SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Rock Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mike Gold who wrote (311)11/15/1998 2:30:00 PM
From: Francis Scavo  Respond to of 1996
 
Mike.
You are right on the 1.4% copper. Reread the source. But the other source claimed .9 to 1%. Had it marked on notepad but lost it. Was trying to find out what kind of cost these other mines had. Will keep an eye on the Rock.
Francis



To: Mike Gold who wrote (311)11/15/1998 3:55:00 PM
From: the Chief  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1996
 
Hi Mike. Also saw the Los Pelambres claims a 50 cent/pound cost to operate the mine. This is okay if you already have an operating mine in place. It does not include the capital cost of the mine itself. Rock Resources initial operating costs would be much higher making it, IMO, an uneconomical operation if their porphyry had a similiar copper ore grade. Certainly, things will be different if significant gold grades are realized or higher grade copper ore is found.

These are "Operating cash costs" which include IRR and servicing debt!

selling at .71c gives a return of 29%! Properties that are mining gold at $300.00 when gold was at $400.00 were only getting 25%!!

Excellent Gold properties that are mining at $190 and selling at $290 are only seeing 34%!!

So if Gold goes to $400 the $190 mine will be seeing 50%. Copper at a $1.00 does the same, so the economics are there!

BTW 'any" copper property in Chile would have to be subjected to the same scrutiny whether it be Rocks or MDIN. The upfront cost must be worth the investment!

the Chief