Is my maths wrong?
December production 30,868 tonnes @ 3.71 g/t Au at 91.1% recovery = 104,328grams ÷ 28.35 (grams to ounces) = 3680 ounces not 3,500 ounces as per their figures
January improved from December’s numbers with 10,499 tonnes treated at 4.71g/t for 1,455 ounces Au recovered and 1,520 ounces Au delivered ....
So the maths is 10,499 x 4.71 x 90% recovery (to be safe) = 44,505grams ÷ 28.35 = 1569.85 ounces not 1520 ounces as per their figures.
Combined discrepancy is 229.85 ounces of gold, which is around $395,000 of gold
Why this discrepancy?
Where is the gold or am I wrong?
Why (quarter after quarter) keep mining at a loss to crumble the company's finances into a perilous state then desperately seek finance/raising which will kill shareholder value?
...............................................................................................................
Next topic.
They wrote, "Over the past three Quarters revenue of circa $6.0 million per quarter from an average of between 3.0 and 3.72 g/t ore (refer to table in Porcupine Flat Processing Facility section of this report). The ability to achieve a better average mine grade has been hampered by a lack of working capital to fund diamond drilling."
Lack of working capital because they lost money mining the above grades yet they also wrote this, "The Company has a capacity to mine and process 40,000 tonnes per quarter against a well known cost structure."
Seriously, they know their cost structure but continued mining at losses to the point of being broke for a whole year!
Is it just me or is this the most catch22 paragraph I have ever read? I think so.
..............................................................................................................
Next topic.
They wrote, "A full reline of the ball mill at Porcupine Flat was completed over a period of a week late in the Quarter".
Really, and how much did that cost and how did you account for that cost?
There is little transparency in CTL's figures when reporting costs. The true cost of production isn't broken down into smaller items.
Fact is the mill wears apparently, wearing the mill on non-profitable mining is not sensible. Filling tailings dams with loss creating operations is not logical.
.............................................................................................................
Some serious issues here, do not get all warm and cosy by this announcement, read it carefully and realise what they did to bring us here.
They could have put the place on ice, had a skeleton crew, drilled out the resources sufficiently with a 15% cap raise to mine high value gold to make profit and so forth incrementally until they had sound cashflow to expand. Failing that, they could have preserved capital by halting operations, delivered a well costed plan brought to the market with a reasonable cap raise minimising a massive 5/2 proposed dilution. There are explorers drilling who cap raise without revenue that seem to run on the smell of an oily rag, here they got it ass about and did it quarter after quarter yet claim they got a good grip on cost structure.
Expand
(20min delay)
