RE: Another Post on X by OMI11 Feb 2026 08:41
‘Perhaps a good moment for a Mining Economics for Dummies lesson - expanding on a tweet a few weeks back.
The are two parts to any mining economics equation - what it cost per tonne or ounce, or pound to produce a bit of metal, and perhaps more importantly, what it costs to build the mine and plant that allows that production to happen. Opex and Capex - the two things are intimately intertwined and must never be assessed in isolation.
There are no lack of companies that have on paper, quite decent projects. Couple of million ounces, a couple of grams per tonne - the sorts of project that were they in operation now, would be doing very well. But of course they aren’t in operation now, and that’s the catch. In the end, someone has to stump up the cash to build a mine, and this is where it gets tricky.
A couple of friendly fund managers explained the dilemma to us.
At one end we have the huge tier 1 projects that are clearly destined to be taken over by the majors. Amazing things, but maybe there are half a dozen of these in the world right now, and that’s being generous. Also, we have tier 2 projects that are owned by producing miners who can fund development from their own internal cash flow.
Then at the other end, we have sweet little things like Pepas that are cheap and cheerful to build, and just offer the potential to make a lot of money very fast.
These two end members are fine.
But then in the middle, there are the problem children. Projects that are maybe 8-10 years from production and would require 5-10x the market cap of the company to build.
This is where it gets hard.
Firstly, where is the money going to come from and how does this impact on dilution - quite a lot normally as debt is increasingly hard to find.
Secondly, that far out, the gold price used in analysis would be probably half of current spot, say $2500. This is just being prudent. But also, the funders would have to factor in say 5% cost inflation each year, which compounded over 8 years is basically 50%.
And so we have gold price at half current spot, with costs 50% higher!!!
On paper then, most of the gold projects on the market now, are not actually economic - on paper!! Now of course if the gold price in 8 year’s time is still $5000 an ounce, then we all wonder why they weren’t built, but that isn’t the point. The point is can they be funded now!
The problem then, is not lack of good projects (there are multitudes that make sense at current spot) but the lack of funding to build them.
We have no answer to this quandary, other than what we have done - to produce a project that avoids all of these issues - that we can fund, we can build and is immune to the gold price.
It’s not sexy, it’s just business.’