RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Cu and - Zn is the appeal -- for suitors StewartCatso wrote: Stewart, why in your opinion did Freeport maintain 54% of the LZ if as you say it is technically challenged? Freeport pretty much wrote the book on caving and they know as much as anyone about this deposit, so I don't know why they would want to maintain their significant stake in a massive deposit if they didn't think it would be a viable, Freeport-sized mine for them in the future.....
Read more at https://www.stockhouse.com/companies/bullboard?symbol=t.nsu&postid=26525451#IhhMkJJKoYxs6vHX.99
It costs them nothing and allows NSU to do some earn-in work.
Incorrect. There is no earn-in on NSU's part for the lower zone. On the contrary, Freeport can increase their holding on the lower zone to a maximum of 54%. In terms of funding further exploration, NSU is on;y on the hook for the first $20M in drilling costs, after which Freeport assumes 72% of costs, so again, it does not "cost them nothing". So again, why would Freeport want to maintain the LZ, and indeed structure the agreement is such a way that they would be in a position to hold a majority position and as such most likely become the operator, if it was not technically feasible to extract the ore?