1 midas gold the golden meadows project
play

1 MIDAS GOLD & THE GOLDEN MEADOWS PROJECT Ticks a lot of boxes - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 MIDAS GOLD & THE GOLDEN MEADOWS PROJECT Ticks a lot of boxes Experienced Leadership Lowest quartile cash costs Management & board have done it before US$331/oz for first 8 years, US$425/oz life-of-mine (net of by-products)


  1. 1

  2. MIDAS GOLD & THE GOLDEN MEADOWS PROJECT Ticks a lot of boxes  Experienced Leadership  Lowest quartile cash costs • Management & board have done it before • US$331/oz for first 8 years, US$425/oz life-of-mine (net of by-products) (1,2)  Strong supporters  Modest capital intensity • Franco-Nevada & Teck Resources • US$240/oz life-of-mine production (1,2)  Low jurisdictional risk  Low all-in sustaining costs Past • Idaho, USA – a stable mining jurisdiction Producing • $US510/oz (cash cost + royalties + sustaining  Brownfields site Brownfields Capex) (1,2) • Potential restoration of extensive prior disturbance Site  Robust Economics  Size • $1.5 billion NPV at $1,400 gold, 27% IRR (both Exploration • Indicated 4.2 million oz and Inferred 2.9 million oz after tax) at 5% discount rate (1,2) Upside of gold  Strategic by-products  Superior grade • Antimony +/- tungsten with production proven • 1.65g/t gold, plus antimony and silver metallurgy  Scale (1)  Significant upside opportunities Lowest • 390,000 oz gold/year for first 8 years & 348,000 oz • Optimization of PEA economics Quartile gold/year life-of-mine • All deposits open to expansion Costs • 4.9 million oz gold produced over 14 year mine-life • Multiple exploration prospects 3 (1) The economic assessment in the PEA is preliminary in nature and uses inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves, and there is no certainty that this PEA will be realized. The inferred mineral resource used in the economic analysis represents 37% of the total life-tonnes considered. (2) See non-IFRS measures at conclusion

  3. EXPERIENCED LEADERSHIP We’ve done it before Peter Nixon Chair Stephen Quin President & CEO • Ex-Goepel, director of Dundee Precious Metals • Ex-COO Capstone, ex-CEO Sherwood Copper Fred Earnest Bob Barnes COO • • CEO of Vista Gold, ex-Dayton, Pacific Rim Ex-VP Ops Capstone, Pan American, Wharf Jerry Korpan Darren Morgans CFO • Ex-Yorkton, director of B2 Gold, ex-Bema Gold • Ex-Terrane, Placer Dome, MIM and PWC Wayne Hubert Anne Labelle VP Legal & Sustainability • Ex-CEO of Andean, ex-VP Meridian Gold • Ex-Capstone, Sherwood, Miramar Stephen Quin CEO John Meyer VP Development • • Ex-Capstone, Sherwood, Miramar & Northern Orion Ex-Kinross, Aurelian, Barrick Mike Richings Richard Moses Field Operations Manager • Chair Vista Gold, ex-Allied Nevada & Lac Minerals • Ex-Livengood, Pebble, Donlin Creek, Bakyrchik John Wakeford Chris Dail Exploration Manager • Ex-Sabina, Miramar, Hemlo & Battle Mountain • Ex-Cominco, Asarco, Kennecott, Piedmont Don Young Rocky Chase Permitting Manager • Ex-KPMG, Placer Dome, director of Dundee Precious • Ex-Barrick, Ex-Hecla, Stibnite district experience Rick Richins Regulatory Consultant • Ex-Coeur, several EIS permitting US mines 4

  4. STRONG SUPPORTERS Endorsement of Major Mining Companies - World’s largest royalty company • US$15M Royalty transaction • $14.65m paid to Midas Gold in exchange for a 1.7% gold only NSR • Midas Gold can buy back 1/3 rd of the royalty for $9m within 3 years • $0.35m received for 2 million warrants at $1.23 per share • Conversion required if Midas Gold trades over $3.23 for 30 days – Canada’s largest diversified mining company • C$9.8M Equity placement • 9.9% ownership in Midas Gold • Can participate in future financings • No warrants 5

  5. LOW JURISDICTIONAL RISK Golden Meadows located in low risk, mining friendly Idaho Lucky Friday Mine Hecla Mining Company Ag-Pb-Zn Coeur d’Alene Sunshine Mine Sunshine Silver Mines Ag Golden Meadows Project Midas Gold Au-Sb Idaho Cobalt Project Formation Metals Co-Cu Thompson Creek Mine Cascade Thompson Creek Mining Mo Maplecroft identifies and monitors the key issues affecting the investment climates of 197 countries. The Atlas analyses yearly trends relating to dynamic risks, which reflect change over a short period of time, including governance, political violence, the BOISE Phosphate District macroeconomic environment, and included this year for the first Agrium, Monsanto, time, resource nationalism. It also includes structural risks which Simplot, Stonegate reflect change over a longer timeframe, including economic IDAHO diversification, resource security, infrastructure quality, the resilience of society to challenges, and the risk of complicity in human rights violations committed by regimes and business partners. 6

  6. PAST PRODUCING BROWNFIELDS SITE Potential redevelopment, concurrent reclamation and restoration of Stibnite area actively mined 1928-97 Present Day – Tailings & Waste Disposal Area Project area has extensive history of mining • Brownfields site, heavily disturbed • Good access with local infrastructure and workforce • Opportunity for environmental win with potential site restoration 1950s – Mill & Smelter at Hangar Flats Present day – Yellow Pine pit 7

  7. MULTI-MILLION OUNCE DEPOSIT Large, high grade, open pit mineral resources Golden Meadows 35km of new drilling to be incorporated into Inferred new resource Indicated 2.90 Moz 4.20 Moz estimates during 1.65 g/t Q3/13 Hangar Flats Yellow Pine Inferred West End 0.39 Moz Indicated 0.93 Moz Inferred Indicated 1.61 g/t 1.90 Moz 1.80 Moz Inferred Indicated 0.61 Moz 1.50 Moz 1.95 g/t * See NI43-101 slide at the back of this presentation for responsibility and disclaimers. Mineral Resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. Mineral resource estimates do not account for mineability, selectivity, mining loss 1.44 g/t and dilution. These mineral resource estimates include inferred mineral resources that are normally considered too speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. There is also no certainty that these inferred mineral resources will be converted to measured and indicated categories through further drilling, or into mineral reserves, once economic considerations are applied. 3 kilometres 8

  8. ROBUST PROJECT 9

  9. PEA HIGHLIGHTS (1) Years 1-8 Life-Of-Mine (14.2 years) Base Case Annual Annual Total Total (At $1,400/oz gold) Average Average Gold (000s oz) 390 3,121 348 4,922 Antimony (M lbs) 9.9 79.3 6.4 90.6 Cash Costs (US$/oz) (2) 331 425 (net of by-products) Initial Capital (US$M) 879 Pre-tax NPV 5% (US$M) 2,136 After-tax NPV 5% (US$M) 1,482 IRR (Pre-tax/After-tax) 33.7% / 27.2% After-tax Payback (years) 3.0 (1) The economic assessment in the PEA is preliminary in nature and uses inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves, and there is no certainty that this PEA will be realized. The inferred mineral resource used in the economic analysis represents 37% of the total life- (2) See non-IFRS measures below tonnes considered. 10 In this presentation, “M” = million, “K” = thousands, all amounts in US$

  10. SUPERIOR GRADE vs. MAJOR PRODUCERS Golden Meadows resource grades vs. major gold producer mineral reserves Yellow Pine* 2.0 1.8 Hangar Flats* 1.6 West End* 1.4 1.2 g/t Gold 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Barrick Newmont Goldcorp Kinross Eldorado IAMGOLD Yamana New Gold 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 * Golden Meadows numbers are mineral resource grades 11 Source: Bank of America Merrill Lynch – North America Precious Metals Weekly

  11. SUPERIOR GRADE vs. N. AMERICAN MINES & PROJECTS Golden Meadows has above average grade for open pit deposits Grade (g/t Au) 3.0 2.4 Golden Meadows average grade 1.65 g/t 2.3 Yellow Pine 1.95 2.0 Hangar Flats 1.8 1.61 West End 1.44 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 - Source: RBC Compilation from Metals Economics Group & public disclosure 12

  12. PRODUCTION SCALE & LOW COSTS Potential for large scale, low cost gold-antimony mine $1,100 PEA PFS $1,000 FS Livengood Mt Henry Recently acquired $900 Yellowknife Net Cash Costs (1) (US$/oz of gold) Size of globe = initial CAPEX North Bullfrog Courageous Lake $800 Mt Todd Esaase Almas Toroparu Detour Goliath Tasiast Bombore $700 Lower Cost Kiaka OJVG Cerro Lindero Maricunga Obaton Sao Jorge Caspiche Goldfield Volcan New Liberty Eagle $600 Springpole Sugar Metates Gold Pantanillo Rainy Blackwater Back River Curraghinalt Karma River Coringa Otijikoto $500 Aurora Angostura Amulsar San Miguel Ollachea GOLDEN MEADOWS Magino $400 LOM Upper Beaver Morelos Brucejack Freegold Mtn GOLDEN MEADOWS Haile Yr 1-8 $300 $200 Tepal $100 Higher Production 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 Annual Production (000s oz of gold) 13 (1) See non-IFRS measures at conclusion. Sources: Haywood Securities & Company Disclosure

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend