Broker reports, page-13

If you take a deep look into Copler capex, they paid zilch for their POX/oxygen plant and took the cost as opex. Quite an appropriate way of lowering upfront capex, but you then need to recognise that the amortised cost is built into their opex numbers, with opex for the POX circuit then being higher than it could otherwise be. How have the Russians structured their cost? Perhaps A$150M for a small POX circuit may go close.

Agree with you that Argonaut have not used the right Gruyere capex numbers. I don’t know why they’ve now dismissed early stage, low capex production from transitional oxides given its the higher than average gold prices in the near term that will form the bulk of the NPV. DCF models based on average prices is lazy modelling. Most other gold projects now using 5% real discount rate, Argonaut use 8%. 5% is probably more appropriate if TO occurs and a major ends up being the natural owner/developer of this project.