latest news-talk with alistair cowden by c-tv, page-17

I think you have to HAVE a profit first, before you can give guidance on it.

JG,

They spend more money on consultants and drilling the known than any miner in history.

Well, no - the latter would be Cudeco, hands down! They spent 5 years drilling a deposit for no material increase in JORC, and have been known to drill on a spacing of a couple of metres!

The Finland drilling IMO is a good investment and the Roseby exploration is definitely needed - it's clearly not an attractive enough asset by itself and the area is underexplored. Things like Turkey Creek need to be proved up to JORC to get the economy of scale up.

I would like to see it done as conservatively as possible at this stage, though.

Also I do think that for a relatively small cost, a revision of the Roseby DFS is critical as well - it was done at the top of the market and ridiculously overpriced. $1.73 C1 for what was supposed to be a low-cost open-cut mine. If they want to get ANY interest at all for Roseby they need to revise that report.

I don't know who TOU'd SRCAG and got him suspended but I really wish they hadn't - it's good to get any news from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

cusox,

Question: Do additional drilling costs and subsequent mine developing costs justify the present value in additional revenue at the end of the current mine life?

Normally finding costs are quite low per lb of copper. I would think that given the relatively high grades, the relatively short mine life and the relatively cheap drilling costs (from within the decline), the drilling costs probably will be quite easily justified. Especially if you consider the capex development to date to be sunk costs, which they are.