Re: Indirect Holding is the key
in response to
by
posted on
Mar 23, 2012 04:07PM
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%)
In my opinion, another significant issue is the existing agreement itself
As someone from CUU management told a poster here, you could drive a truck through it, or words to that ffect
The agrrement itself is full of ambiguities and provides for unrealistic scenarios
For instance it is inconceiveable that Teck would proceed to spend billions of dollars with CUU being in control of the property
There are situations that simply will not hold up and neither party is particularly anxious to test any of it in court
So another factor that informs as to why the BFS would be delayed is that the delivery would start the process on an agreement that is totally inadequate for the project that has evolved since the agreement was originally drawn