth about $0.015.

Mr. Hague owns and controls a total of 44,869,915 common shares of GBGD, representing 48.78 % of all outstanding shares.

Since 2011 the company has managed to fund its operations with JVs that all have ended in lawsuits, but not before Mr. Van Z. Krikorian organised for GBGD to scam its investors out of over $11 million dollars using deceptive and fraudulent gold resource models that showed that the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine contained 2 million ounces of gold, which evidence exists now that this was a FRAUD. Read my previous blogs for more information.

Additional funding for GBGD comes from the former President, Secretary and Chairman Emeritus of Global Gold, Mr. Drury Galagher. He has made cash advances to GBGD totalling $3,125,114 to support a "technically" bankrupt compnay that is carrying $20,350,985 of debts. Why? What is he trying to hide by supporting GBGD? Or, is he just a bad investor?

Global Gold Corp shares labeled as delinquent and demoted to the Pink Sheets with a Public Warning

2017-05-18T09:03:00.000-04:00

As of TODAY, May 17, 2017, Global Gold Corp's shares have been demoted to the PINK SHEETS, labeled as "SEC Reporting Delinquent", "STOP OTC Pink no Information" and with a public Warning! This company may not be making information publicly available.

According to the OTC Markets website, the STOP warning means:

No Information
Indicates companies do not provide disclosure. Publicly traded companies that do not provide information to investors should be carefully researched before making any investment decision.

Were GBGD subsidiaries, Mego-Gold, Marjan and Hankavan declared bankrupt by Armenian courts in April?

2016-05-08T18:59:00.000-04:00

I received a call today from my contact in Armenia confirming that this is actually the case. Not only that a declaration of bankruptcy was issued in April against all GBGD subsidiaries, but that a court appointed liquidator has been named too.

It is a holiday on Monday in Armenia and I expect to get actual court case numbers and other information by mid week.

Nevertheless, in typical Van Krikorian fashion The only reference to this potential bankruptcy was announced in the 10-K, which was filed on May 2, 2016. No mention of the actual bankruptcy in subsequent events, and no mention of bankruptcy claims ever filed against GBGD's subsidiaries in Armenia, ever.

Mr. Krikorian discloses the following in the last 10-K:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/319671/000143774916030518/gbgd20151231_10k.htm

Page 37

"General

The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business or which constitute nuisance claims. In the opinion of management, the amount of any ultimate liability with respect to these actions will not materially affect the Company’s consolidated financial statements or results of operations. The Company has been brought to court by several disgruntled former employees and contractors for unpaid salaries and invoices, respectively, as well as some penalties for nonpayment which totals approximately $280,000. Some employees and creditors have petitioned for a bankruptcy proceeding against the Company’s Mego Gold, GGM, GGH and Marjan subsidiaries in an effort to leverage higher payments. Local counsel has advised that this effort is not ground in law, should not be upheld, and if it is upheld in Armenia there will be relief in international arbitration pursuant to the U.S. Armenia Bilateral Investment Treaty and the Company’s 2008 settlement agreement with the Government of Armenia. The Company has recorded a liability for the actual unpaid amounts due to these individuals of approximately $158,000 as of December 31, 2015 and the Company has depleted the approximately $25,000 previously deposited at the Armenian Marshall service as security for the claims. The Company is currently, and will continue to, vigorously defending its position in courts against these claims that are without merit. The Company is also negotiating directly with these individuals outside of the courts in attempt to settle based on the amounts of the actual amounts due as recorded by the Company in exchange for prompt and full payment."

Bankruptcy cases don't just appear like magic, they are filed and processed over some time. The question remains why was this the only time that Van Krikorian disclosed this potential problem? Van Krikorian has demonstrated a pattern of hiding material facts or just failing to disclose all the facts. These omissions of certain material facts make his disclosures, as filed in his SEC documents extremely misleading.

I refer you back to my blog of November 15, 2015, titled, "Global Gold's Subsidiary and Tukhmanuk Gold Mine, Threatened With Bankruptcy", where on September 18, 2015 a case was filed in Yerevan.(see below). This is not the only case, there appear to be more, as referenced by Van Krikorian," Some employees and creditors have petitioned for a bankruptcy proceeding against the Company’s Mego Gold, GGM, GGH and Marjan subsidiaries..."

This matter was not disclosed in Q3 or 10-K or in subsequent events. There has never ever been a mention in GBGD's SEC filings of any potential bankruptcy claims against its subsidiaries until now. Which leads to the question, what else is Mr. Van Krikorian hiding? How about the truth that there is no 2 million ounces of gold at Toukhmauk as presented by GBGD or the GKZ.

Later,

Vasilios (Bill) Mavridis

Whistle Blower

Montreal, CANADA

http://toukhmanuk.blogspot.ca/2015/11/global-golds-subsidiary-and-tukhmanuk.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Global Gold Corp's (otcqb:GBGD) subsidiary in Armenia, Mego-Gold, is being sued in a "forced bankruptcy" hearing.

Court Case YEKD / 0286/04/15, was filed on September 18, 2015 by an applicant namedAraqsya Bozhevolnova. The electronic court document, produced below does not give any further details.

A google translation of the above document reads:

COURT N: YEKD / 0286/04/15

The application has been received. 18-09-2015Bankruptcy type: forcedThe applicantName: AraqsyaSurname: Bozhevolnova

The DebtorFirst Name: Mego Gold LLCAddress: Tumanyan 1 A-2

State fee. 0

Other notes:

Statistics line number.

The JudgeCourt: Kentron and Nork-MarashThe judge's name. AlexeiThe inscription date. 18-09-2015

About this Blog: Between 2009 and 2012 I was an active investor in the mineral exploration sector in the Republic of Armenia. Our main project in Armenia was the MARJAN polymetallic gold and silver project located in near Sissian. My JV partner, Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, President of Global Gold Corp (otcqb: GBGD) and Trustee of the Armenian Assembly of America, used corrupt means including using his influence with the US EMBASY in YEREVAN to secure an indictment against me for theft of the JV and to corrupt the Armenia judicial system to give him a favourable ruling.

Mr. Van Z. Krikorian is the President, CEO and Legal Counsel of Global Gold Corp. (otcqb:GBGD), a penny stock listed on the OTC markets. His public filings with the US Scurities and Exchange Commission fail to fully disclose the reality on the ground in Armenia in the promotion and development of GBGD's gold project, the TOUKHMANUK GOLD MINE.

This blog is an effort to bring transparency of the activities of Global God Corp. (otcqb: GBGD) and Mr. Van Z. Krikorian in Armenia.

Global Gold Corp (otcqb:GBGD) Keeps Promoting Its Questionable Gold Properties

2016-02-21T23:33:00.001-05:00

Global Gold Corp (otcqb:GBGD) published a Power Point Presentation on its website that was apparently used to promote its questionable gold projects at the Marcus Evans: Global Mining Summit, which took place on the 1st and 2nd of February 2016, at the Red Rock Resort & Spa, Las Vegas, NV. According to event calendar GBGD was being represented by its CFO, Jan Dulman.

The Presentation, or rather "MISREPresentation", published by GBGD, contains mythological stories about proven reserves at Tukhmanuk and Marjan projects.

Linne mining already discovered that the Toukhmanuk resource data is fake. See my blog "Clear and Apparent Fraud at GBGD and Toukhmanuk Gold Mine: Its not as big as BRE-X but its still fraud."

P-P plot shows a great departure from diagonal line as if the distributions are not the same, or as if the drill holes are drilled somewhere except the Tukmnanuk site. This happens when estimation parameters are chosen at random without any knowledge of the subject. Therefore, RESMODEL block models are not usable: -Drill hole values are questionable; etc.

THERE IS NO PATH TO PRODUCTION IN ARMENIA, only a PATH to perpetuate the lie that GBGD's Toukhmanuk and Marjan Projects have a valid gold resources.

Over the last 4 years I have presented evidence in my blogs that GBGD has filed falsified gold resource data to secure Mining License for the Tukhmanuk and Marjan projects, and perpetuated these false claims in their SEC filings.

The "MSREPresentation" promotes the Tukhmanuk Mine which has a 43-101 Report that was never reviewed by any regulator. GBGD is US based company with no listing in CANADA. The 43-101 Report on Toukhmanuk uses data that was provided by GBGD and never verified by the author. If it was verified , they would have discovered that the GBGD data can not be reproduced, i.e. it is falsified. The GBGD resource data that purports to confirm a 2 million plus oz gold deposit is garbage. The only way the data can turn out to be garbage is because it was falsified. The GBGD resource data was falsified at Global Gold's own "ISO" certified Lab, located at the Toukhmanuk site. Were they seeding the samples? NO. They were playing with the published data. Every time a professional outfit analyzed the Toukhmanuk data they found no gold where GBGD claimed they had gold. The resources is probably overstated by about 90%.

But this is not an isolated incident either. GBGD had the same problem with their Marjan project data. Caldera reviewed the Marjan core and resource calculation in 2010 and discovered the data provided by GBGD could not be duplicated either by independent analytical firm lab, Activation Labs.

Analysis of core samples provided by GBGD showed poor correlation to duplicate analysis

Caldera was force to drill new holes and rely on the Soviet-era data. There is no gold resource established at Marjan. Marjan is an exploration play.

To make matters worse, Caldera also discovered that the mining license held by GBGD on Marjan was issued illegally and through corrupt means. The license was issued without an approved resource summary confirmed by the State Committee of Mineral Resources. How? Only answer can be is through Corruption. The State Committee for Reserves rejected GBGD's application for resource approval. See my earlier blogs.

If any one is interested in contacting me directly to learn more about the lies of Van Krikorian and GBGD you can contact me by email at bmavridis.canada@gmail.com.

Regards,

Bill Mavridis

Whistle Blower

Montreal, CANADA

Clear and Apparent Fraud at GBGD and Toukhmanuk Gold Mine: Its not as big as BRE-X but its still fraud.

2016-02-09T20:15:00.000-05:00

On July 5, 2013, GBGD and Mr. Van Krikorian (President and CEO) signed a deal with Linne Mining to act as the CONTRACT MINER for the development of its Toukhmanuk Gold Mine, in Armenia.

By November 2015, Van Krikorian announced in its SEC quarterly filings (10-Q), that the Toukhmanuk project was delayed because the contract miner "requested" to be relieved of its obligations under the mining contract agreement.

To this date, Van Krikorian has failed to post a copy of Linne Mining's letter or provide any clarification to investors, why Linne Mining requested to be "relieved" of it obligations.

Three months later, the reason for Linne Mining's actions have started to become crystal clear. Linne has been swindled by Van Krikorian and GBGD. There is no gold worth mining at the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine. Here is the proof.

Two documents, which were prepared for Linne Mining, surfaced on the web last week. These two documents outline that the database provided by GBGD and used to calculate the gold resources and to develop the resources models are "fake". GBGD's claim that it has over 2 million oz of gold appears to be overstated by at least 1.9 million ounces.

see: http://www.geo-logaritmica.com/2dataSets.pdf
see: http://www.geo-logaritmica.com/WHAT_IS_WRONG_WITH_RESMODEL.pdf
Also see my blog: GBGD Announces Toukhamnuk Mine in Armenia "Delayed"... Is this the end of GBGD?

A third document, which was published today (see below or click), the author published that he reviewed the resource models, used by Behre Dolbear and published in the Independent Technical Report of the Toukhmanuk Mine Project And Getik Prospect, Armenia, In Conformance with NI 43-101 Guideline, on October 17, 2011. The author determined that the data in the models were corrupted in a way that certain gold grades were switched with the silver grades. The net effect is that the gold resources were overvalued, making the resource models worthless. This is the worst type of fraud in mining, manipulating data to create the appearance of a valuable gold mine. Not as blatant as seeding samples with gold as in BRE-X case in 1997, but up there.

From my experience it is difficult to accept that this is an error. I have discovered that Van Krikorian and GBGD have published suspect data on the MARJAN project. and I have been reporting this since 2011.

I hope that the SEC finally shuts GBGD down and deals with this clear and apparent fraud.

(PS Don't forget, Van Krikorian and GBGD scammed their previous JV Partner, CRA. After receiving USD$7 MM investment, Van Krikorian claimed that GBGD was defrauded, Now GBGD has swindled Linne Mining out of $3.4MM)

========================================================

Behre Dolbear Reports Specter Reserves.

So called ‘Tukhmanuk Gold Deposit’, Armenia. Block models RESMODEL1, and RESMODEL2, both mentioned in the Behre Dolbear report which could be viewed at

http://www.globalgoldcorp.com/docs/20111017_J11_163_Global_Gold_Toukhmanuk_and_Getik_43_101_report.pdf

In addition to having wrong grade distribution in comparison with drill holes and discontinuity of drill hole traces, collar coordinate errors, etc., supposedly have been done in misconception with the database and drill hole files associated with them. Below is the screen shot of a vertical section with the drill holes and block model.

Dwg.1. Block model RESMOD2 by Global gold. Drill hole T-3-2-06, Sample #GGMT01430 indicates Au 5.2g/t while the corresponding record in the Global Gold database (file "Total GGMT.xls") shows Au 0.2g/t for the same sample # GGMT01430.

Dwg.2. Tukhmanuk database by Global Gold. GGMT1430.

So do other samples... Which probably means someone, who made the block model, mistakenly (or purposely) used silver grade figures for gold.

As a consequence, in fact we have 39 MILLION TONS OF SILVER RESERVES and only 1 million ton of gold bearing resources.

*) Web-address of the article: http://geo-logaritmica.com/SpecterReserves.pdf

Sergo Cusiani

Yerevan, July 15, 2015
scusiani@gmail.com

sergo.cusiani@geo-logaritmica.com

t. +995 595 300 121

========================================================

About this Blog: Between 2009 and 2012 I was an active investor in the mineral exploration sector in the Republic of Armenia. Our main project in Armenia was the MARJAN polymetallic gold and silver project located in near Sissian. My JV partner, Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, President of Global Gold Corp (otcqb: GBGD) and Trustee of the Armenian Assembly of America, used corrupt means including using his influence with the US EMBASSY in YEREVAN to secure an indictment against me for theft of the JV and to corrupt the Armenia judicial system to give him a favourable ruling.

Mr. Van Z. Krikorian is the President, CEO and Legal Counsel of Global Gold Corp. (otcqb:GBGD), a penny stock listed on the OTC markets. His public filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission fail to fully disclose the reality on the ground in Armenia in the promotion and development of GBGD's gold project, the TOUKHMANUK GOLD MINE.

This blog is an effort to bring transparency of the activities of Global God Corp. (otcqb: GBGD) and Mr. Van Z. Krikorian in Armenia.

GBGD Announces Toukhamnuk Mine in Armenia "Delayed"... Is this the end of GBGD?

2016-01-27T15:55:00.004-05:00

On November 20, 2015, Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, President and CEO of Global Gold Corp (otcqb: GBGD) announced that the development of its Toukhamnuk Gold Mine located in the Republic of Armenia was "delayed". [see third quarter 10-Q as filed on the US SEC website]

In my analysis this sounds like wishful thinking. For all intensive purposes the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine is dead.

Here are the reasons why I believe the project is dead:

1. GBGD is a financial mess with over US$17MM in current debt and little or no cash available. GBGD also confirms it has "no firm commitments from third parties to provide additional financing".

2. Linne Mining, the contract miner that was hired to build the Toukhamnuk Mine, has notified GBGD that it wants permission (whatever that means) to walk away from the project and is further demanding payment of US$3,204,951. GBGD has stated in its SEC filings that Linne Mining is the first ranking creditor.

3. Van Krikorian is threatening to sue Linne Mining if it walks away. If this happens, this will be the 4th major lawsuit that GBGD and Van Krikorian will be involved in over their mining projects. I do not know who in their right mind would want to do business with GBGD and Van Krikorian in Armenia, considering his track record of legal pursuits in his business dealings.

4. While GBGD has received a permit to build a tailings dam from the Minstry of Energy and Natural Resources of Armenia, residents of Meliq Village have been protesting the building a new tailings dam. GBGD has two older tailings dams that have failed and have leaked in to the environment. So far the protesters have managed to block GBGD in moving the tailings dam project forward.

5. The published resources of the Toukhmanuk Mine are suspect. GBGD does not have proven reserves, it is planning to mine GKZ approved mineral resources, which appear suspect. Furthermore, these resources have never been confirmed with independent 3rd party analysis. The professional geologist that prepared the Technical Report on the project (NI 43-101) recommended:

a) All previous drill core be reviewed with an objective of firming up information on vein density and mineralization

b) Check assays should also be carried out at a certified laboratory outside Armenia so that future data is conformable to CIM and JORC standards

c) Resources at Toukhmanuk need to be better defined with further drilling within the preliminary pit outline and a feasibility study carried out on immediate mine development. Cost US$2MM.

6. GBGD drilled 4,000 meters of diamond drilling outside the central are to expand resources, but the results were never published. It appears GBGD never found any gold in the drill results and has hidden this fact. This again makes the gold resource at Toukhmanuk suspect.

7. A former employ of GBGD companies, confirmed to me that the resources used by GBGD to calculate the published resources at the GKZ were fabricated in some sections. See my blog http://toukhmanuk.blogspot.ca/2012/06/what-are-real-gold-grades-at-toukhmanuk.html

8. Global Gold has filed conflicting production reports on the Toukhmanuk mine between 2007 and 2011, overstating its mining volume and playing with their gold grade. Again raising the prospect that the resource is suspect. See my blog: http://gbgd-armenia-mining.blogspot.ca/2013/05/global-gold-corp-gbgd-overstates-mining.html

So where does GBGD and Van Krikorian come up with funds to push the project forward? Directors have already advanced over US$2 million to the company. Even if they push this project forward, the local population is against the project. The published NI-43-101 Technical Report does nothing to prove the gold resources are confirmed, the "professional" geologist never sampled any of the core and relied 100% on the data provided by Van Krikorian and GBGD. That data, is suspect because 4000 meters of drill results were hidden from the public, a former employees of GBGD has confirmed the data some of the data was fabricated, and Van Krikorian and GBGD has been caught in a game of manipulating his own mining data as filed with the SEC that contradicts the data filed with Armenian Government. I don't know what Van's end game is, but it does not look pretty. Is this the end of GBGD?

Global Gold's Subsidiary and Tukhmanuk Gold Mine, Threatened With Bankruptcy

2015-11-15T06:43:00.001-05:00

Global Gold Corp's (otcqb:GBGD) subsidiary in Armenia, Mego-Gold, is being sued in a "forced bankruptcy" hearing.

Court Case YEKD / 0286/04/15, was filed on September 18, 2015 by an applicant named Araqsya Bozhevolnova. The electronic court document, produced below does not give any further details.

A google translation of the above document reads:

COURT N: YEKD / 0286/04/15

The application has been received. 18-09-2015
Bankruptcy type: forced
The applicantName: Araqsya
Surname: Bozhevolnova
The DebtorFirst Name: Mego Gold LLC
Address: Tumanyan 1 A-2
State fee. 0
Other notes:
Statistics line number.
The JudgeCourt: Kentron and Nork-Marash
The judge's name. Alexei
The inscription date. 18-09-2015

This is not the only case pending against MEGO-GOLD. The Administration of the Village of MELIQ has filed a lawsuit to recover certain fees and has a court order to seize GBGD/MEGO-GOLD assets pending the trial.

In US Securities Exchange filings, GBGD declares that it has debts of $15,955,705 and no income.

GBGD has not filed any 8-K to disclose these material events but ignores the rules and regulations to timely file and instead files a 10-Q to bury these material events.

Tailings Dam Fails at Toukhmanuk, Global Gold Corp. Mine in Armenia

2015-11-08T17:20:00.000-05:00

You can read all Securities and Exchange disclosures filed by Global Gold Corp's (otcqb: GBGD) but you will find no mention that the tailings dams of the TOUKHMANUK MINE have multiple breaches. The only disclosure made by GBGD is that there mining operations are suspended until the approval and building of an new tailings dam.

On SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 at a PUBLIC HEARING held at the MELIQ village, where the TOUKHMANUK MINE is located, environmental engineers confirmed that GBGD has illegally (without documents) built a new tailings dam because of breaches at the 2 older dams.

This information was published by UNECE sponsored AARHUS Centers of Armenia

Tense atmosphere in the municipality of Melikgyugh

12.09.2015
On September 9, public debates were held on preliminary environmental impact assessment of the application on upgrading of Tukhmanuk gold mining complex, tailings dump’s protective fence and tailings temporary dry storage draft submitted by “MEGO Gold” CJSC at the village municipality of Melikgyugh of Aragatsotn region of the RA.
Participants were K. Movsisyan, chief specialist of the “Environmental Expertise” SNCO, T. Baghdasaryan, “Mego Gold” LLC’s administrative deputy director, the company’s designers V. Tevosyan and H. Nikoghosyan, H. Poghosyan, the NA expert, H. Mkrtchyan, head of Melikgyugh community, representatives of the H. the Ombudsman’s office, community residents, coordinator of Aparan Aarhus Centre, leaders of “Environmental Public Alliance” and “Greens Union” NGOs, journalists of Shant TV and “Ecolur” environmental-informational NGO.V. Tevosyan, author of the project, director of “Konsekoard” CJSC presented a part of the draft which was related to the plant upgrading and construction of the crushing plant. According to the speaker the operation of the device will include environmental risks associated with the spread of dust arising during crushing and emissions, but the installed absorbing devices will devour the emissions dust and not allow it to spread around.

About the next question on the existing tailings dumps stabilization and construction of tailings temporary storage facility spoke designer H. Nikoghosyan. He noted that currently the three tailings are in a poor condition, collapses of fence were occurred.

According to designer H. Nikoghosyan and K. Movsisyan, chief specialist of the “Environmental Expertise” SNCO the reason of the collapse was that previously was carried out raising of one of the tailings fence without draft documents, without an insulating layer and a protective screen. To improve the current emergency situation is necessary to combine the existing tailings dumps and build a common one.

H. Nikoghosyan said that for storing the old tails is monitored two options: the first is to build a temporary storage on 3 hectares, in a height of 3 meters or to build a new tailings dam and to transfer the old tails there.

It should be noted, that the community residents and environmentalists were repeatedly addressing questions demanding clarification to speakers. Many questions were left unanswered; the answers of some questions aroused the residents’ anger and frustration.

Both the environmentalists and the community residents expressed their concern about the violations committed by “Mego Gold” LLC, failing to comply with its obligations and damages caused to the village.

To the expert of Environmental expertise SNCO were presented several challenges which are the result of the operation of the mine, the enrichment plant and the tailings dumps. The discussion was very heated.

Some of environmentalists and local residents claimed that they are strongly opposed to the submitted project and the mine operation in general.

The links of videos of public debates of Shant TV and EcoLur are below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDJC4jiIC88
http://www.shanttv.com/ru/news/political/2015_09_09/17026/

Natalya Manukyan
Coordinator of Aparan Aarhus Center
Tel: (+374) 94 224926
E-mail: aarhusaparan@mail.ru, info_aparan@aarhus.am
Translated by Anush Beybutyan

Finding: Global Gold Corp. (otcqb:GBGD) involved in Human Rights Abuses in Armenia

2015-05-21T23:12:00.000-04:00

On March 31, 2015, the Human Rights Defender of Armenia, Ombudsman Karen Andreasyan, published his Annual Report examining the activities of 25 Armenian government agencies and compiled 167 systemic problems which have violated the human rights of thousands of people in Armenia.

Pages 173-175 of the Ombudsman's Annual Report deals with the Human Rights abuses against the residents of Meliq Village where Mego-Gold LLC (a subsidiary of Global Gold Corp) has been trying for 4 years to get its third tailings dam approved for its Toukhmanuk Gold Mine.

(see http://extortion-in-armenia.blogspot.ca/2014/10/local-villagers-at-meliq-oppose-gbgds.html)

The chief provocateur of the Meliq Community is none other than Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, the President, CEO, Chairman, Director and Legal Counsel of Global Gold Corp, a penny stock listed on the otcmarkets (otcqb:GBGD), that controls the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine.

Surprisingly, Mr. Van Z. Krikorian is also the co-chair of the Armenian Assembly of America (AAA), which is a tax exempt 301(c) registered lobby group that promotes public awareness of Armenian issues, encourage greater Armenian-American participation in the American democratic process, and assist in humanitarian and development programs in Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh, while strengthening the US-Armenia and US-Nagorno Karabakh relationships.

While Mr. Van Z. Krikorian is an active member of the US-Armenian community and a "respected" lawyer fighting for human rights for the Armenian people in the USA, in Armenia, he does not appear to be interested in Armenian Human Rights, and is pushing to build a gold mine, which the local Meliq Village community opposes.

Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, clearly has a conflict of interest. He operates a company that has business dealings with the Armenian government and also has access the Government of Armenia through his ties with the AAA.

He has used these ties to keep his projects alive in Armenia. In the past I have tried to expose these ties in my blogs. (see http://gbgd-armenia-mining.blogspot.ca/2013/05/oh-what-tangled-web-we-weave-when-first.html)

Krikorian fights for Armenian Rights but his Co. GBGD abuses Armenian Rights in Armenia. http://t.co/xUm9lW3GHH https://t.co/dXgMIlYY01
— Bill Mavridis (@bmavridis) June 11, 2015

The Ombudsman's report reads:

In general, environmental issues have received over 100 complaints in 2014, the Ministry received complaints, there were also complaints about the environmental decision relating to the environmental impact assessment and examination of projects, project documents and their authorized by the relevant social and professional organizing hearings between a small period of time, being a small space allocated for the public hearing, public hearings on the project and the statement, the ministry's official website late placement, etc.

For example, according to Melik village community of 74 residents' complaints, they were not aware of it to February 2, 2014, the ministry website said the former "Environmental Impact Assessment" The procedure established by Article 8 of Law of February 10, 2014 at 11: 00 pm will be held at Yerevan's Sundukyan Street 23/100 had "Mego-Gold" LLC's Aragatsotn province Tukhmanuk tailings project revised environmental part of the environmental impact of public hearings. Therefore, the discussion took place without the affected community participation.

The study showed that in accordance with the law has not complied with the above procedure preceding the "Environmental Impact Assessment" of the Law Article 6 of the procedure, the intended operation of the notification provision. Thus, any initiator (in this case, "Mego-Gold" LLC) in the surrounding Environmental impact assessment of any activity implementation after being notified authority within 7 days to inform the affected community leaders and the public about the planned activities of the project proposals, to the affected community leaders and the initiator notice within 15 days organize the planned activities. Public hearings on the media information about planned activity, date and place of the hearing.

According to the law, if within 30 days of the affected community or society's proposals are sent to the authorized body, is considered a positive opinion of the affected community. In this case, the Ministry of Janaury 17, 2014. Melikgyugh was written notice to the Chairman of the procedure laid down in Article 6 of the Law on the implementation of planned activities within the prescribed 30-day period before and after the completion of the public hearings on February 1, 2014 was published, and based on February 10. In 2014, organized by the Public Hearings are directed to the law, Article 8 procedure documentation to the study, which was essentially an environmental impact assessment of the procedure in 2nd round thus clearly defined by law as binding public hearing dates were set as a result of various and procedures to ensure the implementation of environmental impact on the availability of complete and comprehensive conclusion. Therefore, the Ministry of affected communities should enable the prescribed 30-day period for submitting its opinion, which would be considered positive only in the event of failure. Thus, the Ministry violated above-mentioned period and further measures taken earlier.

The Proposal. Violations of procedures to ensure the rule of organizing public hearings, environmental impact assessment and evaluation of projects, project documentation for proper consideration of the affected community's full involvement in the procedure.

AARHUS: Global Gold Referred For Criminal Investigation

2015-01-23T12:49:00.000-05:00

http://aarhus.am/?page_id=8337&lang=en

On December 22, 2014 The Armenian based environmental NGO, EcoRight, filed a request with the Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia to commence a criminal investigation against Mego-Gold (Global Gold subsidiary that operates the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine) for violating the laws of Armenia, and more specifically:

* embezzlement of state property through fraud;
* tax evasion through false entrepreneurship, hiding overpayments and other gained material benefits, which has caused major damage to the citizens of the Republic of Armenia;
* Performing illegal commercial activities without a special permit (license) to carry out entrepreneurial activities subject to licensing;
* violation of rules in implementing environmental safety activities;
* features of crimes in violation of rules of mineral resources conservation and use.

On January 16, 2015, The AArhus website (http://aarhus.am) published a confirmation letter dated December 26, 2014 issued by the Ministry of Nature Protection (Environment) confirming that "no inspections were conducted in the area of the (Toukhamnuk) mine, and thus no environmental impact assessment was made."

The letter from the chief of staff of the Ministry of Nature protection goes on to say that the "Tukhmanuk mine violations (have been forwarded) to the law enforcement authorities for initiating criminal proceedings."

English Translation of Original Complaint to the Ministry December 22, 2014:

English Translation of Reply from the Ministry December 26, 2014:

Armenian version of Original Complaint to the Ministry December 22, 2014:

Armenian version of Reply from the Ministry December 26, 2014:

OPEN LETTER TO SEC ENFORCEMENT: File # 002-69494 Global Gold Corp (GBGD)

2015-01-22T12:47:00.001-05:00

January 21, 2015

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

RE: GLOBAL GOLD CORP (GBGD) File No: 002-69494

Mr. John Reynolds, Assistant Director
US Securities and Exchange Commission

ReynoldsJ@sec.gov

Ms. Tia L. Jenkins
Senior Assistant Chief Accountant
US Securities and Exchange Commission
JenkinsT@sec.gov

Mr. John Coleman, Mining Engineer
Division of Corporate Finance
US Securities and Exchange Commission
ColemanJ@sec.gov

Dear Mr. John Reynolds, Ms. Tia Jenkins and Mr. John Coleman,

Global Gold has failed to fully disclose its affairs in Armenia since 2008. It is relatively easy for them to hide the truth because material contracts and public documents are only posted in Armenia and only in the Armenian language. Furthermore a number of material contracts have not been posted in SEC filings or the website of Global Gold Corp, namely Mining Contract No 287 regarding the contractual obligations related to GBGD's flagship gold project, the Toukhmanuk Mine, held by its subsidiary, Mego-Gold LLC, in the republic of Armenia.

I have presented to you in the past concrete evidence of failures of GBGD to disclose material facts that make their 8-K, 10-Q and 10-K disclosures misleading to investors.

I recently posted on Investors Hub (link http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109463083) and on my blog "Is There Any Gold in The Toukhmanuk Mine in Armenia, Worth Mining" (link http://toukhmanuk.blogspot.ca/2014/12/armenian-ngo-demands-criminal.html) updates on the continuing saga of Global Gold Corp (Mego-Gold) in Armenia.

My recent blog presents a demand letter sent by Environmental NGO, Ecological Right (EcoRight), to the Minister of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia, seeking criminal investigation and charges against GBGD/Mego-Gold. EcoRight accuses GBGD of:

embezzlement of state property through fraud;
tax evasion through false entrepreneurship, hiding overpayments and other gained material benefits, which has caused major damage to the citizens of the Republic of Armenia;
Performing illegal commercial activities without a special permit (license) to carry out entrepreneurial activities subject to licensing;
violation of rules in implementing environmental safety activities;
features of crimes in violation of rules of mineral resources conservation and use.

The complaint is a result of EcoRight's efforts in documenting the illegal operations of Global Gold at the Toukhmanuk gold mine. EcoRight's research and my research all confirm that the Toukhmanuk mine is technically in default of its mining license obligations. GBGD has failed to disclose in its SEC EXHIBITS the Toukhmanuk MINING CONTRACT No. 287 issued in 2006, which should not be confused with the MINING LICENSE No. HA-L -14/356, now referred to as ShATV-29/184, December 12, 2012. The MINING CONTRACT discloses all obligations entered into between Mego-Gold/GBGD and the State. It includes the mine plan and the mining and investment requirements.

This and other issues related to GBGD's Toukhmanuk MINING CONTRACT No. 287 were covered in my email to you, and others, on November 18, 2013, where I state:

"MEGO-GOLD was required to mine 80,000 tones per year (tpy) of mineralized ore by open pit method for 2 years and then move to underground mining method at a rate of 168,500 tpy for 6.5 years. Since 2006 Global Gold has claimed that it mined 176,400 tones of ore in its SEC filings in an effort to mislead investors and the SEC that it has met its requirement to mine 160,000 tones of mineralized ore in the open pit section of the TOUKHMANUK mine. THE TRUTH IS, and can be confirmed from reading the official Armenian Mine production records deposited by MEGO GOLD with the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of the Republic of Armenia, that MEGO-GOLD has only mined 86,420 tones of mineralized ore in the open pit. GBGD has overstated it mining volume 89,980 tones to cover up the fact that they have not fulfilled the mining requirements of their license, to fool investors, the SEC and potential new JV partners."

GBGD's 10-K only provides the following incomplete description on the property related to its license and contracts. I have added some comments below;

" Toukhmanuk

The Toukhmanuk property is adjacent to the Hankavan property in central Armenia, between the Aragatsotn and Kotayk provinces. The property includes seven surrounding exploration sites as well as other assets. The property is located approximately 60 km (72 km by road) north of Yerevan, close to the Town of Aparan and some 75 km (by road) from the Alaverdi copper smelter in northern Armenia.  Access to the Toukhmanuk Property is by paved road (about 57 km from Yerevan to the turn-off of the road north of Aparan and about 15 km by dirt road from Aparan to Melikkyugh, the nearby village to the site).  Local infrastructure is available at the site and at nearby towns.  Infrastructure at the site includes electrical power, cell phone network and road building equipment.  Logistical support, in terms of power, is available at the Toukhmanuk site, and at Melikkyugh, which is linked by a 10 Kv line to the Armenian Power grid.  Water is available from natural sources within the property, independent of community sources.  In addition to the central property, the acquisition included a 200,000 tonne per year capacity plant [it is a cement mill used to crush ore and breaks down all the time].  The Company has maintained the plant’s crushers, mills, and gravitation circuits ingood condition while also adding a hydro cyclone and flotation cells, as well as building a new tailings dam [they have been trying to build this new tailings dam since 2011, which permit was refused in April 2013]. Other major assets at the property include several bulldozers, excavators and a track trencher which are all in good condition [I have seen this equipment rusting in a field; it is far from good condition].  The property also includes some temporary housing units, and hangers which are used to store core samples, a gold room, and a new ISO certified laboratory [ISO certified lab? Really? IMO this Lab would never pass real international standards and the Lab certificate is presently expired].

The area of the Toukhmanuk Property is underlain predominantly by Jurassic volcanic rocks and Cretaceous intrusive rocks.  The volcanic rocks comprise andesites and dacites, and the intrusive rocks are dominantly granitic with minor granitic gneiss and amphibolites.  Parts of the area are also covered by Tertiary volcanic rocks including obsidian and perlites.  Gold mineralization in the Toukhmanuk area is hosted by both volcanic and intrusive rocks. [ A Canadian Geologist you has visited TOUKHMANUK described this property as a massive shear zone with an anostomizing vein system]

On October 27, 2009, the Company issued a press release announcing the approval of the first stage. The Republic of Armenia’s State Natural Resources Agency (the "Agency") issued its certificate based on the proposal of the Agency’s State Geological Expert Commission made during its October 23, 2009 session, all as further disclosed on our website.

On November 18, 2009, the Company issued a press release announcing that following up on the issuance of the approving a first stage gold reserve, the Republic of Armenia’s State Natural Resources Agency (the “Agency”) has delivered its full decision with backup calculations on November 13, 2009. The Agency issued its decision based on the proposal of the Agency’s State Geological Expert Commission made during its October 23, 2009 session. A copy of the official approval and a partial unofficial translation are available on the company’s website www.globalgoldcorp.com (please refer to the “Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors” on page 3 of this report).

The Company has done geological mapping, ground geophysical surveys, trenching and diamond drill testing at Toukhmanuk and continues its exploration work there based on the Armenian historical GKZ records in conjunction with the exploration work and results done so far (please refer to the “Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors” on page 3 of this report). [failed to disclose 4000 meters of drilling done in 2011] Additional exploration work will need to be funded with additional funds raised through joint ventures, debt, equity or a combination thereof.

The Toukhmanuk property is a lode deposit which is being mined using an open pit method. [The Mine plan and Mining Contract required underground mining for 6.5 years. Never done] The Company has one national exploration license #15, as extended on July 2, 2013 until July 2, 2016 (available on the Company’s website), covering approximately 10,915 acres for sub-surface exploitation of gold.  The Company also has one national mining license #HA-L-14/356, since replaced under the new 2012 Armenian Mining Code with License #29/184 (available on the Company’s website), which covers the central section of the property and is approximately 446 acres for mining gold and silver. [No mention or disclosure of MINING CONTRACT #287, which is a material contract] On December 28, 2012, the Company received the new, renewable mining license through August 5, 2017 [this renewed mining license is disputed, since It was renewed illegally and for too long a length of time. All renewals are for 2 years not 3 years, but still not mention of the MINING CONTRACT which they are in breach of].  The Company is required to pay annual governmental fees of approximately $32,000.  The Company is also required to spend annually approximately $1,200,000 on exploration work [no evidence this investment has been spent on exploration work] and mining annually 168,500 tonnes of mineralized rock at the property as submitted and approved in its mining plan in order to maintain the licenses in good standing [this statement is incomplete statement ignoring required mining volumes from underground operations. Prior to the 2012 10K, GBGD only declared had to mine 80,000 tones per year and make $1,000,000 in exploration on the property. The 80,000 tones per year was for the open pit and only for 2 years, GBGD partially corrected this statement after I complained to their auditors. GBGD has only mined 86,420 tones of ore as per Armenian Government Records but falsely declares it mined 176,400 tones since 2006 in its SEC filings] (please refer to the “Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors” on page 3 of this report).  The exploration license area is defined by the following coordinates:

[omitted]

The Company is required to pay annual government fees and perform work at the property, both as described above, to keep the license in good standing. In various circumstances, Armenian law allows for annual work requirements to be cured in subsequent yearsand by other means without losing good standing status [Check the Armenian Law it does not say that, But GBGD gets away making these statements without baking them up, because no one really knows the laws outside Armenia and the CIS]. Failure to maintain good license status could result in the license being suspended or terminated under Armenian Law. The Company has not received any suspension or termination notices, but could based on the Company’s performance and other factors. [But could? which means what? that the non-performance and annual work requirements can't be cured. GBGD under the Mining Contract had to Mine.] See Item 1A “Risk Factors,” below.

In 2008, GGM upgraded the plant and lab, installed a new gold room, recommenced mining and production of concentrate, and continued its analysis of the prior year’s drill results.  Also, the Company compiled its reserve report and submitted it to the state committee on reserves of Armenia in March 2009 (please refer to the “Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors” on page 3 of this report).  The Company has generated minimal sales from gold and silver concentrate from the property.  Sales were approximately $6,000 in 2006 based on unmeasured old concentrate with waste concentrate, $10,400 in 2007 based on approximately 53 tonnes of concentrate with gold content of approximately 20.8 g/t gold, nothing in 2008, $136,600 in 2009 based on approximately 121 tonnes of concentrate with gold content of approximately 52.6 g/t gold, $358,400 in 2010 based on approximately 222 tonnes of concentrate with gold content of approximately 52.7 g/t gold, $81,702 in 2011 based on approximately 60 tonnes of concentrate with gold content of approximately 38.8 g/t gold, and none in 2012 and 2013. The Company has mined mineralized rock of approximately 52,000 tonnes in 2006 with content of approximately 1.27 g/t gold and 6.37 g/t silver, no mining in 2007, approximately 82,000 tonnes in 2008 with content of approximately 1.85 g/t gold and 5.21 g/t silver, no mining in 2009, approximately 21,000 tonnes in 2010 with content of approximately 2.08 g/t gold and 5.68 g/t silver, approximately 21,400 tonnes in 2011 with content of approximately 0.92 g/t gold and 3.32 g/t silver, and no mining in 2012 and 2013. [This data does not match Armenian State Records] As of December 31, 2013, the Company has spent approximately $11,310,000 on mining and exploration activities [how much on exploration, and where are the drill results?] at this property, excluding acquisition and capital costs.  In 2012, the Company installed two new mills at the plant to increase capacity and efficiency, but in 2012 and 2013 did not process any ore pending approval and construction of a new tailings dam and resolution of joint venture issues."

In 2014 GBGD through its subsidiary Mego-Gold deposited a new mine plan and application to extend their license, which officially expires in February 2015. This material information was never disclosed to investors through SEC filings. All this material information was hidden in Armenia and in the Armenian Language.

As stated above and in my November 18, 2013 email, the current MINING CONTRACT which was issued in 2006 requires GBGD to mine for 2 years by open-pit method, 6.5 years underground, and confirm its mineable resources and invest $1,000,000 a year in exploration on the project. GBGD has failed to meet these requirements and has made this application for a an extension of the mining license trying to bypass their failed MINING CONTRACT by abandoning underground mining and focus on the open pit mining. All this in hope to avoid the cancellation of their license due to defaulting on their obligations.

The new plan which was reviewed by the technical agencies of the Ministry of Nature Protection, as referred to in the letter by EcoRight, (see Armenian version of report BP-93: http://aarhus.am/Expert_PDF/Tuhmanuk%20verlucutyun.pdf) rejected GBGD/Mego-Gold's application on December 11, 2014. But you will not hear anything about this from GBGD. Unfortunately I do not have an English version of report BP-93, but will endeavour to provide to you shortly.

Granted that the truth about GBGD is getting out which is evidenced by their floundering stock price which is now about $0.02 a share, but investors have been hurt by GBGD's lack of disclosure and omission of facts, that have made their SEC disclosures misleading.

The SEC has tried and failed to bring transparency to GBGD's lack of disclosures since 2009. Your department issued a request for clarification of certain disclosures made by GBGD dated June 10, 2013(http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/319671/000000000013031522/filename1.pdf). Point 1,2,3 of the letter request clarification to issues related to Industry Guide 7 as well as details on their licenses related to all their properties:

1. We note your disclosure of tonnes and average grade of ore in this section of your filing. As a company incorporated in Delaware, only proven or probable reserves meeting the definitions in section (a) of Industry Guide 7 may be disclosed in filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Historically, the reporting of measured and indicated resources in term of tons and grade of mineralized material has been permitted. However, this material should be designated as mineralized material in your filing. Please

revise your disclosure accordingly.

2. Please provide an overview of the permits or licenses required to explore or mine in each of the countries in which you operate. In this regard, we note your disclosure of

exploration, mining, and special exploration licenses. Please ensure your disclosure

includes the permits and/or licenses your company currently has at each property and the

applicable terms, conditions, and expiration dates.

3. We note your disclosure of 2006 to 2012 concentrate sales values. Please disclose the

volume and grade of concentrate associated with these sales values. If necessary,

comment on metal recoveries and current stockpiles.

This is not the first time the SEC has requested clarification by GBGD under Industry Guide 7. In SEC letter dated February 2, 2010 you made the following comments 5,6,7 and demanded responses to questions from way back in 2009:

Engineering Comments

5. We note that you have not complied with comment 2 of our letter dated November 20, 2009. Since you do not have proven or probable reserves, identifying the company as a development stage enterprise, and claiming that you are engaged in the development of mineral properties is not consistent with the terminology guidance in Industry Guide 7 and is therefore not appropriate. This would be true even if you have realized some revenues from mineralization on your properties, given the uncertainty of not being able to establish proven and probable reserves. If you have these transactions, you would need to quantify and disclose the production obtained from your properties for each period, also to include the tonnage and grade of the material mined and concentrate produced. In either case, you should remove all terminology that indicates you have progressed beyond the exploration stage, and if production has been realized, we would expect disclosure clarifying that this has been obtained from properties that are in the exploration stage, for which you have not been able to establish proven and probable reserves as defined in Industry Guide 7; the uncertainty surrounding your ability to continue production under these circumstances should be emphasized. We reissue prior comment 2.

Marjan

6. We note your disclosure regarding reserve definitions of proven and probable reserves used in Armenia. Please include additional disclosure comparing and/or contrasting the reserve definitions of Armenia with the definitions in Industry Guide 7. In addition, please clarify in the text whether the proven and/or probable reserves under discussion are defined by Armenia, Canadian 43-101 or Industry Guide 7.

7. We note that you have not complied with comment 6 of our letter dated November 20, 2009. We continue to believe that you need to clarify the nature of any facilities and infrastructure, including a description of any major equipment at your exploration/mine sites, or if there is none, a statement that the properties have no significant assets, surface or underground workings or facilities/infrastructure. We reissue prior comment 6.

In September 24, 2009 the Sec made the following requests too:

Engineering Comments

General

10. We note that you refer to or use terms such as potential mineralization, drill indicated resources, measured, indicated, or inferred resources on your website. As you may know, for U.S. reporting purposes, measures of mineral reserves must be consistent with the definitions set forth in Industry Guide 7. These generally differ from measurement systems that guide the estimation of resources. If you continue to make references on your website to measures other than those recognized by the SEC, please accompany such disclosure with the following

cautionary language:

“Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors - The United States Securities and

Exchange Commission limits disclosure for U.S. reporting purposes to

mineral deposits that a company can economically and legally extract or

produce. We use terms on this web site, such as “reserves,” “resources,”

“geologic resources,” “proven,” “probable,” “measured,” “indicated,” or

“inferred,” which may not be consistent with the reserve definitions

established by the SEC. U.S. investors are urged to consider closely the

disclosure in our Form 10-K. You can review and obtain copies of these

filings from our website at http://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml.”

Please indicate the location of this cautionary language in your response.

General Overview, page 3

11. We note your statement that your company is in the development stage. The terms development and production have very specific meanings within Industry Guide 7 (see www.sec.gov/about/forms/industryguides.pdf). The term development stage should be used to describe companies that are engaged in preparing reserves for production, while the term production stage should be used to describe companies that are engaged in commercial-scale, profit-oriented extraction of minerals. Since you do not disclose any reserves as defined by Industry Guide 7, please revise disclosures that include the terms develop, development or production throughout your document, as necessary to avoid implying that you have progressed beyond the exploration stage. For example, you may replace this terminology, as appropriate, with terms such as explore or exploration, and you should identify your company as an exploration stage enterprise in the financial statement head notes to comply with Instruction 1 to paragraph (a) of Industry Guide 7.

Armenia Properties, Page 5

12. We note your reference to property maps that are posted on your website. Please insert small-scale maps in your filing showing the location and access to each of your material properties, as required by Instruction 3.B to Item 102 of Regulation S-K. Please note that our EDGAR program now accepts Adobe PDF files and digital maps, so please include these maps in filings that are uploaded to EDGAR. It is relatively easy to include automatic links at the appropriate locations within the document to GIF or JPEG files, which will allow figures and diagrams to

appear in the right location when the document is viewed on the Internet. For more information, please consult the EDGAR manual, and if additional assistance is required, please call Filer Support at (202) 551-3600 for Post-Acceptance Filing Issues or(202) 551-8900 for Pre-Acceptance Filing Issues. We believe the guidance in Instruction 3.B of Item 102 of Regulation S-K would generally require maps and drawings with the following features:

• A legend or explanation showing, by means of pattern or symbol, every pattern or symbol used on the map or drawing.

• A graphical bar scale; additional representations of scale such as "one inch equals one mile" may be utilized provided the original scale of the map has not been altered.

• A north arrow.

• An index map showing where the property is situated in relationship to the state, province, or other geographic area in which it is located.

• A title of the map or drawing, and the date on which it was drawn.

• In the event interpretive data is submitted in conjunction with any map, the identity of the geologist or engineer that prepared such data. Any drawing should be simple enough or of sufficiently large scale to clearly show all features on the drawing.

13. Please disclose the following information for each of your properties:

• The nature of your ownership interest in the property.

• A description of all interests in your properties, including the terms of all underlying agreements and royalties.

• The process by which mineral rights are acquired at this location and the basis and duration of your mineral rights, surface rights, mining claims or concessions.

• An indication of the type of claim or concession, such as placer or lode, exploration or exploitation, whether the mining claims are State or Federal mining claims, patented or unpatented claims, mining leases, or mining concessions.

• Certain identifying information, such as the property names, claim numbers, grant numbers, mining concession name or number, and dates of recording and expiration that is sufficient to enable the claims to be distinguished from other claims that may exist in the area or your properties.

• The conditions that must be met to retain your claims or leases, including quantification and timing of all necessary payments, annual maintenance fees, and an indication of who is responsible for paying these fees.

• The area of your claims, either in hectares or in acres.

Please ensure that you fully discuss the material terms of the land or mineral rights securing agreements, as required under paragraph (b)(2) of Industry Guide 7.

14. Please disclose the information required under paragraph (b) of Industry Guide 7 for all your material properties listed under this heading. For any properties identified that are not material, please include a statement to that effect, clarifying your intentions. For each material property, include the following information:

• The location and means of access to your property, including the modes of transportation utilized to and from the property.

• Any conditions that must be met in order to obtain or retain title to the property, whether you have surface and/or mineral rights.

• A brief description of the rock formations and mineralization of existing or potential economic significance on the property.

• A description of any work completed on the property and its present condition.

• The details as to modernization and physical condition of the plant and equipment, including subsurface improvements and equipment.

• A description of equipment, infrastructure, and other facilities.

• The current state of exploration of the property.

• The total costs incurred to date and all planned future costs.

• The source of power and water that can be utilized at the property.

• If applicable, provide a clear statement that the property is without known reserves and that the proposed program is exploratory in nature.

You may refer to Industry Guide 7, paragraphs (b)(1) through (5), for specific guidance pertaining to the foregoing, available on our website at the following address: www.sec.gov/about/forms/industryguides.pdf

15. On a related point, it appears you should also expand your disclosure concerning the exploration plans for the properties to address the following points.

• Disclose a brief geological justification for each of the exploration projects written in non-technical language.

• Give a breakdown of the exploration timetable and budget, including estimated amounts that will be required for each exploration activity, such as geophysics, geochemistry, surface sampling, drilling, etc. for each prospect.

• If there is a phased program planned, briefly outline all phases.

• If there are no current detailed plans to conduct exploration on the property, disclose this prominently.

• Disclose how the exploration program will be funded.

• Identify who will be conducting any proposed exploration work, and discuss their qualifications.

16. We recommend that a brief description of your QA/QC protocols be disclosed, addressing matters such as sample preparation, controls, custody, assay precision and accuracy. This would apply to exploration and operational analytical procedures.

Tukhmanuk, page 5

17. Please disclose your annual production for all properties to comply with Instruction 3 to Item 102 of Regulation S-K.

18. We note your reference to a reserve report that was submitted to the state committee on reserves of Armenia in March 2009, inferring proven and probable reserves are located on your properties. Please forward to our engineer as supplemental information and not as part of your filing, information that establishes the legal, technical, and economic feasibility of materials that you have designated as reserves, pursuant to paragraph (c)(2) of Industry Guide 7 Rule 12b-4 of Regulation 12B. This information should include:

• Property and geologic maps

• Description of your sampling and assaying procedures

• Drill-hole maps showing drill intercepts

• Representative geologic cross-sections and drill logs

• Description and examples of your cut-off calculation procedures

• Cutoff grades used for each category of your reserves and resources

• Justifications for the drill hole spacing used to classify and segregate proven and probable reserves

• A detailed description of your procedures for estimating reserves

• Copies of any pertinent engineering or geological reports, and executive summaries of feasibility studies or mine plans which including the cash flow analyses

• A detailed permitting and government approval schedule for the project, particularly identifying the primary environmental or construction approval(s) and your current status on that schedule.

I have reviewed all the replies made by GBGD to these letters since 2009, and to this date GBGD has failed to respond appropriately to SEC requests.

The other problem with GBGD disclosures is the publishing of a NI 43-101 report on the Toukhmanuk and Getik properties (Getik license was lost last year). GBGD is not listed on a Canadian exchange and the 43-101 report has never been vetted by the TSX. From my experience in dealing with the TSX and reviewing 43-101 reports, for investment purposes, the published 43-101 report on the Toukhmanuk property would never, ever, be approved by the TSX, in its current form for the following reasons:

The first issue is that the 43-101 report erroneously converts and reports GKZ classifications C1, C2 and P1 as Measured, Indicated and Inferred Resources. That can not be done without work being done on the resources by a qualified person. Mr. Christopher JV Wheatly, the geologist and author of this 43-101 report has not done any work on theses resource to classify under CIM as Measured and Indicated, neither has GBGD and neither has the Armenian GKZ. All the resources in this report have to be reported in their original classification as C1, C2 and P1. The State Resource Agency of Armenia (GKZ) is not qualified to define these resources as Measured and Indicated under "international standards" as it attempts to do in its DecisionN234. As you are well aware there are many standards for classifying resources but basically two standards stand out CIM (43-101) and JORC. You may be aware what kind of work has to go in to defining and reporting resources. Global Gold has not done this work under JORC or CIM(43-101), it has done it under GKZ, and I believe it has done it poorly considering the GKZ did not find the resource reported in its Decision N234 acceptable to amend the State Inventory with the FOND to reflect the new resource. In effect the GKZ Decision N234 was a non-decision.

The second issue relates to the Toukhmanuk resources completed prior to 2006, namely the 2004 and 1995 GKZ reports which the author of the Behre Dolbear report states them as "Historical Resources". This again is a problem. With the introduction of NI 43-101 in February 2001, all resources published after this date must meet 43-101 requirements for classification and reporting. Therefore it is illegal to report on the 2004 GKZ Decision N28 as historical, this is not compliant. This is the same rule under JORC but the cutoff date for Historical Resources is 1989. Furthermore JORC does not allow the use of historical data unless you receive a waiver: http://www.jorc.org/docs/jorc2004web_v2.pdf

2. Reporting historical estimates or estimates currently not reported in accordance with the JORC Code Companies seeking to list on ASX wishing to include information in their prospectus which is not JORC compliant need to approach ASX for a waiver, and, subject to certain conditions, waivers may be granted. Listed companies seeking to announce information that does not comply with the JORC Code (PDF 335KB) will also need to approach ASX for a waiver, and, in certain circumstances, waivers may be granted (see Companies Update dated 5 December 2007). Where companies lodge announcements which are based on historical estimates that are not reported in accordance with the JORC Code and not the subject of an ASX waiver, or do not come under Clause 18 of the JORC Code, it is likely that ASX will request the company to make a further announcement retracting the comments made in the earlier announcement. In addition ASX may pursue further supervisory action.

The third point is the use of the GKZ N234 Decision to confirm resources on the Toukhmanuk Project. None of the work done to confirm the resources is compliant to NI 43-101 or JORC. The work was never done or supervised by a "Qualified Person" it was performed by Mr. Henryk Mkrytchyan who holds no acceptable credentials under CIM or JORC. Furthermore all the assays compiled and reported by GBGD in their application to the GKZ in 2008 were performed at GBGD's own lab which Mr. Krikrorian claims has received "international, ISO, certification". The Toukhmanuk lab has not received International ISO certification, it was received certification from the ISO Agency in Armenia. I believe that this lab would never qualify for ISO certification, if it was done by a reputable US, Australian or Canadian agency, let alone pass an annual review and inspection. I am also told the lab's ISO permit expired in 2011. The SGS lab located in Kappan (southern Armenia) has a similar ISO certificate which the Manager informed me was issued after a single visit by the Armenian ISO Agent and he considered that certification process amateurish at best. SGS Kapan does not operate as an ISO approved lab in Kappan even though it has this Armenian issued ISO certification, SGS Kappan claims it only uses SGS standards, which are highly regarded. The only two recognized ISO certified labs in the region that can perform gold analysis are the ALS lab in Romania and the SGS lab in Bulgaria. There is also a lab in St-Petersburg Russia but customs clearance will delay you forever.

But the key question to ask is why did GBGD create their own lab? I refer you to a Global Gold news release of January 11, 2008.

Global Gold Announces Plant Commissioning And Gold Production In Armenia At Toukhmanuk

Greenwich, CT – January 11, 2008 – Global Gold Corporation (OTCBB-GBGD), is pleased to announce that it commissioned its upgraded gold processing plant in Toukhmanuk, Armenia on December 20, 2007, and has continued production from ore stockpiles since, just as gold prices have undergone epochal changes. The Toukhmanuk property is located in the North Central Armenian Belt.

In December, an offtake agreement for the plant's gold production was concluded with the Sagamar Company, and the first delivery of 53 tonnes of concentrate was made before year end. Production had initially commenced in 2006, but was terminated because of the need to upgrade the plant substantially, including a new flotation circuit. A new tailings dam was also constructed in 2007. Current plant capacity is 100,000 tonnes per year. Current throughput is approximately 6,000 tonnes per month with gold grades between 2 – 3 grams per ton.

In addition, the Company is pleased to announce that it has received international, ISO, certification for its laboratory at the Toukhmanuk site. Over the last two years, the Company has drilled over 15,000 meters to confirm the historic GKZ resource at Toukhmanuk of over 2 million ounces of gold and approximately 12 million ounces of silver. Even with control checks in labs outside Armenia, results were inconsistent, and a re-assaying program was undertaken with the new lab. Based on preliminary analysis, it is anticipated that Toukhmanuk may include a wider zone of mineralization to be bulk mined, rather than a higher grade narrow vein underground operation as the initial reports indicated. As small scale production continues from the upgraded plant in 2008, Global Gold is preparing mining and processing plans to substantially increase production.

Global Gold Corporation, an international gold mining, development and exploration company with properties in Armenia, Chile and Canada, is committed to building shareholder value and maintaining social and environmental responsibilities. Minera Global Chile Limitada is a subsidiary through which Global Gold does all of its business in Chile. Global Gold Mining LLC operates in Armenia as a subsidiary of Global Gold Corporation. Global Gold Uranium LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Global Gold Corporation, is engaged in the exploration for and development of uranium deposits in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

More information can be found at www.globalgoldcorp.com.

The check assays referred to in the press release were completed by Activation Laboratories in Ontario, Canada. GBGD re-assayed the Toukhmanuk core and trench data at their own lab because the assays from Activation Laboratories were "inconsistent", as stated in the Jan 11, 2008 news release. I have anecdotal evidence that the assay results were falsified by the Toukhmanuk Lab so as to aid in confirming the historical reserves of 1995 and 2004 GKZ reports, so as to receive a new and expanded resource in 2009 from the GKZ, as published in decision N234. See: http://www.globalgoldcorp.com/docs/20091119DecisionN234-UnofficialTranslation.pdf and http://www.globalgoldcorp.com/docs/20091113DecisionN234-OfficialVersion.pdf

In late 2010 I received an anonymous package which included the list of the drill results of the Toukhmanuk gold project. This list is the same list published by the GKZ on the Reserves of the Toukhmanuk Gold Project, that can also be found on Global Gold's website at: http://globalgoldcorp.com/docs/20091119DecisionN234-UnofficialTranslation.pdf

The difference between the two lists, is that the real gold values of the drill results, as claimed by the anonymous sender, are penciled in. If this is true then there appears to be serious fraud involved at Toukhmanuk and at Global Gold. I have no reason to doubt that the numbers I received are true because to this date Global Gold has failed to mine high grade gold as indicated in its version of the drill results. The alleged real values of the gold grades (penciled in) can be reviewed below along with the actual published data by GBGD, which was handed to the Armenian GKZ.

Here is the GKZ data as published by Global Gold (page17).

Here are the alleged real results penciled in (page 17).

Drill hole Number Reported GKZ Alleged Real Value

-------------------- ----------------- -------------------

T-44-06 (GGMT 01548) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 0.7m @ 1.2 g/t Au

T-38-06 (GGMT 07991) 1m @ 3.90 g/t Au 1.0m @ 1.0 g/t Au

T-60-06 (GGMT 12297) 1m @ 1.20 g/t Au 0.4m @ 0.5 g/t Au

T-24-06 (GGMT 05402) 1m @ 10.00 g/t Au 0.7m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-53-06 (GGMT 11297) 1m @ 9.60 g/t Au 0.4m @ 0.6 g/t Au

T-85-07 (GGMT 13946) 1m @ 4.00 g/t Au 1.0m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-30-06 (GGMT 07150) 1m @ 2.30 g/t Au 1.0m @ 0.6 g/t Au

Here is the GKZ data as published by Global Gold (page18).

Here are the alleged real results penciled in (page 18).

Drill hole Number Reported GKZ Alleged Real Value

-------------------- ----------------- -------------------

T-91-07 (GGMT 15734) 1m @ 7.20 g/t Au 0.7m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-32-06 (GGMT 07866) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 1m @ 0.6 g/t Au

T-31-06 (GGMT 07625) 1m @ 3.90 g/t Au 1m @ 0.6 g/t Au

T-34-06 (GGMT 07232) 1m @ 6.20 g/t Au 1m @ 1.6 g/t Au

T-40-06 (GGMT 08782) 1m @ 8.19 g/t Au 1m @ 2.1 g/t Au

T-45-06 (GGMT 08654) 1m @ 7.02 g/t Au 1m @ 1.8 g/t Au

T-39-06 (GGMT 08163) 1m @ 2.34 g/t Au 1m @ 0.6 g/t Au

T-41-06 (GGMT 08356) 1m @ 3.12 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-82-07 (GGMT 13706) 1m @ 7.00 g/t Au 1m @ 1.0 g/t Au

T-70-06 (GGMT 10472) 1m @ 3.80 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-26-06 (GGMT 06386) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 1m @ 1.7 g/t Au

T-35-06 (GGMT 07973) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-36-06 (GGMT 08945) 1m @ 8.60 g/t Au 0.7m @ 2.2 g/t Au

Here is the GKZ data as published by Global Gold (page19).

Here are the alleged real results penciled in (page 19).

Drill hole Number Reported GKZ Alleged Real Value

-------------------- ----------------- -------------------

T-94-07 (GGMT 14666) 1m @ 3.28 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-85-07 (GGMT 13958) 1m @ 8.10 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-89-07 (GGMT 15488) 1m @ 1.30 g/t Au 1m @ 0.2 g/t Au

T-91-07 (GGMT 15681) 1m @ 4.50 g/t Au 1m @ 1.15 g/t Au

To summarize the above tables we find the following:

Drill hole Number Reported GKZ Alleged Real Value
-------------------- ----------------- -------------------

T-44-06 (GGMT 01548) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 0.7m @ 1.2 g/t Au
T-38-06 (GGMT 07991) 1m @ 3.90 g/t Au 1.0m @ 1.0 g/t Au
T-60-06 (GGMT 12297) 1m @ 1.20 g/t Au 0.4m @ 0.5 g/t Au
T-24-06 (GGMT 05402) 1m @ 10.00 g/t Au 0.7m @ 0.8 g/t Au
T-53-06 (GGMT 11297) 1m @ 9.60 g/t Au 0.4m @ 0.6 g/t Au
T-85-07 (GGMT 13946) 1m @ 4.00 g/t Au 1.0m @ 0.8 g/t Au
T-30-06 (GGMT 07150) 1m @ 2.30 g/t Au 1.0m @ 0.6 g/t Au
T-91-07 (GGMT 15734) 1m @ 7.20 g/t Au 0.7m @ 0.8 g/t Au

T-32-06 (GGMT 07866) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 1m @ 0.6 g/t Au
T-31-06 (GGMT 07625) 1m @ 3.90 g/t Au 1m @ 0.6 g/t Au
T-34-06 (GGMT 07232) 1m @ 6.20 g/t Au 1m @ 1.6 g/t Au
T-40-06 (GGMT 08782) 1m @ 8.19 g/t Au 1m @ 2.1 g/t Au
T-45-06 (GGMT 08654) 1m @ 7.02 g/t Au 1m @ 1.8 g/t Au
T-39-06 (GGMT 08163) 1m @ 2.34 g/t Au 1m @ 0.6 g/t Au
T-41-06 (GGMT 08356) 1m @ 3.12 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au
T-82-07 (GGMT 13706) 1m @ 7.00 g/t Au 1m @ 1.0 g/t Au
T-70-06 (GGMT 10472) 1m @ 3.80 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au
T-26-06 (GGMT 06386) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 1m @ 1.7 g/t Au
T-35-06 (GGMT 07973) 1m @ 3.10 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au
T-36-06 (GGMT 08945) 1m @ 8.60 g/t Au 0.7m @ 2.2 g/t Au

T-94-07 (GGMT 14666) 1m @ 3.28 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au
T-85-07 (GGMT 13958) 1m @ 8.10 g/t Au 1m @ 0.8 g/t Au
T-89-07 (GGMT 15488) 1m @ 1.30 g/t Au 1m @ 0.2 g/t Au
T-91-07 (GGMT 15681) 1m @ 4.50 g/t Au 1m @ 1.15 g/t Au

IT IS ALLEGED THAT A TOTAL OF 24 ASSAYS ABOVE HAVE BEEN FALSIFIED AND THAT WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE THE NET EFFECT OF INCREASING THE GRADE OF THE RESOURCES FILED WITH THE GKZ AND MAKING THE TOUKHAMNUK RESOURCE SUSPECT.

Now you don't have to take my word for it...All the core was analyzed by GBGD/CRA in 2011 and 2012, as indicated in the Behre Dolbear report. Just get the data from them.

Considering GBGD has been mining grades in the range of <1.2 g/t Au, I believe the allegations of falsification of assays is true and needs to be investigated by the SEC.

The Fourth issue relates to the GKZ Decision N234 of October 30, 2009, which approved the reserves for Toukhmanuk Mine as:

C1: 4,104,300 t grading 1.85 g/t Gold and 6.31 g/t Silver(eq to Measured)

C2: 17,814,000 t grading 1,57 g/t gold and 4.55 g/t Silver(eq to Indicated)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C1 + C2: 21,918,300 t grading 1.62 g/t Gold and 4.88 g/t Silver(eq to Measured & Indicated)

The actual Table in the GKZ Decision N234 is posted in the Behre Dolbear report in Appendix 4 under the title GLOBAL GOLD RESOURCE APPROVAL STATEMENT, issued on October 27, 2009, while the Official Decision N234 is published on October 30, 2009.

Reviewing the official Republic of Armenia State Committee on Reserves (GKZ) report of October 30, 2009 it states in Point 1

"To approve the reserves of the Central Section of Toukhmanuk gold property".

In Point 4 it states:

"To propose to Republican Geological Fund State Non-Profit Organization to refrain from making changes resulting from Point 1 of this Decision in the Republican Balance of Properties of Natural Resources..."

It is evident that while GBGD received an approval of the Resource in the form of a statement from the GKZ, 3 days before the actual report was tabled. (This should raise some bells in of itself.)

The Decision N234 issued on October 30, 2009 conveys that the GKZ felt the work on the property needed to be improved so as to to allow for the reserves to be accepted in the "Republican Balance of Properties of Natural Resources the state balance sheet to reflect the changes of the reserves. Decision N234 appears to be a non-decision. The Agency with the state authority to approve resources issued a positive decision that it can't accept the results in the state balance? Is this possible? Is this legal?

The Behre Dolbear Report also publishes a new resource calculation provided by GBGD on page 35, that Global Gold has delineated the following resource using a 0.6 g/t cut-off.

Measured (C1) 6,043,000 t grading 3.10 g/t Gold and 23.83 g/t Silver

Indicated (C2) 18,767,000 t grading 1.99 g/t Gold and 15.71 g/t Silver

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Measured & Indicated 24,810,000 t grading 2.26 g/t Gold and 15.71 g/t Silver
(C1+C2)

This is a neat trick how you increase the resource from 21,918,300t to 24,810,000t (an increase of 2,891,700t or 13.19%) and increase the Gold grade from, 1.63 g/t to 2.26 g/t ( an increase of 0.63 g/t Au or 38.6%) and the Silver grade from 4.88 g/t to 15.71 g/t Silver (an increase of 10.83 g/t Ag or 221%). I find it difficult to believe, nay impossible, that when you include a lower cutoff you, get a higher grade of Gold in the resource calculation.

The GKZ numbers should never be reported as Measured &Indicated and Inferred, but as C1, C2 and P1. Frankly they should not be reported since a qualified person never did the work on these assays for these assays to be even reported here and they don't even qualify as Historical Resources as defined by CIM 43-101and JORC.

The press release issued by Global Gold on October 17, 2011 (http://www.globalgoldcorp.com/news/2011/GBGD-Release-Tech-Report-Ni-43-101-Standards-Toukhmanuk-Getik) should be removed as well as the 43-101 Report since they are misleading. GBGD does not have any M&I and Inferred resources as defined under NI 43-101. NI 43-101 forbids that historical data be used without disclaimers and cannot be used if not validated by a "qualified person". The data was never verified as is confirmed by Behre Dolbear themselves on page 6, section 2.3, where they state:

"Behre Dolbear has relied upon information provided and assumed that it has been accurate. Behre Dolbear has not carried out any independent exploration work, drilled any holes, carried out sampling or analyses on any of the prospects and assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information provided by the client."

Fifth Issue refers to the drilling that Global Gold completed after this Behre Dolbear Report was commissioned. The author of the report indicates on page 40 that GBGD "is currently working on a CIM compliant mineral resource estimate to include all assay results from 4,000 m of recent diamond drilling at Toukhmanuk in 2011."

RAKE was engaged in June 2011 to drill Toukhmanuk at US$218 to US$241 per meter which includes VAT, this is equal to $180 to $200 per meter without Vat not including extra fees. When I was drilling at Marjan in 2010 I was paying $165 per meter all in, no extras ($198 with Vat). Why was GBGD paying such a premium for drilling?

GBGD/Mego-Gold was drilling 4000 meters in 2011 as follows: June 500m, July 1000m, August 1250m and September 1250m. It is over 3 years now, and GBD has never published these results, probably because they found no gold, which would be a material disclosure or lack thereof.

Sixth Issue - Look at the Behre Dolbear Report Recommendations

"all previous drill core be reviewed"
"Intersections which were reported below detection be re-assayed, in particular T 29.
"check assays should also be carried out at certified lab outside Armenia so that the future data is conformable with CIM and JORC"
"Resource at Toukhmanuk need to be better defined with further drilling"
suggested drilling in appendix "would be designed to raise sufficient resources to reserves to underwrite at least five years production ad ensure payback..."

The only good thing that I note to date is that GBGD just cleaned up its website and misleading information on it, but continues to flaunt the Bear Dolbear 43-101 report, which was never vetted and in my analysis is fraudulent and contrary to CIM 43-101 rules to claim historical resources as Measured, Indicated and Inferred.

I continue to hope that the SEC moves to clean up this mess.

Bill Mavridis

Montreal, Canada
514-813-9200

Does Global Gold Corp. (otcqb:GBGD) Have any Gold Reserves at TOUKHMANUK?

2015-01-08T12:46:00.001-05:00

The AARHUS Centre of Armenia published analysis showing the gold reserves issued by the Armenia GKZ under Decree No. N234 are effectively null and void. Pretty much what I have been echoing for some time.

Read below or go to link: http://aarhus.am/?page_id=1383

About Toukhmanuk gold mine or Decree No. 234 being null and void

The Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of the RA is Confessing.

The Ministry agrees to declare that the “approved reserves” resulted by the supplementary exploration of Mego-Gold’s Toukhmanuk gold mine in 2006-2008 have not been registered in the balance sheet as a result of which has not been formed new right on Mineral Resource Management.

The web is untangling or about the Decree No. 234 to be null and void

Through the letter addressed to the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of the RA 23.09.2013, we wanted to get a clarification regarding the fact already discussed many times refer to the contradiction in the clauses1 and 4 of the Decree No. 234, dated in 30.10.2009 of the Agency for Mineral Resources of the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of the RA on the revaluation of Toukhmanuk gold mine reserves in the Aragatsotn Province by the “Mego-Gold” LLC in 2006-2008.

Because according to the clause 1 of that decision the Agency for Mineral Resources made decision:

to approve the reserves of the Central Area of Toukhmanuk gold mine of Aragatsotn Province as of 01.01.2009, in accordance with the Annex 1 to this decision as well as with the data of following table:

According to the 4th clause of the decision:

4. to offer the “Republican State Geological Fund” SNCO to refrain from making amendments in the republican balance sheet of the mineral deposits arising from the clause 1 of the decision until the implementation of the works mentioned in the previous clause.

The issue was worded as follows:

a. if the above mentioned approved reserves have been registered in the republican balance sheet of mineral reserves by the “Republican State Geological Fund” SNCO or not.

The response is the following:

In response to your above mentioned letter, the reserves of Toukhmanuk gold mine in Aragatsotn Province approved by the Decree No. 234, 30.10.2009 have not been registered in the balance sheet of the mineral deposits, in accordance with the demand of the 4th clause of the same decision.

Here we consider necessary to present some of the requirements set by the RA Code on mineral recourses:

Article 63
State registration of geological exploration works, mineral resources reserves, mines, developments
1. Geological exploration works are subject to state registration.
2. It is prohibited to implement geological exploration works without public record.
3. Mineral resources reserves, mines and mineral resources developments are subject to the state registration of the balance sheet, as well as in the form of mineral deposits and developments inventory.
4. On the basis of public records data on mineral resources reserves, mines, developments and geological studies is shaped the fund of mineral resource management.
5. Expert opinion on mineral resources reserves is a basis for registration in the balance sheet
7. As a result of re-establishment mineral resources reserves relevant amendments are made in the state registration

In its response the ministry actually confirms that the requirements of the paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 63 of the reserves state registration are overlooked by the competent authority, if the reserves were really approved in accordance with the paragraph 1 of the decision.

Or in contrary to the logic and the requirement of the laws the competent authority had approved incomplete explored reserves under the paragraph 1 of decision No. 234, so the Agency for Mineral Resources of the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of the RA has committed violation of the law protecting interests of Mego-Gold.

The logic requires making any conclusion based on the legal requirement, therefore, if in 2006-2008 the mine reserves based on the supplementary exploration results were not registered by Mego-Gold, then, proceeding from the above-mentioned paragraphs 1 and 7 of the Article 63, we can conclude that these resources cannot be called approved or reestablished, since relevant amendments were not made in the balance sheet.

“Confirmed” or “unconfirmed” concepts as separate concepts are not included in the Code. In the RA Code on Mineral Resources are commented the concepts “Resources” and “Accounting”.

It is worthy to speak about not registering the resources under the paragraph 4 of the decision N 234 which makes meaningless or null and void the paragraph 1 of the same decision.

Let’s take a few concepts that are commented in the code.

In accordance with the RA Code on Mineral Resources:

Article 3: the main concepts used in the Code:

11) Useful mineral resources- accumulation of useful minerals which volume, quantity, quality, and the position and shape are determined.
12) Mine – a part of the underground, which contains useful mineral which have got geological- economical evaluation.
15) Balance of Mineral Reserves – form of state registration of found mineral resources for each year as of January 1, which contains data on researched mines resources quantity, quality and degree of it exploration, as well as the change during the reporting period

The next question of our letter:

b. Whether the company has carried out the works mentioned in the paragraph 3 of the decision No. 234 or not.

Let us remind that the 3rd paragraph of the decision N 234 is the following; to underline the fact of incomplete exploration of the Central Area of Toukhmanuk gold mine of Aragatsotn Province and the strict necessity to solve the problems mentioned in the paragraph 2.1 of this Decision during the second phase of its supplementary exploration.

The answer is as follows: “The economic entity has not presented report on the activities planned by the paragraph 3 of the decision of Agency for Mineral Resources of the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of the RA as a result of which has not formed new rights on Mineral Resource Management.

The only “valuable” information in the response letter is that the ministry, however, reported that defective works have not been continued, and therefore have not formed new rights on Mineral Resource Management. This honest part of the answer we qualify as an acquisition, this is a news, perhaps unwittingly confession, because at the all response letters distracting from the issues the Ministry tried to disguise through the decision N 234 the fact of operating Mego-Gold illegally without a project and by open cast method and allegedly after revaluation and reestablishment of reserves the geological-economical new conditions predicted the effectiveness of the mine development by the open cast method.

It remains to ask the ministry if a new mineral right has not been formed then in this case how had been confirmed only open pit ore mining in accordance with the mining license agreement No. 287 dated 31.07.2006, and land allocation act 086 for underground mining, and on what legal basis in 12.28.2012 have been reformulated the mineral rights act already suspended by the licensing agreement in 01.11.2008, on what ground mentioned only open pit mine and land allocation established until 2017, when, according to the Ministry’s response letter addressed to us was mentioned that “Until today, the economic entity is implementing exploration activity in accordance with the PV -184 contract, which is valid until January 31, 2015.”

Maybe it is the same kind of misprint as the exploration license granted to Mego-Gold in 02.07.2013, issued for 4 years, instead of 3 years determined by the law. Somebody is prolonging the terms of the Mego-Gold documents by misprints; it is worthy to find out who is that unfortunate benefactor.

Besides making controversial analysis refer to the decision No. 234 we should clarify why the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of the RA closes eyes in favor of Mego – Gold which does not fulfill the duties required by law and is carrying out illegal mining.

18.10.2013

Greta Gaboyan

Armenian NGO Demands Criminal Investigation against Global Gold

2014-12-30T07:17:00.001-05:00

On December 22, 2014, Ecological Right, an Armenia based environmental NGO, sent a letter to the Minister of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia, demanding that a criminal investigation be opened on Mego-Gold, a subsidiary of Global Gold Corp and owner and operator of the Toukhmanuk Gold project.

See Copy of the translated Letter as published on the ARHUS Website of Armenia by clicking here

See Original Armenian Version by clicking here

Ecological-Right lists the following as grounds of criminal investigation and charges against Mego-Gold/Global-Gold.

embezzlement of state property through fraud;
tax evasion through false entrepreneurship, hiding overpayments and other gained material benefits, which has caused major damage to the citizens of the Republic of Armenia;
Performing illegal commercial activities without a special permit (license) to carry out entrepreneurial activities subject to licensing;
violation of rules in implementing environmental safety activities;
features of crimes in violation of rules of mineral resources conservation and use.

The letter is signed by the Chairman of Ecological Right NGO in Armenia, Mr. Arthur Grigorian.

Mr. Grigorian can be reached at:
tel: +37410621739
mob: +37491451320
e-mail: art.grigorian@gmail.com

Ecolur Reports That Toukhmanuk Gold Mine Expansion Rejected by the Armenian Government

2014-12-18T11:46:00.001-05:00

Local Armenian NGO, www.Ecolur.org , published an article today on its website that GBGD's flagship gold mine in Armenia, the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine owned and operated by its subsidiary in Armenia, Mego-Gold, had its mine plan REJECTED by the Ministry of Nature Protection (MNP).

In April 2013 the MNP rejected the tailings dam expansion and changed that ruling in June 2014 after the minister was changed. GBGD may still get an approval next year based on a new application. The problem is that GBGD is in technical default of its mining obligations and their mining license expires in February 2015; they may be out of time to make this gold mine work.

GBGD has failed to make this gold mine work over the last 6 years during the biggest gold bull market. Now GBGD has $14M in current debt with little or no cash, and gold prices are sinking.

GBGD is also being sued by its 49% joint venture partner of the Toukhmanuk Gold mine, Consolidated Resources Armenia (CRA), in the Royal Court of Jersey. CRA is seeking the court ordered liquidation of the JV and the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine. Meanwhile there is an injunction baring GBGD to take any action without the consent of CRA, that would encumber the asset.

Read ECOLUR articles below:

Armenia full versions: http://ecolur.org/hy/news/officials/nature-protection-ministry-denied-tukhmanuk-deposit-exploitation-project/6885/

English summary Versions: http://ecolur.org/en/news/officials/nature-protection-ministry-denied-tukhmanuk-deposit-exploitation-project/6885/

Plus the backup document published by the AARHUS Center
http://aarhus.am/?page_id=7956

Google translate of Armenia full version of article:

Nature Protection Ministry Turned Down Tukhmanuk Mining Project

18:29 December 15, 2014

The Ministry of Environment, "Environmental Expertise" is nixes "Mego Gold" is represented by the surface of the gold / Central station / deposit revised work plan.

Experts from the Ministry justification for the negative findings are as follows.

"- Adjusted to the situation map can not be verified due to lack of open and distance from the mine dumps economy and the possible impact on hydrological

- Hydrogeological and geological conditions in the area around the mine is not a full examination of the missing information and sources of groundwater, groundwater resource protection measures, if necessary, wet blasting and drilling program. In addition, the first stage of the operation of the center will be running mine Getik river bed changes, but the material is missing as a result of environmental impact assessments, exposure prevention, elimination or reduction measures for

- Design documentation is missing so far by the company's operations and planned activities on the environment as a result of all the possible positive and negative impacts of integrity, as well as their interaction. In addition, under the project "Environmental" of paragraph 9.1, the operation is completed, reclamation of the subject, again only to be violated as a result of the open pit areas - 4.39 hectares, dumps - 4.34 hectares, serving pit road - 4.4 hectares, was necessary for the implementation of the reclamation expenditures without justification, however, by drawing materials, pile economy under to be sold to a larger area of ??land than is represented in the project documents. In this case there is a particular area on the company's environmental impact for a full and complete picture of conclusions

- According to the "Geological, Mining, lernatekhnikakan, labor protection" brittle rock volume of 3.7 point in the first round of pit contour is hoghabusakan layer 109.82.0 cubic meters remaining aparnerine` 1328913.0 and 1897672.0 cubic meters of rock overburden rock volume that is not corresponds to the "environmental" groups Table 3.2 presents data missing hoghabusakan layer volume and its storage and use of the procedure in accordance with the Government on 08.09.2011. Decision No. 1396-N requirements

Modified the first phase of the project includes pit ore reserves established for only 4.8 percent of the full deposit is required for the design of complex documents including mine the remaining 95.2% of the reserves, the second stage of the design phase of a project to make the enlarged

- Mine does not have to limit emissions / MPE / norms scale / permissions, the waste from the company's activities are not registered, registration, normavorvel, as well as not fully implemented "Soil" The Code of paragraph 3 of Article 59 and Article 13 The requirements of paragraphs 17

- The design documents for technical assignment, open the first phase extraction productivity filed from 2010 onwards, at first it made 120.0 thousand tons in 2011, at 150.0 thousand tons, while in 2014 it will reach 180.0 million tons, followed by 2015 The first stage performance was scheduled to be open to 300.0 thousand tons, while the "environmental impact" part of the operation of a mine expansion project. However, the finalization of the revised design documentation is not clear what changes have been made to date and the date of deposit. the number of resources are included. In addition, the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources Minister 18.11.2014 No. 01 / 29.3 / 5190-14 notified in writing that "Mego Gold" LLC will provide the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources Agency OHP 2009 year. No. 234 dated October 30, 3rd paragraph reserves terusumnasirvats problem solving performance requirement of additional exploration, mining stocks as a result of the re-establishment of the balance is not registered

- Mined ore is planned to develop a company owned by a maximum of 100.0 thousand tons per year capacity plant, which does not correspond to the mine production capacity and has no positive conclusion

- It is necessary to introduce the company's activities in the area of ??financial and environmental impact assessment

- It does not work out of the stock as of the date they are and are not listed as a separate hankamarminneri, which is fixed to the working professional opinion of the conclusion of this defect does not provide a complete guarantee "Environmental Impact Assessment" Law 5 Article 1, paragraph "a" sub-paragraph 4 of the full implementation of the requirement,

- Working draft submitted to the alternative solutions, which might not provide the "Environmental Impact Assessment" of Article 5 § 1 of the Part "B" of the Rule requires full implementation. "

Note that on June 30, the Ministry of Environment approved the "Mego Gold" in gold extracting plant tailing dump project, which is still the same ministry in 2013 was rejected.

Ecolur Reports Yezidi National Union Files Complaint Against Global Gold Corp's Toukhmanuk Gold Project with OSCE

2014-11-25T14:32:00.001-05:00

ECOLUR an environmental NGO operating in Armenia ,published on their website (ecolur.org) about the issues raised by the Yezidi community near the Global Gold Corp, Toukhmnauk project.

The Yezidi National Union filed a complaint with the Ambassador of the OSCE in Yerevan, that the Yezidi villages of Rya Taza, Mirak and Jarjaris, which are located in the proposed area of Global Gold's Toukhmanuk tailings dam, will disrupt their traditional farming and cattle grazing activities.

Note that on in April 2013 the Ministry of Environment rejected Global Gold's application to build a third tailings dam for the Toukhmanuk Gold project operated by Mego-Gold subsidiary, but in June 2014, after the Armenian National Elections, the newly appointed minister of the Environment approved the application.

see Ecolur Article below

http://www.ecolur.org/hy/news/mining/yazidis-applied-to-osce-yerevan-office-head-for-tukhmanuk-tailing-dump/6618/

(english translation though google translate)

Tukhmanuk tailing problem of ethnic met with head of OSCE Office in Yerevan

11:20 September 25, 2014

Under

OSCE Office in Yerevan, Ambassador Andrey Sorokin received the "Sinjar Yezidis National Union" NGO representatives on "Mego Gold" surface enrichment plant 3rd tailing problem. "He highlighted the problem and said that they will work within the framework of the direction, "he told? Under the" Sinjar Yezidis National Union "President Boris He said:

According to him, the Yezidis are concerned that the tailings dam will be built and Rya Taza Mirak Yezidi villages, a major threat to these villages.

"The Yezidi villages and traditional villages were established after the genocide, when ethnic Armenians in Ottoman Turkey and came here with these people live in rural areas, which are threatened by serious diseases. In addition, as a result of these tailing their villages deprived of the opportunity to engage in cattle and direct emigrate from Armenia, as another opportunity to live there, "said Boris Tamoyan adding that these villages are not recognized as the affected communities, which is a gross violation of the law. Note that the affected community was recognized only Melikgyugh community.

"We are preparing a video, which demonstrates the dangers that lie ahead Rya Taza and Mirak villages. The video spread to villages and awareness activities to carry out informed about the risks, people do not want to jeopardize their future. We know that should not rely on the village, they work to avoid problems. It is clear that if the company has achieved there, it has links with the regional government and the provincial government can suppress the village. That's why we need to inform people and show roads, how to fight. The way the legal framework of these tailing is illegal to display illegal, "said Boris He said:

In turn, the town of Aarhus Center Natalia She noted that under the influence of surface mine tailing Yezidi villages are not two, but three, Rya Taza, Mirak and Jarjaris in all the villages, as well as Aparan city dwellers who have agricultural land in the area They use Halavar reservoir. Natalia Manukyan expert Minasian's survey showed that surface tailings Halavar reservoir is high. This means that the tailings contained heavy metals and toxic materials Halavar actively accumulate in the reservoir.

"We tried Rya Taza in March this year to inform people that you are not far from the tailings dam and the dam reservoir of heavy metals accumulate in Halavar. We wanted to show the results of the research, but the mayor refused to see us at all. We met with residents and residents surprised were, "said Natalia said. He noted that the first and second surface chrekultivatsvats tailings and toxic substances Leakages and dry summer months, the dust is transported to a nearby agricultural lands.Note that on June 30, the Ministry of Environment approved the "Mego Gold" in gold extracting plant tailing dump project, which was rejected by the Ministry of Environment in 2013 until May.

Թուխմանուկի պոչամբարի խնդրի կապակցությամբ եզդիները հանդիպել են ԵԱՀԿ Երևանյան գրասենյակի ղեկավարին

11:20 Սեպտեմբեր 25, 2014

ԷկոԼուր

ԵԱՀԿ Երևանյան գրասենյակի ղեկավար, դեսպան Անդրեյ Սորոկինն ընդունել է «Սինջար եզդիների ազգային միավորում» ՀԿ-ի ներկայացուցիչներին եւ քննարկել «Մեգո Գոլդ» ընկերության Թուխմանուկի հարստացուցիչ ֆաբրիկայի 3-րդ պոչամբարի կառուցման խնդիրը: «Դեսպանը կարևորեց խնդիրը և ասաց, որ իրենց լիազորությունների շրջանակում կաշխատեն այդ ուղղությամբ»,-ԷկոԼուրի հետ զրույցում ասաց «Սինջար եզդիների ազգային միավորում» ՀԿ-ի նախագահ Բորիս Թամոյանը:

Ըստ նրա` եզդիներն անհանգստացած են, որ պոչամբարը պետք է կառուցվի եզդիական Ռյա-Թազա և Միրաք գյուղերի մոտակայքում, ինչը մեծ վտանգ է ներկայացնում այդ գյուղերի բնակիչների համար:

«Այդ գյուղերն ավանդական եզդիական գյուղեր են և հիմնադրվել են հայոց ցեղասպանությունից հետո, երբ եզդիները հայերի հետ միասին Օսմանյան Թուրքիայից տեղափոխվեցին այստեղ: Այդ գյուղերում մարդիկ են ապրում, որոնց կարող են սպառնալ լուրջ հիվանդություններ: Բացի դրանից, պոչամբարի կառուցման հետևանքով այդ գյուղերը կզրկվեն անասնապահությամբ զբաղվելու իրենց հնարավորությունից և ուղղակի կարտագաղթեն Հայաստանից, քանի որ այլ հնարավորություն չունեն այստեղ ապրելու», - ասաց Բորիս Թամոյանը` հավելելով, որ այդ գյուղերը ճանաչված չեն որպես ազդակիր համայնքներ, ինչը օրենքի կոպիտ խախտում է: Հիշեցնենք, որ ազդակիր համայնք ճանաչվել է միայն Մելիքգյուղ համայնքը:

«Մենք հիմա փոքր տեսաֆիլմ ենք պատրաստում, որտեղ ներկայացվում է, թե ինչ վտանգներ են սպասվում Ռյա-Թազա և Միրաք գյուղերի բնակիչներին: Տեսաֆիլմը տարածելու ենք գյուղերում և իրազեկման աշխատանքներ ենք իրականացնելու: Տեղեկանալով ռիսկերի մասին՝ մարդիկ չեն ուզենա իրենց ապագան վտանգել: Մենք գիտենք, որ գյուղապետերի վրա պետք չէ հույս դնել, նրանք աշխատում են խնդիրներից զերծ մնալ: Պարզ է, որ եթե այդ ընկերությունը հասել է այդտեղ, ուրեմն մարզպետարանի հետ կապեր ունի, և մարզպետարանը կարող է ճնշել գյուղապետերին: Այդ իսկ պատճառով հարկավոր է մարդկանց տեղեկացնել և ցույց տալ ճանապարհները՝ ինչպես պետք է պայքարել: Ճանապարհը՝ իրավական դաշտն է: Այդ պոչամբարը անօրինական է, պետք է ի ցույց դնել անօրինականությունները», - ասաց Բորիս Թամոյանը:

Իր հերթին Ապարանի Օրհուս կենտրոնի ղեկավար Նատալիա Մանուկյանը նշեց, որ Թուխմանուկի հանքավայրի պոչամբարի ազդեցության տակ գտնվում են ոչ թե երկու եզդիական գյուղեր, այլ երեք՝ Ռյա թազա, Միրաք և Ջարջառիս: Այս բոլոր գյուղերը, ինչպես նաև Ապարան քաղաքի բնակիչները, ովքեր ունեն մշակովի հողատարածքներ այդ տարածքում, օգտվում են Հալավարի ջրամբարից: Նատալիա Մանուկյանի խոսքով` փորձագետ Սեյրան Մինասյանի կողմից կատարված հետազոտության արդյունքում պարզվել է, որ Թուխմանուկի պոչամբարները Հալավարի ջրամբարից բարձր են գտնվում: Դա նշանակում է, որ պոչերի մեջ պարունակվող ծանր մետաղները և տոքսիկ նյութերը ակտիվորեն կուտակվում են Հալավարի ջրամբարում:

«Մենք այս տարվա մարտ ամսին փորձեցինք Ռյա-Թազայի բնակիչներին իրազեկել, որ ձեզանից ոչ հեռու կա պոչամբար և այդ պոչամբարի ծանր մետաղները կուտակվում են Հալավարի ջրամբարում: Մենք ցանկացանք ցույց տալ հետազոտությունների արդյունքները, սակայն գյուղապետը չուզեցավ մեզ ընդհանրապես տեսնել: Մենք հանդիպեցինք բնակիչների հետ: Բնակիչները զարմացած էին», - ասաց Նատալիա Մանուկյանը: Նա նշեց, որ Թուխմանուկի չռեկուլտիվացված առաջին և երկրորդ պոչամբարներից և թունավոր նյութերի արտահոսք է լինում, և ամռան չոր ամիսներին փոշին տեղափոխվում է մոտակա մշակովի հողատարածքները:

Նշենք, որ սույն թվականի հունիսի 30-ին ՀՀ բնապահպանության նախարարությունը դրական եզրակացություն է տվել «Մեգո Գոլդ» ՍՊԸ-ի Թուխմանուկի ոսկու հարստացուցիչ ֆաբրիկայի նոր պոչամբարի աշխատանքային նախագծին, որը մերժում էր ստացել ՀՀ բնապահպանության նախարարության կողմից դեռ 2013թ-ի մայիսին:

Local Armenian NGO Files Reports Painting a Terrible Picture at GBGD Toukhmanuk Gold Project

2014-11-17T12:30:00.003-05:00

Below I have compiled various reports filed by ECOLUR:

Soil of Meliq, Rya Taza and Miraq Villages is Polluted with Heavy Metals and Toxic Elements from Tukhmanuk Gold Mine

14:02 June 13, 2013

EcoLur

Heavy and exotoxic elements such as As, Sb, Pb, Cd, Cu, Mn, V, Cr, Co, Ni, Zn, Sn, Bi are spread from Tukhmanuk gold mine via different pipes, which get accumulated in Meliq, Rya Taza and Miraq Villages, Aragatsotn Region, and other land areas, as well as in bottom sediments of Halavar and Qasagh Villages. This is what “Ecochemical Analysis of Tukhmanuk zone land and river bottom sediments” work says implemented by “ArmEcoMonitoring” SNCO Deputy Director Seyran Minasyan on “BLEJAN” NGO’s order.

According to this work, the total concentrations of potentially hazardous 17 elements and metals (Sr, Ba, Mn, V, Cr, Co, Ni, Fe, Cu, Zn, Sn, Bi, U, As, Sb, Pb, Cd) have been determined in the samples. It turned out that the concentration of the studied elements of the observation sites located above Meliq Village and below Miraq Village and interim territory of Rya Taza-Meliq exceeds MCP by 12.-2.5 times.

Reminder: Tukhmanuk gold mine is developed by “MegoGold” LLC.

EcoLur Opinion on Tailing Dump Construction Project in Meliq Village

15:16 April 25, 2013

EcoLur

“EcoLur” Informational NGO has sent its opinion on Tailing Dump Construction Project in Meliq Village to the Ministry of Nature Protection.

The opinion says, “The tailing dump construction project in Meliq village proposed by Mego Gold Company should be turned down on the following grounds: the project doesn’t reflect the factual risks and the project is isolated from complex issues of extraction, production and maintenance of industrial wastes.

The tailing dump should be the third one in the territory of Meliq village. It should collect the tails of Mega Gold gold-extracting production. The plant processes gold-bearing ore of Tukhmanuk gold mine. The data submitted in the project about the composition of tails don’t comply with the composition of ores, the data about the presence of toxic metals and toxic elements left after gold extraction are missing in the project. The assessment of background pollution of water and land areas caused by two operating tailing dumps is also missing in the project. It’s possible to indirectly judge about the pollution based on the results of the analysis carried out by the Center for Ecological Noosphere Studies of NAS RA presented to the public and by the research articles about the composition of ore in Tukhmanuk mine. The data about the probable impact on human health are missing. As Health Ministry response shows their specialists haven’t carried out any examinations in the village and they relied exclusively on the project documentation, which doesn’t reflect the real situation.

What about environmental expertise experts’ opinion, in the course of specialized hearings at Nature Protection Ministry held on 19 April, they confirmed that they relied not on the studies of the situation, which already has sharply negative background, but on the data in literature, i.e. they don’t handle the situation. The minutes of the public hearings held in Meliq Village on 27.11.2012 don’t comply with what public representatives and the locals said at the hearings proved by the video recording made by EcoLur in the course of the public hearings. In the course of the discussions held at Nature Protection Ministry on 19 April 2013 Mego Gold Company Director Ashot Poghosyan stated many times when answering to the questions that the final replies to the questions about risks raised by public can be given only when a new project for Tukhmanuk mine development will be submitted.

We propose to consider the problem of keeping industrial wastes of Tukhmanuk mine development in complete documentation package, where not only the tailing dump project will be submitted, but also the projects of mine development and gold-extracting production.”

“EcoRight” NGO Demanding Criminal Investigation for Tukhmanuk Mine Tailing Dump Project

14:21 March 12, 2013

EcoLur

“EcoIravunq” NGO (“EcoRight”) has sent a letter to Public Prosecutor Aghvan Hovsepyan on crime commission, signed by NGO Chairman Arthur Grigoryan. The letter particularly says, “On 27 November 2012 Mego Gold Company organized public hearings in Meliq Village, Aragatsots Region, on the construction project of the third tailing dump for the disposition of wastes of Tukhmanuk mine it develops. The project mentions that the tails contain the following chemical compounds, SiO2 – 46,23%; AL2O3 – 10,81%; MgO – 5,17% ; TiO2 – 0,82 %; CaO –6,41%; MnO – 0,15%; Fe2O3 – 6,4%; FeO -3,62%, but the project doesn’t say a word about heavy metals. The Center for Ecological-Noosphere Studies conducted laboratory analysis, which says that the tails contain arsenic, cadmium and lead. The divergence of the data with the project causes to suspect that the company and Lernametalurgiakan Institute intentionally misled the public by concealing the composition of the tails and their impact on the community and people’s health. The aforementioned facts point out the existing deviations of mine development from the confirmed project, which may contain the features of Articles 281 and 284 of the Criminal Code of Armenia. We think that criminal investigation needs to be carried out to reveal the creditability of the information presented in the project and to reveal to what extent the company and Lernametalurgiakan Institute intended to mislead public with this information, to what extent the activities of Tukhmanuk mine development deviates from the confirmed project and whether there are features of Articles 281 and 284 of the Criminal Code of Armenia.”

Public Demanding to Annul Minutes of Hearings on Tailing Dump Construction in Meliq Village

19:34 March 11, 2013

EcoLur

Public representatives have applied to Nature Protection Ministry demanding to annul the minutes of the hearings on the construction project of a new tailing dump in Meliq Village. The tailing dump will be the third, which Mega Gold Company, the developer of Tukhmanuk gold mine, intends to construct in the village. The application particularly says, “…In the course of the public hearings on 27 November, Meliq Village Head stated he would present the opinion of the village a month later. Nevertheless, the minutes of the hearings are dated 27 November and signed by the village head and company director. The minutes say, “The village has no objections in regard with the construction of a tailing dump…A decision was reached to approve the environmental part of Tukhmanuk dressing plant…” It’s falsification, as during the hearings many opinions were expressed about the impermissibility of constructing the third tailing dump in the village. The minutes don’t reflect the viewpoints of the villagers and public representatives. The company representatives and the project developer, who worked on the project development by company’s order, expressed their positive opinions. We demand to annul the minutes of the public hearings held by Mega Gold Company on the construction project of a new tailing dump for Tukhmanuk dressing plant in Meliq Village,” the application says. The application is corroborated with the minutes of the public hearings for 27 November and the video recording.

Public Environmental Alliance to Armenian PM: Asking to Stop “MegoGold” Company Activities

12:37 January 18, 2013

EcoLur

Public Environmental Alliance, an alliance of 50 NGOs, has addressed a letter to Armenian PM Tigran Sargsyan, which particularly says, “On 20.11.2012 the Public Environmental Alliance has filed a proposal to Nature Protection Ministry, the National Assembly Standing Committee on Agriculture and Environment to set up a working group in regard with the activities of “MegoGold” LLC in Meliq Village. We would like to ask you to assign Nature Protection Ministry, Health Ministry and Ministry of Emergency States, in the frames of their terms of reference, to conduct examination of the situation and to present the findings to the public…At present “MegoGold” Company intends to construct the third tailing dump in Meliq Village. We are asking to stop the activities of the company till the assessment of the situation on the spot.” The proposal filed to Nature Protection Ministry dated on 20.11.2012 is attached to the letter, “…According to the project (construction of a tailing dump), Meliq Village is located in the zone of nine-point seismic risks.” “MegoGold” Company intends to construct a new tailing dump in the territory of 7 ha…The company is the subsidiary of “Global Gold” Company and has been developing Tukhmanum gold mine since 2006. Ore dressing is conducted directly in the territory of Meliq Village. The village itself is in a hard situation. Numerous breakdowns of operating tailing dumps has led to the default with the water pipe of the drinking water in the village, because drinking and irrigation waters get mixed…The dust blown off the tailing dump, accumulates on the ground, which villagers cultivate and contaminate them with heavy metals. All this lead to decrease in crop productivity and caused huge damage, which hasn’t been studied and assessed. According to the villagers, they incur material and moral damage from the development of the mine and the tailing dump. Villagers’ health has been deteriorated, birth rate had reduces, cancer diseases have increased. The villagers have filed complaints to the state bodies, but to no avail,” the letter says.

Public Thinks that Mego Gold Company Should Present New Complex Project of Tukhmanuk Mine Development

12:44 December 04, 2012

EcoLur

The NGOs having taken part in the public hearings on the construction project of the tailing dump of Mego Gold Company in Meliq Village on 27 November think that a new complex project should be presented on the development of Tukhmanuk gold mine.

In their statement to Aram Harutyunyan, Minister of Nature Protection, they noted, “On 27 November 2012 “Mego Gold” Company organized public hearings on the construction project of a new tailing dump in Meliq Village, Aragatsotn Region. The public hearings were participated by Meliq villagers and Village Head Hakob Mkrtchyan, “Mego Gold” LLC Director Ahsot Poghosyan, “Mego Gold” LLC Deputy Director Henrikh Mkrtchyan, Nature Protection Ministry “Environmental Expertise” SCNO Expert Laura Balayan, Head of Environmental Department of “Lernametalurgiakan Institute” Hovik Nikoghosyan, public representatives – Greens Union Chairman Hakob Sanasaryan, “Shogher” Union Chairman Hasmik Aslanyan, Yerevan Aarhus Center Coordinator Silva Ayvazyan, Aparan Aarhus Center Coordinator Natalya Manukyan, Lawyer of Aarhus Centers Arthur Grigoryan, expert-hydrologist Qnarik Hovhannisyan, Editor of http://www.ecolur.org/ Victoria Burnazyan and mass media. Nevertheless, the minutes of the public hearings were not drawn up on the spot.

The participants put their signatures on a separate sheet of paper, which should be attached to the minutes. Meanwhile, a part of the participants, such as the representative of the Environmental Expertise Laura Balayan and Developer Hovik Nikaghosyan left the hall before the end of the hearings. Meliq Village Head Hakob Mkrtchyan stated that the villagers will express their opinions within a month.

We, public representatives, were not acquainted with the text of the minutes and think that the procedure of hearings minutes taking was violated, and consequently, the minutes, as an official document, should be recognized null and void.

Then, under the project:

1. We consider it necessary that Mego Gold Company to meet the demand of the local population and introduce it into the project:

a) the plan of reclamation of two tailing dumps with diagrams and cost of actions. If the company intends to extract the gold it contains, the activities of tail processing should also be included into the project.

b) an alternative of Tukhmanuk gold mine development in closed method,

c) to estimate the damage caused to farms in Meliq Village or plan of actions for consequence minimization,

d) in case of production expansion, to present a plan for forced resettlement.

2. In the course of the public hearings in Meliq Village on 27 November, Company Director Ashot Poghosyan stated that there are plans to expand production and mining volumes, while the issue of new tailing dumps may arise. For the purpose of correct assessment of risks for hazardous objects and supposed actions of Mego Golf Company we think it’s necessary for the company to present a complex project, where the integral part of the project will be the construction of new tailing dumps. The project should also present measures on prevention of environmental pollution.

3. In the presented project the components of tails don’t comply with scientific data (Sh. Khachatryan, “Geochemical characteristics of Tukhmanuk Gold Mine (Aragatsotn Region)”, “Procs of Yerevan State University, 3 (223), 2010). We would ask the developer company to submit the methodology and experimental findings.

4. Developer Hovik Nikaghosyan has tightly connected the construction of a new tailing dump and employment at the plant. “If there is no tailing dump, there will be no mine operating, if there is no mine operating, there will be no plant operating… Everything depends on you, if you don’t want, you can reject, and the mining industry will be closed down in Meliq Village…” We value this statement as misinformation, as the company is able to present an alternative, for example, to conclude an agreement with other ore processing plant.”

Mego Gold Company Intends to Construct Another Tailing Dump Besides Designed Third Tailing Dump (Photos)

17:35 November 28, 2012

EcoLur

Meliq villagers have to decide whether or not they agree “Mego Gold” Company to construct a new tailing dump in the territory of the village. This is what Meliq Village Head said in the course of public hearings on the project on 27 November. Like the previous tome, the minutes of the public hearings were not drawn up. It’s still unknown when the minutes will be drawn up as an official document and passed to the environmental expertise. It’s also not clear, what these minutes will include out of the expressed opinions. The public representatives considered this to be a violation of the procedure and didn’t sign under the list of participants, while the villagers expressed their extreme concern with project risks. First of all, these risks include two non-cultivated tailing dumps and a damaged irrigation system, as a result of which 60 families lost their harvest of the potatoes. People complain of bad ecology and problems with birth rate. The NGOs expressed such an opinion that the village is on the verge of resettlement, as these land areas will stop to be fertile, while after several months it won’t be possible to cultivate these land areas.

But this is not all. Besides the designed construction of the third tailing dump, the company intends to construct another tailing dump, as Mego Gold Company is going to expand its mining volumes in Tukhmanuk gold mine despite the accumulated debts.

More details about all this, about questions and answers raised in the course of the public hearings will be provided in upcoming news by EcoLur.

MegoGold Company Project in Meliq Village: “It's Early to Speak about New Tailing Dump Unless First Tailing Dump Recultivated” (Photos)

15:29 November 01, 2012

EcoLur

Meliq Village hasn't yet made a decision on the construction of a new tailing dump. 'It's early to speak about a new tailing dump, unless the first tailing dump is recultivated,' Said Meliq Village Head Hakob Mkrtchyan. The public hearings on the construction project of a new tailing dump for Megogold Company was held in Meliq Village on 30 October. Nevertheless, the villagers didn't know anything either about the project or the public hearings. Only after half an hour after the appointed time, about 20 people came to participate in the hearings and presented their problems concerning the company activities. An interesting fact: one of the participants, Karen, who had declared about the company owing him money, over 500,000 AMD as a salary, is at the same time the shareholder of American 'Global Gold Mining' Company. The certificate is issued for 250 USD. 'When the company's business was good, about 30 employees received such certificates. I still don't know, what I will gain, but I'm not going to sell it,' Karen said.

The main problem is that the company intends to take new territories from the village, but it hasn't recultivated old tailing dumps, which cause essential damage to the village.

One tailing dump is mentioned in the list of 19 tailing dumps known to the Ministry of Emergency States. The characteristics of the tailing dump are as follows: distance from Meliq Village – 2 km, projected volume – 90,000 cubic meters, fullness – 45,000 cubic meters. The second tailing dump is missing in the list.

EcoLur working group asked to help them to get familiar with the spot of new tailing dump construction and the state of the old tailing dump. Nevertheless, the official representative of the company Henrikh Mkrtchyan left and took with them the representative of Nature Protection Minister Laura Balayan and projector Hovik Nikaghosyan.

A local resident agreed to take us to the place. Outwardly, the tailing dump complied with what the residents said about it during the hearings. Water flew out of one of them through the dug out canal. There were no dams or concrete fortifications. Unfortunately, there was nobody we could ask a question about what we had seen, while the workers having come to the spot after us just forces us out of the territory. “Go away, you don't have any right, this is our territory…”, they said. The explanations that the company is the organiser of the hearings and shouldn't hinder to examine the project on the spot didn't help.

The hearings were held in tense atmosphere. In near future you can watch the video by EcoLur, which shows the Q&A session between residents and Hovik Nikaghosyan and Henrikh Mkrtchyan.

Tailing Dump To Be Constructed in Meliq Village, 9-magnitude Seismic Zone

17:35 October 29, 2012

EcoLur

“MegoGold” LLC intends to construct a tailing dump in the territory of 7 ha in Meliq village (Aragatsotn Region), a 9-magnitude seismic zone. Public hearings on the tailing dump project will be held in the administration building of Meliq Village at 12:00 p.m. on 30 November. “MegoGold” LLC is registered in Armenia and is the subsidiary of Global Gold Company. The tailing dump will be located in a distance of 1600 meters far away from the plant. “…The volume of dumps will make up 88.6 % of all the processing volume...The composition of the tails include SiO2 – 46,23%; AL2O3 – 10,81%; MgO – 5,17% ; TiO2 – 0,82 %; CaO – 6,41%; MnO – 0,15%; Fe2O3 – 6,4%; FeO -3,62%…

Emissions into atmosphere will make up 277.27 tons during construction works… Main polluting substances in the emissions near settled areas are within standards…There are two deep tectonic fractures in the territory…According to the standards of seismic construction, the territory is located in 9-magnitude seismic zone… The volume of ores taken out during the construction works will make up 3342235 tons… Risks at construction works – elimination of vegetation, pollution of territory with construction garbage… Economic damage will make up 733.117 million AMD... The presented sum is not a ground for financial liability… The total amount of damage for environment – air, water and soil, will make up 4,426,620 AMD…”, - the report says.

The report doesn’t say how many tons of raw materials mined from Tukhmanuk mine per year will be processed at the factory and how many tons of tails will be dumped into the tailing dump. Let’s make a reference to the information provided by ArmInfo News Agency in 2008, “…The data of the State Committee on Reserves say that the level of reserves in Tukhmanuk mine make up 12.1 tons of gold with gold ratio 6.74 gr per ton and 30.79 grams of silver per ton.”

“MegoGold” Proposing to Construct New Tailing Dump in Aragatsotn Region

18:27 October 16, 2012

EcoLur

The official website of Nature Protection Ministry informs that “MegoGold” LLC proposes to construct a new tailing dump for the processing plant in Aragatsotn Region. “MegoGold” LLC is developing Tukhmanuk gold mine. The tailing dump, sized 1.53 ha, shall be located next to Melik village. The insoluble part of the tails consists of SiO2 – 46,23%; AL2O3 – 10.81%; MgO – 5.17% ; TiO2 – 0.82 %; CaO – 6.41%; MnO – 0,15%; Fe2O3 – 6.4%; FeO -3.62%... During the functioning of the tailing dump, dust emissions will make up 25.6 tons per year or 0.128 tons per day...”

Photo by www.yerkirmedia.am

Armenian Government Expert States Global Gold Corp Operating Illegally at Toukhmanuk Gold Mine.

2014-11-05T09:57:00.004-05:00

Ecolur Reports: http://www.ecolur.org/en/news/mining/national-assembly-expert-mego-gold-llc-implementing-illegal-activities/6598/

National Assembly Expert: Mego Gold LLC Implementing Illegal Activities

16:47 September 17, 2014

EcoLur:

SEE VIDEO BELOW

Hermine Poghosyan, Expert at the National Assembly Standing Committee on Agriculture and Environment, stated that “Mego Gold” LC is implementing illegal activities. She made this statement at the public hearings on Tukhmanuk gold mine project held in Meliq Vellage, Aragatsotn Region, on 10 September. Hermine Poghosyan: The National Assembly Standing Committee on Agriculture and Environment is very interested in this issue. We have applied to competent bodies many times expecting expert opinions on the information and any other additional information. You don’t have an expert opinion for open pit mining. The opinion you have is issued for closed mining. We have an official letter that you don’t have the opinion of the expertise for open pit mining, i.e. your activities are illegal. “Mego Gold” LLC Director Ashot Poghosyan: As you attended the project discussion, which already has legal force, I should say that it was submitted to the competent body on 11 September 2012. Let’s consider that you were inattentive and you didn’t see it. Hermine Poghosyan: We applied to the Ministry in 2013. Ashot Poghosyan: You didn’t enquire us at ll. Hermine Poghosyan: Do you think that the ministry provided us with incorrect information? Ashot Poghosyan: I don’t think so and it’s not true for 100% that the standing committee of the National Assembly is involved in the secret investigation, I don’t believe you. Karine Movsisyan, Chief Expert at “Environmental Expertise” SNCO of Nature Protection Ministry: In 2006 an opinion was issued, which entitled “Mego Gold” LLC to carry out geoprospecting for two years to make a conclusion about reserves etc. Afterwards they should have submitted closed mining project. That is, our opinion issued in 2006 for open pit mining was valid for two years, then they should proceed to closed mining. Then our administration stated that the company didn’t submit us any project till 2013. This is the situation.

Local Villagers at MELIQ, OPPOSE Global Gold Corp's gold mining project in Armenia

2014-10-29T17:13:00.006-04:00

The TOUKHAMNUK GOLD MINE License is coming up for renewal on February 28, 2015 and Global Gold Corp (OTCmarkets:GBGD) may lose the license. Frankly they should lose the license since they have failed to meet their contractual obligations under the terms of their mining contract.

GBGD, has failed to mine 153,000 through open pit operations and 1,095,250 tones through underground mining operations. In fact, according to Government of Armenia RECORDS, GBGD only mined 86,400 tones of ore from open pit operations at the Toukhmanuk gold mine between 2006 - 2012. Nowhere near the 1,259,400 tones of ore required to be mined under the term of the mining license.

Even the local community opposes GBGD's subsidiary, Mego-Gold, to build a third tailings dam in the area to support future plans to operate the mine exclusively as an open pit operation.

The MELIQ villagers complain of Global Gold's failure to pay employees, environmental damage, abandonment of two other tailings dams, water pollution and soil contamination.

Let us not forget that GBGD's 49% joint venture owner of the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine, Consolidated Resources Armenia (CRA), is suing GBGD for defaulting on approximately $2 Million in loans. The JV between CRA and GBGD has failed and CRA is also seeking a court ordered liquidation of the JV assets, which include the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine. (see blog: CRA Seeks Court Ordered Liquidation of JV and Toukhmanuk Gold Mine: Jersey Court Orders Trial To Commence On An Expedited Basis)

Read below ECOLUR's report on the current community opposition to the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine. ECOLUR is a local Environmental NGO....

EXCERPT from ECOLUR.am web site: http://www.ecolur.org/en/news/dialog-with-officials/meliq-villagers-dont-believe-quotgentlemanquot-promises-by-quotmego-goldquot/6583/

Meliq Villagers Don't Believe "Gentleman" Promises by "Mego Gold"

11:06 September 11, 2014

EcoLur

On 10 September the public hearings of Tukhmanuk gold mining project were held in Meliq Village, Aragatsotn Region, Armenia.

“Today we are discussing the first stage of mining, which will last 6 years. During these years ore will be brought from the open pit, it will be processes without any chemicals to produce concentrate,” said “Mego Gold” LLC Director Ashot Poghosyan and noted that the mine has 19 million tons of ore under estimated reserves.

On behalf of Meliq community, Village Head Hakob Mkrtchyan presented some demands to “Mego Gold” LLC.

“For years you have given us promises, but to no avail. On behalf of our community I’m posing demands in regard with the implementation of social programs. So if the community agrees and the mine works, Mr. Poghosyan, laying a drinking water pipeline is a must till the second half of October. The second demand to construct a reservoir with the capacity of 300,000 cum in the upper part of the community for irrigation purposes. It’s not costly. Then, the construction works of the internal network of the trunk road, which is in poor condition. Also it’s high time to think over the main problem - a road joining the highway.”

“Under the geological and environmental data, when a tailing dump is full, it must be covered with a thick layer of ground and fenced so as an animal or human doesn’t enter its territory. The first tailing dump is full, nothing was done, the second is full as well… even a drop of rain causes it to flow into the river, which we use,” said one of the elderly community members.

In reply Ashot Poghosyan mentioned that the tailing dumps are full of gravitational tails, which must be processed in the frames of this new project. You destroyed the water in the village for 40 days, you didn't come personally and then the police detained me together with several other weather, you didn't come when we blocked transportation. You didn't construct anything for 40 days, as if there is no one living in this village,' another Meliq Villager told Mego Gold Director.

Ashot Poghosyan gave the following reply, 'We have so-called 'gentleman' agreement with the village rural municipality. If any waterline stops operating in our area – around 226 ha, we are reparing it...once again I'm outlining this is a gentleman's agreement.'

The reply made the participants more angry, 'After explosions water sources may change their directions.'

The next question the residents were worried about was Mego Gold's debt of 8 million AMD since 2006.

'Why aren't you paying off...pay off people's money, then tell the people to come and work,' the residents said.

VIDEO OF MEETING:

CRA Seeks Court Ordered Liquidation of JV and Toukhmanuk Gold Mine: Jersey Court Orders Trial To Commence On An Expedited Basis

2014-09-22T11:37:00.001-04:00

Consolidated Resources is suing GBGD and Van Krikorian to recover $2 million in defaulted debt and force the sale of the Toukhmanuk Mine.

A significant amount of background on this issue can be found by reading the Judgment issued byt he Royal Court of Jersey on September 11, 2014. (see links below).

Here is brief overview:

On April 27, 2011, Consolidated Resources Armenia (CRA) concluded a joint venture agreement with Global Gold Corp. (GBGD) for the development of the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine, called Global Gold Consolidated Resources (GGCRL). The JV received $5 million cash from CRA, and CRA received a 49% interest in the Toukhamnuk Gold Mine.

In 2013 CRA made an additional loan to JV, which was guaranteed by GBGD, of approximately $1.5 million cash to support the project.

On March 7, 2014, Van Krikorian, as Manager of the JV, called an illegal meeting of the shareholders and directors of the JV in attempt (1) pass fraudulent financial statements to create fake debts of $3.5 million dollars owed to GBGD by the JV, in an effort to offset the legally binding debts owed to CRA, (2) cancel the JV and (3) take back the assets of the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine illegally using the 51% control of the votes of the JV, even though such actions require agreement by CRA too.

To protect CRA's investment in the JV and recover their loans, CRA sue GBGD and Van Krikorian.

On the 10th of March, 2014, CRA obtained an ex parte interim injunction against GGCRL, GBGD and Van Krikorian, restraining the Joint Venture Company in any way from disposing of or encumbering or dealing with or diminishing the value of any of its assets whether they are in or outside of Jersey.

The GBGD and Van Krikorian applied unsuccessfully for those injunctions to be lifted on the grounds of material non-disclosure but the Court declined to lift the injunctions for the reasons set out in its judgment of 5th June, 2014, (see link below: Consolidated Resources-v-Global Gold [2014] JRC 124).

Mr. Van Krikorian and GBGD also filed a motion to have the case stopped and sent to NY Arbitration, claiming the JV agreement and Shareholders' agreement and Loan Agreement was covered by an Arbitration clause in the JV Agreement.

The Judge ruled that the case will not be stopped and the will be expedited.

Under Jersey Law, due to deadlock between the parties on how the JV will continue, the Lawyers of CRA argued that the most likely outcome of the case will include a court ordered liquidation of the assets of the JV, which includes the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine.

Below is a list and links to the JUDGMENTS:

List of Court Cases as Published on Royal Court of Jersey Web Site:

Consolidated Resources Armenia

(Plaintiff)

vs.

Global Gold Consolidated Resources Limited

(First Defendant)

and

Mr. Van Krikorian

(Second Defendant)

and

Global Gold Corp

(Third Defendant)

(OTCMarkets: GBGD)

Judgment: [2014]JRC 169: Royal Court of Jersey: Samedi Division: September 11, 2014
http://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreportedjudgments/documents/display.aspx?url=2014/14-09-11_Cons_Resources_Armenia-v-Global_Gold_and_Others_169.htm

Judgement: [2014]JRC 132: Royal Court of Jersey: Samedi Division: June 18, 2014
http://www.jerseylaw.je/Judgments/UnreportedJudgments/Documents/Display.aspx?url=2014/14-06-18_Cons_Resources-v-Global_Gold_132.htm

Judgement: [2014]JRC 124: Royal Court of Jersey: Samedi Division: June 5, 2014
http://www.jerseylaw.je/Judgments/UnreportedJudgments/Documents/Display.aspx?url=2014/14-06-05_Consolidated_Resources-v-Global_Gold_and_Others_124.htm

Yes Mr. Van Krikorian, There is an INJUNCTION against you, Global Gold and GGCRL !

2014-09-05T15:34:00.001-04:00

Below is Page 11 of the order issued by the Royal Court of Jersey of an INJUNCTION filed against Global Gold Corp. and Mr. Van Krikorian restricting them from encumbering or diminishing any of the assets of the GGCRL Joint Venture, which includes the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine.

This document was issued by Mr. Jason Troy, the Proceedings Officer of the Royal Court of Jersey. If you want to get a copy of this injunction or other proceedings currently being taken against the GGCRL joint venture, owned 51% by GBGD and 49% by CRA, you can contact the Proceedings Officer of the Royal Court of Jersey at:

Mr. Jason Troy, Proceedings Officer
Royal Court of Jersey
Judicial Greffe
Royal Court House
Royal Square

St. Helier, Jersey C.I.JE1 1JG

Tel: (01534) 441 343

j.troy@gov.je

This injunction has additional pages but I have only received this one. It is clear from this and GBGDs 10-Q filings that Global Gold Corp. and Mr. Van Krikorian are the "Second" and "Third" Defendants in this injunction. The "First Defendant" is GGCRL which is the joint venture company managed by Van Krikorian.

VAN KRIKORIAN cannot pretend this INJUNCTION does not exists or does not affect his contemplated financing with the CONVERSE BANK of Armenia. GBGD and Van Krikorian are forbidden to to encumber or dispose the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine and cannot enter in a transaction without the consent of its 49% partner Consolidated Resources Armenia.

It is clear that CONVERSE BANK of Armenia cannot complete any transaction without the consent of CRA. GBGD's partners, which include Industrial Minerals of Switzerland via Austria, and Linne Mining shell, apparently controlled by Borun Group, of the republic of Georgia, and the Principals of Industrial Minerals, are either accomplices of Mr. Van Krikorian or they have been kept in the dark about this and are possibly the next victims of GBGD. I assume the latter to be more probable and fits the modus operandi of Mr. Van Krikorian, chief executive of Global Gold Corp. (otcqb: GBGD).

Mr. Van Krikorian and GBGD are trying to swindle their JV partner (CRA) out of $7 million dollars of investments they made in their 49% interest of the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine, by claiming that the transaction is "void ab initio" and therefore CRA forfeits its entire Investment (sound familiar?).

As a "whistelblower" I will continue exposing the unscrupulous business practices and fraud of GBGD which are being perpetrated against shareholders and joint venture partners alike. GBGD is a publicly listed company and reporting issuer and cannot act outside the rules of the The Exchange Act and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), forever. Eventually the long arm of the SEC will catch-up to GBGD and Mr. Van Krikorian and probably their auditors.

-Bill Mavridis
Montreal, CANADA

Armenian Environmental NGO Blasts Global Gold, Armenian Minister of the Environment and Urge the CONVERSE BANK to Approach the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine Project with Caution.

2014-09-05T11:58:00.000-04:00

On September 2, 2014 a press conference was held in the capital of Armenia, Yerevan, regarding the objections by civil society against the development of a new 3rd tailings dam at the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine, located at the Meliq Village.

A report of the conference was broadcast by KENTRON.tv and covered by the newspapers Aravot and the independent news agency ARM-INFO.

Below is Armenian TV news report as broadcasted on Kentron TV on September 2, 2014. (transcript below).

On April 26, 2013 the Minister of the Environment rejected Global Gold's subsidiary (Mego-Gold) application for the building of a 3rd tailings dam at the village of Meliq to support mining at the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine. (see: BLOG: Global Gold's Application for A New Tailings Dam REJECTED by Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia).

The new approval came on June 30, 2014, two months after the appointment of a new minister of the Environment. Word of the approval was hidden by the ministry and was only discovered by the public after Global Gold filed its June 30, 2014 10-Q filings.

Local NGO's are mystified on the about face. Nothing on the ground has changed that would justify the approval of the 3rd tailings dam. NGO's and the local villagers at Meliq oppose the project because and local laws have not been followed and the size of the tailings dam threatens the village, its water supply and farm lands.

The Aravot newspaper also published an article on September 2, 2014: «Արամայիս Գրիգորյան, ապացուցիր, որ դու Արամ Հարությունյանից վատը չես», translated to "A. Grigoryan, prove that you're not as bad as Aram Harutyunyan".

Many NGO's consider the last Minister of the Environment, Mr. Aram Harutyunyan, was bad for Armenia, and hope that the new Minister, Mr. Aramayis Grigoryan will not repeat the mistakes of the past and move to reject the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine tailings dam before it is too late.

Ms. Greta Gabrielyan of the environmental NGO Eco-Alliance stated that they have sent numerous letters addressed directly the President of the Republic of Armenia, and the Toukhmanuk Project and the threat to the Meliq village has received a lot of publicity. For these reasons the Minister should be careful to consider the 3rd tailing. According to Ms. Gabrielyan, letters to the Ministry sent since April have remained unanswered, but on August 2, 2014 it became known that on June 30, 2014.

NGO's asked that the CONVERSE BANK of Armenia, the bank that is currently looking at financing the project, to be careful on what kind of project they are financing.

In another article published online by the independent news agency Arm-Info, Mr. Arthur Grigoryan, a lawyer said that: "We are dealing with a phenomenon when the project gets a positive score, despite the expert community's protest."

Transcript of KENTRON TV Broadcast:

Narrator: The building of the third tailing dam at the Toukhnamouk mine has been approved. Considering the ministry of nature protection has already once rejected this project presented since 2012.

Seyran Minassian (independent expert): After the rejection, absolutely no measures have been implemented, no new analysis has been added, no new plan has been added. What is the approval based on?

Narrator: The environmentalists are not only surprised on the approval to build the third tailings dam. Additionally, Mego Gold company has also prepared a new project for the operation of the plant and for the building of a new tailings dam.

Arthur Grigoryan (Member of the civil initiative of the protection of teghut): They have committed major breaches in that area. With this new project they are trying to cover and neutralize their violations.

Narrator: Based on the information held by the environmentalists, the new tailings dam subject to the new project, is many times larger than the village itself.

Arthur Grigoryan (Member of the civil initiative of the protection of teghut) (Showing a map) This dark areal is the village, these small areas are the current tailing damps and this whole area is the new tailings dam. How many times larger is it compared to the village?

Narrator: According to Seyran Minassian, giving an approval to the plant and the new project will damage a whole village.

Seyran Minassian (independent expert): If they proceed to build this new factory and implement this new plan then Meliq Village should be moved because it only has a length of approximately 2km and this makes it so that the factory is on one end and the tailings damp on the other.

Narrator: The president of the NGO, Ecological Academy, is convinced that the operation of the Toukhmanuk mine will not only be catastrophic to the Meliq Village but also to the Ararat fields.

Greta Gabrielyan (Member of Eco-Alliance): Continuing the exploitation of the mine at Meliq Village means water that flows to the basin of the Halavar and Abaran regions will be polluted with heavy metal residues.

Narrator: In these circumstances, the environmentalists say the approval of the third tailings dam can be considered a criminal offence.

Arthur Grigoryan (Member of the civil initiative of the protection of teghut): This is either the result of incredible stupidity, which I don’t think is the case, or just a usual corruption affair which is more probable.

Narrator: We tried to get explanations from the director of Mego Gold Company Ashot Poghosyan who asked us to call back in 3 hours. After 3 hours, he answered that he’s aware of the environmentalists’ claims and that they are mainly false. Instead of presenting us with counter facts, he invited us to the public hearing due to take place on September 10.