u/Automatic-Tooth5853

​

Pour le contexte, je ne suis pas français, je viens d'un pays très pauvre, de famille très pauvre et j'ai eu mon premier téléphone à 18ans aujourd'hui j'en ai 26. Je viens d'un pays où, quand une fille te plaît mais que t'as peur tu envoies ton pote faire ta déclaration à ta place. Bref, le oui/non tu te le prends tout de suite.

J'ai toujours vu le monde occidentale dans les séries télé pour ado ( friends, vampires diarry...etc), et du coup j'ai toujours cru qu'ils avaient plus facilement que nous le reflexe d'aller parler à une fille et même couché avec le premier soir. Chez moi, c'était inimaginable tu ne parlais qu'à une fille avec qui tu voulais sortir.

J'ai donc été très surpris en arrivant en France pour mes études, de découvrir quelques de complètement différents. Tout se fait en ligne, personnes n'ose faire sa déclaration/séduction/aborder une fille.

Moi, dans mon aspect habituel je le fais toujours et comme dans mon pays parfois je me prend des nons et parfois des ouis avec des femmes juste exceptionnelles.

Ma question mesdemoiselles et dames, c'est comment vous souhaitez qu'on vous approche ?

Pour ma part je fais toujours un " salut/excusez moi, je n'ai pas pu m'empêcher de vous remarquer et je dois avouer que vous êtes absolument ravissante"...3s de silence pour voir sa réponse ( positive/négative). Si positive, je continue " serait-il possible de vous inviter à prendre un verre ? " .

En terme de proportions réussite/echec je suis sur du 70/30. N'hésitez pas à me proposer des améliorations mesdemoiselles.

Bonjour,

Je suis étudiant ingénieur DevOps, je commence un CDI en octobre.
Je viens du Niger pour ceux qui connaissent, un pays d'Afrique de l'ouest.
Le pays est riche en Or, mais la pauvreté des populations locales fait qu'ils ne peuvent pas réellement en profiter. C'est ainsi que les turcs, les chinois et pas d'émiratis se sont implémentés et réussissent aujourd'hui à produire plusieurs dizaine de kilos par jours.

J'ai toujours voulu changé cela, c'est ce qui m'a conduit à venir en France car venant d'une famille pauvre la seule source de revenu que je pouvais générer c'est celle issue de mon travail (job étudiant, alternance et enfin CDI ).
Après avoir économiser 2 ans, j'ai pris un permis de 3km2 dans une zone aurifère, installé un forage d'eau, viabilisé le site, le sécurisé et acheter un peu de matériels.
J'ai une équipe de 20 ouvriers qui travaillent sur site, je n'ai pas le moyen de leur versé un salaire alors on a convenu d'un partage des résultats ( ils ont 33% des bénéfices nets ) et je leurs assure le gite et le couverts.

Nous avons commencé il y'a 2 mois, nous avons des coordonnées à cibler par l'aide de certains amis géologues et nous effectuons des prélèvements, puis nous analysons la teneur.
A ce jour, nous avons extrait 2tonnes de roche dans une première localisation, nous avons analyser 1T avec 4.1g d'or. Sachant que du fait de nos moyens très limitée, on a besoin d'au minimum 25g/T de teneur pour se lancer sur un point.

Je finance ce projet tout seul aujourd'hui, en utilisant des fonds de précédentes activitées que j'avais vendu car elles n'étaient pas viable sur le long terme. Je réussirai tout seul, s'en aucun doute c'est juste que ça me prendre plus longtemps et mes finances seront mises à rude épreuve pendant encore longtemps.

Mais si je peux avoir 1/2/3 associé pas plus, et que nous mettons nos efforts en commun ( Financiers, juridique, fiscale et tech ), il nous sera possible de construire quelques chose de robuste et durable.

Je m'arrête là, sinon j'en ai encore pour longtemps.

Je cherche donc des associé (es) qui ont le goût du risque mesuré, vivent à Lyon afin de se rencontrer plus facilement ( mais je peux me déplacer ça ne me dérange pas ), et qui sont en mesurent de vivre avec le minimum pendant au moins 1an. Car 1an, c'est je pense ce qui nous sépare d'une bonne nouvelle à ce stade du projet.

Hi,

I'm a solo entrepreneur building an artisanal and small-scale (ASM) gold project in Niger, and I'll be straight about where I am.

I hold a secured 3 km² permit in the Agadez region, with gold-bearing quartz veins outcropping at surface and gold confirmed in early samples. I have official, signed CRGM quotes for the first geochemical campaign ready to execute. What I don't yet have is the capital to run it — and after a long list of investor conversations, the recurring answer is the same three: too small, too early, or Niger risk.

I've concluded the missing piece isn't another pitch, it's the right kind of introduction. The investors who fit this are the ones comfortable with frontier resource projects at an early stage, and those are exactly the people I struggle to reach from where I sit.

If anyone in your network fits that profile, or if there's a door you'd be willing to point me at, I'd be truly grateful. And if not, I completely understand.

Thank you,

People do some crazy things with money. But no one is crazy.

Here’s the thing: People from different generations, raised by different parents who earned different incomes and held different values, in different parts of the world, born into different economies, experiencing different job markets with different incentives and different degrees of luck, learn very different lessons.

Everyone has their own unique experience with how the world works. And what you’ve experienced is more compelling than what you learn second-hand. So all of us—you, me, everyone— go through life anchored to a set of views about how money works that vary wildly from person to person. What seems crazy to you might make sense to me.

The person who grew up in poverty thinks about risk and reward in ways the child of a wealthy banker cannot fathom if he tried.

The person who grew up when inflation was high experienced something the person who grew up with stable prices never had to.

The stock broker who lost everything during the Great Depression experienced something the tech worker basking in the glory of the late 1990s can’t imagine.

The Australian who hasn’t seen a recession in 30 years has experienced something no American ever has.

On and on. The list of experiences is endless. You know stuff about money that I don’t, and vice versa. You go through life with different beliefs, goals, and forecasts, than I do. That’s not because one of us is smarter than the other, or has better information. It’s because we’ve had different lives shaped by different and equally persuasive experiences.

Your personal experiences with money make up maybe 0.00000001% of what’s happened in the world, but maybe 80% of how you think the world works. So equally smart people can disagree about how and why recessions happen, how you should invest your money, what you should prioritize, how much risk you should take, and so on.

In his book on 1930s America, Frederick Lewis Allen wrote that the Great Depression “marked millions of Americans—inwardly —for the rest of their lives.” But there was a range of experiences. Twenty-five years later, as he was running for president, John F. Kennedy was asked by a reporter what he remembered from the Depression. He remarked:

I have no first-hand knowledge of the Depression. My family had one of the great fortunes of the world and it was worth more than ever then. We had bigger houses, more servants, we traveled more. About the only thing that I saw directly was when my father hired some extra gardeners just to give them a job so they could eat. I really did not learn about the Depression until I read about it at Harvard.

People do some crazy things with money. But no one is crazy.

Here’s the thing: People from different generations, raised by different parents who earned different incomes and held different values, in different parts of the world, born into different economies, experiencing different job markets with different incentives and different degrees of luck, learn very different lessons.

Everyone has their own unique experience with how the world works. And what you’ve experienced is more compelling than what you learn second-hand. So all of us—you, me, everyone— go through life anchored to a set of views about how money works that vary wildly from person to person. What seems crazy to you might make sense to me.

The person who grew up in poverty thinks about risk and reward in ways the child of a wealthy banker cannot fathom if he tried.

The person who grew up when inflation was high experienced something the person who grew up with stable prices never had to.

The stock broker who lost everything during the Great Depression experienced something the tech worker basking in the glory of the late 1990s can’t imagine.

The Australian who hasn’t seen a recession in 30 years has experienced something no American ever has.

On and on. The list of experiences is endless. You know stuff about money that I don’t, and vice versa. You go through life with different beliefs, goals, and forecasts, than I do. That’s not because one of us is smarter than the other, or has better information. It’s because we’ve had different lives shaped by different and equally persuasive experiences.

Your personal experiences with money make up maybe 0.00000001% of what’s happened in the world, but maybe 80% of how you think the world works. So equally smart people can disagree about how and why recessions happen, how you should invest your money, what you should prioritize, how much risk you should take, and so on.

In his book on 1930s America, Frederick Lewis Allen wrote that the Great Depression “marked millions of Americans—inwardly —for the rest of their lives.” But there was a range of experiences. Twenty-five years later, as he was running for president, John F. Kennedy was asked by a reporter what he remembered from the Depression. He remarked:

I have no first-hand knowledge of the Depression. My family had one of the great fortunes of the world and it was worth more than ever then. We had bigger houses, more servants, we traveled more. About the only thing that I saw directly was when my father hired some extra gardeners just to give them a job so they could eat. I really did not learn about the Depression until I read about it at Harvard.

Hello,

I have a 5-year gold mining permit in the Agadez region of Niger.

The permit covers 3 km², and our samples have already yielded 4.1 g/t, but these results are incomplete because they were taken from quartz outcrops visible at the surface.

Before beginning any mining operations, I would like to engage the Polish company Terraeye, which specializes in satellite spectrometry and helps projects like ours understand the composition of their soils and better target areas most likely to contain gold.

The cost of this study is $20,500, an amount I do not currently have, as I have invested everything in acquiring the permit, developing the site, and hiring about ten workers.

I am looking for a partner who will cover this expense in exchange for equity in the project.

Quick disclosure up front, because it's relevant: I do partner relations for a small, early-stage gold exploration project in the Agadez region of Niger. I'm not here to pitch it — I'll actually use it as the cautionary example. What I want to share is the stuff I wish more retail investors understood before they read a headline like "drilling returns 1.5 g/t gold" and assume someone's about to get rich.

Exploration is a staged process, and each stage answers a different question. Most of the value — and almost all of the risk — lives in how far along that staircase a project actually is.

1. Grassroots / geochemistry. You sample soils and stream sediments and look for anomalies. Cheap, fast, and proves almost nothing on its own — it tells you where to look, not what's there.

2. Geophysics. You image the subsurface (magnetics, IP, etc.) to find structures that could host mineralization. Still indirect. You're reading shadows, not gold.

3. Trenching and surface assays. Now you're putting numbers on rock you can actually see. This is where you get results like "~1.5 g/t over X metres." Genuinely encouraging in a West African context — but a surface assay is a spot reading, not a measure of how much gold sits in the ground.

4. Drilling + a certified resource estimate. This is the bar that matters for institutional money: a resource/reserve reported under a recognized code — JORC (Australasia) or NI 43-101 (Canada). A qualified person signs off, the methodology is auditable, and only then can anyone responsibly talk about tonnes and ounces "in the ground."

Here's the part that trips people up: steps 1–3 can look incredibly exciting and still be worth essentially nothing if the project never crosses into step 4. A single high grab-sample number is the most over-quoted and least meaningful figure in the entire sector. Nature isn't uniform; the distance between one good assay and an economic deposit is enormous, and most projects die in that gap.

So how should you actually read an exploration-stage opportunity?

• Ask which stage the data is at, and whether any resource is JORC / NI 43-101 compliant. If it isn't, that's not automatically a red flag — but the valuation should reflect it, and anyone implying "proven reserves" without a compliant report is either confused or lying.
• Treat grade in isolation as meaningless. Grade only means something alongside tonnage, depth, metallurgy, and jurisdiction.
• Match the money to the stage. Pre-resource exploration is angel / high-risk-venture territory, not "safe gold exposure." Anyone selling early exploration as low-risk is misrepresenting it.

To be straight about my own project: we're at stages 1–3. We have geochemistry, geophysics, trenching, and encouraging surface assays in an economically interesting range — appropriate for early, high-risk backing, and nowhere near a certified reserve. I think being honest about exactly where a project sits is the whole game. The sector has a trust problem precisely because so many people blur these lines.

Happy to answer questions on any of it — the West African permitting side, what these stages actually cost, or how the financing risk maps back to the geology. And genuinely curious how others here weigh exploration-stage risk.