Copper Fox Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Copper Fox

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

Recommended by:

dsikorsk

From: louel	7/28/2018 11:29:15 AM
	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) of 10654

50% of Galore sold to Newmont is a catch 22. It puts galore front and center in Tecks Triangle projects. On the other hand a go to production decision would mean the road would be completed. Greatly benefiting Shaft Creek Romios and other companies working the area. The presently outlined agenda suggests 3 to 4 years revisiting the Pre-feasibility study. Not an actual feasibility which would I expect have to be done prior to a production decision. That puts the time line approx. 5 years out. Another Bear market could be under way in or before the build time frame like what happened in 07. The spending on galore of 12 to $20M annually over a four year period eclipses that of Shaft creek. Suggesting where priorities lie. If Newmont pushes Teck to develop Galore I believe it would be financially risky and illogical that Teck would attempt doing shaft creek in the same time frame. After the Fording coal fiasco they are far more cautious. So other than a buyout of Ernesto's portion it appears semi shelving Shaft Creek may be in the plans. Galore is a richer deposit with a 16% IRR as compared to shaft Creek with an IRR of 11% I would suggest many have far to great of expectations on the value a miner would pay for 25% of Shaft Creek I stated when the feasibility study was released, I expected a price 35 to 38 Cents +- per share. Comparing the two projects and the price Newmont paid. That still stands. I've noticed a bit of discrepancy in the reports between Teck and Newmont. One says Teck will spend the money The other says it will be shared contributions. It also says modifications are to be made to the GCMC agreement as to governing. However it does not declare who will be the operator assuming NG's position. Although it does mention Newmont's credibility to handle the task, By building 9 new mines in 5 years on time and under budget. Newmont: “Partnering with Teck allows us to bring both organizations’ considerable technical, financial and sustainability strengths to bear in evaluating and refining development plans for Galore Creek, and to build on the strong relationships Teck has established with the Tahltan First Nation and British Columbia.” Newmont and Teck will define the scope, budget, and timeline for prefeasibility studies over the next several months and expect the prefeasibility studies to be completed over three to four years with "an annual budget of $10 to $15 million (50 percent basis)". GCP will be governed by a Management Committee comprised of leaders from Newmont and Teck and managed by a GCP study director and team, supported by Newmont and Teck subject matter experts. Over the last five years, Newmont has built nine new mines and expansions on four continents – on or ahead of schedule and at or below budget. TECK; Teck and Newmont have agreed to a work plan at Galore Creek with the objective of completing an updated prefeasibility study over the next three-to-four years to improve overall project understanding and economics. Teck will invest approximately $12-20 million (US$10-15 million) annually to complete this work. Teck and Newmont have also agreed to certain modifications to the existing shareholders agreement. Teck has held a 50% interest in the Galore Creek project since May 2007.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next