Member Info for Pbow

Jack you know my name and you have seen my Linkedin page. All the companies Ive worked for are listed there.

What mystery? The PFS explains all this about TAM.

The main thing people should be annoyed with is that this wasnt drilled when the PFS came out. Its absolutely disgraceful that it didnt happen.

It drives me mad the ineptitude of the company and people arguing things they dont understand. Ive worked in Construction for over 20 years on big projects (up to 3.3 billion USD) in the commercial / cost control department. There are basically two things I know a lot about. Man City and construction costs - particularly in civil engineering type projects.

If TAM isnt viable it will not provide cheaper construction materials than borrow pits on site. Its COMMON SENSE!!!!!!!!

Why add transport costs to the excavation cost?

Cash if you read the PFS it says more drilling is required at TAM to confirm viability. They are doing that drilling now. Until that drilling is completed we dont know that TAM is viable

All from the PFS.....

26.4.1 Exploration

Minor in-fill drilling works will be undertaken to investigate the Tandayama-America deposit. The budget for the exploration works is $5 million.

Parambas TSF

Embankment construction material would be sourced from borrow pits, spillway excavations, excavation for the process plant construction, excavation for the portals and from underground development waste. This option has poor embankment to storage efficiency (i.e., large embankment volumes) and therefore its economics are improved if the Tandayama Americana open pit is developed which would provide lower cost construction materials. Further design work is planned for this TSF option as the viability of the Tandayama Americana open pit Is assessed.

Cachaco TSF

Embankment construction material would be sourced from borrow pits and spillway excavations. This option has poor embankment to storage efficiency (i.e., large embankment volumes) and therefore its economics are improved if the Tandayama Americana open pit is developed which would provide lower cost construction materials. Further design work is planned for this TSF option as the viability of the Tandayama Americana open pit is assessed.

Again construction doesnt work like that. They would use borrow pits at the site of the TSF.

In construction you always do the cheapest option!!!

Jack no one knows if it is viable which is why they are drilling it now....... So im not here to tell you its not viable as I simply dont know.

If its not - and they decide to go ahead with the TSF in one of the locations that the PFS says only works if viable they will do borrow pits on site (almost certain on that). Why would you dig it up and transport it. It would be nuts.

Rodney there will be cheaper sources of rock than drilling TAM when its not a viable prospect.

No worries mate - mine are bad too but my PA is good.

This, according to Vargas, alters the operation plans of the firms.

Chamber of Mining of Ecuador asks to suspend the mining fee

The mining fee will be paid on a biannual basis in July and January for medium, large mining and marketing licences. For small mining, it is only one payment per year.

However, as the rate is in force just a month ago, this first payment (in July and January) will be proportional. In July, the medium and large mining company will cancel one twelfth of everything they have to pay for this year, said Javier Subía, deputy minister of Minas, last Wednesday.

Meanwhile, in January 2026, small mining will pay for seven months (June-December). And, the medium and large mining, there will already cancel the full rate (July-December), said the official.

Aurania acknowledges that payment of the new mining tariff in Ecuador is not feasible

Concerns about paying this tax also extend to small mining. Paúl Pineda, president of the Zamora Mining Chamber, mentioned that in this regime there are miners who cannot even work because they do not have an environmental license. "If we cannot produce, we should look for other sources to pay the fee.".

For this reason, together with the National Chamber of Mining of Ecuador, it is being considered to present actions of unconstitutionality and protection. "Not that we do not want to pay, but we want a fair amount," said Pineda.

Mining rate in Ecuador: how it will work and who it affects, according to the Government of Noboa

In the case of small mining, the law states that concessions of up to 300 hectares can be accessed. Thus, in the exploration-exploitation stage, around $28,200 would be cancelled, considering the scheme established by Arcom.

The government will aim to raise $229 million through this mining tax rate to strengthen Arcom and combat illegal mineral extraction.

Ive translated literally. I dont understand this bit

"In the case of small mining, the law states that concessions of up to 300 hectares can be accessed. Thus, in the exploration-exploitation stage, around $28,200 would be cancelled, considering the scheme established by Arcom." in Spanish.

Usually a way round that stuff Add :-)

The deadline for the payment of the mining fee came. As of this July 1, 2025, companies that engage in medium and large mining must record this value imposed by the government, but far from complying with this measure, the unions are considering filing demands for unconstitutionality, after exhausting the dialogue.

The tension caused by this issue became more evident on 25 June 2025. Diario EXPRESO learned that at the meeting, between representatives of the mining sector and the Mining Regulation and Control Agency (Arcom), the attendees of the union got up and left the room after confirming that the call was more to explain what the fee will be like, than to evaluate it.

"At the beginning of the meeting, we asked if there is a political will to change the rate, they said no In the face of that, those of us who represent the union stood up and left," said Patricio Vargas, president of the Cuenca Mining Chamber, which brings together 25 companies and 200 miners.

The position of the government on this imposition remains firm. Carolina Jaramillo, spokesperson for President Daniel Noboa, reiterated on June 30, 2025 that the mining rate is in force and will continue. He recalled that it is variable according to the phase of the project, mining regime and concessioned hectares. "The impact is not the same for everyone," said the official.

The range of this tariff will be between 3% and 100% of a Unified Basic Remuneration, which for this year is $470, for each hectare granted. Thus it represents between $14.1 and $470, depending on the type of mining and the phase of the project, says resolution Arcom-003/25. The taxation does not apply to artisanal mining.

Jaramillo added that there has been a permanent dialogue with associates, guilds, chambers and the ministry. And he recalled that through this imposition, the anti-technical and illegal extraction of minerals will be combated.

This version does not completely convince the sector. The Ecuadorian Mining Chamber (CME) said that despite insisting that technical tables be set up to assess the rate and suspend the measure, the meetings have not gone beyond talks. "There has been no opening," said Maria Eulalia Silva, its CEO.

Mining rate: The position of Minister Manzano causes tension in the mining sector

Thus, after exhausting the space for dialogue, the companies are considering filing demands for unconstitutionality, because it was not effectively socialized, the rate does not work as a counterpart to a service received and is "disproportionate," said the president of the Chamber of Mining in Cuenca. "In Cuenca, we declared ourselves in resistance (...) All this must be reviewed by the courts.".

For example, in the case of a medium-sized mining project, which is under advanced exploration and has a concession of about 7,800 hectares, the amount to be paid for the fee amounts to $1.4 million.

Interesting and potentially good news

https://www.expreso.ec/actualidad/economia/empresas-alistan-demandas-inconstitucionalidad-tasa-minera-248251.html

Cash dont tell the world you are thick..... you dont need to as we already know.

Rodney you should be a car salesman

The option selected for the estimation of capital and operating costs provided as part of this study was the Coastal Plains East TSF but all four options were found to be viable options. The options located on the Cascabel Mining Concession (Parambas and Cachaco) should be reassessed if open pit mining at Tandayama Americana deposit is incorporated into the mine plan as these facilities become more economical should ex-pit mine waste be available and provide environmental control solutions for the valleys potentially impacted by open pit mining and waste disposal. The Coastal Plains Main TSF provides a much larger capacity (in excess of 1.8 Bt) than required under the current study and should be reassessed if the mine production plan increases. Details of the facilities are provided in the following sections.

You clearly haven't read the PFS based on your last comment Rodney. Nor do you understand construction.

"There is plenty of precedent for mines using waste or low-grade rock from nearby deposits (like TAM) to construct Tailings Storage Facilities (TSFs). In fact, it's an established best practice in both cost control and geotechnical design."

Yes there is plenty of examples of it and it's what we want..... but if they dont mine TAM then the above doesnt happen

If rock is mined from TAM purely for the sakes of the TSF it is by definition imported fill. Your other point is exactly what im saying - the results of the drills will have to be terrible for it not to be viable. I dont see it happening (but its possible). I just hope and pray they are stonkers

Just as an aside taking rock from TAM that is not a by product would be imported fill in construction terms. It would be expensive.

Rodney believe me its not as easy as that. It will also be crazy expensive. You will need to buy the land. You will need to mine it. You will need to do some sort of remedial works. The only thing you will be saving is transport. We need it to be viable to a minor extent - it so the rocks are a by product (even if they aren't necessarily a cheap one).

Rodney it doesn't really work like that.... i get where you are coming from mind, given you probably dont work in construction. My point about moving the line for where it becomes viable is more realistic.