February 2012
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT Forward Looking Information This Presentation contains ‘‘forward-looking information’’ within the m...
Why ? Brucejack hosts a significant high-grade gold resource: • 5 mi...
BRUCEJACK AND SNOWFIELD PROJECTS 4
BRUCEJACK PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Brucejack Gold Resources Growth 80,000 ...
BRUCEJACK GEOLOGY West Zone West Zone VOK Zone VOK Zo...
BRUCEJACK EXPLORATION DRILLING 1980-1994 – Newhawk Valley of the Kings Zon...
VISIBLE GOLD Brucejack Top 20 High-grade Gold Hits ...
BRUCEJACK RESOURCE – HIGH-GRADE ...
HIGH-GRADE RESOURCE AREAS5x5x5 blocks (>5.0 g/t AuEq) within low-grade halo. Zones are 450 meters apart. ...
BRUCEJACK DRILLING 11
VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE 12
VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE 13
VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 14
VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 15
VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 16
VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE Will be revised 17
VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE Open Open TSX, NYSE:PVG ...
WEST ZONEBased on 1980’s/1990’s drilling Open 19
WEST ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 20
BRUCEJACK ENGINEERING STUDIES Advancing Brucejack’s potential for ...
BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE COMPARISON 25.0 ...
VALUE CREATION: CASE STUDY Andean Resources acquired for $3.6 billion by Goldcorp ...
BRUCEJACK RESOURCE - GLOBAL Gold/silver vein systems within lower grade envelopes Mineralization remains open Brucejac...
SNOWFIELD PROJECT 120 (NDM) ...
SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY & SUSTAINABILITY  Pretivm’s Social Responsibility Policy reflects our commitment to establishing ...
PVG SHARE PERFORMANCE Share Return from January 31, 2011 – January 31, 2012 (%) ...
SHAREHOLDING & ANALYST COVERAGE Silver Top ...
MANAGEMENT & BOARD Robert Quartermain, B.Sc., M.Sc., P.Geo, D.Sc. President & Chief Ex...
CONTACT HEAD OFFICE COMMON SHARESPhone: 604-558-1784 Pretium Resources Inc. TSX...
of 30

Pretivm february presentation 2 web

Published on: Mar 4, 2016
Published in: Business      
Source: www.slideshare.net


Transcripts - Pretivm february presentation 2 web

  • 1. February 2012
  • 2. CAUTIONARY STATEMENT Forward Looking Information This Presentation contains ‘‘forward-looking information’’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking information may include, but is not limited to, information with respect to the anticipated production and developments in our operations in future periods, our planned exploration and development activities, the adequacy of our financial resources, the estimation of mineral resources, realization of mineral resource estimates, costs and timing of development of the projects we currently intend to acquire (the “Projects”), costs and timing of future exploration, results of future exploration and drilling, timing and receipt of approvals, consents and permits under applicable legislation, our executive compensation approach and practice, the composition of our board of directors and committees, and adequacy of financial resources. Wherever possible, words such as ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘expects’’ or ‘‘does not expect’’, ‘‘budget’’, ‘‘scheduled’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘forecasts’’, ‘‘anticipate’’ or ‘‘does not anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘intend’’ and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, have been used to identify forward-looking information. Statements concerning mineral resource estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward-looking information to the extent that they involve estimates of the mineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as ‘‘expects’’, ‘‘anticipates’’, ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘projects’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘assumes’’, ‘‘intends’’, ‘‘strategy’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘potential’’ or variations thereof, or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking information. Many of these risks are listed and described in our final short-form prospectus dated April 4, 2011 (the “Prospectus”), which is available for review on SEDAR at www.sedar.com under our profile. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Forward-looking information involves statements about the future and is inherently uncertain, and our actual achievements or other future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, those referred to in the Prospectus under the heading ‘‘Risk Factors’’. Our forward-looking information is based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date the statements are made, and we do not assume any obligation to update forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable law. For the reasons set forth above, prospective investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. National Instrument 43-101 Technical and scientific information contained herein relating to the Projects is derived from National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant technical reports “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Snowfield Property” and “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Brucejack Property” dated February 18, 2011, a preliminary economic assessment entitled ‘‘Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Snowfield Brucejack Project’’ dated October 28, 2010 (the “Preliminary Assessment”) and a preliminary economic assessment dated June 3, 2011 on the Brucejack Project. We have filed the Technical Reports and Preliminary Assessment under our profile at www.sedar.com. Technical and scientific information not contained within the Preliminary Assessment and Technical Reports for the Projects have been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Kenneth C. McNaughton, an independent “qualified person” under NI 43-101. This presentation uses the terms “measured resources”, “indicated resources” (together “M&I”) and “inferred resources”. Although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations (under NI 43-101), the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource will be converted into mineral reserves. In addition, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre feasibility studies, or economic studies, except for a Preliminary Assessment as defined under NI43 101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable. Currency Unless otherwise indicated, all dollar values herein are in Canadian $. 2
  • 3. Why ? Brucejack hosts a significant high-grade gold resource: • 5 million ounces Measured & Indicated (9.3 Mt @ 16.62 g/t gold ) • 3 million ounces Inferred (4.0 Mt @ 25.67 g/t gold)  Opportunity for near-term production  Advancing as a stand-alone project Brucejack and Snowfield global gold resources total 38 million ounces M&I and 28 million ounces Inferred within a growing gold camp in northwestern B.C. 3
  • 4. BRUCEJACK AND SNOWFIELD PROJECTS 4
  • 5. BRUCEJACK PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Brucejack Gold Resources Growth 80,000 35 70,000 30 Gold resources (mil) 60,000 25 50,000 20 Meters 40,000 15 30,000 10 20,000 10,000 5 0 0 2009 2010 2011 M&I Au Inf Au Meters drilled Exploration resumes. 5.3 km Discovery of Valley of the • Updated PEA on underground Kings Zone. Brucejack high-gradeExploration development of Mine Development Acquisition by Pretivm (Q1) West Zone Certificate issued (December 2010) • Feasibility Study (Q4) 1960-1980 1986-1989 1993 2009-2010 2012 1980-1985 1990 1999-2000 2011 West Zone West Zone Acquisition by • PEA on Brucejack discovery Feasibility Study Silver Standard high-grade (June) and definition completed Resources Inc. • 72,144-meter drill program (May-Oct) • Resource update (November) 5
  • 6. BRUCEJACK GEOLOGY West Zone West Zone VOK Zone VOK Zone TSX, NYSE:PVG 6
  • 7. BRUCEJACK EXPLORATION DRILLING 1980-1994 – Newhawk Valley of the Kings ZoneHistoric Au resource: 908 DDH/120,000m421,000 oz M&I West Zone82,700 oz Inferred2009 Au resource:4.0M oz M&I 2009-2010 – Silver Standard Valley of the Kings Zone4.9M oz Inferred 110 DDH/50,946m2010 Au resource:8.2M oz M&I12.6M oz Inferred Valley of the Kings Zone 2011 – Pretivm2011 Au resource: 176 DDH/72,144m12.9M oz M&I18.2M oz Inferred 500m >0.3 g/t gold North – South Existing 5km underground workings 500m 7
  • 8. VISIBLE GOLD Brucejack Top 20 High-grade Gold Hits Interval Depth Gold Hole Gold (g/t) (meters) (meters) (oz/ton) SU-115 0.6 60.6 18,755 547.0 SU-260 0.5 68.4 17,750 517.7 SU-12 1.5 273.0 16,948 494.3 SU-230 1.0 305.7 7,420 216.4 SU-150 0.5 76.4 6,670 194.5 SU-40 1.64 648.0 5,850 170.6 SU-195 0.5 349.4 5,740 167.4 SU-84 0.44 198.0 5,480 159.8 SU-29 0.5 560.0 5,344 155.9 SU-260 (2011) SU-115 0.51 76.1 4,209 122.8 SU-132 0.5 57.68 4,060 118.4 SU-249 0.5 115.6 3,880 113.2 SU-239 1.0 310.0 3,460 100.9 SU-176 0.5 335.8 2,810 81.9 SU-54 1.59 53.6 2,490 72.6 SU-106 0.69 240.4 1,710 49.9 SU-150 0.5 59.0 1,640 47.8 SU-136 0.84 228.0 1,550 45.2 SU-115 (2011) SU-195 (2011) SU-226 0.52 335.0 1,465 42.7 SU-150 1.03 234.0 1,280 37.3 SU-157 0.54 350.0 1,200 35.0 SU-190 1.98 520.68 1,094 31.9 SU-135 0.5 75.0 1,070 31.2 SU-193 1.5 93.5 1,040 30.3 SU-53 1.5 21.5 1,025 29.9 8 SU-84 (2010) SU-29 (2009) SU-115 1.28 61.2 1,005 29.3
  • 9. BRUCEJACK RESOURCE – HIGH-GRADE (1)(2)Brucejack Project 5.0 g/t Grade & Tonnage Estimate – November 2011 Brucejack Summary Assay Statistics(Based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne) Contained  97 drill holes /42,000 m for 5.0 g/t resource Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver  32 samples grading over 1,000 g/t Au (millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz) Measured 2.4 7.93 236.1 0.60 18.0  157 samples grading 100 g/t to 999.99 g/t Au Indicated 6.9 19.99 60.9 4.46 13.6  529 samples grading 20 g/t to 99.99 g/t Au M+I 9.3 16.92 105.6 5.06 31.6 Inferred 4.0 25.67 20.6 3.33 2.7 (1)(3)Brucejack Project Underground Sensitivity – November 2011 Valley of the Kings Intersection Statistics(Based on a cut-off of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne) Grade Intervals % of total Contained (g/t Au) Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver 2009-2001 (1,122 samples) (millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz) 0.5 to 4.99 94.2 Measured 2.4 7.29 241.2 0.57 18.9 5.0 to 19.99 3.7 Indicated 6.1 24.13 53.3 4.76 10.5 +20 2.1 M+I 8.6 19.35 106.7 5.33 29.4 2011 (6,252 samples) Inferred 4.0 25.73 22.0 3.29 2.8 0.5 to 4.99 95.1 5.0 to 19.99 2.9 +20 1.9(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions are: Au US$1,200/oz. (71%); Ag US$22/oz. (70%)(2) 5.0 g/t cutoff within the 0.30 grams of au-equiv /tonne optimized pit shell(3) The Underground Sensitivity is a sensitivity study of the Brucejack underground potential and isnot meant to supercede or replace the results of the bulk-tonnage mineral resource estimate.Sensitivity results are not reported within a constraining Whittle pit shell. 9
  • 10. HIGH-GRADE RESOURCE AREAS5x5x5 blocks (>5.0 g/t AuEq) within low-grade halo. Zones are 450 meters apart. Historic underground workings (5.3km) Proposed exploration decline Valley of the Kings Zone West Zone Valley of the Kings Zone Underground Sensitivity (1) West Zone Underground Sensitivity (1) Contained Contained Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver (millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz) (millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz) Measured 0 0 0 0 0 Measured 2.4 7.29 241.2 0.57 18.9 Indicated 4.6 29.72 22.6 4.4 3.37 Indicated 1.5 7.04 149.4 0.34 7.1 M+I 4.6 29.72 22.6 4.4 3.37 M+I 3.9 7.7 206.5 0.91 26.0 Inferred 3.7 26.89 17.5 3.23 2.11 Inferred 0.2 7.0 94.79 0.05 0.71(1) The Underground Sensitivity is a sensitivity study of the Brucejack underground potential and is not meant to supercede or replace the results of the bulk-tonnage mineral resource 10estimate. Sensitivity results are not reported within a constraining Whittle pit shell.
  • 11. BRUCEJACK DRILLING 11
  • 12. VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE 12
  • 13. VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE 13
  • 14. VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 14
  • 15. VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 15
  • 16. VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 16
  • 17. VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE Will be revised 17
  • 18. VALLEY OF THE KINGS ZONE Open Open TSX, NYSE:PVG 18
  • 19. WEST ZONEBased on 1980’s/1990’s drilling Open 19
  • 20. WEST ZONE TSX, NYSE:PVG 20
  • 21. BRUCEJACK ENGINEERING STUDIES Advancing Brucejack’s potential for near-term production  June 2011 PEA(1) based on 5.0 g/t cut-off gold resource of 903,000 ounces M&I (3.7Mt @ 7.66 g/t gold) and 1.9 million ounces Inferred (4.7Mt @ 12.54 g/t gold): – Average annual production years 1-10 of 173,000 ounces of gold – Capex of US$281.7 million – Operating costs of C$158.36/t milled – 5% NVP of US$1.426 billion(2) – Internal rate of return of 48%(2)  Update to PEA based on Underground Sensitivity anticipated Q1 ― 5.33 million ounces of gold M&I (8.6Mt @ 19.35 g/t gold) ― 3.29 million ounces of gold Inferred (4.0 Mt @ 25.73 g/t gold)  Feasibility study anticipated Q4 (1) Source: Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project, effective date June 3, 2011 (2) Spot Price Case metals prices of US$1,536.30/oz gold and US$37.86/oz silver 21
  • 22. BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE COMPARISON 25.0 Brucejack Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Grade (g/t) (2011) 20.0 Kirkland Lake 15.0 Red Lake Brucejack (2010) 10.0 Cerro Negro Jerritt Canyon Eleonore Kensington El Penon Quimsacocha 5.0 Casa Berardi 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Resources (mm oz)Brucejack gold resources based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne within the 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne optimized pit shell.Source: Intierra Ltd. 22
  • 23. VALUE CREATION: CASE STUDY Andean Resources acquired for $3.6 billion by Goldcorp in Q4 2010 for Cerro Negro Project  At Feasibility-stage with exploration potential  Gold resources at time of acquisition, December 2010: – Indicated Resources of 2.54 million ounces (13.8 million tonnes at 5.71 g/t) • Includes Probable Reserves of 2.07 million ounces at 9.03 g/t Au – Inferred Resources 0.52 million ounces (5.02 million tonnes at 3.24 g/t)  Gold reserves and resources at March 31, 2011 (post acquisition by Goldcorp) – Probable Reserves of 4.26 million ounces (13 million tonnes at 10.19 g/t) – Indicated Resources of 0.38 million ounces (4.67 million tonnes at 2.50 g/t) – Inferred Resources of 0.72 million ounces (4.51 million tonnes at 4.98 g/t) 23
  • 24. BRUCEJACK RESOURCE - GLOBAL Gold/silver vein systems within lower grade envelopes Mineralization remains open Brucejack Project Bulk-Tonnage Mineral Resource Estimate – (1) November 2011 (Based on a cut-off grade of 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne) Contained Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver (millions) (g/t) ( g/t) (million oz) (million oz) Measured 12.2 2.50 81.6 0.99 32.1 Indicated 293.0 1.26 10.5 11.91 99.3 M+I 305.3 1.31 13.4 12.89 131.5 Inferred 813.7 0.70 7.7 18.20 201.2 Brucejack Project 1.25 Grade & Tonnage Estimate – (1),(2) November 2011 Contained Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver (millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz) Measured 9.3 3.08 102.2 0.92 30.6 Indicated 64.8 3.62 23.7 7.53 49.4 M+I 74.1 3.55 33.6 8.46 80.0 Inferred 78.5 2.68 16.3 6.76 41.2(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions are: Au US$1,200/oz. (71%); Ag US$22/oz. (70%)(2)@ 1.25 g/t cut-off within the 0.30 grams of au-equiv/tonne optimized pit shell. 24
  • 25. SNOWFIELD PROJECT 120 (NDM) Iron Cap Zone (SEA) Gold Resources (mm oz.) 100 Snowfield Open Pit (September 2010 PA) 80 66.9  (SEA) 60 Mitchell Zone (NG/ABX) (SEA) 40 45.3  (PVG) 20 40.4  37.9  25.9  14.5  9.0  0 4.4  Sulphurets Zone (SEA) Pebble KSM Donlin Gold Snowfield Measured + Indicated Resources Inferred Resources Snowfield Mineral Resource Summary – Feb. 2011(1,2) Grade Contained Metal Tonnes Au Ag Cu Mo Re Au Ag Cu (mm (mm (mt) (g/t) (g/t) (%) (ppm) (ppm) (bil lbs) oz) oz) Measured 189.8 0.82 1.69 0.09% 97.4 0.57 4.98 10.3 0.38 Indicated 1,180.3 0.55 1.73 0.10% 83.6 0.50 20.93 65.4 2.60 Measured & 1,370.1 0.59 1.72 0.10% 85.5 0.51 25.92 75.8 2.98 Indicated Inferred 833.2 0.34 1.90 0.06% 69.5 0.43 9.03 50.9 1.10 (1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions: Au US$1,025/oz (71%); Ag US$16.60/oz (70%); Cu US$3.0/lb (70%); Mo US$19.00/lb (60%); Re US$145.00/oz. (60%) (2) Mineral resource estimate at 0.30g/t AuEq cut-off. 25
  • 26. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY & SUSTAINABILITY  Pretivm’s Social Responsibility Policy reflects our commitment to establishing positive, trusting relationships with First Nations, local communities and other key stakeholders  We are working to ensure that communication with local communities is open and continuous, and that the benefits of our exploration success can extend to them  We will collaborate with community leaders to explore training and employment opportunities  Pretivm’s management team has been cooperatively engaging with local community leaders in the Stewart, BC region for over 10 years  We have begun the consultation process with community leaders concerning the Brucejack high- grade opportunity 26
  • 27. PVG SHARE PERFORMANCE Share Return from January 31, 2011 – January 31, 2012 (%) Pretivm Pretivm S&P/TSX Global Mining Index XAU Index 27
  • 28. SHAREHOLDING & ANALYST COVERAGE Silver Top Five Shareholders(1,3) (shares in millions) Standard, 22% Silver Standard Resources 18.913 Institutions, Royce & Associates 6.346 Management, 50% Carmignac Gestion 5.400 5% Robert Quartermain 2.876 Retail, 23% Norges Bank Investment 2.094 Analyst CoverageCapital Structure(1,2) CIBC Brian QuastPublic Float 68.0 Citibank Alex HackingSilver Standard Shares 18.9 Cormark Securities Richard GrayTotal Issued & Outstanding Shares 86.9 Dahlman Rose Adam GrafIncentive Options 5.2 GMP Securities Craig WestTotal Fully Diluted Shares Outstanding 92.1 Salman Partners Ash Guglani UBS Dan RollinsWorking Capital (at September 30) C$33.0 million Very Independent Research John Tumazos(1)Assumes the exercise of 5,750,000 share purchase warrants each exercisable to purchase one share of Pretivm owned by Silver Standard at $12.50 until April 7, 2012.(2)As of September 30, 2011; ownership calculated on an undiluted basis.(3)As of January 8. Source: IPREO, SEDI 28
  • 29. MANAGEMENT & BOARD Robert Quartermain, B.Sc., M.Sc., P.Geo, D.Sc. President & Chief Executive Officer, Director Joseph Ovsenek, B.A. Sc., P.Eng., LLB Vice President & Chief Development Officer, Director Ken McNaughton, M.A. Sc., P.Eng. Vice President & Chief Exploration Officer Ian I Chang, M.A. Sc., P.Eng. Vice President, Project Development (L to R): John Smith, CEO, Silver Standard; Tom Yip, CFO, International Tower Hill Mines; Robert Quartermain; Ross Mitchell, former CFO, Silver Standard Resources Inc; Joseph Ovsenek; Noel Dunn, Managing Director, Liberty Metals & Mining Ken Konkin, P.Geo. Project Manager Peter de Visser, CA Chief Financial Officer 29(1)All senior management and directors are shareholders of Pretivm
  • 30. CONTACT HEAD OFFICE COMMON SHARESPhone: 604-558-1784 Pretium Resources Inc. TSX/NYSE:PVGFax: 604-558-4784 570 Granville St. Issued: 86.9 millionToll-free: 1-877-558-1784 Suite 1600 Fully diluted: 92.0 millioninvest@pretivm.com Vancouver, BC 52-week hi/low: $16.53/$6.01www.pretivm.com Canada V6C 3P1 Market capitalization (at January 31, 2012) $1.425 billion

Related Documents