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: Clues
21
May 16, 2013 10:02PM
8
May 17, 2013 12:51AM
6
May 17, 2013 08:37AM
4
May 17, 2013 08:59AM
1
May 17, 2013 09:00AM

May 17, 2013 09:01AM
4
May 17, 2013 09:07AM
2
May 17, 2013 09:10AM
8
May 17, 2013 09:39AM
7
May 17, 2013 10:00AM

May 17, 2013 10:04AM
27
May 17, 2013 10:10AM
13
May 17, 2013 11:33AM
13
May 17, 2013 12:20PM
16
May 17, 2013 12:27PM
13
May 17, 2013 12:48PM

A 75% back in comes with $340 million , a financed to production clause and Teck as operator. Just that is an easy sell to another major.

The more that I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that a back in of 75% will not be an option that Teck choses. Why? Enormous risk for Teck. The terms of the 75% back in option require Teck to arrange financing for the entire project (3-4B). The terms also stipulate that an operating mine has to be built and operational within a certain time ( 4 years under the old agreement ). But let's say they negotiate 6 years under a new agreemeent.

Who will be on the hook for the money if something goes wrong during the building process? Let's say after 3 years costs of materials escalate out of sight and Teck has already spent 2B into the mine. This scenario is exactly what happened with Galore. Do they put the project on hold? Teck will be in a situation where they are forced to spend even more money to build it or lose it entirely.

Then there is the matter of financing this project. With the BFS as it stands will Teck be able to get financing for this at reasonable rates? I'm not a finance guy but imho, most major banks and lenders will require an improved BFS with better numbers to offer financing at favourable rates on this project. The alternative for Teck would be to finance this entirely by issuing bonds. Their bonds right now pay just under 5% so they can get financing for fairly good rates now. However, Teck has stated that they do not want to jeapordize their credit rating with enormous bond financings.

With this possible scenario in mind, it would be much better for Teck to either buy us out entirely or back in for 40%. Imo, I think a 100% buyout makes much more sense. They can either find a partner to do it now or later after they spend money upgrading the resource and improving the BFS numbers. Then at least Teck will not be under a time constraint to develope this project and be the operator to develope it the way they want. I invite your comments on this.

2
May 17, 2013 01:10PM
6
May 17, 2013 01:22PM
11
May 17, 2013 01:25PM
11
May 17, 2013 01:26PM
10
May 17, 2013 01:36PM
13
May 17, 2013 01:57PM
24
May 17, 2013 04:26PM
2
May 17, 2013 06:21PM
9
May 17, 2013 06:33PM
21
May 17, 2013 07:56PM
6
May 17, 2013 09:40PM
30
May 17, 2013 09:46PM
4
May 17, 2013 11:17PM
1
May 18, 2013 01:56AM
20
May 18, 2013 08:18AM
9
May 18, 2013 09:22AM
12
May 18, 2013 10:34AM
5
May 18, 2013 08:09PM
2
May 18, 2013 08:42PM
4
May 20, 2013 11:55PM
13
May 21, 2013 08:21AM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply