Scoping Study is Wrong

If you stare at a spreadsheet long enough you go mad. And then you start seeing numbers that convince you that you are.

If you run the 1 May 2015 Cinovec Scoping Study you see the numbers don't add up based upon the data provided.

The Study claims the use of Indicated Resources so we can assume they are referring to the grades declared. The problem is, those grades do not produce the numbers of the Study.

Tin Production
Claimed 4,200tpa. Actual 2,000,000*0.23*0.8 = 3,680tpa

Tungsten Production
Claimed 800tpa. Actual 2,000,000*.03*0.7 = 318tpa
(Assumptions claim 53% recovery. Summary claims 70% recovery)

Lithium Carbonate Production
Claimed 19,500tpa. Actual 2,000,000*0.21*0.8*(O to CO) 2.473 = 7,270tpa

Operating Costs
Claimed $125m pa. Actual 2,000,000 *(27.04+11.24+39.14) = $155m pa

Revenue
Claimed $233m, which is close enough for their claimed production rates. Actual production rates produce revenue of $140m.

Anybody want to prove the numbers work? You need to find 14% more tin, 152% more tungsten, and 168% more lithium. And $30m pa in cost savings.

I need a stong cup of tea and a lie down.