Ann: Bibiani Feasibility Study Completed-RSG.AX, page-45

torpedo

your bibiani deferrment thinking doesnt appear to make sense - otherwise why rush to have the dfs to be ready this half. they already had a scoping study and the dfs is hardly persuasive

only reason I can see is they thought ravenswood was going to be done - but higher gold price saved it. reopning the old open cut was tlaked abotu back when bibiani revised FS was made a priority - so it doesnt sound like there's some innovative mining solution at play.

but just hard to see how Bibiani would be thought of as a lower gold price risk prospect.

as to Mali's 20% income from project continuing to be reallocated back to RSG to cover outstanding capex costs - this is the first I have heard of that.

havent seen it referenced in the investor PPTs Ive read - would be a major oversight on RSG's part if thats correct.

does uimply though that rsg woudl then be on hook for 100% of Syama u/g capex - but be able to draw on 100% of cashflow and bullion to meet cost

As for u/g you have miscontrued the topic - we're looking for pointers to what it costs in 'pre-strip capex' so to speak - to take an o/c mine u/g.

the entire conversation is about cash calls dur to lumpy capital demands - not normalised or lt FCF