Welcome To the Copper Fox Metals Inc. HUB On AGORACOM

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%)

Free
Message: Re: Another thought
6
Jan 06, 2013 07:44PM
5
Jan 06, 2013 09:04PM

Remember this Folks ! A BFS is NOT a fanfare event like an updated increase in a Resource Estimate. It is meant to do the opposite. The best analogy I can give is that you are buying a new investment property (flip) and are willing to spend up to 'X' dollars for it. The BFS is a derisking tool that is kind of like a Mike Holmes quality (in our case) inspection that lays out all the faults (scenarios) and the economics behind those scenarios (costs). You as the buyer NEED to know prior to purchase if you pump the money into that cracked foundation and new roof, will you still come out on top even during a prospective downturn in the realestate market.

Well guess what folks...It's positive ! Whoever buys Schaft Creek and possibly it's trend is going to make a lot of money for a long time. The infrastructure that the BFS outlines is for just this, the ability to handle MORE.

I am tickled pink by the BFS and fully understand it's primary principle. What I want to see is the RE block model over the new pit, depths and just how far this thing can big pushed both back into the mountain and at depth. The 171,160,000 tonnes of waste rock (inferred) was only 1/2 of the increase in waist rock (350Mt more) than the PFS. That means the pit walls were pushed back. Like I said before folks, you only go out further, when you want to go deeper. 400 meters is a joke when you look at some of the drill results in the paramount zone 650m + and open at depth beyond that. It's a mine folks beneath a mine, just as webgogs said in posts past and it gets better at depth!. Mike told someone here at a conference 'we will be negotiating the deposit.' Well everyone, that does not mean P&P in the BFS, it means MI&I and future potential at SC based on correlations. Yes, the BFS numbers are deceiving, but just remember that the PFS pit model had very little to no inferred rock. That meant less waste and more M&I contributing in a positive way to the economics of the project. That pit is now obsolete given what we know now about the SC deposit and both CF and Teck want to be able to get to it all.

LDubs

5
Jan 06, 2013 11:44PM
2
Jan 07, 2013 09:30AM
3
Jan 09, 2013 02:21PM
2
Jan 09, 2013 02:32PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply