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 : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jackjc who wrote (59664)	5/24/2008 8:53:39 PM
From: tyc:>	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78424

If Teck exercises its back-in to Schaft Creek, in addition to providing $160M of capex, it would also undertake to arrange all production financing. Copper Fox would become an equal 25% minority partner. How valuable would be that undertaking to arrange production financing to Copper Fox ? In contrast, Goldcorp has no back-in rights to Mt. Milligan nor to Berg. It's simply the majority shareholder of TRX who has already presented an approved feasibility study for Mt. Milligan. G has given no undertaking to arrange production financing, which, for Mt Milligan alone would be close to a billion, Which is to be preferred ? I don't know, but I sure wish that TRX had the assurance that Copper Fox would have.