I was going to ask the same thing. I would think that the company would use any funds that would be raised specifically towards immediate revenue-generating initiatives to stop the bleeding and dilution of the share structure that weighs heavily on the share price.

However, the company may need the NI 43-101 to secure bank or other financing. Banks, reputable financiers and investors in mining companies don't take companies at their word regarding their estimated resources. They require 3rd party verification in the form of official geological reports. The reserves that would be calculated and properly classified in the acceptable geological reporting format for whatever the company's reporting jurisdiction is, would be used as an objective measure of valuation.

However, that brings up the next issue that doesn't make sense or that the company is improperly referring to - The NI 43-101 is a rule specific and exculsive to the Canadian Securities Administration (CSA). A US company cannot file an NI 43-101 report unless it is listed in Canada. Many companies that either don't know better or are intentionally misleading shareholders (hopefully it is the former) often refer to the NI 43-101 as a flag of aspiring legitimacy. However, US-listed companies are prohibited from mentioning the mineral classifications and any NI 43-101 reports in their filings or marketing materials unless they are listed on one of the Canadian exchanges. And in such cases, they must issue the proper disclaimer text in their marketing materials and their filings.

Part of the SEC's suggested disclaimer reads as follows:

"This website uses terms that comply with reporting standards in Canada and certain estimates are made in accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) and the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (“CIM”) - CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves, adopted by the CIM Council, as amended (the “CIM Standards”). This website uses the terms “mineral resource,” “measured and indicated mineral resource,” and “inferred mineral resource.” We advise U.S. investors that while these terms are defined in accordance with NI 43-101 such terms are not recognized under the SEC’s Industry Guide 7 and are normally not permitted to be used in reports and registration statements filed with the SEC."

The SEC requires US-listed companies to file an SEC Industry Guide 7 report for resource classification which is a much stricter standard in that it requires a final or bankable feasibility study before a company can report its minerals reserves. I'm not sure of the cost to get to that point, but I have heard people loosely throw out figures around $1 million or more (do not take my word on that one though).

If you don't believe what I've described above, there is a lot of publicly available commentary made by legal, mining and SEC experts on the subjet matter.

http://www.kayescholer.com/news/publications/sec-vs-canadas-ni-43-101-30august2013/_res/id=sa_File1/mason-mining-journal-article.pdf

http://www.apgo.net/ni43-101.htm

http://web.cim.org/standards/MenuPage.cfm?sections=185,188&menu=202