Global Gold Corp (GBGD): Extortion and Fraud In Armenia

Van Krikorian's TOUKHMANUK Gold Project is BANKRUPT

2018-03-05T23:31:00.001-05:00

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.

2018-01-18T05:31:00.001-05:00

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

2017-11-04T06:59:00.002-04:00

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, 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 conspired 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

2017-09-08T10:26:00.003-04:00

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

2017-06-19T10:05:00.003-04:00

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

2017-05-18T09:00:00.002-04:00

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's subsidiaries in Armenia declared Bankrupt?

2016-05-12T20:35:00.000-04:00

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.

Clear and Apparent Fraud at GBGD and Toukhmanuk Gold Mine

2016-03-07T20:55:00.000-05:00

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 below)
see: http://www.geo-logaritmica.com/WHAT_IS_WRONG_WITH_RESMODEL.pdf (see below)
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 their other projects 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)

========================================================
TUKHMANUK DEPOSIT, TWO DATA SETS, COMPARISON OF RESOURCES

========================================================
WHAT IS WRONG WITH "RESMODEL" BLOCK MODELS
OF TUKHMANUK DEPOSIT?

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

BEHRE DOLBEAR REPORTS SPECTER RESERVES

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

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.

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

2015-05-21T23:10:00.000-04:00

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

2015-01-23T12:52:00.002-05:00

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)

2015-01-22T13:11:00.001-05:00

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 issue 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 TOUKHMANUK 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

Whistle Blower

Montreal, Canada
514-813-9200

Armenian NGO Demands Criminal Investigation against Global Gold

2014-12-30T07:25:00.000-05:00

On December 12, 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

2014-12-19T08:21:00.002-05:00

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.

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

2014-11-17T08:40:00.002-05:00

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.

Caldera Died in 2012 and After 2 years of Delays, Arbitrator issues a "Default" Judgement for Damages Against Caldera

2014-11-12T12:25:00.000-05:00

November 12, 2014

Proverbs 24:16-18 says that "For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises again,

But the wicked stumble in time of calamity."

I was advised by Caldera that the Arbitrator issued a "default" judgment against the Company on November 10, 2014 with respect to the damages phase of the counter claims filed by Van Krikorian and Global Gold Corp ("GBGD").

Caldera has not been operating since 2012, is delisted and is technically bankrupt, with no assets and millions of dollars in current liabilities. Caldera's lawyers resigned in 2012 due to non payment and the company could not hire a lawyer to present the company and assist it in a defence during the recent damage phase. The Arbitrator refused to allow me, Bill Mavridis, to represent the company since I am not a lawyer. This is why I refer to this ruling as a "default" judgement, Caldera did not participate because it could not afford to pay for a lawyer. This award is an example of what happens when a company is broke/bankrupt and can't file a defence.

Caldera died in 2012, and for all these and other reasons I resigned and left Caldera.

In his ruling, the Arbitrator confirmed that I was not a party to the Arbitration and therefore did not hold me liable for any damages personally, only Caldera. But Caldera is technically bankrupt and GBGD will not be able to collect one red scent of this award.

Issues related to my actions as an individual that the Arbitrator took exception to was with respect to my personal blogs filed on this and other sites. Since I was not a party to the arbitration I could not put in a defence, but if I was allowed by the Arbitrator I would categorically state that I stand behind all my claims against Global Gold Corp ("GBGD") as posted and that they were based on my opinions with further defence based on the legal doctrine of substantial truth.

I welcome GBGD to sue me personally so the truth can be made public. I have demonstrated in my blogs that GBGD engaged in making and distributing defamatory statements in US SEC filings and media in Armenia, GBGD and Van Krikorian also engaged in extortion and blackmail by trying to put me in jail in Armenia, so as to quickly push me out of the project. I won that fight, which, to me, confirms that Van Krikorian and GBGD were engaged in fraud, corruption, extortion and blackmail against me personally.

Proverbs 24:16-18 says that "For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises again,
But the wicked stumble in time of calamity" and the Calamity for GBGD and Van Krikorian are still pending.

That calamity will come out from lawsuit filed by Consolidated Resources Armenia ("CRA") in the Royal Court of Jersey. CRA essentially made claims that they have been defrauded out $5 million equity investment in the Toukhmanuk Gold Mine for 49% interest in the Joint Venture and furthermore GBGD defaulted in approximately $2Million in notes owed to CRA. In the lawsuit, CRA is also requesting that the joint venture be dissolved since it has failed and no longer operating, and that a court ordered liquidator be appointed so that the Toukhmanuk assets be liquidated and the proceeds be split between GBGD and CRA, less damages.

Bill Mavridis
bmavridis@gmail.com

Global Gold Corp. Threatening YEZIDI Community with Toukhmanuk Gold Mine

2014-11-06T09:12:00.002-05:00

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

Yazidis Applied to OSCE Yerevan Office Head for Toukhmanuk Tailing Dump

11:20 September 25, 2014

EcoLur

Ambassador Andrey Sorokin, the Head of the OSCE Office in Yerevan, received “Sinjar” Yezidi National Unity representatives and discussed the construction of the third tailing dump for Tukhmanuk ore dressing plant by “Mego Gold” Company. “The ambassador attached much importance to this issue and said they will work in this direction within their competencies,” said Boris Tamoyan, Chairman of “Sinjar” Yezidi National Unity.

Because of tailing dump construction these villages will be deprived of any opportunity to deal with husbandry and will directly emigrate from Armenia, as they won’t have any chance for earning their living,” Boris Tamoyan said and added that these villages are not recognized as project affected, which is a gross violation of the law.

Aparan Aarhus Center Head Natalya Manukyan mentioned that “In March 2014 we sought to make the residents of Rya-Taza aware of having a tailing dump not far from them and the heavy metals of this tailing dump accumulating in Halavar reservoir. We wanted to show them the findings of the research, but the village head didn’t want to see us at all. We had meetings with the residents, who got surprised.”

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

2014-10-30T00:02:00.003-04:00

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 tones of ore through open pit operations and 1,095,250 tones od ore 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 terms of the mining license issued in 2006.

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. They failed to follow the terms of the first mining contract and now they want to be rewarded with a new mining contract.

The MELIQ villagers complain of Global Gold's failure to pay employees with payments still outstanding for over 2 years, 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 repairing 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

2014-09-22T11:43:00.001-04:00

Consolidated Resources is suing Global Gold Corp. (otcmarkets: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 by the 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 2012 CRA made an additional loan to the 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 sued GBGD and Van Krikorian.

On the 10th of March, 2014, CRA obtained an ex parte interim injunctions against GCRL, 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.

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 the 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

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.

2014-09-05T13:39:00.001-04:00

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.

Global Gold Corp. and Van Krikorian sued by Joint Venture Partner and Investor of $7MM

2014-04-07T13:57:00.001-04:00

You heard it here first..... According to the court roll published by the Royal Court of Jersey on March 28, 2014, Global Gold Corp and its CEO, Chairman, Director and Corporate Counsel, Mr. Van Krikorian, are being SUED by Consolidated Resources Armenia (CRA). CRA has invested approximately $7,000,000 in acquiring a 49% interest in GBGD's Armenian assets, namely the Toukhmanuk Gold mine and the Getik copper and gold exploration property. And now CRA is suing GBGD. Why?

I took the liberty to check the SEC filings for GBGD and there is no Form 8-K filed disclosing this lawsuit. By law GBGD must disclose material events, like a lawsuit, in 4 business days from having knowledge. There was no disclosure.

Global Gold did file a Form 8-K on February 3, 2014 stating that they have not closed Binding Heads of Agreement to merge GBGD's Armenia assets with Signature Gold of Australia. (see GBGD 8-K filing of September 5, 2013). It will be curious to see how GBGD and Van Krikorian, who received $7,000,000 cash from CRA, that they are not able to close a deal since 2011, and in fact this will be second deal they failed to close. And how will GBGD explain to the SEC that it has failed to file material disclosure Form 8-K explaining the lawsuit. In my previous blog I also provided PROOF that GBGD received a Ministerial Decree from Government of Armenia that its GETIK License was cancelled by the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources, due to non-performance. This Ministerial Decree was issued on January 24, 2014 (see blog: GBGD Loses Getik Exploration License). Over 2 months have now passed and GBGD has not filed a Form 8-K to disclose this material event either. Stay tuned.....As news filters out about this new lawsuit against GBGD and Mr. Van Krikorian I will bring the facts to your attention what GBGD has failed to disclose to investors in my continuing whistle-blowing effort to expose fraud at GBGD.

Posted on www.briefingwire.com:

http://www.briefingwire.com/pr/global-gold-corp-gbgd-sued-by-investor-in-royal-court-of-jersey

Van Krikorian and Global Gold Corp Accused of Misappropriating Funds From Investor

2014-01-08T23:11:00.001-05:00

It appears that a disgruntled employee of Global Gold Corp. (otcmarkets: GBGD) from Armenia, (which there are many of) decided to expose his former employers and dropped off some files to my attention. In that file was a copy of a "Derivative Action Complaint" which was prepared by Consolidated Resources Armenia (CRA), GBGD's latest victim.

The COMPLAINT outlines that Mr. Van Krikorian, the President, Director and Corporate Counsel of GBGD, and Mr. Ian Hague, independent director and controlling shareholder of GBGD (and founder of FireBird Management) conspired to defraud its investor, CRA, of $5MM capital investment and $2MM Note and retain the benefit of the capital infusion for GBGD.

Evidence of this complaint supports what I discovered in the past, that GBGD (aka "GGC") was trying to defraud CRA out of their $7MM investment made on the Toukhmanuk and Getik gold properties in Armenia. CRA owns 49% of the Joint Venture known as Global Gold Consolidated Resources (GGCRL), and GBGD ("GGC") owns 51%.

Mr. Ian Hague and Mr. Van Krikorian abused their powers as directors of GGCRL and GBGD in order to commit the worst kind of fraud – specifically blocking receipt by GGCRL and depriving CRA investors of all of its Armenia mining assets while seeking to extort millions of dollars in cash and equity illicitly from CRA in exchange for allowing the obligatory asset transfer to occur.

This COMPLAINT was prepared on behalf of CRA by DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP, which is one of America's top 100 LAW FIRMS.

A full copy of the complaint is posted below:

Some of the more egregious items outlined in the COMPLAINT accuse Mr. Ian Hague and Mr. Van Krikorian of the following:

"Krikorian and Hague have refused without justification to bring about the transfer of key assets to GGCRL, assets essential for it to conduct its business and deliver shareholder value. Krikorian and Hague have failed to assist in the transfer of these assets, as a means to coerce egregious employment terms for Krikorian and to alter the terms of the joint venture for the benefit of GGC and themselves personally, at the expense of the other joint venture partner, CRA. Krikorian and Hague have perpetuated a series of improper actions undermining GGCRL’s business, including:

(i) concealment and misrepresentation of substantial GGC liabilities, including tax liabilities that posed material risks to the assets to be transferred to GGCRL;

(ii) fraudulent transfers of corporate funds to personal bank accounts of GGC officers;

(iii) misappropriation and misuse of corporate funds, and

(iv) self-dealing. (2)"

"Rather than take steps as directors of GGCRL to ensure that the Closing took place, Krikorian and Hague have caused GGC to block the Closing and have attempted to extract more value for GGC and themselves, at the expense of CRA and GGCRL. (62)"

"Krikorian even expressly indicated at a GGCRL board meeting that he and Hague intend to persist in blocking the Closing until they “get what they want”—simply ignoring their duties as directors of GGCRL. (64)"

"Throughout these delays, Krikorian has repeatedly sought to negotiate an employment agreement with GGCRL for himself, with terms egregiously favorable to him personally. In particular, as a portion of his executive compensation to be paid by GGCRL, Krikorian has demanded that he personally receive a minimum of 5% of the shares of GGCRL in addition to significant salary increases, annual bonuses, and a golden parachute providing for a huge windfall payment of accelerated compensation equating to millions of dollars (66)"

"and with Hague’s full knowledge and unconditional support, Krikorian has blocked completion of the Closing and both prevented and severely damaged the Public Listing process in part as a ploy to attempt to force GGCRL to agree to Krikorian’s egregious terms of employment. (67)"

"Throughout the delays, acting in their capacities as directors of both GGC and GGCRL, Krikorian and Hague have attempted to force a wholesale alteration of the material terms of the Joint Venture Agreement, to secure terms more favorable to GGC, at the expense of CRA. (68)"

"Holding out for egregious and damaging employment terms and a wholly reshaped joint venture deal, Krikorian and Hague also refused to go forward with negotiations on two reverse merger opportunities, which would have brought significant value to GGCRL and its shareholders. (69)"

"Krikorian and Hague systematically delayed the Closing at every step laid out in the Joint Venture Agreement. Krikorian made it an overt strategy to abuse his role and signing authority as interim executive chairman, using the routine signing of GGCRL corporate documents necessary for developing its business as bargaining chips to exact special favors for GGC and Hague and himself.( 72)"

"Krikorian and Hague have stated that, by preventing the Closing of the joint venture, they intend to retain the benefit of the capital infusion GGC received from CRA—which made it possible for GGC to stay in business—(76) "

"As a part of their ongoing effort to avoid tax liabilities to the Armenian
government, upon information and belief Krikorian and Hague have supported and encouraged fraudulent transfers of GGCRL funds. In particular, Krikorian and Hague have knowingly transferred corporate funds to personal bank accounts—including without limitation accounts in the name of the Country Manager, Ashot Boghossian—in order to evade Armenian tax authorities. (81)"

"Krikorian and Hague misappropriated and misused substantial corporate funds, repeatedly using funds advanced by CRA for purposes other than those disclosed. For example, a substantial portion of the $5 million advanced by CRA, as well as the $2 million of addition interim funding, was intended to be used for plant expansion and balance sheet cleanup. Instead, Krikorian and Hague directed GGC to use a substantial portion of those $5 million of funds for other unapproved purposes, and diverted substantial portions of those funds to GGC obligations, to the detriment of GGCRL and its shareholders, all while blocking the intended plant expansion and balance sheet cleanup. In other words, Krikorian and Hague have authorized GGC to use those funds for unapproved purposes instead of forcing GGC to use those funds as otherwise agreed, or have themselves blocked GGCRL from using those funds for high-priority purposes. (85)"

http://www.briefingwire.com/pr/global-gold-corp-otcqb-gbgd-manager-and-director-accused-of-misappropriating-funds-from-investor

US Judge Blasts Van Krikorian / Global Gold Corp and Overturns his $37MM Default Judgement Against Former Minister of the Republic of Armenia, Mr. Vardan Ayvazyan

2013-12-26T14:10:00.001-05:00

I finally received a complete copy of the ruling handed down by Justice Paul Oetken, relating to the overturning of the Vardan Ayvazyan default judgement (link to copy of ruling here), that awarded Global Gold Corp. (otcmarkets: GBGD) $37MM. The order was overturned on November 21, 2013 by the same Judge who issued it, on the grounds stated below:

Because this Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Ayvazian, the default judgment is void and must be set aside. Equitable factors also support this outcome. Global Gold has had its day in court and has also had its day before the Tribunal that it contracted for, from behind a veil of ignorance, before the dispute arose. Faced with consistent adverse decisions, it now seeks to change the rules of the game. This is the rare case where the interests of finality and the interests of protecting a defaulting defendant are aligned: Global Gold may not circumvent the decision of the ICA Tribunal by returning to this Court, which lacks jurisdiction over Ayvazian.

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Ayvazian’s motion to vacate default judgment (Dkt. No. 15) is GRANTED, and the default judgment entered in this case on July 11, 2012 (Dkt. No. 9) is hereby VACATED.

The complaint is hereby dismissed without prejudice.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED

Dated: New York, New York
November 21, 2013

J.Paul Oetken

United States District Judge

Since 2006, GBGD has been attempting to impugn the character of Mr. Vardan Ayvazyan by making outrageous and unsubstantiated declarations of corruption, all in an apparent scheme to gain advantage in negotiations with the representatives of the Government of the Republic of Armenia, so as to secure and maintain his exploration and mining licenses on the Marjan and Hankavan gold deposits.

No less than 3 times have the International Chamber of Commerce Court of Arbitration ("ICA Tribunal") and the United States District Court have ruled that Mr. Krikorian's dispute with SHA, LLC does not involve the former Minister of the Environment, Mr. Vardan Ayvzyan, since he was not party to his dealing with SHA, LLC or mentioned anywhere in his agreements.

Judge Paul Oetken, not only reversed his own decision that issued a default judgement in favour of GBGD, it slammed Van Krikorian and Global Gold, for abusing the legal system by trying to aggressively and repeatedly pursue Mr. Vardan Ayvazyan so as to get the ruling that it wanted.

Judge Paul Oetken states: "Global Gold has had its day in court and has also had its day before the Tribunal . . . Faced with consistent adverse decisions, it now seeks to change the rules of the game . . . Global Gold may not circumvent the decision of the ICA Tribunal by returning to this Court, which lacks jurisdiction over Ayvazian."

More on The CONSISTENT ADVERSE DECISIONS that GBGD received and tried to circumvent by abusing the ICA Tribunal and the US District Court, in my next blog, Part II.

www.BriefingWire.com/pr/us-judge-blasts-van-krikorian-global-gold-corp-gbgd-and-overturns-his-37mm-default-judgement

Armenian Documentary calls Van Z. Krikorian of Global Gold Corp. a SWINDLER!

2013-04-16T10:14:00.001-04:00

The Video below was released in Armenia on April 6, 2013. The title in Armenian is
ԽԱՐԴԱԽՆԵՐԸ, or KHARDAKHNERE, which tranlates to "FAKERS" or "SWINDLERS".
(Van, Please correct me if I am wrong about the translation.)

The video prepared by certain NGOs describes how Mr. Van Z. Krikorian used his influence and political connections, which he gained from his work and membership with the US based lobby group the Armenian Assembly of America (AAA), and connections to the Department of State and the US Embassy in Armenia, to help enrich himself and "swindel" his employees, contractors, partners and the Republic of Armenia.

I hope the English version will be published soon...

PART V: "YOU, YOUR BROTHER AND AZAT ARE ALL GOING TO JAIL"

2012-06-21T09:46:00.002-04:00

That's what Mr. Van Z. Krikorian said to me and my brother (John Mavridis) in October 2010 while we were trying to resolve the dispute between Global Gold and Caldera. Little did I know that he was serious and that his scheme was already put in place weeks before!

Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, the Corporate Counsel of Global Gold Corporation, authorized his lawyer in Armenia Mr. Hrayr Ghukassyan, to file a criminal complaint against me for theft and fraud on September 15, 2010, for allegedly stealing the shares of Marjan Mining Company.

Below is the signed complaint filed by Global Gold Mining, the subsidiary of Global Gold Corporation (GBGD) that was filed with the Prosecutor of Yerevan City, Mr. Badalyan.

Translated from Armenian

To: Mr. Badalyan,

Prosecutor of Yerevan city

From: Hrayr Ghukasyan

Global Gold Mining LLC

Representative of the Armenian Branch

Address: 2a/2 Tumanyan, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia

Tel: 010 52-94-18, 093 988-797

Consider and report to:
A.R.Zakharyan
(signature)
15.09.2010

A. Hakobyan
(signature)
15.09.2010
Application
15.09.2010

Global Gold Mining (GGM) (www.globalgoldcorp.com) is an international company and a foreign investor in the Republic of Armenia, engaged in mineral mining in Armenia and Chile. GGM has already invested about USD 10 million in Armenia. GGM operates in Armenia, acting as a participant, shareholder and investor of the companies licensed by the Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. The Company has four exploration areas in Armenia: Tokhmanuk (Aragatsotn region), Getik (Gegharkunik region), Hankavan (Kotayk region) and Marjan (Syunik region).

The special mining license of Marjan is held by Marjan Mining Company, LLC, and 100% of its shares are owned by Global Gold Mining.

In 2010, within the framework of making investments for the exploration and further exploitation of Marjan property, Global Gold Mining entered into joint venture with the Canadian company. As a result Marjan-Caldera Mining, LLC joint venture was formed.

Parties obtained a number of arrangements, including in writing with regard to their further economic operations of the joint venture and exchanged documents.

However, in August 2010, the representative of Marjan-Caldera Mining, LLC - by violating the joint venture agreement and the legislative requirements of the Republic of Armenia, abusing and acting beyond the power of attorney issued by Marjan Mining Company, LLC, using falsified documents, failing to submit documents required by the law, illegally using the seal - registered the amendments to the Charter of Marjan Mining Company, LLC and change of the executive director in Nork-Markash Territorial Division of State Register of Legal Entities of the Republic of Armenia. As a result, Global Gold Mining, LLC has been illegally deprived of 100% of shares of Marjan Mining Company, LLC; i.e. its ownership and its right to manage the Company.

Based on the above-mentioned, Global Gold Mining, LLC finds that the mentioned circumstances and the factual data in confirmation thereof contain elements of an act not authorised by the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia, and I hereby ask you to examine the facts specified in the message and settle the issue of initiating a criminal case.

All relevant documents are with the Nork-Marash Territorial Division of the State Register of Legal Entities under the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia, and all other information will be provided immediately upon request of the competent authorities.

14.09.2010
Global Gold Mining, LLC
Representative of the Armenian Branch
H. Ghukasyan
(signature)

The Claim states I, Vasilios (Bill ) Mavridis, the CEO of Caldera Resources, at that time, my Manger in Armenia, Mr. Azat Vartanyan, and the Senior Officer of the State Registry office, Mr. Artur Azaryan, falsified documents, used illegal corporate seal, illegally registered documents and "illegally deprived of 100% of shares of Marjan Mining Company, LLC; i.e. its ownership and its right to manage the Company." WHAT A BUNCH OF HOOEY !

All that Caldera did was register the transfer of the shares of Marjan Mining Company (Armenia) from Global Gold Mining (Delaware) to the Joint Venture, Marjan-Caldera Mining (Delaware) per the Joint Venture Agreement. The shares were officially transfered as per signed resolutions of the Boards of Caldera and Global Gold on June 18, 2010.

In my opinion, when Caldera took control of Marjan Mining Company, as was anticipated by the JV, Global Gold went ballistic, because I don't believe they ever wanted us to have the project, all they wanted to do was scam Caldera out of $150,000 cash.

The Prosecutor's office transferred the file to the police for review. The initial investigator assigned to the case was Ms. Diana Vardanyan, the preliminary investigator of the police office of the Central district of Yerevan performed the initial investigation. Azat Vartanian met with the investigator a couple of times. The last time was October 21, 2010.

For some reason that investigator Ms. Diana Vardanyan, was removed and replaced by Ms. A. Iskandaryan, of the Central Department of the Yeravan City Police, and the investigation restarted. On October 27, 2010 a summons was issued to my Manager, Azat Vartanyan to appear for questioning.

After several "KGB" style interrogations it appeared to Mr. Azat Vartanyan, our Manager in Armenia, that this bogus case would be dropped. It wasn't.

A decision to institute criminal proceedings was signed on November 3, 2010 by Deputy Prosecutor A. Afandyan. (These Prosecutor's Decisions are kept confidential and are kept that way till after the investigation is closed or goes to trial. So how did we get a copy of this Decision? Well from Van Z. Krikorian himself, from an email on November 5, 2010. This has the odour of corruption).

But the Police Investigator found no evidence of a crime

(EXCERPT BELOW)

After the Police found no evidence of a crime and the Deputy Prosecutor closed the case on August 28, 2011, Mr. Hrayr Ghukassyan filed an appeal of the decision to the Prosecutor. The appeal was rejected on September 13, 2011 and the file closed. That's 12 months from the initial filing of this bogus complaint.

But the words of Mr. Van Krikorian's threats that

"you, your brother and Azat will all go to jail"

echoed in the background.

On September 26, 2011, Global Gold filed a formal Appeal of the Prosecutor's decision in Court:

[Excerpts] Translated from Armenian

To: Court of General Jurisdiction

of Kentron and Nork-Marash administrative districts of Yerevan city

From: Hrayr Ghukasyan

Representative, Advocate of Global Gold Mining, LLC

APPEAL

The appeal is filed against the Decision rendered by L. Tadevosyan on 13 of September 2011, the Prosecutor of Corruption and Organized Crime Department of General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Armenia on refusal of the appeal filed by the representative of Global Gold Mining, LLC against the Decision rendered by Ed. Hakobyan on 23 of August 2011, Deputy Head of the 1st Division of the Department of Especially Important Cases of the General Investigation Department of the Police of the Republic of Armenia on Dismissing the criminal proceedings with regard to the case No 13201810 and not initiating criminal prosecution.

Claim of the Appeal:

Having regard to the above-mentioned and guided by Article 18 of the Constitution of theRepublic of Armenia, Article 263(2) and Article 290 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Armenia, I hereby ask you to render a decision on the obligation of the prosecution authority to eliminate the violation of human rights and freedoms; i.e. withdraw the illegal, groundless and unjustified decision rendered by L. Tadevosyan on 13 of September 2011, the Prosecutor of Corruption and Organized Crime Department of General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Armenia on Refusal of the appeal filed by the representative of Global Gold Mining, LLC against the Decision on Dismissing the criminal proceedings and not initiating criminal prosecution and consequently the illegal, groundless and unjustified decision rendered by Ed. Hakobyan on 23 of August 2011, Deputy Head of the 1st Division of the Department of Especially Important Cases of the General Investigation Department of the Police of the Republic of Armenia on Dismissing the criminal proceedings with regard to the case No 13201810 and not initiating criminal prosecution and reinstitute the preliminary investigation of the criminal case.

Enclosed are:The power of attorney of the representative of “Global Gold Mining” LLCThe copy of the Decision rendered by Ed. Hakobyan on 23 of August 2011, Deputy Head of the 1st Division of the Department of Especially Important Cases of the General Investigation Department of the Police of the Republic of Armenia on Dismissing the criminal proceedings with regard to the case No 13201810 and not initiating criminal prosecution.

26 September, 2011Representative of Global Gold Mining, LLC

He lost that claim and then filed an appeal to the Appeal Court of Armenia, Criminal Division.

He lost that appeal and then filed a final appeal to the Cassation Court of Armenia, Criminal Division.

That appeal was reject too.

PART IV: VAN KRIKORIAN TARRED AND FEATHERED ME !

2012-06-15T22:23:00.000-04:00

Why did a "reputable" lawyer and a prominent leader of the American Armenian community through his work with the Armenian Assembly of America, authorize the filing of a bogus criminal complaint against me in Armenia, when I was President and CEO of Caldera Resources?

This "bogus" criminal complaint was nothing more the a scheme to force me to walk away from a business venture in Armenia, to gain an advantage for Global Gold in a civil litigation and to scare me off and attempt to humiliate me by executing a "TAR-AND-FEATHER" campaign.

Mr. Krikorian then proudly declared in the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings of Global Gold Corporation (GBGD):

"[C]aldera officials are currently under criminal investigation..."

10-Q Global Gold Corporation Filed August 22, 2011 for the period ending June 30, 2011

http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/319671/000143774911003507/ggc_10q-033111.htm

10-Q Global Gold Corporation Filed May 20, 2011 for the period ending March 31, 2011

http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/319671/000143774911006272/gbgd_10q-063011.htm

10-K Global Gold Corporation Filed April 14, 2011 for the Year ending December 31, 2010

http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/319671/000143774911002304/0001437749-11-002304-index.htm

"[I]n October 2010, two Caldera officials came under criminal investigation in Armenia for fraud..."

10-Q Global Gold Corporation Filed November 11, 2011 for the period ending September 30, 2011

http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/319671/000143774911008868/gbgd_10q-093011.htm

What Mr. Krikorian failed to ever mention in his certified SEC filings, probably to avoid self incrimination for attempted extortion, that it was Global Gold Corp. (GBGD) that authorized the filing of the criminal complaint.

On August 24, 2011, the Liutenant-Colonel Mr. Ed. A. HAakobyan, Deputy Chief of the Division 1, Department of Investigation of Especially Important Cases of GID of the RA Police in his investigation of the claims made by Van Z. Krikorian's agents is Armenia to be baseless.

"[a]s stated in the applications and testimonies of A. Poghosyan and H. Ghukasyan, no property damage has been caused to the state, any physical person or legal entity, the dispute and relations between “Global Gold Mining” and “Caldera Resources Inc.” derive from the agreement executed by them and are of a civil nature."
AUGUST 24, 2011

This was nothing more then a proverbial TAR-AND-FEATHER attack. I believe the actions of Van Krikorian are unethical and illegal.

Please VOTE in our POLL if you think the actions of

Mr. Van Z. Krikorian are UNETHICAL.

(1) Even after the prosecution was dropped by the Armenia Police and the Prosecutor's Office, Mr. Krikorian made false statements in his SEC filling stating:

"[I]n October 2010, two Caldera officials came under criminal investigation in Armenia for fraud, ... [B]ased, in part, on a misunderstanding of the June 2010 TSX Venture Exchange approval letter and Caldera’s misrepresentations that payments due to Global Gold were being held in escrow, the criminal investigation of two Caldera officials was declined by prosecutors and the first instance judicial review in Armenia. In accordance with Armenian law, those decisions are now pending further judicial review."

Only in the twisted logic and made up facts created by Mr. Van Krikorian does the dropping of Criminal investigation is just a "first instance judicial review".

(2) When the case was dropped by the Police Investigator and the Prosecutor, usually the saga would be over. Not for Mr. Van Krikorian, he authorized Global Gold to appeal the decision, but was denied.

(3) Ok then, it should be over now. No it wasn't. Mr. Van Krikorian authorized his agents in Armenia to start a brand new legal challenge and sued the Police Investigator and the Prosecutor for failing to do their job.

Global Gold lost the case against the Police and the Prosecutor. You figure it would be over now. No it was not.

(4) Mr. Van Krikorian then authorized his agent's in Armenia to appeal to the Criminal Court of Appeal and pursue the Police Investigator and the Prosecutor furhter. Mr. Krikorian lost that appeal too. You think it would be over now? Not for Mr. Van Krikorian.

(5) Mr. Van Krikorian then authorized his agents to file an appeal to the highest criminal court in the land, the Criminal Division of the Cassation Court. They lost the appeal there too. Now it is over. The last ruling against them was in early 2012.

There was not first instance, this was a new legal challenge. It was a filing of a bogus criminal complaint that was thrown out. Global Gold continued filing new lawsuits against the Police Investigator and the Prosecutor in an attempt to restart the criminal investigation and file formal charges against me. The Police and the Prosecutor both said their was no crime and the dispute was of a civil nature. But Van Krikorian wanted to see me in Jail and sued government officials to get his way. Thank GOD for little miracles. He failed.

(6) Do you think this would be over now! No! Mr. Van Z. Krikorian then tried to file a new criminal complaint with the Police in Armenia in April 2012, using the Arbitrators Ruling of March 29, 2012 as evidence of fraud. This claim was thrown out.....Now its over.

Mr. Van Z. Krikorian, a member of the Bar of New York, a leader of the Armenian Community, Chairman, CEO, Director and Corporate Counsel for Global Gold Corporation, a publicly traded company on the OTC/PinkSheets with trading symbol GBGD, tried to put me in jail a total of 6 times.

VISIT THE VIDEO PAGE ON MY BLOG

AND SEE SCATHING VIDEO REPORTS

FROM ARMENIA AGAINST GLOBAL GOLD

http://toukhmanuk.blogspot.ca/p/news-reports-on-gbgd-global-gold-and.html