Copper Rand Gold production – another link found (from Quebec Government)

http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=9985&mn=2063&pt=msg&mid=2909991

Now take a closer look at that Unites States SEC foiling form 2004:

http://www.secinfo.com/dRX7g.11fj.d.htm

I noticed two 4 things:

1) The ore grades are in this SEC report at the bottom.  There are some “higher grade” holes that have ore grades as high as:

4% - 7% copper

0.15 – 0.19 oz per tonne gold  (that’s 4.25 – 5.4 grams per tonne)

3 holes with gold grades at 0.25 oz/tonne or higher  (over 7 grams per tonne)

Notes:

a) This is Copper Rand (where the gold is “free byproduct”), not the high grade Corner Bay deposit.

b) The reports are sometimes inconsistent in their usage “short tons” vs. “metric tonnes  (“long tonnes”).  I think the pattern is that Campbell uses short tons when reporting the overall size of a deposit, and metric tonnes when discussing gore grades.  Please allow some margin here.

---------------------

2)  Andre Fortier was quoted in this SEC report (November 2^nd 2004) as follows:

[Quote from Mr. Fortier] "We were always confident that the Copper Rand deposit would be an economically feasible operation and the current results substantially exceed initial forecasts."      

That’s when the gold price was about $430 USD and the copper price was a little under $1.00 USD per pound.

---------------------------------

3)  This was already discussed] Campbell reported a huge increase in grades and size of the deposit AFYTER they successfully received millions in investment from a number of very reputable Institutions (like Sprott Asset Management).  

This suggests that the Institutional Investors saw very profitable operations at Copper Rand, even with the lower grades (the earlier numbers are also in this report).  It might suggest something else too.

4) Everyone should take a minute to think about how the serious Investors in CCH were attacked and Bashed on the StockHouse CCH message board for almost 2 years.  Collectively, the "Bashers" posted over 1,000 times to try to disrupt our serious conversations.

And one of their biggest angles of attacks was that “Campbell is a base metal producer, not a gold producer”.  Bashers like “AlanKrasberg” and “MolySpecKing” repeated line that over and over again.  

Look at these reports, and YOU be the judge.  I think we have a huge Gold mine right in front of us, and the real news here is being downplayed every day.  It may not be a “big mine” for a company like Newmont, but for a Canadian Junior with a market cap in the $50 million range, it’s quite good.  And Campbell has other gold deposits in the immediate area (Cedar Bay and Chevrier).

Other Information to Study

And you see that contradiction (the pattern of downplay, IMO) in the Investor two slide shows. 

Campbell’s 2007 slide show (on THEIR website):

http://www.ressourcescampbell.com/ppt/cch-corpo-general-07-en.ppt

Campbell’s 2004 slide show (which they don’t like to talk about)

http://www.campbellanalysis.com/files/Campbell Investor Slideshow (Powerpoint file).ppt

They 2004 slide show documents very strong cash flow, even with the metal prices that existed back then. The 2007 slide show projects operating costs that are much, much, higher.  

And in the middle, in the 3^rd and 4^th quarters of 2005, Campbell had two quarters of production or Copper Rand that suggested the lower 2004 numbers are the accurate set of numbers. 

I documented that in these two posts (there is overlap here):

Last two quarters in 2005 = Very important to analyze

http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=9985&mn=1882&pt=msg&mid=2829385

You can verify those Copper Rand projections here (more numbers to compare)

http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=9985&mn=593&pt=msg&mid=2238015

So Campbell had these two reasonably good quarters.  Then the Financiers arrived, and got their paws on this company.  And every quarter in 2006 and early 2007 was a reported loss (while they got their hands around as many shares as possible).

Yes, fuel costs have gone up, and that would lead to an increase in production costs.  But according to the company, the Copper Rand mine will be operating much more efficiently.  They installed the Alimak Mining System and they built a new ramp at Copper Rand.  By the companies own words, these will improve production.

I strongly dispute the newer production costs estimates coming from the company.  I stand by my earlier numbers saying that on-going Copper Rand production costs will be in the $1.25 USD per pound range (maybe lower), and the gold can be modeled as “free byproduct”.

And remember, we have already “caught them” talking some double-talk once:

http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=9985&mn=1310&pt=msg&mid=2609121

(This post deals with the extremely high grade Corner Bay copper deposit).

Go ask Mr. Fortier about Gold production at Copper Rand (production targets and gold grades).  See what he says.  Please post it here, if you are able to.