Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Alexandria Minerals Corp ALXDF

Alexandria Minerals Corp is a Canadian based gold exploration and development company. Its project consists of Orenada, Akasaba, Sleepy, Manitoba and Ontario properties together with the Other Quebec properties. It is mainly focused on exploring the cadillac break property which is located in Val-d'Or, Quebec. The cadillac break property consists of approximately 21 contiguous projects of over 460 claims, located in Bourlamaque, Louvincourt and Vaquelin Townships. The manitoba properties include


GREY:ALXDF - Post by User

Post by NextPhaseon Feb 27, 2018 10:56am
192 Views
Post# 27628215

Visualizing the Impact of Resource Size and Grade at Orenada

Visualizing the Impact of Resource Size and Grade at OrenadaHey all,

I'm continuing to work on my NPV model for Orenada. I used information from several mines in the area to help with many of these assumptions. The following assumptions in the table are fixed, so we can focus on the impact of grade and resource size to the final NPV.

Fixed Items Metric
Operating Cost / t  $               15.00
LOM Sustaining Capital  $     300,000,000
Preproduction Capital  $     150,000,000
Construction Period 3 years
Tonnes per day Mined 4,500
Recovery 87.5%
Discount Rate 5%
$CAD per g of au  $                    50.00

The following three visualizations attached to this post show the variable changes in NPV when resource size and grade assumptions change. Changes to these factors along with the fixed factors impact the mine life, all-in sustaining cash flow, and revenue realized per tonne mined, which drastically impact the NPV estimate for Orenada.

Please be aware these numbers reflect different scenarios for pre-tax NPV, it's still difficult to come up with a truly accurate estimate until our uncertainty is reduced from seeing the actual numbers from the upcoming resource estimate. Once we receive this new information, we can more accurately predict an estimated NPV, and thus, the market should have more confidence in the economic potential of Orenada. If you're interested in the after-tax NPV, then taking 60% of the pre-tax NPV will get you pretty close.

The orange highlighted numbers are based on Orenada's current resource estimates. The purple highlighted scenarios use LRG's estimate for grade for two of the charts, but I took a stab in the dark on the new resource area. Do not take these as accurate projections, but more helpful assumptions to demonstrate the potential economics of Orenada.

So, what should you take away from this exercise? Here are several points I think are important to appreciate before seeing the new resource estimate.
  • Grade improvements are extremely important for the overall economics for Orenada, especially for lowering price sensitivity, smaller payback period, and overall project risk.
  • Resource size helps justify a higher fixed capital cost by supporting a longer mine life and higher tonnes of material mined per year.
  • Improvements to both grade and resource size simultaneously turbo charge increases to final NPV estimates.
  • If we receive a positive resource estimate, then the market will more likely value Orenada on a notional PEA calculation rather than the current early-stage explorer blanket valuation, which assumes AZX lacks a standalone economically-viable resource
User image

User image

User image

Let me know if you have any ideas on how to improve these assumptions, and thanks for reading!

NP

Disclaimer: I own AZX, this is not financial advice, these numbers are not predictions, do your own DD.
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>