First I think its pretty straightforward how the NTL reduces our CapEx.

We build our powerlines to Terrace, its cheaper than building our powerlines to existing infrastructure. Given the NTL isnt even built yet, no one knows the final cost so I fail to see how CUU can account for a cost that hasnt even been finalized. Anyone disagree with this?

Im not trying to bring up an argument from SH but I think its pretty clear how this reduces our CapEx and just cant figure out how a powerline that hasnt been built yet can be factored into the BFS. Not to mention this is more a thing for whoever acquires the resource and goes into production versus the company proving it up.

Second.....I just had to retort on SH's top post yesterday.

Dig it...

Copper Fox’s] large percentage of insider ownership makes a back-in by Teck Resources Ltd. (TSX: T.TCK.A, Stock Forum) (TSX: T.TCK.B, Stock Forum) (NYSE: TCK, Stock Forum) still highly speculative, as Teck is not the kind of company that will overpay for a low grade copper resource that is CUU, especially when they have a lot of other projects in the works and several other options for future expansion. There is still a chance that Teck and CUU may not come to terms on a back-in price, and Teck could walk away and decline. There is huge risk of this, and this is why you are not seeing a large amount of buying happening.

Let me break this down a bit...

large percentage of insider ownership makes a back-in by Teck Resources Ltd. (TSX: T.TCK.A, Stock Forum) (TSX: T.TCK.B, Stock Forum) (NYSE: TCK, Stock Forum) still highly speculative

I dont know about a lot of you people out there...investing is a highly personal thing to everyone and people will obviously look for different criteria. However...I believe its fairly widely known that a high percentage of insider ownership is an excellent thing. It shows the shares are in good hands fo rthe long run, and helps to keep the outstanding shares tight. I believe most people look for high inside ownership because it also shows managements commitment to their own project. Theres plenty of projects out there with little inside ownership that I would never consider investing in. If management doesnt think they have a good project who else would? What we lack is INSTITUTIONAL ownership....but given that we also face less risk of someone coming out of the blue and dumping millions upon millions of shares. If Institutions start to buy CUU we will see a run as the amount of cheap shares is drying up, these guys will come in looking to buy millions of shares and frankly....there is less out there all the time.

Teck is not the kind of company that will overpay for a low grade copper resource that is CUU, especially when they have a lot of other projects in the works and several other options for future expansion

I dont know of many companies that will over pay for a low grade copper deposit period, but the fact of the matter is the bulk tonnage of a project can easily offset the low grade. Most bulk tonnage deposits are low to mid grade moreover so this point really is kind of moot. You only have to build one mine and after the payback period its just gets cheaper. Rising metal prices assure that a lot of deposits that would not normally go into production now have a much fairer chance of doing so. The cost of the metal goes up, the cost to build a mine and operate it stays roughly flat. As the economy improves I expect the price of copper will offset any inkling poor economics on this one.

There is still a chance that Teck and CUU may not come to terms on a back-in price, and Teck could walk away and decline. There is huge risk of this, and this is why you are not seeing a large amount of buying happening.

Okay this is a very fair point. Except most people are valuing Copper Fox around the 25% mark as Teck absorbs 75% of this project for a pittance. Honestly, THIS IS THE BEST CASE SCENARIO FOR THIS COMPANY. I would gladly sell all my shares into the market based around 100% ownership instead of recieve a buyout based around 80%,60% or 25% depending on which amount Teck decides.

Not really certain how this made it as the best post but its certainly off the mark by a considerable amount. Re read it and look at whats going on. It makes no sense.

Had to throw my 2 cents in on this one.

Rogue,

I posted this on SH and am preparing to hear a multitude of opinions reflecting poor valuation and judgement. I can honestly say its amazing how SH allows garbage like this ot be considered its top post. Its poorly thought out, short, and uses no supporting arguments. On top of that.....the last two sentances show how clearly whoever wrote this has no understanding of CUU, our contract, or how we are actually valued. It is what it is...and I think myself, AG and most investors out there saw right through it.

Rogue,