Author

admin

Browsing

Perth, Australia (ABN Newswire) – Basin Energy Limited (ASX:BSN) (OTCMKTS:BSNEF) is pleased to invite shareholders and investors to an investor webinar where Managing Director, Pete Moorhouse will provide a Company update following the recently acquired extensive uranium and rare earth portfolio in Queensland and outline upcoming exploration plans.

DETAILS

Date: Thursday, 28 August 2025
Time: 11:30AM AEST / 9:30AM AWST

Registration:
https://www.abnnewswire.net/lnk/66GZ5R65

Participants will be able to submit questions via the panel throughout the presentation, however we highly encourage attendees to submit questions beforehand via chloe@janemorganmanagement.com.au

To view the Presentation, please visit:
https://www.abnnewswire.net/lnk/3Z6Y66N7

About Basin Energy Ltd:

Basin Energy Ltd (ASX:BSN) (OTCMKTS:BSNEF) is a green energy metals exploration and development company with an interest in three highly prospective projects positioned in the southeast corner and margins of the world-renowned Athabasca Basin in Canada and has recently acquired a significant portfolio of Green Energy Metals exploration assets located in Scandinavia.

Source:
Basin Energy Ltd

Contact:
Pete Moorhouse
Managing Director
pete.m@basinenergy.com.au
+61 7 3667 7449

Chloe Hayes
Investor and Media Relations
chloe@janemorganmanagement.com.au
+61 458619317

News Provided by ABN Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Investor Insight

Corazon Mining Ltd presents a compelling investment case driven by a strategic pivot to WA gold exploration, capitalising on its recent acquisition of the Two Pools gold project. This acquisition offers significant near-term exploration upside, while the company retains a high-quality portfolio of base and battery metals projects, providing long-term optionality and leverage to the evolving critical minerals market. This strategy positions Corazon to deliver shareholder value through potential high-impact discovery and future project development.

Overview

Corazon Mining Ltd (ASX:CZN) is an Australian junior exploration company focused on high-quality gold and critical minerals projects in Australia and Canada.

Company Highlights

  • Two Pools Gold Project: The company’s primary focus is the newly acquired Two Pools Gold Project in Western Australia’s highly productive Plutonic Greenstone Belt. This underexplored tenure contains a recently identified 20km-long greenstone belt that was previously misclassified as granite.
  • Confirmed High-Grade Mineralisation: Historical drilling at Two Pools has delivered standout intercepts, including 12m @ 8.89 g/t Au (incl. 3m @ 34.25 g/t Au) and 18m @ 3.89 g/t Au (incl. 4m @ 15.96 g/t Au).
  • Trident-style Analogy: Drilling has confirmed mineralisation extends beneath overthrust granite, a key geological setting similar to Catalyst Metals’ nearby Trident Deposit, highlighting the potential for significant blind discoveries.
  • Strategic Location: Two Pools is located just 60km from Catalyst Metals’ Plutonic Processing Plant, offering strong future development synergies
  • Strategic Battery and Base Metals Portfolio: Corazon retains ownership of key projects in Canada and Australia including the MacBride Copper-Zinc-Gold Project and the historic Lynn Nickel-Copper-Cobalt sulphide camp in Manitoba, and the Mt Gilmore Copper-Cobalt-Gold project in NSW. These assets provide long-term exposure to critical metals.
  • Compelling Value Proposition: Corazon offers a unique investment opportunity with a small market capitalisation but large, high-quality assets.

Key Projects

Two Pools Gold Project (Western Australia)

Project Highlights:

  • A new, highly-prospective gold exploration project in the proven Plutonic-Marymia Greenstone Belt.
  • The project covers 193km2 of underexplored tenure containing a newly identified 20km-long greenstone belt
  • Historical Drilling and surface sampling have confirmed high-grade gold mineralisation, with a compelling geological setting analogous to other major deposits in the region.

Lynn Lake Base & Precious Metals (Manitoba, Canada)

Project Highlights:

  • High-quality base and precious metals asset, offering strategic, long-term value.
  • MacBride Copper-Zinc-Gold Project: High-grade, near-surface mineralisation and significant exploration upside for VMS-style deposits.

Other Projects

  • Mt Gilmore Copper-Cobalt-Gold (NSW, Australia): An emerging porphyry play with potential for a significant potential copper-gold system.

Management Team

Simon Coyle – Managing Director

Simon Coyle is a mining executive with over 20 years’ experience in the resources sector, spanning across gold, iron ore, manganese and lithium. He is a graduate of the Western Australian School of Mines and has held a number of senior operational leadership roles across both private and publicly listed companies.

Most recently, Coyle served as CEO and president of TSXV-listed Velox Energy Materials. Prior to this, he held senior roles at Pilbara Minerals, including general manager – operations, where he was instrumental in the development and expansion of its flagship lithium project, establishing it as one of the world’s leading spodumene concentrate producers. Coyle currently serves as non-executive director of Kali Metals.

Kristie Young – Non-executive Chair

Kristie Young is a professional Board Director who began her career as a mining engineer in the mid 90’s across both underground and open cut operations (incl. Hamersley Iron, Mt Isa Mines, Plutonic Gold, New Hampton Goldfields, Surpac), feasibility studies and project evaluation. She holds a BEng(Mining) Hons from the University of Queensland.

Over 25 years’ industry experience, including business development director roles with both EY and PwC. She brings more than 15 years’ experience on boards and committees and currently serves as a non-executive director of Brazilian Rare Earths (ASX:BRE), Livium (ASX:LIT), Tasmea Ltd (ASX:TEA), and MinEx CRC.

She is a Fellow of the AusIMM and a graduate and Fellow of the AICD.

Scott Williamson – Non-executive Director

Scott Williamson is a highly experienced mining engineer with an Engineering and Commerce degree from the West Australian School of Mines and Curtin University. With more than 20 years of experience spanning technical and corporate roles in the mining and finance sectors, he brings a wealth of industry expertise and strategic insight. A proven leader in business development, Scott has extensive experience in equity capital markets, complementing his strong technical skill set.

Currently, he serves as managing director of Blackstone Minerals and non-executive Director of Leeuwin Metals.

Scott also holds a WA First Class Mine Manager’s Certificate and is a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.

Robert Orr – Company Secretary and Chief Financial Officer

Robert Orr manages Corazon’s financial operations and corporate governance, ensuring compliance and effective financial management.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Coelacanth Energy Inc. (TSXV: CEI,OTC:CEIEF) (‘Coelacanth’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce its financial and operating results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025. All dollar figures are Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted.

FINANCIAL RESULTS Three Months Ended Six Months Ended  
  June 30 June 30  
($000s, except per share amounts) 2025 2024 % Change 2025 2024 % Change  
               
Oil and natural gas sales 4,828 3,164 53 7,494 6,830 10  
               
Cash flow from (used in) operating activities (1,826 ) (480 ) 280 (845 ) 2,776 (130
Per share – basic and diluted (1) (-) (-) (-) 0.01 (100 )
               
Adjusted funds flow (used) (1) (600 ) 262 (329 ) (2,040 ) 1,340 (252 )
Per share – basic and diluted (-) (-) (-) (-)  
               
Net loss (3,464 ) (2,329 ) 49 (7,081 ) (3,530 ) 101  
Per share – basic and diluted (0.01 ) (-) 100 (0.01 ) (0.01 )  
               
Capital expenditures (1) 14,273 2,522 466 39,974 3,785 956  
               
Adjusted working capital (deficiency) (1)       (41,901 ) 64,386 (165
               
Common shares outstanding (000s)              
Weighted average – basic and diluted 532,274 529,400 1 531,862 529,298  
               
End of period – basic       532,866 530,126 1  
End of period – fully diluted       591,544 617,804 (4

 

(1) See ‘Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures’ section.

  Three Months Ended Six Months Ended  
OPERATING RESULTS (1) June 30 June 30  
   2025   2024   % Change   2025   2024  % Change   
               
Daily production (2)              
Oil and condensate (bbls/d) 539 284 90 362 292 24  
Other NGLs (bbls/d) 27 39 (31 ) 26 38 (32
Oil and NGLs (bbls/d) 566 323 75 388 330 18  
Natural gas (mcf/d) 3,861 3,724 4 3,588 3,829 (6 )
Oil equivalent (boe/d) 1,210 944 28 986 968 2  
               
Oil and natural gas sales              
Oil and condensate ($/bbl) 82.58 97.76 (16 ) 84.51 91.34 (7
Other NGLs ($/bbl) 26.96 33.26 (19 ) 32.19 33.99 (5 )
Oil and NGLs ($/bbl) 79.91 89.86 (11 ) 81.01 84.73 (4 )
Natural gas ($/mcf) 2.02 1.55 30 2.77 2.50 11  
Oil equivalent ($/boe) 43.86 36.85 19 41.97 38.76 8  
               
Royalties              
Oil and NGLs ($/bbl) 17.65 21.97 (20 ) 17.20 21.36 (19
Natural gas ($/mcf) 0.09 (100 ) 0.30 0.30  
Oil equivalent ($/boe) 8.26 7.86 5 7.85 8.48 (7 )
               
Operating expenses              
Oil and NGLs ($/bbl) 10.82 10.34 5 10.77 10.11 7  
Natural gas ($/mcf) 1.81 1.72 5 1.80 1.69 7  
Oil equivalent ($/boe) 10.86 10.34 5 10.77 10.11 7  
               
Net transportation expenses (3)              
Oil and NGLs ($/bbl) 4.43 2.10 111 3.86 2.28 69  
Natural gas ($/mcf) 0.70 0.72 (3 ) 0.74 0.70 6  
Oil equivalent ($/boe) 4.33 3.55 22 4.20 3.54 19  
               
Operating netback (loss) (3)              
Oil and NGLs ($/bbl) 47.01 55.45 (15 ) 49.18 50.98 (4
Natural gas ($/mcf) (0.49 ) (0.98 ) (50 ) (0.07 ) (0.19 ) (63 )
Oil equivalent ($/boe) 20.41 15.10 35 19.15 16.63 15  
               
Depletion and depreciation ($/boe) (12.76 ) (14.85 ) (14 ) (13.35 ) (14.63 ) (9 )
General and administrative expenses ($/boe) (13.69 ) (15.17 ) (10 ) (16.78 ) (14.50 ) 16  
Stock based compensation ($/boe) (10.31 ) (14.50 ) (29 ) (13.43 ) (12.25 ) 10  
Finance expense ($/boe) (13.02 ) (1.53 ) 751 (12.96 ) (1.29 ) 905  
Finance income ($/boe) 0.64 9.89 (94 ) 0.96 10.25 (91 )
Unutilized transportation ($/boe) (2.75 ) (6.07 ) (55 ) (3.25 ) (4.24 ) (23 )
Net loss ($/boe) (31.48 ) (27.13 ) 16 (39.66 ) (20.03 ) 98  

 

(1) See ‘Oil and Gas Terms’ section.
(2) See ‘Product Types’ section.
(3) See ‘Non-GAAP and Other Financial Measures’ section.

Selected financial and operational information outlined in this news release should be read in conjunction with Coelacanth’s unaudited condensed interim financial statements and related Management’s Discussion and Analysis (‘MD&A’) for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, which are available for review under the Company’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

OPERATIONS UPDATE

Coelacanth has surpassed many milestones over its initial three years including:

  • Drilling and testing successful test pads at both Two Rivers East and West in multiple zones.
  • Completing significant infrastructure including a facility capable of ultimately handling 16,000 boe/d and over 23 miles of pipelines to connect wells and facilities to major gathering systems.
  • Obtaining core, pressure and other data that are invaluable in helping define commerciality to the multiple Montney horizons mapped over Coelacanth’s 150 section contiguous land block.

Wells recently placed on production from our 5-19 pad have exceeded expectations and we look forward to placing all our wells on production by October 1, 2025 once all planned third party outages and /or major pipeline maintenance is completed in September. Coelacanth will calibrate production to the type curves in our independent reserve report and recently released resource report to determine ultimate recoveries and provide insights into potential drilling and completion optimizations.

Over the next few years, Coelacanth will continue with its business plan that incorporates:

  • Systematically developing the resource using pad development and horizontal multi-frac technology to increase production and maximize cash flow and investment returns.
  • Delineating the lands with vertical and horizontal wells to help in quantifying and understanding the commerciality of its large Montney resource base that includes up to four Montney benches over its 150 contiguous sections of land.
  • Developing and licensing a flexible infrastructure plan that will allow for the resource to be scaled to a much larger production base.

Coelacanth has licensed additional locations on the 5-19 pad, is in the process of licensing additional development pads, delineation locations and additional infrastructure to grow beyond current plant capacity. While commodity prices and available capital will dictate the pace of execution of the business plan, we are very pleased with the results to date and look forward to reporting on new developments as they arise.

OIL AND GAS TERMS

The Company uses the following frequently recurring oil and gas industry terms in the news release:

 Liquids
 Bbls  Barrels 
 Bbls/d  Barrels per day 
 NGLs  Natural gas liquids (includes condensate, pentane, butane, propane, and ethane) 
 Condensate  Pentane and heavier hydrocarbons  
   
 Natural Gas
 Mcf  Thousands of cubic feet 
 Mcf/d  Thousands of cubic feet per day 
 MMcf/d  Millions of cubic feet per day 
 MMbtu  Million of British thermal units  
 MMbtu/d  Million of British thermal units per day 
   
 Oil Equivalent
 Boe  Barrels of oil equivalent 
 Boe/d  Barrels of oil equivalent per day 

 

Disclosure provided herein in respect of a boe may be misleading, particularly if used in isolation. A boe conversion rate of six thousand cubic feet of natural gas to one barrel of oil equivalent has been used for the calculation of boe amounts in the news release. This boe conversion rate is based on an energy equivalency conversion method primarily applicable at the burner tip and does not represent a value equivalency at the wellhead.

NON-GAAP AND OTHER FINANCIAL MEASURES

This news release refers to certain measures that are not determined in accordance with IFRS (or ‘GAAP’). These non-GAAP and other financial measures do not have any standardized meaning prescribed under IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other entities. The non-GAAP and other financial measures should not be considered alternatives to, or more meaningful than, financial measures that are determined in accordance with IFRS as indicators of the Company’s performance. Management believes that the presentation of these non-GAAP and other financial measures provides useful information to shareholders and investors in understanding and evaluating the Company’s ongoing operating performance, and the measures provide increased transparency to better analyze the Company’s performance against prior periods on a comparable basis.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

Adjusted funds flow (used)
Management uses adjusted funds flow (used) to analyze performance and considers it a key measure as it demonstrates the Company’s ability to generate the cash necessary to fund future capital investments and abandonment obligations and to repay debt, if any. Adjusted funds flow (used) is a non-GAAP financial measure and has been defined by the Company as cash flow from (used in) operating activities excluding the change in non-cash working capital related to operating activities, movements in restricted cash deposits and expenditures on decommissioning obligations. Management believes the timing of collection, payment or incurrence of these items involves a high degree of discretion and as such may not be useful for evaluating the Company’s cash flows. Adjusted funds flow (used) is reconciled from cash flow from (used in) operating activities as follows:

  Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
  June 30 June 30
($000s)  2025   2024   2025   2024 
Cash flow from (used in) operating activities  (1,826 ) (480 ) (845 ) 2,776
Add (deduct):        
Decommissioning expenditures 48 328 187 476
Change in restricted cash deposits 422 846
Change in non-cash working capital 1,178 (8 ) (1,382 ) (2,758 )
Adjusted funds flow (used) (non-GAAP) (600 ) 262 (2,040 ) 1,340

 

Net transportation expenses
Management considers net transportation expenses an important measure as it demonstrates the cost of utilized transportation related to the Company’s production. Net transportation expenses is calculated as transportation expenses less unutilized transportation and is calculated as follows:

  Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
  June 30 June 30
($000s) 2025 2024 2025 2024
Transportation expenses 779 826 1,330 1,371
Unutilized transportation (303 ) (522 ) (580 ) (747 )
Net transportation expenses (non-GAAP) 476 304 750 624

 

Operating netback
Management considers operating netback an important measure as it demonstrates its profitability relative to current commodity prices. Operating netback is calculated as oil and natural gas sales less royalties, operating expenses, and net transportation expenses and is calculated as follows:

  Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
  June 30 June 30
($000s)  2025   2024   2025   2024 
Oil and natural gas sales 4,828 3,164 7,494 6,830
Royalties (910 ) (674 ) (1,401 ) (1,495 )
Operating expenses (1,195 ) (888 ) (1,923 ) (1,782 )
Net transportation expenses (476 ) (304 ) (750 ) (624 )
Operating netback (non-GAAP) 2,247 1,298 3,420 2,929

 

Capital expenditures
Coelacanth utilizes capital expenditures as a measure of capital investment on property, plant, and equipment, exploration and evaluation assets and property acquisitions compared to its annual budgeted capital expenditures. Capital expenditures are calculated as follows: hello

  Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
  June 30 June 30
($000s)  2025   2024   2025   2024 
Capital expenditures – property, plant, and equipment 370 184 1,038 577
Capital expenditures – exploration and evaluation assets 13,903 2,338 38,936 3,208
Capital expenditures (non-GAAP) 14,273 2,522 39,974 3,785

 

Capital Management Measures

Adjusted working capital (deficiency)
Management uses adjusted working capital (deficiency) as a measure to assess the Company’s financial position. Adjusted working capital (deficiency) is calculated as current assets and restricted cash deposits less current liabilities, excluding the current portion of decommissioning obligations.

($000s) June 30,
2025 
December 31,
2024 
Current assets 6,439 11,579
Less:     
Current liabilities  (53,926 ) (37,234 )
Working capital deficiency (47,487 ) (25,655 )
Add:     
Restricted cash deposits 4,900 4,900
Current portion of decommissioning obligations 686 2,118
Adjusted working capital deficiency (Capital management measure) (41,901 ) (18,637 )

 

Non-GAAP Financial Ratios

Adjusted Funds Flow (Used) per Share
Adjusted funds flow (used) per share is a non-GAAP financial ratio, calculated using adjusted funds flow (used) and the same weighted average basic and diluted shares used in calculating net loss per share.

Net transportation expenses per boe
The Company utilizes net transportation expenses per boe to assess the per unit cost of utilized transportation related to the Company’s production. Net transportation expenses per boe is calculated as net transportation expenses divided by total production for the applicable period.

Operating netback per boe
The Company utilizes operating netback per boe to assess the operating performance of its petroleum and natural gas assets on a per unit of production basis. Operating netback per boe is calculated as operating netback divided by total production for the applicable period.

Supplementary Financial Measures

The supplementary financial measures used in this news release (primarily average sales price per product type and certain per boe and per share figures) are either a per unit disclosure of a corresponding GAAP measure, or a component of a corresponding GAAP measure, presented in the financial statements. Supplementary financial measures that are disclosed on a per unit basis are calculated by dividing the aggregate GAAP measure (or component thereof) by the applicable unit for the period. Supplementary financial measures that are disclosed on a component basis of a corresponding GAAP measure are a granular representation of a financial statement line item and are determined in accordance with GAAP.

PRODUCT TYPES

The Company uses the following references to sales volumes in the news release:

Natural gas refers to shale gas
Oil and condensate refers to condensate and tight oil combined
Other NGLs refers to butane, propane and ethane combined
Oil and NGLs refers to tight oil and NGLs combined
Oil equivalent refers to the total oil equivalent of shale gas, tight oil, and NGLs combined, using the conversion rate of six thousand cubic feet of shale gas to one barrel of oil equivalent.

The following is a complete breakdown of sales volumes for applicable periods by specific product types of shale gas, tight oil, and NGLs:

  Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
  June 30 June 30
Sales Volumes by Product Type  2025   2024   2025   2024 
         
Condensate (bbls/d)                     17                     56                     17                     38
Other NGLs (bbls/d)                     27                     39                     26                     38
NGLs (bbls/d)                     44                     95                     43                     76
         
Tight oil (bbls/d)                   522                   228                   345                   254
Condensate (bbls/d)                     17                     56                     17                     38
Oil and condensate (bbls/d)                   539                   284                   362                   292
Other NGLs (bbls/d)                     27                     39                     26                     38
Oil and NGLs (bbls/d)                   566                   323                   388                   330
         
Shale gas (mcf/d)                3,861                3,724                3,588                3,829
Natural gas (mcf/d)                3,861                3,724                3,588                3,829
         
Oil equivalent (boe/d)                1,210                   944                   986                   968

 

FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION

This document contains forward-looking statements and forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable securities laws. The use of any of the words ‘expect’, ‘anticipate’, ‘continue’, ‘estimate’, ‘may’, ‘will’, ‘should’, ‘believe’, ‘intends’, ‘forecast’, ‘plans’, ‘guidance’ and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements or information.

More particularly and without limitation, this news release contains forward-looking statements and information relating to the Company’s oil and condensate, other NGLs, and natural gas production, capital programs, and adjusted working capital. The forward-looking statements and information are based on certain key expectations and assumptions made by the Company, including expectations and assumptions relating to prevailing commodity prices and exchange rates, applicable royalty rates and tax laws, future well production rates, the performance of existing wells, the success of drilling new wells, the availability of capital to undertake planned activities, and the availability and cost of labour and services.

Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements and information are reasonable, it can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. Since forward-looking statements and information address future events and conditions, by their very nature they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from those currently anticipated due to a number of factors and risks. These include, but are not limited to, the risks associated with the oil and gas industry in general such as operational risks in development, exploration and production, delays or changes in plans with respect to exploration or development projects or capital expenditures, the uncertainty of estimates and projections relating to production rates, costs, and expenses, commodity price and exchange rate fluctuations, marketing and transportation, environmental risks, competition, the ability to access sufficient capital from internal and external sources and changes in tax, royalty, and environmental legislation. The forward-looking statements and information contained in this document are made as of the date hereof for the purpose of providing the readers with the Company’s expectations for the coming year. The forward-looking statements and information may not be appropriate for other purposes. The Company undertakes no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, unless so required by applicable securities laws.

Coelacanth is an oil and natural gas company, actively engaged in the acquisition, development, exploration, and production of oil and natural gas reserves in northeastern British Columbia, Canada.

Further Information

For additional information, please contact:

Coelacanth Energy Inc.
Suite 2110, 530 – 8th Avenue SW
Calgary, Alberta T2P 3S8
Phone: (403) 705-4525
www.coelacanth.ca

Mr. Robert J. Zakresky
President and Chief Executive Officer

Mr. Nolan Chicoine
Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/264010

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

HIGHLIGHTS:

  • 30.20m grading 6.29g/t gold from 195.8m
  • 14.75m grading 13.6g/t gold from 153.5m
  • 20.95m grading 6.67g/t gold from 113.5m
  • 12.20m grading 8.72g/t gold from 344.5m
  • Consistent gold mineralization at the western end of the High Grade Panel
  • First results from a 15,000 metre program continuing throughout 2025

Heliostar Metals Ltd. (TSXV: HSTR,OTC:HSTXF) (OTCQX: HSTXF) (FSE: RGG1) (‘Heliostar’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce its first results from the current 15,000 metre drill program at its 100% owned Ana Paula project in Guerrero, Mexico. The program has the primary goal of converting inferred ounces to higher confidence classifications, as well as supporting the ongoing Feasibility Study and testing the next exploration targets around the Ana Paula deposit.

Heliostar CEO, Charles Funk, commented, ‘In 2025, Heliostar will drill more metres than we have in our entire Company’s history. We intend to drill between 40,000-50,000 metres from the close of the mine acquisitions late last year to the end of 2025. This drilling is being funded by cashflows from our operating mines. We are particularly excited to be undertaking our largest program at Ana Paula. These first results highlight the consistency of gold mineralization at the High Grade Panel, where we have two rigs turning. One is focused on resource drilling to grow the resource and to convert inferred to higher confidence ounces, and the second is with a geotechnical focus to support the Feasibility Study. These are the first of consistent, drill results planned to be released monthly from Ana Paula through 2025 and into 2026.’

Drilling Program

Heliostar has two rigs turning with 18 holes completed and 5,556 metres drilled to date. Drilling is designed along north-south sections with angled holes to best define the overall east-west orientation of the High Grade Panel. Heliostar’s drilling approach at Ana Paula has been to rotate drilling by approximately 90 degrees from the majority of historic intercepts. This change has been interpreted by the Company to have contributed to demonstrating more continuous and higher-grade gold mineralization within the High Grade Panel than previous operators recognized.

Where appropriate, the holes are also being used to collect rock strength data, hydrogeologic data and samples for further metallurgical studies that will directly influence the Ana Paula mine design in the ongoing Feasibility Study.

Drill Results Summary

Holes AP-25-323 and AP-25-325 are resource conversion holes drilled at the western end of the High Grade Panel. Hole AP-25-323 was drilled further west than the most prospective polymictic breccia host unit and still returned a number of attractive intercepts, including 12.2 metres (‘m’) grading 8.73 grams per tonne (‘g/t’) gold from 344.5 m.

AP-25-325 is located ~30m southeast of AP-25-323 and intercepted the favourable breccia host unit. The hole returned a wide, high-grade interval of 30.2 m grading 6.29 g/t gold from 195.8 m and a number of deeper intercepts that have the potential to expand the resource, including 4.5 m grading 12.6 g/t gold from 277.5 m downhole beneath the High Grade Panel.

Holes AP-25-322 and AP-25-324 are geotechnical holes for mine development planning and returned assay results in line with expectations, including a hit of 14.75 m grading 13.6 g/t gold from 153.5 m in AP-25-322.

Drilling continues at the less well-defined western edge of the High Grade Panel, with results from three additional holes pending from this area. Recently, drilling has been focused in the centre of the High Grade Panel with assays from seven holes pending from this area.

The next Ana Paula drill results are anticipated to be released in mid- to late September.

Figure 1: Plan Map of the current drill program at Ana Paula

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/264051_510b159934e6b936_003full.jpg

Figure 2: Cross-Section through hole AP-25-325

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/264051_510b159934e6b936_004full.jpg

Drilling Results and Coordinates Tables

Hole ID From
(metres)
To
(metres)
Interval
(metres)
Au
(g/t)
Topcut
Au (to 
64 g/t)
Hole
Purpose
AP-24-322 21.8 43.0 21.2 3.77 Geotechnical Hole
and 113.5 134.45 20.95 6.67
and 153.5 168.25 14.75 13.6 11.6
including 164.4 168.25 3.85 45.1 37.2
and 245.2 255.75 10.55 2.14
AP-24-323 195.5 199.5 4.0 7.81 Resource Hole
and 224.5 235.5 11.0 2.26
and 344.5 356.7 12.2 8.72
including 353.0 356.7 3.7 24.4
AP-25-324 52.0 65.2 13.2 2.73 Geotechnical Hole
including 64.15 65.2 1.05 18.4
AP-25-325 81.4 94.5 13.1 2.10 Resource Hole
and 195.8 261.0 65.2 3.81
including 195.8 226.0 30.2 6.29
and 277.5 282.0 4.5 12.6
and 295 301.0 6.0 2.25
and 369.6 371.9 2.3 6.43

 

Table 1: Significant Drill Intersections

Drilling Coordinates Table

Hole ID Easting
(WGS84 Zone 14N)
Northing
(WGS84 Zone 14N)
Elevation
(metres)
Azimuth
(°)
Inclination
(°)
Length
(metres)
AP-25-322 410,129 1,998,045 924.3 180 -55 269.4
AP-25-323 410,055 1,998,154 954.2 180 -55 431.0
AP-25-324 410,205 1,998,017 932.4 180 -50 59.4
AP-25-325 410,080 1,998,140 950.2 180 -55 392.0

 

Table 2: Drill Hole Details

Quality Assurance / Quality Control

Drill core is PQ size, and the core is cut in half, with half sent for analysis. Core samples were shipped to ALS Limited in Zacatecas, Zacatecas, Mexico, for sample preparation and for analysis at the ALS laboratory in North Vancouver. The Zacatecas and North Vancouver ALS facilities are ISO/IEC 17025 certified. Gold was assayed by 30-gram fire assay with atomic absorption spectroscopy finish, and overlimits were analyzed by 30-gram fire assay with gravimetric finish.

Control samples comprising certified reference and blank samples were systematically inserted into the sample stream and analyzed as part of the Company’s quality assurance / quality control protocol.

True widths are not reported as mineralization at Ana Paula occurs as disseminations or vein stockworks with variable controls, including rock porosity, lithology and fault networks.

Statement of Qualified Person

Stewart Harris, P.Geo., a Qualified Person, as such term is defined by National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects, has reviewed the scientific and technical information that forms the basis for this news release and has approved the disclosure herein. Mr Harris is employed as Exploration Manager of the Company.

About Heliostar Metals Ltd.
Heliostar is a gold mining company with production from operating mines in Mexico. This includes the La Colorada Mine in Sonora and the San Agustin Mine in Durango. The Company also has a strong portfolio of development projects in Mexico and the USA. These include the Ana Paula project in Guerrero, the Cerro del Gallo project in Guanajuato, the San Antonio project in Baja Sur and the Unga project in Alaska, USA.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

Charles Funk
President and Chief Executive Officer
Heliostar Metals Limited
Email: charles.funk@heliostarmetals.com
Phone: +1 844-753-0045
Rob Grey
Investor Relations Manager
Heliostar Metals Limited
Email: rob.grey@heliostarmetals.com
Phone: +1 844-753-0045

 

Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This news release includes certain ‘Forward-Looking Statements’ within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and ‘forward-looking information’ under applicable Canadian securities laws. When used in this news release, the words ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘target’, ‘plan’, ‘forecast’, ‘may’, ‘would’, ‘could’, ‘schedule’ and similar words or expressions, identify forward-looking statements or information. These forward-looking statements or information relate to, among other things, show the full extent of the deposit, upgrade and expand the resource base, growing our annual production profile in the near term and bringing additional production online.

Forward-looking statements and forward-looking information relating to the terms and completion of the Facility, any future mineral production, liquidity, and future exploration plans are based on management’s reasonable assumptions, estimates, expectations, analyses and opinions, which are based on management’s experience and perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, and other factors that management believes are relevant and reasonable in the circumstances, but which may prove to be incorrect. Assumptions have been made regarding, among other things, the receipt of necessary approvals, price of metals; no escalation in the severity of public health crises or ongoing military conflicts; costs of exploration and development; the estimated costs of development of exploration projects; and the Company’s ability to operate in a safe and effective manner and its ability to obtain financing on reasonable terms.

These statements reflect the Company’s respective current views with respect to future events and are necessarily based upon a number of other assumptions and estimates that, while considered reasonable by management, are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, political, and social uncertainties and contingencies. Many factors, both known and unknown, could cause actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from the results, performance or achievements that are or may be expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements or forward-looking information and the Company has made assumptions and estimates based on or related to many of these factors. Such factors include, without limitation: precious metals price volatility; risks associated with the conduct of the Company’s mining activities in foreign jurisdictions; regulatory, consent or permitting delays; risks relating to reliance on the Company’s management team and outside contractors; risks regarding exploration and mining activities; the Company’s inability to obtain insurance to cover all risks, on a commercially reasonable basis or at all; currency fluctuations; risks regarding the failure to generate sufficient cash flow from operations; risks relating to project financing and equity issuances; risks and unknowns inherent in all mining projects, including the inaccuracy of reserves and resources, metallurgical recoveries and capital and operating costs of such projects; contests over title to properties, particularly title to undeveloped properties; laws and regulations governing the environment, health and safety; the ability of the communities in which the Company operates to manage and cope with the implications of public health crises; the economic and financial implications of public health crises, ongoing military conflicts and general economic factors to the Company; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities; employee relations, labour unrest or unavailability; the Company’s interactions with surrounding communities; the Company’s ability to successfully integrate acquired assets; the speculative nature of exploration and development, including the risks of diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; stock market volatility; conflicts of interest among certain directors and officers; lack of liquidity for shareholders of the Company; litigation risk; and the factors identified under the caption ‘Risk Factors’ in the Company’s public disclosure documents. Readers are cautioned against attributing undue certainty to forward-looking statements or forward-looking information. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially, there may be other factors that cause results not to be anticipated, estimated or intended. The Company does not intend, and does not assume any obligation, to update these forward-looking statements or forward-looking information to reflect changes in assumptions or changes in circumstances or any other events affecting such statements or information, other than as required by applicable law.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/264051

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Here’s a quick recap of the crypto landscape for Monday (August 27) as of 9:00 a.m. UTC.

Get the latest insights on Bitcoin, Ethereum and altcoins, along with a round-up of key cryptocurrency market news.

Bitcoin and Ethereum price update

Bitcoin (BTC) was priced at US$111,282, a 1.5 percent increase in 24 hours. Its lowest valuation of the day was US$109,526 and its highest price as of Wednesday was US$112,279.

Bitcoin price performance, August 27, 2025.

Chart via TradingView

Ether (ETH) was priced at US$4,605.36, down by 4.3 percent over the past 24 hours. Its lowest valuation of the day so far was US$4,411.96 and its highest level was US$4,638.61.

Altcoin price update

  • Solana (SOL) was priced at US$204.44, up by 9.1 percent. Its lowest valuation for Wednesday so far was US$187.47, and its highest valuation was US$205.32.
  • XRP was trading for US$3.00, up by 3.6 percent in the past 24 hours. Its lowest valuation of the day so far was US$2.89, and its highest valuation of the day was US$3.05.
  • SUI (Sui) was trading for US$3.44, up by 2.4 percent in the past 24 hours. Its lowest valuation of the day so far was US$3.36, and its highest valuation of the day was US$3.50.
  • Cardano (ADA) was priced at US$0.8619, up by 3.5 percent. Its lowest valuation for Wednesday so far was US$0.8327, and its highest valuation was US$0.8746.

Today’s crypto news to know

Trump Media and Crypto.com seal US$6.4 Billion CRO treasury deal

Trump Media & Technology Group shares climbed 5 percent on Tuesday (August 26) after the company confirmed a US$6.42 billion partnership with Crypto.com to launch a CRO-focused treasury vehicle.

Dubbed as the Trump Media Group CRO Strategy, the new entity will be seeded with US$1 billion in CRO and its balance will be structured as an equity line for future token purchases.

As part of the agreement, the company will operate a validator node on the Cronos blockchain, staking all its tokens to earn network rewards. CRO prices soaring 30 percent in a single day after the announcement, even as most of the crypto market lagged.

Still, the deal has stirred controversy among token holders, as it required reissuing 70 billion CRO previously “burned” to reduce supply which effectively inflated circulation by more than 200 percent.

Ethereum inflows hit US$1.3 Billion following Powell’s policy hints

Ethereum funds saw a massive US$1.3 billion inflow over the past week as traders responded to dovish signals from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.

Data from SoSoValue shows Ether-based exchange-traded products have absorbed US$3.7 billion since June, compared with US$900 million in outflows from Bitcoin funds.

The surge also coincided with Ethereum hitting a new all-time high of $4,955 on August 24.

Publicly listed companies also joined the rush, adding Ether to their corporate treasuries and pushing collective holdings to nearly 5 percent of total supply.

That accumulation rate is running at more than twice the fastest quarterly pace Bitcoin has ever seen, according to Standard Chartered’s Geoffrey Kendrick via DLNews.

Canary Capital Files for First Spot ETF Tracking Trump Meme Coin

ReutersCrypto fund manager Canary Capital has submitted paperwork to launch the first-ever spot ETF tied directly to President Trump’s meme coin, TRUMP, according to a Reuters report.

Unlike earlier applications filed under the 1940 Investment Company Act, Canary’s proposal was lodged under the 1933 Securities Act, meaning the ETF would hold TRUMP tokens outright rather than use offshore subsidiaries or cash equivalents.

The application comes despite skepticism from analysts, who note the SEC typically requires a futures ETF to trade for six months before approving a spot product.

The filing follows the SEC’s February announcement that meme coins fall outside its securities jurisdiction, a decision seen as aligning with the president’s pro-crypto stance.

Meanwhile, the TRUMP token has lost more than 70 percent of its value since launching in January. Analysts expect the SEC to rule on several meme coin ETF applications later this year.

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

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

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

  • Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce are engaged. Proving it was never a fake love story.
  • Initial skepticism stemmed from perceptions of Kelce as a goof and an unlikely match for Swift.
  • This moment shows the power of love. Yes, it really does.

Once, someone wrote that the Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce relationship was fake. Not real. A made up thing. Some kind of publicity stunt. Some of what was written was tongue in cheek but it also seemed like the right approach. You know why. These types of highly public romances seem artificially inflated.

The headline to the story read: ‘The Taylor Swift-Travis Kelce romance is fake. You know it is. So what? Let’s enjoy it.’

Well, it wasn’t fake, was it?

You know the dolt who wrote that story? This guy. Me. That’s who.

It was two years ago. What I will say is that when I reached out to NFL players around that time, as well people in various front offices, and even inside the NFL’s offices, no one believed it. And I mean, no one. It was considered a total joke.

Long live the Eras Tour with our enchanting book

Part of the perception was no one took Kelce’s love life seriously. The Kansas City Chiefs tight end was viewed as a future Hall of Famer and remarkable player but kind of a goof. After all, this is a man who was the star of his own reality dating show, ‘Catching Kelce,’ in 2016.

With news of Kelce’s engagement to Swift coming Tuesday, Aug. 26, what we see now is that love isn’t so easily explained. It doesn’t come in neat little packages. It’s not something we can predict. It’s not something that we can even vision. It’s like a fifth dimension that only becomes clear when it’s right before our face and, even then, it can be muddled.

And predicting other people’s love? LOL. Even more impossible. When I see Kelce. When I hear him. When I see him melt around Swift, well, hoo boy were we wrong. But at the time, he didn’t seem like the kind of person who would be capable of such deep emotional connections.

What the football world saw in Kelce (outside of the Chiefs) was someone seemed too odd to date someone like Swift — a megastar, talented businesswoman and super intelligent human. But we deeply, wrongly underestimated Kelce.

We saw in the ‘New Heights’ podcast just how much they love each other, but also, how much love Kelce has inside of him. He’s no goof.

This lesson is about love. Its powers and abilities are more super than any Avenger. It can destroy us but it can also captivate us. We know it when we see it and we see two people deeply in love. For once, for just once, we should drop our cynicism. That protective veil who sees a heating Earth and soiled politics and just enjoy this.

It’s OK. It’s totally OK.

Remember the beginning? Swift was shown at Arrowhead Stadium during FOX’s broadcast of the Kansas City’s game against the Chicago Bears at the end of Sept. 2023. Swift was sitting in a box next to Donna Kelce, Travis’ mom. Swift was cheering while wearing a red hoodie as the team prepared for kickoff. People rolled their eyes.

No longer. At least no one should be.

I see there are betting odds for when they will get divorced. Those oddsmakers will be as wrong as I was.

It’s fine to believe in love. Try it.

Just try it. It won’t hurt this time.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Coco Gauff fired her primary coach, and that decision is about to come under scrutiny at the US Open tennis tournament.

Her new coach, Gavin MacMillan, is a biomechanics specialist Gauff is hoping can help her fix ongoing struggles with her serve.

So far, good enough.

The third-seeded Gauff, the American star, outlasted the formidable Ajla Tomljanovic 6-4, 6-7 (7), 7-5 — despite a flawed serve that proved solid enough.

During an on-court interview after the match, Gauff said preparing for the US Open for the past 5-6 days with a new coach “has been really tough and mentally exhausting. … I think I’m just trying to improve with each match.’’ 

Both players had trouble holding serve, but neither had trouble powering the ball from the baseline. They spent much of the match slugging it out during long rallies. They combined for 115 unforced errors, but they also cracked 41 winners — 29 from Gauff.

Although Gauff had 10 double faults, she also uncorked four aces and her fastest serves topped 110 mph.

And in the end, it was pure Gauff. She struck a signature backhand for a winner and match point.

Gauff called it a tough match and it lasted just three minutes shy of three hours.

“Ajla was tough,” Gauff said. ‘I felt she was getting so many balls back and I was trying to push her back and she was standing on top of the baseline.

‘But, yeah, it wasn’t the best but I’m happy to get through to the next round.’’

Coco Gauff vs. Ajla Tomljanovic highlights

Coco Gauff interview

Coco Gauff vs Ajla Tomljanović: US Open score

Coco Gauff def. Ajla Tomljanovic 6-4, 6-7 (7), 7-5 in first round of US Open.

Coco Gauff next opponent

Coco Gauff is slated to face Donna Vekic in the second round on Thursday, Aug. 28.

Uh oh, Coco

Gauff led 4-2 in the second set before Tomljanovic fought back and went up 5-4. Soon Gauff looked clutch, saving two set points before knotting the set at 5-5. But the set went to a tiebreak and Tomljanovic was in control the whole way before closing it out 7-2.

Coco Gauff bounces back after shaky start

Gauff dropped the first two games of the match and she looked especially apprehensive with her service. But she fought back. Showing increased confidence, she won six of the next eight games and secured the set, 6-4.

How to watch Coco Gauff at US Open Round 1

Match time: 7 p.m. ET

TV: ESPN

Streaming: ESPN+, Fubo

Opponent: Ajla Tomljanović of Australia. Gauff and Tomljanović have played only once, with Gauff winning that match at the Paris Olympics 6-3, 6-0.

Watch the US Open with ESPN+

Coco Gauff: What to know

Gauff, who won the US Open in 2023, is seeded third. She recently parted ways with her primary coach, Matt Daly, and hired biomechanics specialist Gavin MacMillan as she continues to struggle with her serve. Gauff and her first-round opponent, Ajla Tomljanović of Australia, have played only once, with Gauff winning that match at the Paris Olympics 6-3, 6-0.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Entering the second year under its new format, the 2025-26 UEFA Champions League draw will be held on Thursday, Aug. 28 in Monaco, assigning all the matchups for the primary stage of the world’s premier club soccer competition.

Coming off the club’s first-ever European title, Paris Saint-Germain enters the new campaign as one of the favorites to lift the trophy in Budapest, Hungary, at the end of May. Real Madrid, the 15-time winners, will look to get back on top after an exit in last year’s quarterfinals.

This is the first time the tournament has featured six teams from one domestic league, with Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester City, Newcastle United, Chelsea and Tottenham all representing the English Premier League.

Here’s what to know about Thursday’s draw:

When is the Champions League draw?

The UEFA Champions League draw is scheduled for Thursday, Aug. 28 at 12 p.m. ET.

How does the Champions League draw work?

Thirty-six teams from across Europe will participate in the league phase, with each being assigned eight opponents – four home matches and four on the road – in Thursday’s draw.

The clubs enter the draw in four pots based on UEFA rankings and cannot be matched up against another team from their own country (ex: Real Madrid can’t draw Barcelona), and no team can face more than two opponents from any other country.

Champions League format

The 36 clubs all play in one ‘league’ with matches staged on select Tuesdays and Wednesdays through January, with the top eight teams advancing directly to the round of 16.

The teams that finish ninth-24th enter the knockout round playoffs in February, two legged ties that will determine the other eight teams in the last 16.

Once the 16 remaining teams are determined, the rest of the bracket is drawn – with the top eight finishers seeded.

Champions League schedule

League stage

  • Matchday 1: Sept. 16-18
  • Matchday 2: Sept. 30-Oct. 1
  • Matchday 3: Oct. 21-22
  • Matchday 4: Nov. 4-5
  • Matchday 5: Nov. 25-26
  • Matchday 6: Dec. 9-10
  • Matchday 7: Jan. 20-21, 2026
  • Matchday 8: Jan. 28, 2026

Knockout round playoffs

  • First leg: Feb. 17-18
  • Second leg: Feb. 24-25

Round of 16

  • First leg: March 10-11
  • Second leg: March 17-18

Quarterfinals

  • First leg: April 7-8
  • Second leg: April 14-15

Semifinals

  • First leg: April 28-29
  • Second leg: May 5-6

Final: May 30 at Puskás Aréna in Budapest, Hungary

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

CHICAGO — The Las Vegas Aces are back to their old selves. And that ought to scare the hell out of the rest of the WNBA.

After falling two games below .500 on July 10 and being in danger of missing the playoffs, the Aces take an 11-game win streak into Atlanta on Wednesday night (7:30 p.m. ET, NBA TV). Their win over Chicago on Monday clinched a playoff spot, and they could move up to the No. 2 seed with a win against the Dream.

“People should be nervous,” Aces point guard Chelsea Gray told USA TODAY Sports. “I still don’t think that we’ve really hit our peak yet.”

The Aces, back-to-back champs in 2022 and 2023 and semifinalists last year, were quietly and then not so quietly written off after an awful start to the season. The low point came after the All-Star break, when they got walloped twice in eight days by the Minnesota Lynx.

The first loss, by 31 points, was bad. The second, by 53 points, was a cover-your-eyes-and-hide-the-children train wreck.

“I had a locker room full of frustration and my biggest goal was just keep everybody on the ship and keep the ship moving in the right direction. Nobody gets to jump overboard,” Aces coach Becky Hammon said.

From the outside, Las Vegas’ struggles were confounding. The Aces still had four starters from their 2023 championship team, including A’ja Wilson, the three-time MVP and most dominant player in the game, and Gray, one of the best point guards in WNBA history.  

They’d added Jewell Loyd, a two-time WNBA champion with the Seattle Storm and 2023 scoring leader, and veteran Dana Evans. Hammon, in her fourth season after returning to the WNBA, is now one of the league’s longest-tenured coaches.

But the losses of Kelsey Plum and Alysha Clark, along with former assistants Natalie Nakase (Golden State Valkyries) and Tyler Marsh (Chicago Sky), meant this was a very different team. Even with their biggest names still around, this Aces team needed to establish its own rhythm.

“We spoiled a lot of people with the way we played and how we played, and they expected that year after year from us when it looks different, it was very different, for us. We had a completely new team from top to bottom, and that takes time,” Wilson told USA TODAY Sports.

Under Hammon, Las Vegas had become a fast-paced offensive juggernaut. The 2023 title team had four players who averaged 15 points or more, and the 2022 team had three. (Gray averaged 13.7 points in 2022.) The Aces had the league’s top offensive rating in 2022 and 2023, and were second last year.

This version of the Aces doesn’t have that same firepower. Or speed, much to Hammon’s irritation.

The Aces are currently seventh in scoring, at 82.8 points a game. They’re taking fewer shots (67.4) than they did in both 2023 (69.2) and 2022 (70.3), and their pace and offensive ratings are the lowest, by far, of Hammon’s tenure.

“None of it’s been intentional. I hate playing slow,” Hammon said. “I want that ball kicked up. I want to play faster. But at the end of the day, it’s like the personality of your kid. It’s going to be what it’s going to be. I can’t make it be something it’s not.”

The difference is this team is better defensively than Hammon’s previous Las Vegas teams.

“Their ownership and their accountability on that end of the floor with each other has really gone through the roof,” Hammon said. “Even with a high-powered offense, you have a bad shooting night, a lot of times you’re in jeopardy of losing games. And with this team we can shoot terrible and still win some games.”

Since that terrible, awful, no good loss to Minnesota, the Aces are allowing 77.8 points a game. That’s an improvement of more than five points from the first 28 games. They haven’t allowed anyone to score more than 87 points, after giving up 90 or more nine times in the early going.

The addition of NaLyssa Smith, acquired from Dallas right before the All-Star break, has only strengthened the Aces on the defensive end.

In Monday night’s game against the Chicago Sky, Las Vegas was clinging to a two-point lead, and its win streak, with 1:21 left to play. Smith delivered a monster block on Kamilla Cardoso’s close-range layup, then had the defensive rebounds on Chicago’s next two possessions as Las Vegas escaped with a 79-74 win.

“Back in what? Early May, June, we probably would’ve lost this game,” Aces guard Jackie Young said. “But I think it just shows our growth throughout the year and how we’re able to just come together as a team and grind out a win.”

After Wednesday’s game, the Aces’ eighth in 14 days, they will get a week off before playing Minnesota again. It will be a measure of how far Las Vegas has come and, improbable as it was just a month ago, a possible preview of the WNBA Finals.

“We’re just trying to hit our stride,” Gray said. “There’s times where we play a good 30-minute game. Or a 32-minute dominant game. We’re looking forward to 40.”

The rest of the W should consider itself warned.

Follow USA TODAY Sports columnist Nancy Armour on social media @nrarmour.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Major League Baseball disciplined Contreras, the St. Louis Cardinals’ first baseman, on Aug. 26, one day after he flew into a rage after getting ejected and chucked the bat toward the field, striking hitting coach Brant Brown in the arm.

Contreras, 33, is appealing the suspension and was in the lineup for their game against the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Contreras, 33, was upset at home plate umpire Derek Thomas’s called strike call in the seventh inning of their game against Pittsburgh and was ejected after apparently saying something while walking back to the dugout.

Contreras is batting .261 with 29 homers and an .802 OPS this season for the Cardinals.

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news fast. Download for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY