PEA average grades first 5 years:
- Copper: 0.288%
- Gold: 0.203 g/t
- Moly: 0.014 %
- Silver: 1.225 g/t
Hole SCK-21-445 (from 47m to 130m)
- Copper: 0.365%
- Gold: 0.212 g/t
- Moly: 0.015 %
- Silver: 1.63 g/t
- CuEq: 0.50%
Hole SCK-21-447 (7m to 116m)
- Copper: 0.411%
- Gold: 0.56 g/t
- Moly: 0.004 %
- Silver: 2.84 g/t
- CuEq: 0.70%
These two holes showed higher grades near surface vs. what was used in the PEA. If they can get more good results near surface, grades used in the PEA could possibly be revised upwards?
More grades = more $$$. More recoveries = more $$$. More throughtput = more $$$.
EBITDA first 5 years was $695M US. I could see this increase by another $100M US per year with more aggresive grades, recoveries and thoughtput.
After, using $3.50 US copper would add another $100M US? Even better, using $3.75 US copper would add $200M US?
From $695M US to possibly $1B US EBITDA per year? That would make a nice difference on the NPV.
IMO.
MoneyK
