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: AGM Questions

I am sorry the annual general meeting has been shifted to Calgary (an oil town) rather than keeping it in Vancouver (a mining town).If in Vancouver, I would be able to attend.I also believe that the attendance and questions would be better if held in Vancouver.

Nonetheless, I have no control over such things. In the absence of my attendance, will someone please raise the following issues.

1.During the Joint Venture negotiations with Teck, did Copper Fox receive an offer (or suggestion of offer) from Teck that was unacceptable to Copper Fox management or directors?

2.Has Copper Fox ever received an offer or suggestion of offer from any other company that was unacceptable to Copper Fox management or directors?

3.The July 15, 2013 news release announcing the joint venture with Teck says that the agreement is in spirit with Teck’s right to back in at 75% under the former agreement. Under the former agreement, Teck had to spend approximately $350 million before earning back 75% interest.Since Copper Fox would retain 25%, $87 million of that $350 million would be attributed to Copper Fox’s capital contribution.Under the new agreement, Teck’s upfront expenditure is $20 million cash to Copper Fox, $40 million in future contingent payments, $4 million for acquisition of Copper Fox’s mineral claims, and $60 million for development costs. Teck buys back immediately with a $124 million commitment vs. earn back with $350 million under the previous agreement.

a.Given the enormous reduction in Teck’s monetary commitments to earn back 75%, how can the existing agreement be construed as being in the spirit of the previous agreement?

b.Besides Copper Fox being able to insist on $½ million in expenditures each year, is there any provision whereby Teck cannot mothball the project?

c.If additional resources are discovered by the 10,000 metres of diamond drilling by Teck, will a new feasibility study be required?

d.Are there any pending deals or further developments that are pending upon the results of the diamond drilling?

4.What are the chances for getting copper out of Van Dyke via fracturing and in-situ leaching?What is the anticipated capital cost to undertake in-situ leaching?Have environmental permits been issued for fracing and in-situ leaching?

5.Will a partner be brought in for Sombrero Butte or Van Dyke, or is Copper Fox planning on exploring on its own?

1
Oct 15, 2013 10:38AM
17
Oct 15, 2013 05:28PM
4
Oct 15, 2013 07:08PM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply