Statement in Response to Silver Elephant's News Release Dated June 17, 2026

This is a defensive legal rebuttal, not an investable business update.

What the company is saying

Andean Precious Metals Corp. is positioning itself as a responsible, law-abiding operator unfairly targeted by Silver Elephant Mining Corp.'s legal action. The company wants investors to believe that the civil claim filed in Vancouver, British Columbia, is baseless and that Andean has acted entirely within the bounds of law and regulation. The announcement repeatedly uses categorical language—terms like 'spurious,' 'wholly without merit,' and 'categorically rejected and denied'—to frame Silver Elephant's allegations as not just incorrect, but entirely unfounded. Andean emphasizes its intention to 'vigorously respond' through legal channels, projecting confidence that the facts and law will ultimately vindicate its position. The company highlights its ownership of the San Bartolome processing facility in Bolivia and the Golden Queen mine in California, and describes itself as a 'growing precious metals producer' with ambitions to expand into 'top-tier jurisdictions in the Americas.' Notably, the release is silent on any specifics of the legal claim, omits any discussion of potential financial exposure, and provides no operational or financial data. The tone is measured but firm, with management seeking to reassure stakeholders without escalating the dispute in public. The only named individual is Juan Carlos Sandoval, Chief Financial Officer, whose presence signals standard corporate protocol rather than any extraordinary institutional endorsement. This narrative fits a classic crisis communications playbook: deny wrongdoing, assert compliance, and shift focus to ongoing business and growth ambitions. There is no evidence of a shift in messaging compared to prior communications, but the lack of historical context makes it impossible to assess whether this is a departure from past disclosure practices.

What the data suggests

The data disclosed in this announcement is minimal and almost entirely qualitative. The only concrete facts are the dates of the Silver Elephant news release (June 17, 2026) and Andean's response (June 18, 2026), as well as confirmation of asset ownership in Bolivia and California. There are no financial results, operational metrics, or period-over-period data provided—no revenues, production volumes, cash balances, or profitability figures. The company claims to be 'well-funded' and focused on growth, but offers no supporting numbers or evidence. There is no information on whether prior financial or operational targets have been met or missed, nor any reference to historical performance. The gap between the company's confident assertions and the actual evidence is stark: all legal and operational claims are unsupported by data. The quality of disclosure is poor, with key metrics missing and no way for investors to independently assess the company's financial health or legal risk. An independent analyst, relying solely on the numbers and facts presented, would conclude that this is a defensive legal communication with no actionable financial or operational signal. The only verifiable information is that Andean is aware of the legal claim and owns the assets it says it does.

Analysis

The announcement is primarily a legal rebuttal to a civil claim and does not contain substantive operational or financial disclosures. Most statements are defensive or assertive in tone but do not make exaggerated claims about business performance or future outcomes. While there are some forward-looking statements about legal intentions and corporate ambitions, these are generic and not paired with specific, unsupported projections. There is no evidence of narrative inflation regarding measurable progress, as no operational milestones, financial results, or capital programs are discussed. The only aspirational language relates to the company's ambition to grow and expand, but this is not presented as imminent or guaranteed. The data supports only the factual awareness of the legal claim and the company's current asset ownership.

Risk flags

• ●Legal risk is front and center: the company is the subject of a civil claim in British Columbia, and while it denies all allegations, the actual content and potential financial exposure of the claim are undisclosed. This creates material uncertainty for investors, as legal outcomes are unpredictable and can have significant financial or reputational consequences.
• ●Disclosure risk is high: the announcement omits all financial and operational data, providing no basis for assessing the company's current performance or resilience. Investors are left in the dark about cash position, profitability, or any potential impact of the litigation on ongoing operations.
• ●Forward-looking risk is substantial: nearly half the statements are forward-looking, including legal outcomes and growth ambitions, but none are supported by concrete evidence or interim milestones. This pattern of aspirational language without data increases the risk of narrative inflation.
• ●Operational risk is present: the company operates in Bolivia and California, but provides no update on the status, output, or challenges at either asset. In the absence of operational disclosures, investors cannot assess whether the legal dispute is distracting management or impacting business continuity.
• ●Pattern risk: the company's categorical denials and lack of detail mirror classic crisis communications, where management seeks to control the narrative without providing transparency. This approach can erode investor trust if repeated over time or if subsequent disclosures fail to provide clarity.
• ●Timeline/execution risk: the legal process is inherently slow, and the company's growth ambitions are not tied to any specific timeframe. Investors face the risk of capital being tied up for years without resolution or value creation.
• ●Capital intensity risk: the company claims to be 'well-funded' and focused on growth, but provides no evidence of its capital position or funding sources. If litigation or operational setbacks require significant cash outlays, the company's ability to execute on its ambitions could be compromised.
• ●Geographic risk: the company references operations in Bolivia and California, but the legal dispute is centered in British Columbia. The lack of clarity on how the legal process in Canada might impact assets in other jurisdictions adds another layer of uncertainty for investors.

Bottom line

For investors, this announcement is a legal rebuttal, not a business update. Andean Precious Metals Corp. is responding to a civil claim by Silver Elephant Mining Corp., but provides no details on the nature, size, or potential impact of the litigation. The company's categorical denials and confident tone are not backed by any evidence or data, making it impossible to independently assess the merits of the case or the company's financial health. The only verifiable facts are the existence of the legal claim and the company's asset ownership in Bolivia and California. No notable institutional figures are involved in this announcement, and the only named executive is the CFO, whose presence is routine. To change this assessment, the company would need to disclose the specifics of the legal claim, potential financial exposure, and provide updated operational and financial metrics. Investors should watch for future disclosures that include court rulings, settlement details, or audited financials, as well as any operational updates from the San Bartolome or Golden Queen assets. At present, this announcement is not a signal to act, but rather a situation to monitor closely for further developments. The single most important takeaway is that investors have no new actionable information on the company's financial or operational outlook—only confirmation that a legal dispute is underway and management is in damage-control mode.

Announcement summary

(TSX:APM, OTCQX:ANPMF) Andean Precious Metals Corp. announced its awareness of a news release by Silver Elephant Mining Corp. regarding the filing of a Notice of Civil Claim in Vancouver, British Columbia. Andean strongly disagrees with Silver Elephant's characterization of the facts and circumstances described in the claim and categorically rejects and denies any suggestion or allegation of improper interference with Silver Elephant's contractual or business relationships. The company states it has conducted its business affairs and operations in accordance with applicable laws, legal obligations, and regulatory requirements. Andean owns and operates the San Bartolome processing facility in Potosí, Bolivia and the Golden Queen mine in Kern County, California. The company describes itself as a growing precious metals producer focused on expanding into top-tier jurisdictions in the Americas and is well-funded to act on future growth opportunities. Andean will present its position through the appropriate legal process and will provide no further comment at this time. The company projects achieving its ambition to be a multi-asset, mid-tier precious metals producer.

Disagree with this article?