RE: In defense of Gordon Glenn As far as i can tell, the 'problem' was Sutcliff who seems to have skipped some key steps in de-risking the mine to secure financing As far as I can tell, the 20 million financing due diligence process seems to have exposed these risks and that deal is now dead,
Why hasn't this been announced? isn't it material?
To me this really doesn't make sense, though. The only way mining companies de-risk a mine once the pea has been done is when they get financing. This may require them to hedge their production to get the financing. From what I had been led to believe, Sutcliffe had been systematically drilling to upgrade the resource and had a engineered plan for open pits and underground mining that showed the resource to be very economical.
Was that all a lie?