It will be an interesting read when it hits the desk no doubt .
Among other things it will be of great interest to read what impact the "simplified" approach has on pit shell volumes , strip ratios , plant design , yield , CAPEX , OPEX , etc., etc., etc.
While the previous approach targeting selective multiple high grade pits and a fast track construction methodology was seen by a few as "high risk" , I for one hope that the "standard" approach stacks up economically with what maybe a higher strip ratio and lower yield over a longer period of LOM. Anyone expecting higher yields I think should temper those thoughts given the larger pit design.
They do have an increased resource base (presumably) after the additional drilling and a current 6 year high on the POG as a base point but there will be trade offs no doubt imo.
I keep going back to the IRON TRIANGLE of project management , the sides of which are Time , Scope and Cost with the fundamental core being Quality. You cannot change one side without affecting the other two and therefore the core .
The Scope of the project was changed 15 months ago (approx). to improve the quality we were led to believe.
Hence the Timeline , Cost and Quality will significantly change. Those 15 months (+ some) have come at a cost and it remains to be seen if that cost is warranted .
They were worried about a significant cost overrun yet we have since had 2 CR's to the tune of $8M+ and at this point not a lot to show for it.
I sincerely hope that PFS - Mk.2 justifies their actions.
Hopefully looking forward to a much more positive 12 to 18 months ahead for everyone's benefit , not just a few !
My observations and opinion only , dyor .
Expand
