RE:A little perspectiveCashcosts wrote: When the inital Mineral Reserve and subsequent PEA for Fire Creek was detailed it had a life of mine of 5 years and 241k ounces. They been mining it for a a few years now and the Reserves are 50k ounces higher. There is going to be a lot more gold in the ground at their operations.
Yes they must have not gone blindly to spend $ 80 M. This is the SAME team from GBG so they knew the mine and potential. ALL Gold stocks except a few that were up on earnings Friday, got hammered. Richmont down 8 % on Friday too. Classic jobs report rig same thing happened July 7th deja vue. My question is can someone explain the results of the table from SEDAR under 1.0 - Summary from the technical report:
IRR in the summary table is at 1074 %. How is the IRR so high at 1074 % from table but JUST ABOVE they quote IRR of 11 % after tax?? -
Table 1-4: Summary of Economic Results
A sensitivity analysis was performed on the Mine value drivers and found to be most sensitive to gold price, direct mining costs, and average grade. Table 1-5 and Figure 1-2 show the sensitivities of the various metrics to the Net Present Value (NPV).
August 4, 2017 | Report Date
| |
NPV $k IRR % Discounted Payback Years Cash cost $/oz AISC $/oz | $8,781 1074% 1.5 $746 $1,086 |
It also says "first phase" of Hollister will be 11 % IRR, does this mean the ENTIRE project including Hatter Graben will have an IRR of 1074 % and this 1074 % is just an estimate in this pre-feasibility study? Is the 11 % just to extract Gloria ounces?
The first phase of production from the Hollister mine is economically viable with an after-tax internal rate of return and Net Present Value (NPV7%, US$1,200 Au) of 11% and US$657,000 respectively. Assumptions used in the cash flow model include the following:
Thanks!! Either the stock is an ultra value play at this level or here for a reason due to lack of CLARITY that needs to be addressed in the CC on Thursday.