looks good punters, page-36

mrblu, AlbertE

My back of the envelope calculations were meant to determine with conservative assumptions whether the economics justified taking the project to prefeasibility study level or not,they are not a fully fledged financial model intended at developing a valuation for the project.

Yes, the US$1 billion CAPEX is a bit steep for a 45,000 tpd plant. Hudbay is spending US$1.5 billion at Constancia which has a 80,000 tpd plant, and yes a operating margin of $2500 is a bit low for a bulk mining/conventional flotation operation, but I repeat I have used conservative assumptions in my back of the envelope calculations, and have not factored in the value of the underground operations.

I have since added in corporate tax calculations and that would make a copper only project slightly NPV negative (again with conservative assumptions). Once credits for Moly are added in the IRR jumps to 20% as shown below:

Remember, they are back of the enevelope calcs so no need to tear them down.

Anyway, clearly this is project worth taking to prefeasibility to get more accurate estimates of value and to de-risk.

Snicket,

I have noted your comments on no Canadian listing. Thats good, but issuing the resource statement in compliance with NI 43-101 must be for a reason, maybe their sseking to attract a Canadian partner... we will find out.

2liveinhope,

Had a quick look at MGO, first pass looks good, their open pit would be larger with higher grade and gold credits, seems better than MNC other than it being located in PNG. Will do a bit more due diligence and might join you there as a shareholder.

jhu,

HCH (I do hold) is somewhat different to MNC as it is higher grade, is closer to surface and is in a way a brownfield site. It already has mining companies in its registry. The similarites with MNC are in location (the Andes) and perhaps stage of development.

Alejandro
-----------
Do your own research, this is not investment advice
BDR, HCH, MNC