RE:RE:RE:RE:now a pessimistic post Sherry35,
The operational issue at GUY is not at all similar to MND. GUY's problem is that their gold head grades dropped from the 2.88 g/t predicted in their 43-101 report to 2.12 g/t actual in the most recent quarter with the result that they did not get the 60k+ ounce gold production that was in their mine plan, but only produced 41,200 ounces. At the same time open pit strip ratios have gone up from 4 to 8 which means costs have gone up by $10 million USD, while top line revenue has stayed nearly constant at around $50 million USD, with the result that GUY went from net earnings of $8.39 million USD in Q1 2018 to a loss of $2.196 million in Q3 2018. So GUY is bringing in a mine consultant to review the resource modeling--not good news.
To make matters worse, GUY is getting ready to go underground at Rorys Knoll, and so their costs are going to go up in the next 2 years.
Unlike GUY which has no flexibility to improve their mine economics short term, Mandalay Resources has the capability to improve mine economics at Bjorkdal by changing the ore mix going into the mill, and IMHO the reduction in gold production at Bjorkdal will result in an improvement in cash flow. I think most investors assume that if gold production drops, then both revenue and bottom line results will be lower than the previous quarter.
Furthermore, at Bjorkdal, the 2018 mine plan was based on mining 2.1 g/t gold underground, and the long term average underground grade at Bjorkdal is 3.2 g/t. So IMHO there is a considerable
opportunity to improve quarterly gold production at Bjorkdal.