Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Twin Mining (formerly Twin-Gold) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: WillP who wrote (161)	2/2/2002 1:23:35 AM
From: russet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 613

Done,...the TWG.t spring 2002 minibulk guess the biggest diamond contest. A free cyberdrink of your choice to whoever wins (gggggggg) Letmebe Frank 5.1 carats Will P 3.3 Russett 2

To: WillP who wrote (161)	2/6/2002 6:05:03 AM
From: VAUGHN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 613

Hello Will As we have surmised, Herman is no fool, he knows that upon the release of initial lab results, the market typically focuses on micro/macro counts and immediately extrapolates implied grades, regardless of limited sample sizes (300 tonnes – Freightrain & 18 tonnes - Cargo 1). He also knows the market compares everything to Ekati and Diavik and if both JI pipes have implied grades lower than the astronomical numbers of their Lac de Gras cousins, simply releasing lab results may not be the most strategic decision regardless of how exciting the size of some stones. Knowing that market predilection, and knowing how Diamond Trading N.V.’s reliability (independence) was questioned by some in valuing the previous parcel, I would imagine, and I’m only guessing here, that TWG will, has or should have the “run of mine” sample results valued by two independent diamontaires perhaps in addition to a third valuation by Diamond Trading N.V. then released concurrently with the Lakefield results. Strategically, this would be the smart thing to do. As using those implied grades, the market will arrive at preliminary $ per tonne figures and that should help maintain interest. For discussion purposes, I have extrapolated some preliminary numbers: Ekati mines small (2 hectare) pipes in the middle of nowhere for which trucked shipping costs are significant and stripping ratios are high, certainly much higher than those TWG would experience mining the 500 metre Freightrain or Cargo 5 pipes. Using the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board - Report of Environmental Assessment on the Proposed Development of Sable, Pigeon and Beartooth Kimberlite Pipes - February 7, 2001 Ekati has a production rate is 18,000 tonnes per day or 14,208,000 tonnes per year. Ekati’s EA also indicates they mined in their remote location at an operating cost in 1999 of $88,000,000. Therefore their operating cost was approximately $13.39 per tonne on these small pipes in this isolated location. Considering the size of Freightrain and its lower stripping ratio, I will suggest that it could be mined at approximately twice the rate of Ekati or 28,000,000 tonnes per year. As TWG has the advantage of lower stripping ratios, larger pipes and deepwater port bulk supply, I will suggest operating costs to be approximately 2/3’s of Ekati’s for the same volume or $117,000,000 per year. That suggests an operating cost of $4.20 per tonne. Assuming I am out by a factor of 100% then lets conservatively estimate an operating cost of twice that figure or $8.40/tonne. If the market extrapolates Freightrain & Cargo 1 grades to say .225 carrats per tonne and a “run of mine” parcel comes back valued averaging say $150 per carrat then initial JI ore values might be projected at say $33.75 per tonne. Not terribly exciting on the face of it but subtracting the $8.40 per tonne operating cost and we arrive at a net ore value of $25.35 per tonne. This provides a preliminary net revenue of (28,000,000 tonnes per annum x $25.35 per tonne) = $709,800,000 per year. If I am still overly optimistic and JI only produces 14,000,000 tonnes per year then TWG would realize approximately $354,900,000 per annum or $4.61 per share. If TWG retains only 40% after bringing in a deep pocketed partner financing JI through to production, then earnings of $1.84 per share to $3.68 per share might be reasonably projected. Of course if grades and/or $’s per carrat are higher, or operating costs are lower, then the above numbers would be conservative. Considering that BHP originally estimated they would realize $150 per carrat at Ekati but have since realized much higher figures, I do not believe it would be overstating in suggesting that the above noted numbers may be conservative. So lets hope that Herman is in fact soliciting three independent parcel valuations before releasing Lakefield's results. Your thoughts? Regards Vaughn