RE: some confusion i believe21 Nov 2020 17:33
Hi Sparticus,
I don't think that is strictly correct as we are (I assume still are) working to a 15 year mine plan with 6m ore tonnes per year.
I think it is more about the positive results changing the mine plan. For example in the PFS, years 13, 14 and 15 included inferred rather than indicated. The 2018 results will not actually increase the 6m ore tonnes but it should show all indicated rather than inferred. Likewise, years 4-10 UG rather than OP. The 2018 results should, as you say, optimise the (cheaper) OP mine rather than have to use the (more expensive) UG. This, as I understand, is critical as it throws off more profit in the early (first 10?) when we pay lower taxes. Obviously, the mine plan will be rescheduled to get the more profitable (higher grade, OP, lower cost) stuff out first...
Obviously, there is the chance that the mine plan could be extended to more than 15 years but I seem to remember that Red Lee stated that this would have a minimal effect on NPV due to the discounting factor over such a long period.
That is my simple understanding, BB2.