Thats a good solid analysis, happy to see someone has done the...

Thats a good solid analysis, happy to see someone has done the calculations, especially the different breakdowns of tonnages and most importantly grades. This is what HC is all about and kudos to you for sharing that info with the forum

I agree with other posters that in a completely ideal world the 89KT of ore at a nominal grade of 6.1g/T may be mineable (putting aside grade control issues and smallest mining unit/limitations of selective mining of the semi horizontal vein that is clearly seen in Figs 4 and 5).

But this isn't an ideal world and with sub-horizontal high grade narrow vein style systems in open pits you will always see a dilution in mined grade when actually mined (with dilution, blasting and grade control limitations) in the order of 10-20% of grade. Lets split the difference and assume a 15% dilution of grade in that 89KT of high grade ore.

So I would redo that base case scenario of 100KT of ore mined on the assumption that Maroon (or the contract mining crew) will try to pick up the extra 11KT on top of the nominal 89KT of ore at a grade of 6.1g/T , this extra 11KT will not be high grade, most likely in the region of the general average of the resource (say 2.5g/T Au). So I would dilute down the 89KT of ore down to say 5.2g/T Au of ore and throw the extra 11KT of ore at say 2.5g/T and when weighted averages are done that would bring the entire package of 100KT of ore extracted down to say 4.7g/T Au.

Would it be possible to redo the numbers at 100KT of ore at 4.7g/T Au head grade and run it through that 93% recovery rate (looks entirely reasonable to me) and tweak the USD price of gold and exchange rates if you want to?

If you did I am guessing that the actual gold that would be reported as cashflow for LNY would be in the order of less that AUD $8M. I think your base case (in the yellow section of the spreadsheet) scenario of a grade of 6g/T Au with 100KT of ore (so LNY share of grade = 2.5g/T) and realized cash of $8M. This, in my opinion is the absolute best case scenario with everything working as expected, and the mining contractor able to find the additional 11KT of ore at 6.1g/T that isn't in the resource statement.

I realize that Sherwood have more than 100KT of resources but to prove additional tonnes they will need to go drilling again to prove up additional tonnes and ounces to the point where they can be confidently mined, and then renegotiate another campaign of mining with some sort of revenue sharing agreement. My natural instinct was caution in that probably the best highest grade ore available at Sherwood was going to be mined and profit shared with this high grade ore then gone the economics of the remainder of the resource becomes more difficult given lower grades and cost of haulage.

I take and accept others points that Maroon is wearing most of the costs and risk as far as this initial 100KT of ore with transportation, costs of mining (and subsequent treatment), grade control, some moving of un-mineralized waste rock etc etc and obviously its better to see the gold come out of the ground and provide some cashflow for LNY rather than having it sitting there doing nothing. If the deal is structured right there should be incentive for both Maroon and Laneway to maximize grade, minimize grade dilution and minimize costs so that it makes money for both of them, so they may do it again in the future. Obviously this will be a dry season only haulage proposition so I will follow with interest to see how they both go (now that the ML is finally granted).