I mean jeez it's just massive... 1bn tonnes?

[Hydrogen]

Have you seem this image yet ?

Well it's quite something: She's a bit flat chested - but she's got one hell of a bootie on her The Blue is the breccia pipe plotted from Inventum 3d Model with the South East Crescent highlighted over in red.

Essentially that's the 6.5moz MRE, plotted over the known Breccia pipe . Now, inventum hasn't been updated yet. But we have the data from the new MRE to consider.

That bootie area is around the "Link Zone" / Eastern breccia so we should start to see some of that area go red once the MRE results are in

Now consider the Scale. Bamps has previously suggest 1bn tonnes plus and I thinks now nailed on. Why?

Why? Well - The breccia pipe dimensions are coming out roughly at 650 x 400 x 1800m. What average multiplier would you use across the sulphides, cemented breccia & crackle breccia? I'm allowing 2.7 and the figure comes out damned near enough 1bn tonnes.

Now consider the grade. This image is from the latest 8.4Moz MRE - BUT just Look how much converted yellow to blue cemented breccia there is now in this latest slice - from the new MRE - IMO Around 70-75% and maybe 80%

So much volume has now been converted from the low grade yellow crackle breccia ( which was marginal at 0.2g/t ) to this blue cemented (highly economic for bulk underground at around 1-1.5g/t) it’s almost right through the deposit now. ( so much of that used to be yellow).

And this slice is from 250m deep into the deposit - (ie it's even better above - principally a function of the drilling density - above)

Eyes on the prize folks... 800mt to 1bn tonnes around 1 to 1.5 g/t puts up there with the best in the world.

Not advice - just an opinion.

[Hydrogen]

Then consider this - the biggest mines in the world

I reckon Havieron is at least 1/2 way up on that list, eventually, and probably pretty similar to Detour Lake or even Nevada gold Mines …

[ManFromUruguay]

Great post Hydro.

Please help me out....what would 1Bn tonnes at 1 g/t work out at for GGP on our 30% before costs ?

Cheers fella
MFU

[Hydrogen]

Hi MFU -

It’s a tough question - but if you consider that first it's simply way out into the future,... so it obviously gets tricky to anticipate value 20 years ahead and it should be discounted according. Also gold may be $50,000/oz or copper may be $20,000 a tonne, if the world returns to some gold standard or whatever.

Also Gold mines are inherently depleting assets they lose value over time (unless you add reserves). This is what will happen with Havieron.

You can run various rudimentary scenarios; most depend on millions of tonnes of production volume v grade and recovery = oz equivalent product.

As a guide to valuing this - 1st You could consider the value of similar mines ( i have with Regis/Tropicana) where i concluded at least $1.2bn to $1.7bn based on a similar production profile - Tropicana was producing 300-koz and regis bought 30% - but it doesn't have a bulk caving opportunity and it’s an aging asset that’s produced for 15 odd years.

As i have perviously posted - Adding on a suitable Regis type 'premium' Hav could fetch upwards of US $1.4bn to $1.836bn based on 30% of the higher grade Sulphide SLOS mine alone (NB - it would have to be a 'proven' mine operating good volumes) That values the SLOS, but apportions absolutely nothing to the huge future bulk caving opportunity, in these lower grade breccias which are looking decidedly more and more economic.

You could perhaps take 1b tonnes and broadly convert to ounces equivalent; so 1,000,000,000 x 1g/t /31 (grammes per oz) = gives you 31moz equivalent say of which in reality, roughly 60% may be economically recovered. Thats in essence 18moz equiv. Reserves - which at today's money is $2040/oz which is $36bn worth of recoverable metal. Problem is This is misleading becuase yo cannot produce 18moz immediately - it takes 25 years. You also need to take account of mine build capex and sustaining capex and mining costs -

18moz Reserves in a large proven producing mine in Australia have been valued at $500-850/oz so thats's $9-15bn on a 100% bases or $3-5bn on a 30% basis for the bulk cave.

Another Method might be ( Total stab in the dark here) : lets apportion $5-6bn US in capex for two block caves and associated processing plant or transport to telfer over 17 and 15 years of production. Now If you think about it that might be quite low, becuase NCM would allocate $200m to developing a new cutback at Telfer domes but that would then they can produce 400koz for 2-3 years so its an ongoing caps with open pits. Underground bulk would be much better economics so long as the havieron ore body is amenable to caving. But you can see 6bn in capex leaves that $30bn in recovered metal and our share of that would $10bn. This doesn't not included the actual mining costs - which are significant - and we don't know what the AISC of a Hav block cave will be yet...

6bn shares in issue and $1.5bn for the SLOS and $2bn for the bulk cave values GGP at $3.5bn = 58c or 46p per share fully diluted.

Alternatively Perhaps you could stretch to include mining costs around $300-350/oz or less (so 18moz x 0.3 = 5.4moz net for ggp's 30%) so cost to produce that = 5.4moz x $350/oz bulk caving AISC cost = $1.9bn over the life of mine so that's $10bn gross revenue - 1.9bn mining costs $8bn in future earnings before gov royalties and 30% tax on profits.

All the numbers should be discounted by at least 10%.

obviously what this doesn't specify is just how much leverage that level of income can offer to invest in other assets or develop anything else we discovered in the vicinity of Havieron. Remember Newcrest was a single asset company - just Telfer - back in the early 90s.

Hope that helps - not financial advice and just my opinion.

[ManFromUruguay]

Some really interesting thoughts Hydro many thanks!

[Hydrogen]

And look at this... Northern Star 2nd best large cap mining performer over 10 years... nice.

[droverman]

Hi H2,
you forgot to multiply by the SG which is about 2.8 to 3.1 so 1000000000 X SG (2.8) X 0.8g/t / 31 do the maths i am very conservative, i make it a lot and what i calculated a long time ago so 72,258,064 million oz
with an sg of 3 and 1g/t equivalent we get even more then 96 million oz that makes it the largest deposit in the world since, well i don't know when? DM

[Bamps21]

You don’t multiply tonnage x specific gravity that’s already been done.
You multiply cubic metre x specific gravity to give tonnage

[droverman]

Correct Bamps, getting carried away a bit, all the same its still huge like the find in Black Hills in USA in the 18 hundreds. They moved the Indians off their land, end result death of Custer. Land grab for gold, hope nobody does the same to us at GGP. Cheers Bamps. DM

[droverman]

Correct Bamps, getting carried away a bit, all the same its still huge like the find in Black Hills in USA in the 18 hundreds. They moved the Indians off their land, end result death of Custer. Land grab for gold, hope nobody does the same to us at GGP. Cheers Bamps. Still prefer 1,000,000,000 cubes instead, could bet that big over time.

[Bamps21]

Hi Droverman
Yes you did get carried away
If you look in my thread about the graphics I’ve posted the 0.5g/t shell this takes in about 50-60% of the breccia pipe, this relates to about 5-600m tons.
The rest needs fan drilling to prove up, right at this minute it would probably be in a 0.1g/t shell. A 0.1g/t shell is more than likely a lot bigger than this breccia pipe, this can be seen on some of the plans perhaps double the size of the pipe at the moment. There’s a big but though is it economical at these depths?
Minyari shells are nearly all based on 0.1 shell.
The OPVM of 7900 is indicating an area of around 16% that is double the area of the sulphides, if you use that figure over the whole breccia pipe the average grade reduces to 0.52g/t.
All my calcs I’ve based it on 0.75g/t but on the top 900m, I can only see somewhere of 23-26m oz down to 1300m

[ManFromUruguay]

Hi Bamps
For someone like me trying to understand may I ask are you hinting that it is possible we could be looking in total at between 23 and 26m ozs for the whole Hav deposit but only after a significant amount of fan drilling etc ?

Would this be conservative/realistic/a tad ambitious?

Best
MFU

[Bamps21]

Hi MFU
With what we have at the moment 15moz will come.
With fan drilling all the way down 23moz will come in time.
With most mines waste/dilution can take a % out of that the average is around 15%, at Havieron their quoting 6%.
Also recovery factors are hanging around the high 80s for both copper and gold that’s unusual to have both that high..
I would like to say 23m is conservative but a lot of unknowns-
Grades going into the processor are normally higher than forecast.
Recovery rates may increase with experience of dealing with the ore.
Open at depth
Boundaries at depth are not defined
High grade ore suspected at depth
Other ores adding to the aueq factor

[ManFromUruguay]

You're a gent Bamps

Best
MFU

[Hydrogen]

Bit random - but 11 June 2020 - A Blast from the Past:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0CXUkQXyWE

Best New Results :

· HAD057W2: 58m @ 6.2g/t Au, 0.49% Cu from 588m, including

· 10.1m @ 20g/t Au, 0.79% Cu from 631.9m

· HAD059: 109m @ 6.3g/t Au, 0.71% Cu from 668m, including

· 4m @ 78g/t Au, 1.2% Cu from 718m

· HAD059W2: 166m @ 2.8g/t Au, 0.23% Cu from 794m, including

· 29m @ 12g/t Au, 0.19% Cu from 912m

· HAD062: 132.2m @ 4.3g/t Au, 0.49% Cu from 557.8m, including

· 4.5m @ 66g/t Au, 2.6% Cu from 573.5m

· HAD063: 101m @ 4.6g/t Au, 0.36% Cu from 636m, including

· 26.9m @ 16g/t Au, 1.0% Cu from 640.1m

· HAD066 : 82.1m @ 2.4 g/t Au, 0.08% Cu from 557.6m, including

· 1.5m @ 86g/t Au, 0.87% Cu from 586.5m

· HAD071: 45.3m @ 8.9g/t Au, 0.63% Cu from 588.7m, including

· 16.9m @ 20g/t Au, 1.2% Cu from 598.2m

[Hydrogen]

Bit random - A Blast from the Past: We should collate the Best of Havieron holes

How about 11 June 2020 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0CXUkQXyWE

Best New Results :

· HAD057W2: 58m @ 6.2g/t Au, 0.49% Cu from 588m, including

· 10.1m @ 20g/t Au, 0.79% Cu from 631.9m

· HAD059: 109m @ 6.3g/t Au, 0.71% Cu from 668m, including

· 4m @ 78g/t Au, 1.2% Cu from 718m

· HAD059W2: 166m @ 2.8g/t Au, 0.23% Cu from 794m, including

· 29m @ 12g/t Au, 0.19% Cu from 912m

· HAD062: 132.2m @ 4.3g/t Au, 0.49% Cu from 557.8m, including

· 4.5m @ 66g/t Au, 2.6% Cu from 573.5m

· HAD063: 101m @ 4.6g/t Au, 0.36% Cu from 636m, including

· 26.9m @ 16g/t Au, 1.0% Cu from 640.1m

· HAD066 : 82.1m @ 2.4 g/t Au, 0.08% Cu from 557.6m, including

· 1.5m @ 86g/t Au, 0.87% Cu from 586.5m

· HAD071: 45.3m @ 8.9g/t Au, 0.63% Cu from 588.7m, including

· 16.9m @ 20g/t Au, 1.2% Cu from 598.2m

[strudel]

To my mind, the 29th Oct 2020 report and HAD084 is as legendary as HAD005.

"New Eastern Breccia Zone:
A potential new fourth target area, the “Eastern Breccia”, has
been identified by growth drilling from two drill holes, including 342.2m @ 2.0g/t Au, 0.11%
Cu from 1536.8m (HAD084). Encouragingly, the new Eastern Breccia highlights the potential
for a new region of breccia development not previously recognised and extends
mineralisation externally to the ovoid-shaped Crescent sulphide zone."

Best use of the word "encouragingly" in an RNS ever.