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

Tudor Gold Corp V.TUD

Alternate Symbol(s):  TDRRF

Tudor Gold Corp. is a Canada-based precious and base metals exploration and development company. The Company has claims in British Columbia's Golden Triangle (Canada), an area that hosts producing and past-producing mines and several large deposits that are approaching potential development. The Company has a 60% interest in Treaty Creek gold project, located in northwestern British Columbia, which is host to the Goldstorm Deposit, a large gold-copper porphyry system, as well as several other mineralized zones. The Company's Treaty Creek property covers an area of approximately 17,913 hectares.


TSXV:TUD - Post by User

Comment by rockport1on Jul 04, 2024 3:27pm
112 Views
Post# 36118641

RE:Details Details

RE:Details DetailsSasha, I think you misunderstand why Tudor is focussed on the high grade. They are not abandoning the low grade as you imply.  This intent of delineating high grade cells is for mine planning economics. If high grade cells can be mined early in the mine plan, then payback can come much sooner, making the project that much more attractive. The lower grade will still be mined.

I disagree with your statement that 25+ million ounces of low grade is uneconomic.  For example, the average AuEq grade of 1.19 is substantially higher than our KSM neighbors at about 0.90 g/t (.71 Au g/t + .18% Cu), and yet KSM has an after tax NPV(8%) of $4 billion .  Note, that KSM also requires about $1 billion in tunnelling costs that Goldstorm is unlikely to require.  Gold recovery at KSM also appears to be under 80%, which is quite low.

A further note is the fliexibility of the Goldstorm deposit.  If project economics require it, they can use a 1.0 g/t cutoff grade, leaving 15 million ounces AuEq at a grade of 1.49 g/t.  You can compare this to the release this week from Seabridge on the Bronson Slope deposit. It has a 5 million ounces at a grade of 0.33 g/t!  How could that possibly be economic if 1.19 g/t is not?  Goldstorm is 3.5 times the grade! 

All this to say that as the development goes forward, they are likely to further enhance the project economics, just as most mine projects do. This is how the mining process works.

Sasha11 wrote: The last couple of news releases smell of desperation.   The share price is tanked because experts know this is not a project, at least not the one they are trying to sell.   Tudor now seems to be alluding to a smaller higher grade (possibly partially underground) project.  But why lose the advantage of economies of scale for large open pit operation?   That is because the majority, perhaps close to all of their stated 25+ million ounces of a low grade resource is uneconomic.  They need to put out the sample grade, recovery, and method of the test work that is briefly referred to in the news release.  Compare that to the assumed mining cut-off grade and in context with their MRE.  How promoting of this illusion to the general public has been allowed for so long by the securities regulators is a joke, and why the TSX junior mining index is treated as such.



<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>