1) I'm replying to you, responding to the points you made, nothing personal just poor manners to use third person pronouns. I usually check to see who is upvoting the childish flames at me and admit being surprised to see your always one of them. Some might say that is a bit personal, certainly I always tried to steer you in the right direction with some respect. Regards your followers, this thread had hardly any followers before you turned up with a red heart, please pardon my presumption. Certainly 16 readers liked the post comparing Corridor's 7.5% HM LOM mine grade against BSE Toliara's 6.1% LOM HM grade. People might like to read it but it's unsupported and misleading.
2) You are correct I did not read the leapfrog table properly, multiply by 1.7 for tonnes (as per IHG Robbins MRE). Regardless, my points stand that high grades >6% are deep and figures represent accumulation of HG ore from all over each deposit not from surface in a continuous optimised pit shell. Infill drilling will tighten up the boundary between high and low grade holes but not materially add to the high grade tonnage considering the large bulk mining resource required.
3) The Tolliara DFS mining reserve represents the tonnes and grade in optimised pit shells from surface, not cherry picked resource at some cut-off. That Grade-Tonnage Curve you showed from KM isn;t reality, it's a mathematical addition of all the tiny block model cells above each cut-off grade from regardless of depth or location or relationship to surrounding cells. In some high grade gold deposits one might pick out the small HG pockets of ore and carry some huge waste strip ratio but not in min sands. Most of the KM model cells above 7.5% HM will have to be mined with all the low grade cells on-top and all the lower grade cells to the sides inside a very low (or no) strip pit. The oblique MRE model section diagram shows this problem clearly.
4) Tolliara has 3.5 years of 9.4% HM is an undeniable fact (2-4.5 incl). Not 9.4% Hm in deep or wide spread holes, ~44Mt average from surface inside a single pit. Stage 2 has 10 years @ 7.1% HM inside pits. Years 1 and 5 will admittedly be slightly lower grade as lower grade ore is used while ramping and tweaking new plant into nameplate capacity. From year 15 onwards the grade drops off obviously, averaging 5.4% HM for the next 20 years. Depending on what happens with the west-deeps exploration BSE will either increase the front end to keep production up at 1.8Mt of HMC to the dry plant or expand the front end to match (beyond this discussion). What is critical for capex payback and NPV is high grades in early years which Tolliara has.
5) You have cherry picked the only hole couple of holes with 7.5% from surface at Corridor I can remember. Let's see if the lab agrees with the visuals, still might not be any holes >7.5% HM from surface? Yes, they went back and infill drilled the best part of KM (the best deposit) and hit good and probably better mineral than the MRE drilling last year. As per the plan from that infill drilling release, they have two high grade trends they focussed within a lower grade envelope. As per the figure, >6%HM in white, >4%HM in black dashed line. There is plenty of 5%HM from surface, >7.5%HM at depth, just not a lot of holes from surface to the HG at depth that are >6.5% HM. A few holes around 7%HM do not make an mining resource comparable to Toliara's DFS of 44Mt @~ 9.4% or even 250Mt @ 7.1% Hm for the first 10 years of Stage 2.
Setting up peoples expectations for 7.5% HM for MRQ's pending SS is wrong, comparing Toliara's 6.1% 38 year LOM average to MRQ at 7.5% is terribly misleading. So misleading it makes me wonder...
6) Recoveries, so much going on including slimes levels, HM size distrib'n, THM grade etc. Bottom line is that IHG Robbins are no mugs and I see no reason to increase recoveries from the lab to a 20Mtpa plant. Recoveries may be better in the KM area of HG they are obviously focussed on for the SS, probably marginally better with IHG tweaking the process from knowledge gained in phase 1 met work. There is no basis at all for comping Corridor recoveries to STA or BSE given markedly different deposits. The best pointer to Corridor recoveries are IHG Robbins lab derived recoveries on Corridor ore, and will be until proven otherwise.
7) I absolutely would incorporate the Ti-mag into the SS whether it's realistic or not... needs every cent of value per tonne it can get imo.
8) Agreed, CR late this year, hopefully into the traditional Xmas rally
"Anything less than 10% MC/NPV ratio usually warrants an investment from me and then i'll see how it develops and free-carry the initial capital."... fair enough approach in general, i love a bargain too, but sometimes an 'asset' is really just a liability which needs to be continually fed just keeping the lights on. IMO once market decides a project isn't going to get developed or JV'd this side of the second coming, sooner or later it's back to shell value as all the bargain traders head for the exit into no bid. Percentage of in-ground or NPV value means very little if the market can never see it being monetised. Only time will tell on that score, could be a long way off, in the mean time good luck trading your way to free carried.
(20min delay)