IKN

idle and fond bondage

The best bit in the Mako Mining (MKO.v) NR today

It’s not the cruel reality of a C$230m market cap company relying on a 100k oz resource to justify its valuation, either. It’s this:

2015 Resource Estimate

The 2015 PEA estimated mineral resources totaling 152,000 Indicated ounces of gold and 787,000 Inferred ounces of gold.  This updated mineral resource estimate totals 177,800 Measured and Indicated ounces and 100,900 Inferred ounces of gold.  Comparing the 2015 and 2020 models, it was evident that the general location of the 2015 mineralized zone was modeled appropriately with respect to locations of the principal domains albeit generous in thickness and extrapolation.  Several 2015-modeled solids depicting vein mineralization have since been drilled showing that mineralization does not exist where modeled in 2015.  Another reason for the difference is that MDA took a more conservative approach to modeling extrapolations and projections from drill data, where no drilling was done since 2013.  The 2020 volume of modeled veins and veins-plus-halo were 89% and 46% lower, respectively, compared to the 2015 single-domain volumes.

An important difference between the 2015 and 2020 models is the interpretations of the mineralization.  The vein and vein zones (both averaging >15 g/t Au) have distinct, sharp-bounded contacts usually within low-grade halos.  By modeling these veins and halos as one in 2015, the extreme high-grades in the vein were spread out into the larger volume of the halo in the estimate, thereby over-estimating metal, albeit at lower grades than exist in the vein and vein zones.

That is the most wonderful and construed way of saying “the artisanals mined us out” I’ve ever seen. Wonderful stuff.

13 Comments

    Mako? Closer to done up like a kipper

    Reply

    Mako? More like a school of plankton trying to pretend they’re the big Tuna.

    It’s a joke

    Reply

    If Mark were a “tool” – what would he be?

    A knife!

    Sharp, Multi use. Can stab; like in the back….but can kill prey with perfection. And who wants to catch a falling knife….not this MAKO shark…

    Reply

    There is plenty of explor-co’s trading at & above this mkt cap. This company just alls in between the extremes – but IS funded to production too.
    To assert the mkt cap is all about the existing resource is disingenuous at best.

    Reply

      The Vancouver promo show has been pumping MKO all year, this site is one of the very few that has called BS on the company and its inflated market cap, the price is now reflecting reality a little more, the PPS is flat in 2020 YTD despite a record move in gold. And I am disingenuous.

      Welcome to the comments section, the world needs foils.

      Reply

        Like share price is the whole story: Convenient you don’t count the mine development cost dilution – NOW behind them. And EVERYONE knows near ALL explore co’s transitioning to dev co’s typically hit a soft pocket in this transition.

        And you provide no fodder against the explore co’s at >$200 mil mkt caps. Invest as you see fit. Go short it. Knock yourself out!

        Reply

          Top content, William. Straw man, judgmental and suppositional, which isn’t a bad selection to get into a few brief lines. Once again, welcome!

          Reply

          The difference to most others developers is they have a feasibility study demonstrating economics and a sizeable resource.

          In Mako’s case neither exists, so you’re making a bet that they’ll be able to prove up more resource at a cost that doesn’t eat all the profit from the initial production.

          Maybe it’ll work out, but given past history at La Trinidad, skepticism seems warranted here.

          Reply

    Good point (nice to be on subject matter!). U think Wexford just put in C$16.4M on top of prior tens of C$M; As critics claim there’s not a big resource to make it fly – meaning narrow parameters for the viability calculations and less mine risk. I trust Wexford’s calculations & what I’ve seen.
    Me, I betting on more resource visibility to leverage the current ROI. Not like they are not funded to production @ higher. This calculation’s long been made by deeper pockets.

    Reply

    Good point (nice to be on subject matter!). Wexford just put in C$16.4M on top of prior tens of C$M; As critics claim there’s not a big resource to make it fly – meaning narrow parameters for the viability calculations and less mine risk. I trust Wexford’s calculations & what I’ve seen.
    Me, I’m betting on more resource visibility to leverage the current ROI. Not like they are not funded to production @ higher. This calculation’s long been made by deeper pockets. Not new now

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Hello, you are not in a chatroom, you are in my living room. Opposing views and criticisms welcome, insults or urinating on furniture unwelcome. Please refrain from swearing if possible, it is not needed.