RE:RE:In mining, success is relativeCapex overrun: Q3 MD&A, page 6, paragraph 2. 389 was the orginal capex, and now it is a range of 475-515, a 106 million overrun to the midpoint of the range. The explanation is on page 7, last paragraph: 74 million due to enhancements to the water treatment plant required by new environmental regulations. I guess the -10%/+20% to -10%/+10% margin would increase costs by another 20m. So where is the other 12m? Hopefully that will cover the increase in executive comp next year. (Graph that out and turn it around, it looks like the stock chart.)
What I mean is, have you ever seen a mine perform to PEA, PFS, or FS specs on capital cost, operating cost, head grade, production, time frames, etc.? In my experience the surprise is almost always to the negative. The very idea that the original detailed engineering of the FS was done to a -10%/+20% is called into question, with a 100+m overrun. And yes, the drilling and test mining has indicated better grades and tonnages than in the block model. In case you didn't notice, the press releases miss no opportunity to point it out. So perhaps the upside in the resource will offset the aggressive costing and timing of the mine plan.