Re: Both Sides of the Picture
in response to
by
posted on
Feb 11, 2012 01:00PM
CUU own 25% Schaft Creek: proven/probable min. reserves/940.8m tonnes = 0.27% copper, 0.19 g/t gold, 0.018% moly and 1.72 g/t silver containing: 5.6b lbs copper, 5.8m ounces gold, 363.5m lbs moly and 51.7m ounces silver; (Recoverable CuEq 0.46%)
2. There seems to be poor information flow to us regarding delays. I understand there will be delays when working on something as large as this Feasibility. That is acceptable. But why wait so long to tell us? We found out Dec 14 that the feasibility would be delayed. At that point, there was only 1 working week left in the year. Did they not know sooner about the delay? Other companies are able to predict feasibility dates months in advance.
3. Our drill results are painfully slow. There are likely valid explanations for this. However, I'm concerned that Copper Fox is either selecting poor contractors for this job or they have weak control over the contractors.
4. Our budgeting abilities seem to be weak. Why so many financings? Why did we not just plan a large financing last spring and get it over with all at once?
Elmer is constrained by the money people. He saved the co from bankruptcy yet they still drag their feet on spending money. This is not his fault.
5. This is not "cheap". This is a $525M dollar company with a likely 25% stake in a mine years away from construction. There are very few other companies in that situation with a market cap as high as us. So why am I here? Because I expect Copper Fox to be a very expensive buyout.
We have 25% of 130 billion dollars in the ground. We are cheap. We have a good IRR in the safest jurisdiction on the planet. That fetches a premium. Watch Harper in China for a clue.
6. Our 2011 drilling program was not very aggressive. Instead of reading about all the potential, I would prefer if we proved it. Look at Lumina Copper. They are a company smaller than us and they pulled off a 99,500m drilling program in 2011. Ours was 10,000m. If we have a drill program this year, I hope to see it start with a bang.
The drill program was constrained by the money men. "Spend only what you absolutely have to." and "If you increase resource over inferred you get more money" and "It will take too long to convert the potential into measured and this does not fit in our timeframe"
7. Our Resource Estimate last year was very disappointing. The share price suffered because of it. It was not the shorts, or the frisbee shares, or the big banks. It was our own bad news that caused the drop. It's not the job of a resource estimate to remove rock that is uneconomical. That is the job of PFS/BFS. Our resource should not have gone down.
We got improved economics. The pounds didn't vanish. How can this be bad?