A good comparison for capex costs is Seabridge's KSM. KSM is a 120,000 tpd mine located in the Golden Triangle. The prefeasibility report was posted on Sedar on June 14.

Galore Creek is also a valid comparison but this project is significantly more complex than Schaft Creek.

When comparing capex costs, it's important to remember that Schaft Creek's huge advantage is the site layout. This impacts capex in several ways:

1. No Tunnels

The tunnels at KSM and Galore Creek are a significant portion of the capex costs. In addition to the costs, the tunnels also add a significant risk for cost and schedule overrun.

2. No Concentrate Pipeline

The concentrate at Schaft Creek can be shipped from the plant site to the port via truck. Compare this to Galore Creek, which states in the PFS:

"Another major capital component is the concentrate transportation and filtration system, which includes a 70 km slurry and fuel pipeline, filter plant, water treatment plant, 50 person full-service camp, and fuel tank farm. Reconfiguration of this portion of the process could reduce the overall capital requirement, and GCMC has made plans to investigate the reconfiguration options."

The site layout at Schaft Creek also helps reduce operating expenses.