RE:RE:WHERE DOES THE DIFFERENCE LIEI would use Sprott's numbers as they have professional analysts which is one of the reasons they have to use only published production / grade numbers and are fiduciaries, making them liable if they opine expectations that don't come to fruition ... They have to stick with published facts and draw conclusions / expectations from those facts only.
I on the other hand am just an old used car salesman and can draw conclusions out of thin air and am void of any liability ... Making a decision one way or the other from a BB blog would be crazy ...
However I have been around a long time, have been on site, and think I have a feel for the place. I believe our management is the exact opposite of Skeena. I think we will never hype the deposit but rather have the results speak for themselves and if that means lower prices in the short term, then that is the cost of preserving management's integrity to the shareholders.
Some of my thoughts re my expectations.
- Feasibility study used 5.9 g/t ... Actual drill results ( ~ 800,000 meters) averaged ~ 8 g/t because of the dilution of the narrow vein system ... i.e. we will have to dig out 1.36 tonnes to get our 8 grams. The SAMS mining method remedies that problem, and I believe we will incorporate the method when mining the narrow vein sections of the deposit.
- Our assays (~ 800,000 metersover 15 years) cut the grade off at 1 OPT (~28g/t) and 10% of our reported assays exceeded that mark ... many in the 75-150g/t range ... will that translate into 8.8 g/t when we actually mine the deposit ??? I think so, but using that as a cushion in my calculations.
- FS used 2,500 tpd we have the capacity of 2800 and can push it to 3,000 tpd ... Does this mean our throughput will be 12 - 20 % higher ???? But if we say throughput only goes up to 2750 (10 %) and grade only comes in at 7.4 g/t (25%) then our production from the FS goes from 150,000 oz X 1.1 X 1.25 = 206,250 ounces.
- I used a cost of $800 aisc based on the FS ... If our grade goes up 25% and we produce 200,000 ounces (+33%) while our throughput only goes up 10% ... Shouldn't our cost / ounce go down substantially ??? A 15% reduction in costs drops us under $700 aisc. I used $800.00 (another cushion)
- SAMS, if used, further reduces mining costs ... Another cushion.
- Repeatedly management has been very optomistic about increasing the deposit size through underground drilling adding ~ 4 years to mine life when the material ~ 100 meters from our current stopes are drilled ... And I believe them , or going back to what I said earlier ... They wouldn't have said it. Increasing mine life means they can comfortably increase throughput ... Idea is to be at least a minimum of an eight year mine life.
Don't take my "glass's is 7/8ths full" optimism ... Go back over the various presentations (if they can still be listened to) and hear for yourself what I think Derek has been eluding to but not saying (my interpretation)
Good luck to all