ECUADOR GOLD AND COPPER CORP V.EGX

Reply to Korpfu

[TheMerlion]

Korpfu, you will notice that TESTFREAK has buried all the informative posts and my reply to you under a mountain of nonsense posts from himself. For ease I have copied my reply to you below along with some useful links to articles which are relative to of discussion.

First the links, one relating to actual OpEx, another, worth considering involving NI43-101 estimates and finally the last is an interview from a very informed and respected industry expert explaining about grades, then my reply to you.

The Terrible Truth of Gold Mining Cost Reporting

https://www.explorationinsights.com/pebble.asp?relid=3443

Blind Faith-- Samples, Assays, and Estimates

https://www.explorationinsights.com/pebble.asp?relid=3509

Brent Cook: Do NI 43-101s Provide a False Sense of Security?

https://www.theaureport.com/pub/na/brent-cook-do-ni-43-101s-provide-a-false-sense-of-security

korpfu wrote: Thanks,

I realize that you need more results, however, my calculations are assuming that the inferred and indicated are proven.

So, you are suggesting that open pit/partial open pit is totally out of the question.  

I guess with the gold at greater depths, some serious benching would be in order to get to the deposits, increasing the costs.  I have seen mines where part is open pit, then ramp to ore bodies below the pit.  I am more familiar with underground mining operations than open pit though.

I am trying to find a similiar deposits at this depth that are currently being mined. 

Sinking shaft is an extremely expensive endeavor, and ramping to ore bodies is as well.  I am also assuming that a CHL facility would be required to process the ore. 

Korpfu, you have to remember that the whole "Condor Project" consists of several different concessions and the current NI43-101 covers the the whole "Condor Project" and not just one area of interest such as Santa Barbara.

The main focus in at Santa Barbara and this is where the greatest resource lies in the current NI43-101 which is (for Santa Barbara South only) 236,100,000 tonnes @ 0.57g/t for 4,330,000oz indicated and 102,000,000 tonnes " 0.5g/t for 1,600,000 inferred.

The reminder of the current NI43-101 is spread over the "Condor Project" at Soledad, Los Cuyes and Enma but all of the copper resource reported in the current NI43-101 is held at El Hito but that is all in the inferred category.

Santa Barbara is around 5kms away from El Hito and over 15kms away from all the other areas included in the current NI43-101.

Now, it is out of the question that production at all the locations will take place due to limited exploration and future costs therefore it is obvious that Santa Barbara is the most likely candidate should any production take place. Afterall, this is where the current drill program is taking place albeit the Santa Barbara North Zone is the focus.

Therefore look at the area in question where most of the EGX exploration has taken place, Santa Barbara and look at the intersection depths on page 64 and 65 of the most recent NI43-101 and you will see very minimal AU g/t at shallow depths but most intersections at depths well over 300mts and even as deep as between 500 and 710mtrs.

As you suggested, open pit for the shallow intersections then underground but would this be viable considering the shallow intersectionas are low grade?

The PEA will reveal more.

You also mention leaching process but will the locals of nearby Pachicutza, Buena Fe, Chiches, San Roque, El Panqui or the nearby Los Hachales Nature Reserve be happy with this?

I know there has been many demonstrations in Ecuador involving other miners proposing this method.

As I say, the PEA will reveal much more.

Have you heard of Dynasty Metals and Mining. These operate in Ecuador with high grades, therefore not comparable, and I have a position here.

https://www.dynastymining.com/index.php

Another high grade deposit in Ecuador, Loma Larga, is held by INV Metals. Again, not comparable but interesting reading.

https://www.invmetals.com/s/Home.asp

There are many more but sorry I am really pushed for time right now.

Will discuss more later.

[korpfu]

Thanks, I have used Santa Barbara to crunch some basic numbers.  I agree the biggest resource they have is where the development will take place (if ever).  Again, I have assumed the indicated and inferred as proven.  The depth is concerning.  Sinking shaft is never cheap.  There are too many unknowns to do any real number crunching.  You are right, there are many

[TheMerlion]

Very sensible and factual. I am happy with my 71% profit and I would advise you to not get too greedy with your exit price. The chances of developing a mine and sustaining profitable production are virtually nil like many of the juniors in the industry. In the lucky cases the majors come to the rescue but with resources such as this there are thousands of them which will never be produced.