Hey JSS.
The companies you chose off a good spread, to start discussing AIC.
Let me pile up all the numbers, then at least you can cross check them for yourself.
WGX - (to be honest, WGX is usually provides less clarity than others stocks on exactly what their non-sustaining capex actually relates to...., plus they report on gold sold, not produced, which basically no other company does (I am a very cynical person)) Though ironcally, WGX get very close to actually showing what the AIC, except they decide to leave out one final row in their spreadsheet!
MarchQ produced - 62.5k
AISC was $1135 (but not AIC... the magical word 'sustaining' is removed, and the truth is revealed).
62.5k produced.... but we need to add in the $56.2m spent that is non-sustaining. So another massive $899 spent, per ounce for the quarter. Brining their AIC to $1399 AUD. Their average sale price was $2232, so they made a massive $66 an ounce. But, of course, it is non-sustaining, so it does count, except.... WGX has basically been overspending for many years, on never ending non-sustaining development (which arguably, has to be done, but, then, WGX has never said to the market, btw- our 3 year forecast will see us not actually creating any free cashflow, because its all going back into the business).
Now, we can even look at the DecQ, or Sept Q, and see similar outcomes, although from memory, WGX generated some free cashflow last year.
Next up is GOR (btw - I am going to have to break this post up, as I am time poor!
GOR- A company, I believe that has one of the lowest AIC in Australia as a gold miner (or should have anyway).
MarchQ - produced 33k ounces (net).
AISC $1386 AIC - $1707
Total 'capital costs', i.e, non-sustaining, was $15.3m (or $462 spent per ounce). Again, looked at over the 12 month period, it will be something similar throughout the year.
Interestingly, here is a fairly good explanation regarding non-sustaining capital costs.
GOR has provided very clear explanation regarding their AIC (which as I mentioned, is low compared to most, especially when averaged out over a 12 month period.
Hopefully, this is helping to better clarify what I was getting at. Hopefully I can do the other companies later today.\
Though as you say, WAFs report was definitely the most concise and provides a clear AIC (they are happy too, as it looks damn good!)
