here are my notes from the conference call, page-6

So now that the traders and rampers have left do the long termers want to actually discuss the PFS and conference call?

I thought Paul Adams Q to LJ re opex (and LJs response) particularly interesting: Paul enquired whether opex might not be lowered by using a higher ppm cut off level in estimation, with the expectation that any lower resource would be more than made up over time with further drilling/exploration. LJs response was that was exactly the 'kind of thing' BMN would be looking at when trying to extract costs in the leadup to the DFS. In fact he reiterated this cost reduction focus in both the presentation and on a number of answers in the Q&A. They left open a number of avenues to do this and said they would be looking for 'as much as they could get' when it came to cost reductions - whether that was '5% or 30%'.

LJ also mentioned his background in similar (low grade, large volume) mines and stressed that he had picked his management team largely around their experience in getting these types of projects into production. I thought it very interesting that on a targeted strip ratio of 3.5:1 BMN has allowed 'the vast majority of its mining capex' ($41m) plus $22-23/lb opex for pre-grade enhancement (ie before milling, leaching etc - where grade really starts to come into play). EXT (with their much vaunted $23.60/lb opex estimate) included only $12.70/lb for opex and no separate provision for initial capital costs. When you consider they have an inferior 5:1 strip ratio you do begin to wonderif they are being too ambitious or perhaps BMN have allowed themselves a lot of wiggle room? The more I think about it the more I feel that the life of mine $41/opex is on the high side of the +/- 25% standard variance for a PFS and we are far more likely to see it drop rather than rise as details get tightened up over 2010.