Re: Indirect Holding is the key
in response to
by
posted on
Mar 24, 2012 03:19AM
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%)
The talk about the delayed BFS can be looked in so many ways.
Take the position of CUU management.
You have the asset, you have the potential acquirer of your asset, and you have this contract which would trigger your potential acquirer to act. However the contract supposely have some loopholes to call it...
So you're in the process of advanacing the FS. You're almost there. You have a mine plan going.
Should you go and just pull a d*** move and release the FS and force Teck to act on how much they want to back in. You as CUU management would hope SP would appreciate and other miners would want to bid for us!
Then you think about the risk, what happens is that nobody wants us? what happens if they didn't like the FS and the mine plan was not satisfactory to what they want?
We pissed of Teck by not allowing them to fully act on project. We cannot find another potential acquirer.
BUT if the mine plan of the FS is looked after by a person who have worked with Teck before and understands their demands in a project, you're continuingly working with your potential acquirer and everyone is happy. Last resort is that you can always release it and hope for the best.
It's almost like you're seeing this girl and suddenly you be like oh I'm going to see what my other options are. Do you think this girl is going to come back to you?