Myriad Uranium's First Three Holes at Gem Are Shallower and Thicker Than Anything at Lucky Cliff

Gem is a small uranium deposit on the northern part of the Copper Mountain project in Fremont County, Wyoming, and until this week Myriad Uranium Corp. had drilled none of it in the current programme. On September 10, 2026 the company reported its first three holes there. Those holes total 507 metres, and the release lists 21 radiometric intervals above 100 parts per million equivalent uranium oxide.

Maple looked at this company on September 9, 2026 in a piece testing the data-advantage case against the forever-explorer charge, built on the Lucky Cliff holes released on August 20 and corrected on August 24. That piece set out why a downhole gamma reading is a screening tool rather than a grade, and why the 1979 historical figures for the district do not multiply out. None of that has changed, and none of it is repeated here.

What is new is a second target, drilled shallower, and the arithmetic that follows from it.

Gem starts near surface, and Lucky Cliff did not

The three Gem holes are GEM0001DD, GEM0002DD and GEM0003DD. Their reported intervals begin at 10.65, 14.37, 22.66, 43.17 and 60.30 metres downhole. At Lucky Cliff, four holes for 716.6 metres reported intervals beginning at 18.00, 18.94, 45.16, 85.08 and 118.46 metres.

That is the whole of the new geological information, and it is worth more than the peak reading of 1,368 ppm that will be quoted from the release.

Uranium of this kind is a bulk commodity at very low grade. What decides whether a low-grade occurrence can ever pay is how much rock has to be moved to reach it, and depth to the top of mineralisation is the first-order input to that. Mineralisation starting at 10.65 metres and mineralisation starting at 118.46 metres are different propositions to the same mine planner, at the same grade. Chief executive Thomas Lamb put the observation in the release directly: "Mineralisation at Gem is indeed near-surface and intervals so far are long with excellent grades."

The first half of that sentence is supported by the depths in the table. The second half is a characterisation, and characterisations of grade at these levels need translating.

What 210 parts per million looks like as pounds in a tonne

Two hundred and ten parts per million is 0.021 per cent equivalent uranium oxide. Put another way, a tonne of rock at that reading carries about 210 grams, or roughly 0.46 pounds, of uranium oxide equivalent. A tonne of the 1,368 ppm peak interval would carry about 3.0 pounds.

Those are small numbers by design. Sandstone-hosted uranium in the Wyoming basins has historically been mined at grades in this range, in bulk, and often by in-situ recovery where the geology and hydrology permit it. So "excellent grades" is a relative statement about a low-grade deposit type, not a statement about a high-grade one, and a reader who has come from a gold or a copper file needs that translation before the numbers mean anything.

The more useful comparison is grade multiplied by thickness, which is how uranium explorers rank intercepts internally because it approximates the quantity of metal a hole passed through. The arithmetic below is mine, done on intervals the company disclosed.

On this measure the three best Gem intervals each exceed the best Lucky Cliff interval by between 36 and 62 per cent, and two of the three begin above 25 metres. That is a genuinely better set of holes than the August ones, on the company's own reported figures, and it should be said as plainly as the caveat that follows it.

The caveat is unchanged and total. Every number in that table is an equivalent-uranium estimate produced by Century Geophysical's downhole gamma probe suite and converted to a grade by its OREGRADE system over 15-centimetre steps. The release states that these "are radiometric estimates derived from downhole gamma logging and are not chemical assays", that they "may be affected by disequilibrium, borehole diameter, casing, water, probe calibration and other borehole conditions", and that they "will be verified by laboratory assay results". It also states that the reported intervals "are downhole lengths and do not represent true widths, which have not yet been determined". Nothing in the table survives a materially different assay result.

The 1979 archive puts 1.44 million pounds at Gem

The Copper Mountain historical estimate that circulates in discussion of this company is a district figure. The Gem-specific historical number, from the same 1979 compilation, is 1.44 million pounds of equivalent uranium oxide in 3.07 million tonnes at 234 ppm, at a 100 ppm cut-off.

That figure carries the standard warning, which Myriad applies consistently: a qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify it as a current mineral resource, and the company is not treating it as one. It is useful here only as a scale marker. If Gem is roughly the size the 1979 workers thought it was, it is a small part of the district rather than the centre of it, and three holes at 507 metres is a proportionate amount of drilling to have put into it.

Copper Mountain still has no current mineral resource estimate under National Instrument 43-101. The conceptual exploration target quoted in the September release, 1,111 to 2,971 million tonnes at a 100 ppm threshold, is described by the company as based on geological interpretation, structural favourability and historic drilling density, with insufficient exploration completed to define mineral resources. An exploration target is a range of guesses about tonnage, disclosed as such under the rules; it is the least binding number in the file.

Seven holes into a programme sized at 4,500 metres

Phase II began on July 2, 2026 with an initial 4,500 metres and contingent increases to between 7,000 and 10,000 metres, on a budget of about US$5.95 million over twelve months. Adding the two releases gives seven holes for 1,223.6 metres completed, or roughly 27 per cent of the initial allocation. That total is my arithmetic; neither release states a cumulative figure.

Three things are absent from the September 10 release that a reader would reasonably look for. There is no assay turnaround date, so the laboratory verification the company promises has no schedule attached. There is no next-steps section at all. And there is no hole count for the programme as a whole, only metres, which makes it hard to judge how far through the plan the two targets drilled so far take the company.

The stated end point has not moved: the company has said the final stage of Phase II will be infill drilling to support a current resource estimate under National Instrument 43-101, contingent on results. No date for that has been disclosed either.

Where a European holder actually buys this

The security is quoted in Germany under the symbol C3Q, WKN A3D1E0, on ISIN CA62857Y1097, per Deutsche Börse's own instrument page for the company, and the same identifiers appear in Myriad's release boilerplate and on its stock information page. The quotation is a Frankfurt open-market line rather than a Xetra listing, which the company's own use of the C3Q.F form is consistent with.

Two things follow for a reader in Frankfurt. Copper Mountain is in Wyoming, so this is a Canadian-listed issuer holding a United States asset, with permitting and regulatory exposure to Wyoming and federal agencies rather than to a Canadian province. And several German data services still carry the ISIN under the company's former name, Myriad Metals Corp., which is a naming artefact rather than a different security.

On the treasury, this run could not verify a current figure. The most recent annual management's discussion and analysis retrievable during the run covers the year ended April 30, 2025 and is too old to quote as a cash position. Since then the company closed a C$8,603,000 bought-deal placement on November 13, 2025 at C$0.40 per unit with a full warrant at C$0.60, and received about C$3.4 million from the sale of Red Basin in May 2026. The fiscal 2026 annual filing was not verified against SEDAR+ during this run, and no cash figure is presented here as current.

The view, seven holes in

Constructively, with the same bound as before.

The Gem holes are better than the Lucky Cliff holes on thickness, on grade-thickness and on depth, and two of those three are the ones that decide whether a bulk-tonnage uranium occurrence can be worked cheaply. Myriad also continues to label its own screening data accurately, in the release, without prompting, which is not universal in this sector.

What the company has after seven holes is a radiometric signature at two targets, consistent with what 1970s operators reported, on a project it now owns outright. What it does not have is a single laboratory assay disclosed from Phase II, a true width for any interval, or a current resource on any part of Copper Mountain.

What would change the reading, in order: laboratory assays that track the probe estimates within a reasonable margin would convert the whole Phase II data set from screening to measurement, and assays that come in materially below them would do the opposite. A stated date for those assays would remove the largest unknown in the September release at no cost. Infill drilling with a disclosed spacing, and a date for the maiden resource estimate, would move the project a rung. A fiscal 2026 cash figure would let an outside reader work out how much of the 4,500 to 10,000 metre range is actually funded.

Gem is the second of five targets named in the Phase II plan, and the shallowest results so far. Depth is the variable that decides how a deposit of this type could ever be mined, and three holes have moved it in the company's favour. Nothing else in the release has moved at all.

Transparency note. This is an independent due-diligence analysis and editorial opinion piece produced by The Maple Markets editorial desk. It is not sponsored, promoted or commissioned, and no compensation of any kind has been received from Myriad Uranium Corp (CSE: M) or any party acting on their behalf. The analysis is based on public disclosure available as of the publish date; every figure is attributed to its primary source. The Maple Markets and its authors may hold positions in securities mentioned; nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security, and readers should not treat it as investment advice. Past disclosure does not guarantee future results. Policies: Editorial Standards · Financial Disclaimer.