Here is some more info or maybe just reshuffled info on the SEA…TUD situation cut from the Stockwatch gold report today.
I think SEA/TUD mgmt should get off their asses and make lawyers rich scheme and do their F’’’ing jobs and get a deal between them…..the amount of gold here is staggering ,more then enough for both….also economics dictates this should be a combined mine….
((( As usual, Fridays are slow news days for those touting drill results and dream sheets, but it was a busy day for briefcase toting attorneys. Rudi Fronk's Seabridge Gold Inc. (SEA) lost 97 cents to $33.74 on 645,000 shares on word that Joseph Ovsenek's Tudor Gold Corp. (TUD) is huffing lawyerly in its direction. Seabridge, you see, needs to dig two long tunnels at its mammoth KSM project in northwestern British Columbia, and those tunnels would traverse Tudor's Treaty Creek property.
Tudor Gold is again challenging a condition requiring it "not to obstruct, endanger or interfere with the construction, operation or maintenance of" the proposed KSM tunnels. (We did mention that lawyers were involved.) Essentially, Tudor is arguing that the requirement amounts to an expropriation of a part of its property by the provincial government on behalf of Seabridge -- something Tudor insists it cannot do. Accordingly, Tudor is seeking a court declaration that the condition does not apply to its property, or that if it does, Tudor Gold is owed compensation.
Mr. Fronk, Seabridge's chairman and chief executive officer, says that he and his crew -- his lawyers, essentially -- "are confident that the province has acted within the law and that the various authorizations for the [tunnels] are appropriate and reliable." This new legal action, Mr. Fronk grumbles, is one of a number of legal challenges Tudor has made over the years opposing Seabridge's tunnel rights, and "in every instance, the government has reconfirmed our approvals and our understanding of the legal aspects of these matters."
If Mr. Fronk and his lawyers are wrong, and Tudor were to be successful, Mr. Fronk says that "it could have consequences for the KSM Project." He does not say what those consequences are -- that is left to investors, bureaucrats and anyone else interested enough to follow the dispute to fret out -- but in the meantime, he says that Seabridge "will continue to advance [its] current plans for the KSM project for the benefit of shareholders, local communities and the first nations who have so strongly supported our progress."
Litigation, innuendo and consequences aside, there is potentially a lot on the line either way. KSM -- the acronym stands for Kerr, Sulphurets and Mitchell -- hosts a reserve of 2.29 billion tonnes grading 0.64 gram of gold, 2.2 grams of silver and 76 grams of molybdenum per tonne, along with 0.14 per cent copper. That alone hosts 47 million ounces of gold, 160 million ounces of silver, 7.3 billion pounds of copper and 385 million pounds of molybdenum.
That is but a sliver of the full resource, which tallies to 160 million ounces of gold, 878 million ounces of silver, 58 billion pounds of copper and 1.2 billion pounds of molybdenum. Your eyes may be glazing over as you try to fathom those numbers -- but there is another, worrisome, number at play according to a three-year-old prefeasibility study: Seabridge will need $6.4-billion (U.S.) to build a mine at KSM -- one that is limited in size because its permitted tailings capacity is "just" 2.3 billion tonnes. In any case, the tailings-limited reserve is sufficient to support a 33-year life.
The mine plan called for a 135,000-tonne-per-day operating rate that would expand to nearly 200,000 tonnes per day -- with that expansion not included in the initial capital cost. Even so, the bottom line of the study was workable even with gold at $1,750 (U.S.) per ounce, as the internal rate of return topped 16 per cent and the discounted net present value was near $8-billion (U.S.) after taxes. (The return reached 18 per cent at the spot price for gold, but remember, this was three years ago, when bullion was spotting at just $1,850 per ounce. Little wonder then, that Seabridge and the bureaucrats are eager to press on with the project.)
Meanwhile, Tudor Gold, which lost two cents to $1.02 on 1.09 million shares today, has a not-to-be-sneezed-at resource at Treaty Creek. The company lists 730 million tonnes indicated at 0.92 gram of gold and 5.48 grams of silver per tonne, along with 0.18 per cent copper. Another 150 million tonnes are inferred at 1.25 grams of gold and 6.02 grams of silver per tonne, plus 0.15 per cent copper.
While the tonnages are Lilliputian in comparison with KSM, the Treaty Creek grades are better, closing the metals gap between the two projects somewhat: All told, Treaty Creek is credited with over 26 million ounces of gold, nearly 128 million ounces of silver and almost 3.4 billion pounds of copper. Tudor Gold does not have any economic study for the project, although it does pay lip service to producing one on occasion.
Yes, progress in that regard has been slow at Treaty Creek -- KSM as well, for that matter -- but that is to be considered given the time and effort needed to nudge two bulky elephants forward. While there was not that much enthusiasm to do so a decade ago with gold hovering near $1,000 an ounce, there is much more interest today, as bullion nears $4,000 an ounce. And so, stay tuned as the lawyers do battle. ))) |
