Re: Converting the waste and scope of its size

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%)

Reply New Message

Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message

hoghead

Rank: Vice President [?]

Points: 4327 [?]

Votes: 116 Score: 3.0 [?]

Your Vote:

Please Log In to Vote

Did you know? You can earn activity points by filling your profile with information about yourself (what city you live in, your favorite team, blogs etc.)

Re: Converting the waste and scope of its size

in response to

Re: Converting the waste and scope of its size

nopoo2

posted on Jan 09, 2015 11:05PM

It might be classified as 'waste' in the BFS because it did not meet the parameters of the modeling software for inclusion at a higher grade but Teck and CUU do not classify it as waste. Its mineable and the way the pit is designed, or the finalization of the pit design, will ensure its mined.

===================

Yes, but our qualified person should have foresaw this shortcoming? These parameters should be squarely in his wheelhouse? I assume it must be common knowledge for an experienced geologist/explorer...

I do agree with you that Teck likely doesn't classify it as waste internally, but if it stays inferred officially do you really think Teck will pay us a buyout price calculated as if it was in the measured and indicated column?

As discussed yesterday, that essentially triples the NPV (and our 25% value).

I don't personally think Teck is going to pay any more than they have to.

I admit I could be completely wrong on this, but IMHO the JV strongly favored Teck. Actually very little that has happened hasn't been for Teck's benefit.