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%)
Message: Time to do the deal!
I know there are varying opinions regarding what will happen with the costs of our project ... I am still in the camp that figures the capex will drift higher, despite our deposit being one of the most economical around it seems. What does that mean?
It's time to do the deal, and if Teck management hasn't been talking to CUU management directly, I bet they have had some backroom talks with potential partners. Given Teck's spending cuts for 2013, which BC mine suppliers are already starting to feel (let alone others globally who might have worked on QBII and other projects), my guess is that Teck would prefer some big partners to help carry the load on this. Teck is cashed up but they still have debts and need to tread wisely imo. Buying us out and building by themselves is a big cash flow risk. Thus, I think they go the partner route on this.
Look at Barrick's Pascua-Lama project. Up from $8 billion to $8.5 billion to build, since July. They are cutting spending too.
So, time to drop the BFS, let Teck bring in some partners and make some history (Glencore/Xstrata makes a lot of sense with Xstrata's Liard ownership already). Not worried about the big picture for us btw, I just think what CUU management wants for capex, and the capex TetraTech signs off on, might be two different things.
The cost overrun at Barrick Gold Corp.'s Pascua-Lama gold project, the company's largest and most complicated endeavour ever, will be even greater than expected, the world's largest gold miner said on Thursday. The massive project in the southern Andes mountain range between Chile and Argentina is now expected to cost as much as $8.5-billion (U.S) to build as it targets first production in the middle of 2014. That is even more than the approximately $8-billion Barrick estimated Pascua-Lama would cost to develop in July. Pascua-Lama is expected to become one of the world's largest and lowest cost mines once it is producing, but getting there has proven challenging to Barrick as it ran into massive escalation in capital costs and delays. Barrick said on Thursday that the increase in capital costs was split, roughly evenly, between the impact of the delay in pouring first gold a year later than expected, increased labor hours and installation rates after being reviewed in more detail and incremental payments to the company it has hired to help it build the mine. Cost overruns have become the biggest challenge to global mining companies as they face the highest prices in decades for materials like steel and concrete even as the cost of energy and equipment soar along with labour costs. Barrick announced a major review of its projects portfolio in July, less than two months after the surprise ouster of former chief executive officer Aaron Regent. It said on Thursday it had cut cut or deferred about $1-billion in spending from the initial sustaining and minesite expansion budget for 2013. "Despite additional spending at Pascua-Lama, and continued inflationary industry cost pressures, Barrick expects 2013 capex to be largely in line with 2012," the company said. The Toronto-based miner reported net earnings of $620-million (62 cents a share) compared to net earnings of $1.37-billion ($1.37 per share) in the same prior year quarter.Globe and Mail - November 1, 2012
Barrick says Pascua-Lama gold project costs more than expected
Costs now expected to hit as much as $8.5-billion; third-quarter net profit fell to $620-million (U.S.) or 62 cents per share
7 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply