“Commencement of construction is subject to a number of additional requirements, including a public consultation and receipt of required permits and authorizations. The submittal of the mine permit applications is presently scheduled for the third quarter of 2018 and could take more than 12 months to process.” (from Mon Dec 18, 2017 Columbus Gold Provides Update on Montagne d' Or Gold Project in French Guiana)
Both CBGDF and NG have already formally indicated their aim to build this mine. However, notice that the expectation is even if everything goes well re., the public disclosure process it could be as long as August 2019 before permits are granted. Yet, if the environmentalists do get into court on this issue then you can add IMHO at least 6 - 12 months more to this process (ie., 2020).
From my perspective as a long term CBGDF stockholder this delay is good! Why? CBGDF is not required to start funding their portion of building until actual construction begins (ie., 1.5 – 3 yrs.). So, no debt or 45% dilution begins until 'the shovels go in'. I am sure based on Giustra and NG comments CBGDF will have the funding they need but it does not need to be used until those permits are signed (20 – 30 months from now).
So, if CBGDF holds steady in their resolve to 'milk' the next couple of years what will impact the SP positively? I contend - 1) if gold continues its slow climb the SP will grow just through gold interest momentum itself also having been unshackled from the Nevada assets. More importantly you can add to that SP momentum - 2) NG's infill drilling to upgrade at least the pits one mill ozs inferred; - 3) possible resource drilling results beyond the original BFS pit into the CBGDF post BFS exploration drilling area; - 4) any increase in grade and/or ozs that CBGDFs ongoing analysis of the BFS itself might generate; - 5) possible reductions in on going mine costs teased out by further BFS analysis and ESIA design – 6) possible restrictions placed on further gold exploration in French Guiana to appease opposition power groups as the mine permit is granted; - 7) actual stages of mine building being announced; etc.
Note CBGDF will hold verifiable ozs, bank loans, a major partner who will build and once permitted, a mine, potentially a national gold mine! Based on the hype and sheer foolhardiness of the mining/exploration community several years ago where do we feel investor and take over interest will go this time? IMHO to explorers with documented and verifiable assets and a big new mine. Newmont, Barrick and Iamgold, etc have learned a very costly lesson in the past and they won't make the same mistakes again with their money.
I have said in past entries that I see a $2 CBGDF SP in the next 18 – 24 months and if most of the points above come to fruition I could have been extremely conservative here. However recently someone asked why is the present CBGDF SP getting hammered? Is it a number of traders trying to make some money on their sale of several thousand shares? Maybe, but more realistically (and I am not getting into these implications) a potential buyer would be very happy to see such negative SP 'action.' Again, will NG come in within the next 2 months with a bid before any new reserves are presented via their infill drilling results and the ESIA presentation (NG will have identified any new pit limits required by the newest exploration and infill drilling in the ESIA document before it is presented)?
I hope that I am wrong about such a 45% bid materialising (remember that NG selling out with CBGDF would entirley change my thesis) but a 30% premium on a 20 day SP average of e.g., US 0.60 (or lower) means US 0.70 – 0.80 bid. Again, I hope that Guistra and or holders will reject any such offer if it is made to them as I think long term holders on e.g., a US 0.50 cost basis can look for a 4 – 10 bag exit on CBGDF alone (never mind the AUAU potential shareholders have received), but such gains will require patience and nerve.
As always JMHO – good luck to all