Obviously the remoteness and topography has not changed. What has changed is the mine plan.
To me it made sense when we were talking about a low strip mine in an accessible-by-land-vehicles large low valley (Korbel) which required a coarse crush and no further processing. The plan was to use the natural topography to create heap leaches (the smaller valleys draining into Korbel valley). This type of operation would require very little energy and could easily be done without the need for expensive infrastructure or large crews. This is the type of operation that has been proven to work in the nearest analogue mines. Easy, cheap, proven cashflow opportunity. This is honestly what originally attracted me to the company several years ago.
Where I started to become concerned was when they started talking about ore sorting and crushing for floatation. This is a very different type of operation, with very different energy, maintenance, and equipment needs. Suddenly, the remoteness and elevation plays a much larger factor.
On top of this we are now seeing what appears to be a shift in focus to RPM, which is no longer in a relatively easy to access valley. It is on top of steep rugged Alaskan mountain tops.
If someone at Nova would actually give a logical reason why heap leach was suddenly abandoned, and why potentially Korbel looks to be getting put on the bench, I'm all ears. When I've spoke to the company via email in the past, i was not satisficed with their explanations. They felt like convenient excuses to me.
Common sense for a company like this would be to focus 100% on fast tracking some kind of inexpensive operation in the easiest to access place, then use that cashflow to fund expansion into places like RPM. This used to be the story Chris would spin. I liked that story. At current cash burn rates, we could be looking at close to 100% (maybe more...) dilution before we even get a slight wiff of cashflow.
NVA Price at posting:
84.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)