IKN #699Premium

The IKN Weekly
Week 699, October 9th 2022
Contents
This Week: In Today’s Edition, Canadian Thanksgiving Day, Fed-fighters take a hit.
Fundamental Analysis: Updating on Top Pick Minera Alamos (MAI.v).
Stocks to Follow: Amerigo Resources (ARG.to), Pure Gold (PGM.v), Rio2 Ltd (RIO.v), Minera
IRL (MIRL.cse), Superior Gold (SGI.v), QC Copper & Gold (QCCU.v), Goldshore Resources
(GSHR.v).
Copper Basket: Overview, Meridian Mining (MNO.to), Copper Mountain (CMMC.to), Hot Chili
(HCH.ax).
Producer Basket: Overview, Sandstorm Gold (SAND) (SSL.to).
TinyCaps Basket: Overview, Aurelius Minerals (AUL.v), Winshear Gold (WINS.v), Precipitate
Gold (PRG.v), Manitou Gold (MTU.v).
Regional Politics: Brazil: Lula is favourite but not a lock for October 30th, Chile: Mines closed
and permitting tracks withdrawn, Mexico: a reminder on Guerrero, Colombia: Government anti-
mining sentiment rising.
Market Watching: Deferred.
I remind subscribers that no part of this newsletter can be copied, reproduced or
given to any third party without the express permission of the author.
This Week
In Today’s Edition
 Today’s main fundies sections is somewhat overdue, so with the advent of the PEA
announcement last week on Cerro de Oro and Santana now apparently ramping well
(and with all the rainwater it needs), it’s high time we revisited our Top Pick and
personal largest position, Minera Alamos (MAI.v). We do numbers, thoughts and finish
we a new and solid target price on which to set eyes.
 We make use of the Market Watching section a little more than in resent editions this
week, as the news from Copper Mountain (CMMC.to) and the 3q22 numbers out of
recent small spec trade Pure Gold (PGM.v) demand closer attention.
 A modestly positive week for the PM space, which would have been very positive if it
weren’t for the bucket of cold water poured over the market on Friday by a hot BLS
Jobs number that told Jay Powell to remain aggressive. We consider what it all means
in the main intro section.
 Avoid exposure to Colombia. And while we’re at it, let’s reiterate the short call on Aris
Mining (ARIS.to) as it currently whistles past its own high-country graveyard. That and
“other herbs” (to translate an Argentine saying) in the Regional Politics section.
Canadian Thanksgiving Day
US Markets are open for business as usual, but a reminder to readers that tomorrow Monday
October 10th is this year’s Canadian Thanksgiving Holiday and its stock markets are closed until
Tuesday.
1

The Fed-Fighters take a hit
The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men.
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!
To A Mouse, Robert Burns, 1785
Everyone has a plan until they
get punched in the mouth.
Mike Tyson, 1997
For this weekend’s discerning and carefully considered macro commentary the intro section
relies on that bastion of business reporting, the New York Post. Yes, Post not Times, which may
not be as highbrow in presentation but this report (1) has all the need-to-know and is every bit
as enlightening on the subject as anything from Bloomie, WSJ or CNBC last week. Your title:
“Dow tanks as jobs growth boosts Fed hike bets”
Sums it up nicely, in fact it was the title that got my attention in. The NYP-Not-NYT then goes
on to note the headline BLS jobs numbers on Friday (+263k NFP and UR 3.5%), how they
compared to expectations and a correct snap analysis, “…while hiring slowed a bit, the labor
market continued its robust streak.” Nothing to add here and we even get the requisite analyst
opinion so take it away, NYP:
““The strong commitment to higher short-term rates drove rates up across the curve,
rattling markets and undermining a previous market assumption that the Fed would
pause increases in the event of a recession,” Brad McMillan, chief investment officer
for Massachusetts-based Commonwealth Financial Network, told The Post.”
Further questions? What’s more, use that report and you’re only one click away from the latest
on Gisele Bündchen and Tom Brady’s break-up, or how Gizelle Bryant and Candiace Dillard are
“not in a good place” after their “husband drama.” Whoever they might be.
I digress. As noted last week, the BLS Employment Report is normally the most important
macro release of the US month but at the moment, we’re training our eyes on the Inflation
reports as expected in the week to come, in particular the CPI number expected on October
13th. However the Jobs Report still has plenty of influence over the market and unfortunately
for us, showed as much on Friday. As for what it all means to the mining and PM sectors, let’s
start with one of the bullet points from the close of last week’s edition, IKN698:
I may be too leery on the PM and base metals markets at the moment, but last week’s
rally isn’t my idea of a turn point indicator. On the other hand I’m destined to miss the
very bottom and buy back on the way up. Watching, but not biting yet.
That stood up well over last week’s trading:
For four days and particularly last Tuesday, I began wondering whether those words were
timed too closely to perfection. The equity markets ran well at the start of the week on
renewed optimism of getting that so-called Fed Pivot soon and it was exactly that sentiment
which got its reversal on the Friday jobs numbers. As a result and as seen in this chart of the
2

US Dollar Index (DXY) the greenback revered its
mini collapse and the USD rose again as Treasurys
yields increased…we know that dynamic by now.
As for our sector of focus, gold seem to hold its own
and the move in GLD (+2.08%) was better than
both GDX and GDXJ on the week. It’s not often that
gold bullion rises by that much and out-performs the
PM equities at the same time. That might suggest
that gold started catching a bid compared to the
USD and that plays into the “Stagflation, Not
Inlfation” narrative we’ve discussed on these pages
(too many times) before, but as the ongoing
comparative between the two shows (right), gold
and the DXY are still doing their impression of a
Rorschach Test. The near-identical pattern means
one of them is busting all the moves (i.e. the USD)
and the other’s mirror image (GLD) is due to its
becalmed status.
That’s also the message from the GLD inventory
data, which saw just under 4.5 tonnes of gold
bullion added back to the ETF’s vaults (Friday close
944.31mt) but the Inventory/Price ratio dropped to
under the 6X line (5.98X, to be exact). Slight
movements only, the market remains ambivalent to
gold as a real live option to the USD for the time
being. That’s not a minor point either, as until gold starts catching a bid and improving its low
against the USD in real investment terms, the fate of its price action and therefore that of the
PM stocks is going to be dictated from the outside, by moves on the US Dollar.
GLD gold holdings, 2022 YTD (metric tonnes)
1140
1120
1100
1080
1060
1040
1020
1000
980
960
940
920
900
Summing up and to make clear the house position on the issue of whether gold will out-
perform going forward, these points:
 I believe stagflation is very possible and if so, at some point gold will benefit even as
the Fed raises rates. This is the “That 70s Show” scenario and the start of the Volcker
years
 Gold is also well-positioned for out-performance when the Fed Pivot finally arrives. As
soon as the Fed eases off the rate hike (or at least its narrative), the USD will weaken
and along with the backdrop of declining inflation will give the producers of the
Monetary Metal a double whammy to the upside.
 However, we’re not there yet in either of those scenarios. The Plain Vanilla Inflation
narrative still rules the market and until such time that it changes, there’s no reason to
believe gold will out-perform. Therefore we watch, wait and KEEP POWDER DRY.
3
22/1/3 22/1/31 22/1/32 22/2/2 22/2/21 22/2/22 22/3/4 22/3/41 22/3/42 22/4/3 22/4/31 22/4/32 22/5/3 22/5/31 22/5/32 22/6/2 22/6/21 22/6/22 22/7/2 22/7/21 22/7/22 22/8/1 22/8/11 22/8/12 22/8/13 22/9/01 22/9/02 22/9/03
mt 6.50 GLD: Inventory/Price Ratio, 2022 YTD
6.40
6.30
6.20
6.10
6.00
5.90
5.80
5.70
5.60
source: SPDR GLD data 5.50
13/21/1202 01/1/2202 02/1/2202 03/1/2202 9/2/2202 91/2/2202 1/3/2202 11/3/2202 12/3/2202 13/3/2202 01/4/2202 02/4/2202 03/4/2202 01/5/2202 02/5/2202 03/5/2202 9/6/2202 91/6/2202 92/6/2202 9/7/2202 91/7/2202 92/7/2202 8/8/2202 81/8/2202 82/8/2202 7/9/2202 71/9/2202 72/9/2202 7/01/2202
Source: SPDR data, IKN calcs

And with that we circle back to the major macro data coming your way in the week ahead,
October 13th and the US CPI reading that currently has a consensus forecast of +8.1%,
according to the ineffable Bill McBride over at Calculated Risk this weekend (2). We quote:
8:30 AM: The Consumer Price Index for September from the BLS. The consensus is
for a 0.2% increase in CPI, and a 0.5% increase in core CPI. The consensus is for CPI
to be up 8.1% year-over-year and core CPI to be up 6.5% YoY.
By way of a reminder, a reading lower than +8.1%/+6.5% will suggest a less aggressive Fed
and therefore, better macro for equities and anything non-dollar. A continuation of high
inflation means Jay Powell and his friends will set about proving that they’re really, really,
REALLY not joking about their policy decisions so see previous intros for that depressing
scenario. Finally, the big Thursday CPI event is cushioned between other potentially market
moving data out of the US, as on Wednesday we get the Producer Price (PPI) reading as well
as the Fed Minutes from the last FOMC, while on Friday it’s Retail Sales. See the link above for
more on those.
Fundamental Analysis of Mining Stocks
Updating on Top Pick Minera Alamos (MAI.v)
With the advent of the 43-101 compliant PEA out of our Top Pick Minera Alamos (MAI.v)
(MAIFF) last week, it’s time to revisit the stock in light of its recent developments and as
mentioned in passing on the blog Friday (3) “…have
a good stare at its numbers and wonder why its
shares remain stubbornly cheap.” That’s today’s
main fundies section and despite its warm reception
early week, the ongoing apathy toward this stock
and its charms continues to show in the ten-day
chart seen here (right). But that’s for later, first we
do some general housekeeping before launching
into the note by offering up the required links for
the content. Here’s the company website homepage
(4), here’s the latest corporate presentation (5),
here’s the link to last Monday’s NR announcing the
PEA (6) and finally, this link (7) takes you to the
replay of the 6ix live webinar from last Tuesday
October 4th, and the accompanying presentation, source of a couple of the visuals below.
Today’s note has two major sections:
 The Cerro de Oro PEA
 Thoughts on why MAI.v has failed to move up in 2022
We also note in passing the latest from Santana, but for the time being hold back on deeper
consideration of its numbers as that can happen when MAI reports its 3q22 financials. It stands
to reason that all subjects are important and contribute to the eventual price target, but
adjustments to the Santana model can wait in order to focus on the main event. So without
further ado…
The Cerro de Oro PEA
It took time to arrive but we’re glad it’s here, as on Monday MAI published the NR announcing
the 43-101 compliant PEA for the next project slated to become a mine at MAI, Cerro de Oro
(CdO). While the NR isn’t the document and we’ll have to wait a while before that is filed to
SEDAR (45 days max), the NR gave us plenty of detail on the project components and there’s
enough to allow plenty of confidence in the mine plan, as well as more than enough for a Excel
addict to put together a ballpark model and get a handle on what CdO can do for the company
and its share price. We begin with the NR and while I’m not into padding out work with
copypastes, in this case let’s get the company position clear via its extended highlight bullet
points on the PEA. Notes below:
4

Highlights of PEA
 Production highlights
 Average annual gold production approaching 60,000oz (~60,000oz to 70,000oz in Years 1 through
4).
 8.2 year mine life based on initial mineable total of 59 Mt of mineralization (0.37 g/t Au) heap
leached at an average rate of approximately 20,000 tpd – +0.40 g/t Au in Years 1 through 4.
 477koz of gold produced in loaded carbon/doré.
 LOM strip ratio of 0.3:1 (waste:mineralization)
 Robust economics using metals prices of $1,600/oz Au
 LOM All-In Sustaining Cost (AISC) of $873/oz – averaging $763/oz in Years 1 through 4.
 After-Tax NPV at 5% of $150.5M and IRR of 111%.
 Low capital intensity project with rapid payback:
 Pre-production capital costs of $28.1M (includes 30% contingency).
 Payback period of 11 months.
 Used crushing plant already purchased reduces up-front capital requirements.
 Significant Upside
 Mineralization appears open in multiple directions as well as to depth.
 Additional metallurgical testing to examine amenability of gold recovery from deeper sulphide zones
of mineralization not accounted for in current resource calculations and mine plans (some early
indications that material may prove to be leachable).
 Updated Inferred Mineral Resource estimate containing 67 million tonnes of 0.37 g/t Au (790 koz of
contained gold) based on an upward revision of the base case resource metal price to $1,700/oz.
There’s a lot to like about this plan, above all it’s simple and 100% inside the wheelhouse and
world of a team that has made a specialty out of this type of mine. Small-to-scale-up, low
capex, heap leach with the objective being to mine at a profit, rather than create an asset then
hope it works. CEO Koningen did it under Chester Millar, then took the model and made a
multi-mine company out of Castle Gold, he did it again at Santana and now it’s the turn of CdO.
At this point, I’m going to direct your attention to the NR rather than regurgitate a whole bunch
of data that you can read at the original document. MAI supplied a lot of detail in Monday’s
publication and is a “mini-PEA” in itself, with breakdowns of expected capex, mining schedules
and several key aspects of input costs. After exchanging with company President Doug
Ramshaw on more than one occasion last week, I’m personally satisfied that this is a “quality
PEA” and due to the technologically straightforward (or even simple) nature of the mine plan,
the large amount of data already collected on the mineralization (or “orebody, because I can
call it that while they cannot) and the house expertise on building exactly this type of mine in
exactly this locality, I have no issue about seeing this move to production without MAI going to
the expense and time of producing a PFS.
So instead of a long-winded section, here are just a few observations and comments on the
corners covered by MAI in its NR, please go there and reads the whole thing at your leisure.
Capex Estimates: At $28.1m it’s an easy build and theoretically MAI could even fund it from
Santana cash flow, but I know the company will take out some sort of debt financing to move it
forward with a view to quick payback. I’d expect MAI could cover this with a U$20m loan or
facility and have that paid back within the first year of operations, I also expect a queue of
financiers to offer the company a deal for that amount, it will be a case of choosing the one
that best fits the corporate profile. The NR also includes a capex breakdown (they didn’t need
to do that) and there’s nothing out of the ordinary on the list. Having already procured a
crusher and with highly favourable geography, this is going to be a cheap build-out.
Opex Estimates: Along with the headline opex assumption of U$6.66/tonne over Life of Mine
(LoM), MAI offers a breakdown table and all inputs looks reasonable. For the record, in my
model (below) I’m building in conservatism by using a U$7.55/tonne op-ex number, which gives
my model a 13% cushion to already reasonable numbers. The key to this operation is the low
strip rate and compact mine infrastructure, which keeps waste and haulage to a minimum.
5

Mineral Resource: Here’s the main table, a simple one:
It’s low grade, but with slightly higher average grade mined in the first years. The 0.15 g/t cut
off using U$1,600/oz gold and the assumed recovery costs puts on-site mining at around
U$5.50/oz, which fits well with the opex assumption above. However, due to the nature of the
known deposit, the company track record and the way they’re making no secret about future
expansion plans for CdO, expect this resource to grow considerably once the mine starts up.
Mining: As straightforward as they get, with an average 0.3/1 strip ratio which is even lower in
the first years and a nine year mine life that gives a nominal 111% IIR but frankly, even that is
conservative as MAI gives us a table of annual production estimates that signals its own
redundancy. This mine’s resource is virtually certain to expand significantly and offer many
extra years of mine life, we should consider this PEA as a starting point only. Production come
years 8 and 9 isn’t about to tail off in the way the model shows.
Processing: Due to the relatively low LoM grade of 0.37% Au, the mine has to run at the
expected recoveries and costs so it was pleasing to hear they have collated a lot of
metallurgical data and are confident about getting the 68% average recovery, with the higher-
grading crusher material compensating for lower recoveries from the run of mine mineralization
expected to go straight to pad. Regarding the resource confidence, the company told me that
while they will conduct further infill drilling to get the resource up from inferred to indicated, it’s
not a geologically difficult body and the homogenous nature of the mineralization should mean
simple and straightforward mining. No issues here.
Permitting Status: The only potential weak point of this story, MAI will begin its permitting
track by submitting its EIA application this quarter. My doubts are less about the company here
and more about Mexico and its SEMARNAT office being capable of expediting the necessary
permits in little more than one calendar year. Under normal circumstances and for what is
ultimately a simple and straightforward project that’s perfectly achievable, but I’ve seen too
many projects suffer “frustrating and illogical delays” due to LatAm public servants dragging
their heels. I’m sure MAI has built some leeway into its timeline for any permit eventualities and
would probably be able to “pre-construct” a lot of the mine before getting the final rubber
stamps, but there’s still the potential for a timeline delay here.
Overall and with the single caveat of potential timeline delays due to permitting a new mine in
Mexico, this is a good-looking project on paper and a great fit as MAI’s second mine. Now to
take that paper and consider what it might be worth to the company
A financial model for Cerro de Oro
While a simplified model that will always be at the behest of the gold price, the data provided
by MAI last Monday gives us plenty of parameters with which to generate a reasonable model
and a value for the mine based on cash flow potential (the only way to value this company). To
that end, we use most of the input criteria as offered by the company list week, making slight
adjustments in order to add some conservatism to our model and hopefully making all later
surprises good ones. Therefore we use on a LoM basis:
 20,000 tonnes per day throughput rate
 An average grade of 0.37 g/t gold
 An average recovery of 68%
 We assume a mining cost (COGS + SG&A) of U$7.55/mt, some 13% higher than the
MAI assumption of U$6.66/mt in order to build in plenty of leeway
 A U$20m debt facility to cover capex, with the balance from Santana cash flow and no
equity financing required (we assume 460m S/O)
 Reasonable assumptions for normal inputs (DD&A)
 The current Mexico State burden tariff (corp tax, royalty, worker participation, etc)
6

 A 10% deduction for TC/RC, assuming MAI sells its gold in CIL to local refiners
 Other minor adjustments
We then as usual run the model using four gold prices, with U$1,500/oz base case, the
preferred U$1,700/oz to reflect current prices, then two higher price decks:
MAI.v: Cerro de Oro Annual Operating parameters
Price deck U$1.5k/ozAu U$1.7k/ozAu U$1.8k/ozAu U$2.0k/ozAu
Tonnes per year 7,200,000 7,200,000 7,200,000 7,200,000
Avg grade (g/t Au) 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37
Au prod oz (68% rec) 62,971 62,971 62,971 62,971
gold revenues 94.5 107.1 113.3 125.9
total sales 85.0 96.3 102.0 113.3
source: MAI data, IKN calcs & estimates
The criteria give us an average annual production of just under 63,000 oz gold, slightly higher
than the “approaching 60k over LoM” assumption made by Minera Alamos in its NR on Monday.
As we assume that its years eight and nine will not drop off as per their model, this fits well
enough with their guidance. We then run the eventual total sales through the condensed
income statement model:
MAI.v at CdO: Condensed Income statement model (U$m)
item U$1.5k/oz Au U$1.7k/oz Au U$1.8k/oz Au U$2.0k/oz Au
Sales (U$m) 85.0 96.3 102.0 113.3
COGS 50.4 50.4 50.4 50.4
Depreciation 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
SGA+R&D 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
NSR 4.3 4.8 5.1 5.7
Op income 22.4 33.1 38.5 49.3
Interest 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
Workers Part. 1.6 2.5 2.9 3.7
Tax 5.1 7.9 9.3 12.1
Net income 13.2 20.3 23.9 31.0
Shares out 460 460 460 460
EPS 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.07
Sust. Capex 2 2 2 2
FCF 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08
Sources: MAI data, IKN calcs & estimates
While the net income number is interesting, as usual in these mining growth stories the
important number is operating income and in this case, we sketch out an annual operating
income of U$33.1m at U$1,700/oz gold, or C$40m at our standard house forex of US$0.80 =
CAD$1.00 (which, by the way, is North of CAD$44.5m at the current forex).
This generates a price target for MAI at Cerro de Oro only and here’s a best guess on that:
Sales and earnings Target price & valuation data for MAI.v based on
Year 1.5kAu 1.7kAu 1.8kAu 2.0kAu CERRO DE ORO ONLY and U$1,700/oz gold
Sales (U$m) 85 96 102 113 12-month target $0.39 based on 6x FCF
Sales growth 13% 6% 11%
EPS 0.029 0.044 0.052 0.067 Mkt cap (CAD$m) $228 Enterprise value $223
FCF 0.038 0.054 0.062 0.077 P/sales (1.5kAu) 2.36 EV/sales (1.5kAu) 2.32
P/E (1.5kAu) 17.3 EV/EBITDA (1.5kAu) 8.8
P/E (1.7kAu) 11.2 EV/EBITDA (1.7kAu) 6.2
P/E (1.8kAu) 9.5 EV/EBITDA (1.8kAu) 5.4
7

It’s always going to depend on the multiple one uses, but I think 6X FCF is reasonable at this
stage as that would grow toward 10X as the project is built out and comes to fruition. So as
things stand, the model guides to Cerro de Oro being worth 39c per share to MAI in 2023. As
for the glass-half-empty people among the readership, if you think 6X is too generous for a
mine that’s still unfunded and not on its permitting track yet, a low 4X multiple changes the
target to 26c.
An update on Santana
Though not a main focus of our efforts today, we now factor in the influence of Santana on the
current share price and our eventual target via the current, unadjusted model for MAI’s first
operating mine, now close to commercial production.. For today you only get the target price
box, as we can check up on progress in more detail and make any adjustments when MAI
reports its 3q22 quarter in about a month’s time. So without much evidence, our assumption
that Santana is now worth around 36c/share to the company.
Sales and earnings Target price & valuation data for MAI.v based on
Year 1.5kAu 1.7kAu 1.8kAu 2.0kAu SANTANA ONLY and U$1,700/oz gold
Sales (U$m) 46 53 56 62 12-month target $0.36 based on 10x FCF
Sales growth 13% 6% 11% Upside to target -28%
EPS 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 Mkt cap (CAD$m) $225 Enterprise value $221
FCF 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 P/sales (1.5kAu) 4.27 EV/sales (1.5kAu) 4.19
P/E (1.5kAu) 35.9 EV/EBITDA (1.5kAu) 19.1
P/E (1.7kAu) 22.2 EV/EBITDA (1.7kAu) 12.6
P/E (1.8kAu) 18.7 EV/EBITDA (1.8kAu) 10.8
Therefore and without complicating matters with a valuation for La Florida and its eventual
mine, there’s a solid case to value Minera Alamos on its two advanced development projects
alone and get to 75c/share, which represents an upside of 51.5% to this weekend’s share price
of C$0.495.
Before moving on, these two charts are a reminder of where we stand as regards Santana. The
latest from the company is that they will declare formal commercial production on the mine on
January 1st 2023, but that isn’t going to stop them from returning a mine operating profit in Q3
or Q4, as long as our model holds. The chart below left outlines what we know and can assume
about 2022 monthly production from the mine and with the leach pads now being stacked and
abundant seasonal rainfall now arrived to replenish reservoirs, production is expected to
increase toward 2,500/oz month by year end, which is almost the nameplate and well in excess
of the rate required to declare commercial production. Meanwhile the chart below right has the
known production quarters to date (and recall the mine turned a profit in 2q22, 3,129 oz gold
was enough) and our best guesses for Q3 (5,700oz Au) and beyond. Note that although slated
as a 35,000/oz year mine, we fully expect Santana to start beating that total on a quarterly
basis and should eventually trend as high at 50k oz Au per year as its growth program kicks in.
MAI at Santana: Approx production per month to date
(ests for 2q22 months)
8
104
098
0311 0731 0021
008
0011 5722 0051 0002 0002 0052 0052
3000
2750
2500
2250
2000
1750
1500 1250 1000 750
500
250
0
12q4 naj bef ram rpa yam nuj luj tse
gua
tse
pes
tse
tco
tse
von
tse
ced
Oz Au MAI: Gold sales, per qtr
source: MAI data, IKN calcs and ests
104 8512 9213 0075 0007 0008 0008 0008
00001
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000 4000 3000 2000
1000
0
12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4 tse32q1 tse32q2 tse32q3 tse32q4
Au Oz
source: company data, IKN ests

Meanwhile just a couple of charts from the balance sheet in order to frame what we expect
from the most important line items of the upcoming financials. We’re now at the point where
MAI has no large bills to pay and a mine slowly building its profitability, so as from now there’s
every reason to expect treasury cash&eq (est C$10m as at 3q22) and working capital (est
C$19m as at 3q22) to begin to accrue.
MAI.v: Cash treasury per qtr
24
22
20 18
16
14
12 10
8
6
4
2
0
Which brings to a close the preliminary number crunch and valuation section of this update
note on MAI. And for what it’s worth I’m going to run with that 75c price target for the time
being and feature it in the ‘Stocks to Follow’ table going forward, but reserve the right to
upgrade it as soon as it gets hit (and it will). After all, this is my idea of a real long-term
investment and wealth building opportunity in the precious metals mining space and that will
not change even as the price blasts past $2.00 in a couple of years’ time, but for those with a
nearer-term focus a more modest 12 month target of 75c under current market conditions is a
reasonable one.
Thoughts on why MAI.v has failed to move up in 2022
We now move to the second subject on the agenda today, as we consider reasons why MAI has
failed to lift off this year. As noted in the ten-day chart above, that dynamic remained in-paly
last week as the initial enthusiasm for the Cerro de Oro PEA release waned and while the stock
did return a weekly win, it’s 49.5c close was something of a disappointment to this desk
(FWIW, on Monday I predicted a 60c or 61c close for the week to a couple of WhatsApp pals).
However and before we start picking too many
nits about MAI, another price chart (right):
The 2022 YTD visuals for MAI show that while it
hasn’t set the world on fire, neither has it lost
much and there are few juniors that can say
the same this year (I know, I own a few of
them). Minera Alamos hasn’t been a net winner,
but it has benefited from a bunch of loyal
shareholders who see the same obvious and
deep value in the stock as well as being willing
to place their trust (and cash) in the hands of
an exemplary board and management team.
There are a lot of long-term investors in this
stock who bring the same mindset to this investment and they have bulwarked the stock and
stopped it from sinking too low.
Therefore my criticisms will be tempered by reality, but all the same there’s no getting around
the fact that both I and many other MAI holders came into 2022 expecting greater things from
the stock after having watched its price action get sat upon by Osisko Gold Royalties drip selling
into the open market in 4q21. When it ran to 70c in April I was “a good start, let’s see how far
it goes” and while Messrs Putin and Powell put the dampers on that run in their separate styles,
it’s still a drag to have a Top Pick going nowhere. On consideration, I see two reasons for the
stock’s lacklustre performance. In fact, that’s three:
9
61q4 71q1 71q2 71q3 71q4 81q1 81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 22q3
source: company filings
srallod
fo snoillim
28 MAI.v: Working Capital per qtr
26
24
22
20 18
16
14
12 10 8
6
4
2
0
-2
61q4 71q1 71q2 71q3 71q4 81q1 81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 22q3
source company filings
srallod
fo snoillim

 The market is in the dumpster
 MAI hasn’t delivered on timelines and now has something to prove with Cerro de Oro
 Commercial production at Santana is more important than the CdO PEA
But reason one is slightly unfair, I’ve already tackled it above and it applies to the whole sector,
not just Minera Alamos. We move to the company specific issues.
Non-delivery on timelines: Before this gets too heavy or critical, I do realize Covid happened
and I also know how much it stopped the world from moving forward on its plans. I also speak
as a self-admitted “MAI True Believer” who is fully on-board with the company and its plans,
think they are the right people doing development in the right way and it’s virtually impossible
to imagine team more aligned to its shareholder base, so the loyalty that has seen MAI through
to today is both understandable and fully deserved.
However and it must be said, when you put together a corporate presentation in December
2019 (to be exact December 3rd and modified on December 7th at 12.13pm) that states Santana
will be in production “Mid-2020” and with expansion slated for H2 2021, the fact that Santana
still isn’t in commercial production and is now expected to go commercial on January 1st 2023 is
a timeline miss. While we’re on this corporate presentation flashback and being picky, we
should give credit to the company for securing the mooted third asset and, as things turned
out, Cerro de Oro took the place of La Fortuna. But again, the “production H2 2021” for the
second asset is now slated for mid-2024, that’s basically three years.
And that’s enough Memory Lane, we return to the present and now consider the timeline to
production at Cerro de Oro, as proposed by Minera Alamos last week. Here’s the relevant slide
from its corporate presentation, notes underneath:
In essence, MAI is proposing a seven-quarter lapse between today and start-up of the Cerro de
Oro mine, or in reality nine quarters until it hits the type of profitable “pre-commercial
production” we now have at Santana so let’s slate Cerro de Oro commercial production for
10

2025. We also have milestones in that slide, some of which are more important than others.
While the first four quarters shouldn’t post too many problems (submitting permit applications
and starting drill and met testing programs are internal), the fun starts as from 3q23 when the
company expects to receive permits on-time, then start the build out before the end of the year
and start the mine up just six months after that. Those are three and a half quarters of
intensive timelines and I don’t really mind (or care) whether you blame Covid, AMLO or the
company, but there’s no way around the fact that the Santana project suffered significant
delays.
As timelines go, the track for Cerro de Oro to operational status is a reasonable one all round.
It’s going to be sharp for the company to stay on track and they’ll have to execute smartly (and
get those permits), while at the same time it’s not long enough for us retail shareholder grunts
to wonder why we’re sponsoring a junior so far into the future. However, it also means that
even if the company hits all milestones on time we’re still three years away from this company
making it to 100k/annum production cadence and as this estimated forward sales guidance
chart illustrates (by making a couple of reasonable guesses for Santana expansion, CdO
ramping and the eventual build-out at La Fortuna), close on five years before this is a 200,000
ounce per year machine.
MAI: Est forward sales guidance
60000
Gold ounces per qtr
55000
50000
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
11
12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4 tse32q1 tse32q2 tse32q3 tse32q4 tse42q1 tse42q2 tse42q3 tse42q4 tse52q1 tse52q2 tse52q3 tse52q4 tse62q1 tse62q2 tse62q3 tse62q4 tse72q1 tse72q2 tse72q3
Oz Au/Qtr
Fortuna Au sales
CdO Au sales
Santana Au sales
source: IKN ests from MAI data
Please be clear, this is not an issue o a personal level. I’m here because I recognize an obvious
opportunity to get in on the ground floor with a company and a story that is destined for far
greater things and, aligned as it is with its shareholder base, will create wealth for all
concerned. Minera Alamos ticks all the boxes as a true investment in the mining sphere, not
just a 12 month trade or a three month speculative flip on the movements in the underlying
metals. Opportunities such as MAI are rarities and it’s not for nothing that it’s my largest single
position in the sector and Top Pick here at The IKN Weekly. However, neither am I myopic
about the way in which this market operates and for many market participants, a strong
fundamental story with top class management is not what they are looking for. That’s fair
enough, so the way in which MAI traded on the back of last week’s PEA news was more about
a world not ready to commit long-term cash to a lacklustre macro market for juniors.
Which opens the floor for the other reason why I think MAI hasn’t taken off yet.
Commercial production at Santana is more important than the CdO PEA: The nature
of circumstances in 2022 has seen the declaration of commercial production at Santana pushed
back and back again. As alluded in the previous segment(s), we cannot fault MAI for many of
the reasons behind these delays (e.g. Covid) and that’s also true in 2022, but the combination
of external and internal factors have done what they’ve done.
 First there was Covid. We know about that
 Then Santana began producing in 4q21, only to throttle back and take time to work
through teething glitches (perfectly normal for a heapleach operation, in fact it’s best to
sort out issues early as they tend to run on rails afterward)

 Then the company had to wait for its explosives storage permits
 Then the lack of rainfall began to affect 2q22 plans and saw the company hold back on
its main ramp up until the rains reappeared in Q3
Nothing nefarious in that list, nothing on which we can complain to the management, but at
some point this year there was a subtle change of narrative at MAI. Faced with the series of
unfortunate and mostly unrelated small delays and glitches that stopped development of
Santana at the preferred rhythm, the company started talking up the Cerro de Oro PEA as the
important catalyst, the one that would make the difference to the narrative and ultimately the
share price. The insiders and management may even have sincerely come to believe it as true,
as well, but I found myself keeping my own counsel on this subject while conversing on this
with President Doug Ramshaw during 2022.
While I agree that the Cerro de Oro PEA is important and a catalyst for adding real value to
MAI, the fact remains that until Santana declares commercial production the stock remains off-
limits to a lot of what we can group as “professional money”, typically larger institutions and
value investment books that have strict barriers to entry on junior names. MAI is still in its early
days as a long-term wealth creating investment and has enjoyed downside protection from a
general lack of sellers, as the stock is held by a loyal core of retail investors that have gathered
around Ramshaw, Koningen and their team (and rightly so). But “no sellers” is only one half of
a successful public quote and the inertia suffered this year is due to the lack of new buyers. As
noted above, it’s not the right profile for the flippers and near-term exploreco speculators that
jump onto momentum trades or a “hot hole” out of some exploreco, then use well-trodden
social media channels to pump it higher and “feed the quacking ducks” before moving on to the
next trade. That type of zero sum game is an anathema to the typical profile of a MAI investor
and equally, the spec and momo traders in the TSXV aren’t interested in a boring stock such as
this with the old-fangled idea of real wealth creation at the centre of its plan. The result is a
lack of buyers that cancels out the advantage of the legion of strong hand retail holders in this
stock and all the time, the exact type of long-term, value hunting money that would suit MAI
down to the ground has been locked out of the stock because the commercial production
declaration has kept getting set back.
As a result, 2022 has turned into a wash and even with the strongly positive PEA news on CdO
last week, there wasn’t any serious buying interest in the company. That detail seems to have
been lost by MAI along the way in 2022 and while it’s understandable, it’s also been a major
source of frustration for this desk all year. I get that this company is a small team and cannot
effectively push 100% on more than one project at a time, so when at some point mid-year the
narrative changed and CdO PEA became “the next thing” it became the latest delay to the
eventual declaration of commercial production. Most recently there’s also been a “well we could
do it now, but it would be neater and easier for the CFO to wait until quarter end”, which was
slightly annoying. I don’t mean to make this into a Big Thing and three or five years from now
when MAI.to (not MAI.v) is flying high today’s kvetch will be a mere footnote. What’s more,
assuming the commercial production declaration comes as now expected on January 1st we’re
almost at the end of the wait anyway. That timing may work out well and new insto budget
money to for a place to allocate itself as from 2023 will be more than welcome, but I have little
doubt that if Santana were already commercial by now, its price would be closer to my current
target than it is today.
With that off my chest, it’s time to wrap up and see the forest for the trees. Be in no doubt,
Minera Alamos (MAI.v) is still a nailed on Top Pick and my best investment idea in the junior
space today and, assuming a level playing field with the gold price, anyone buying at these
current prices will not regret doing so. The fact that Santana isn’t officially commercial yet and
has stopped insto money from buying the stock (and the news last week) is ultimately a case of
your author nitpicking and I wouldn’t be so fussy if I were a buyer, as those of you looking to
position in this excellent opportunity should consider the next two months before that
declaration as an obvious window of advantage. Get in before the deep pockets.
12

Stocks to Follow
The benchmark ETFs for the PM sector GDX (+1.1%) and GDXJ (+1.9%) put in a second
positive week overall, but the market reaction to the US jobs numbers on Friday took away a lot
of the intra-week gains and left metals bulls sighing on what might have been. Our Stocks to
Follow list largely matched the overall sector with ten winners (MAI.v, QCCU.v, RIO.v, PA.v,
APN.v, MIRL.cse, NCAU.v, ATC.v, ELBM.v, WRN.to) from the 18 covered stocks including larger
percentage gains in Palamina (PA.v up 16.7%...only a penny in real terms) and Electra Battery
(ELBM.v up 9.7%), but most of the others moving up by minor amounts. Three stocks were
unchanged on the week (SGI.v, PGM.v, GSHR.v, all goldies), that means five losers (ARG.to,
CKG.v, ALDE.v, XYZ.v, MENE.v) but even here losses were minor and no real harm done.
With the addition of Pure Gold (PGM.v) to the list last week we now have 17 stocks under
active or Watchlist coverage, three below our self-imposed limit. Just two blobs of green and
that sucks.
company Ticker this week Avg Price Reco date Current PPS Gain/Loss% Notes
TOP PICKS
Minera Alamos MAI.v STR BUY C$0.21 13-Oct-19 C$0.495 135.7% New $0.75 near-term tgt
RECOMMENDED STOCKS
Amerigo Res ARG.to STR BUY C$1.36 12-Dec-21 C$0.95 -30.2% CheapCu w/low downside risk
Superior Gold SGI.v STR BUY C$0.95 3-Apr-22 C$0.38 -60.0% Needs to improve by Q4
QC Copper&Gold QCCU.v BUY C$0.275 25-Apr-21 C$0.17 -38.2% Now drilling. Easy hold
Rio2 Ltd. RIO.v HOLD C$0.83 22-Apr-18 C$0.13 -84.3% Cheap on permit probs, appeal
SPECULATIVE TRADES
Chesapeake Gold CKG.v SPEC BUY C$3.07 20-Feb-22 C$1.94 -36.8% Au leverage, small trade so far
Pure Gold PGM.v SPEC BUY C$0.14 26-Sep-22 C$0.14 0.0% spec turnround trade, Au in Ca
Aldebaran Res. ALDE.v BUY C$0.72 16-May-21 C$0.64 -11.1% trying patience
Palamina Corp PA.v SPEC BUY C$0.295 21-Nov-21 C$0.07 -76.3% Au expl in S.Peru
Altiplano Metals APN.v HOLD C$0.31 17-Sep-21 C$0.23 -25.8% Cheap entry, plan on track.
Minera IRL MIRL.cse hold C$0.195 22-Jul-12 C$0.095 -51.3% CEO change will move stock
A WATCHLIST OF POTENTIAL TRADES. NB: I DO NOT OWN
Newcore Gold NCAU.v SPEC BUY C$0.51 20-Mar-22 C$0.26 -49.0% potential gold exploreco trade
ATAC Res ATC.v SPEC BUY C$0.095 11-Sep-22 C$0.085 -10.5% V cheap Yukon neighbour play
Electra Battery ELBM.v WATCH C$5.31 20-Mar-22 C$4.20 -20.9% potential battery metals play
Anacortes Mining XYZ.v WATCH C$0.49 22-Jul-22 C$0.51 4.1% potential gold exploreco trade
Goldshore Res GSHR.v WATCH C$0.33 22-Jul-22 C$0.195 -40.9% potential gold exploreco trade
Western Copper WRN.to SPEC BUY C$2.41 20-Mar-22 C$1.79 -25.7% potential copper trade
LONG-TERM NON-MINING HOLD
Mene Inc. MENE.v adding C$0.66 6-Dec-20 C$0.50 -24.2% LT bet, adding slowly
CLOSED TRADES IN 2022 date closed close price
Great Bear Res GBR.v Jan'22 C$15.83 26-Aug-20 C$28.58 80.5% Bought out by Kinross, print
Copper Mountain CMMC.to Jan'22 C$3.40 18-Jun-21 C$3.78 15.9% Sold 1/2 position in rebalance
Copper Mountain CMMC.to Feb'22 C$3.40 18-Jun-21 C$3.70 8.8% Sold rest on FY22 guidance
Trilogy Metals TMQ Mar'22 U$1.84 15-Sep-19 U$1.04 -41.3% killed by US permit reversal
McEwen Mining MUX Apr'22 U$0.89 2-Jan-22 U$0.82 -7.9% No 2022 turnaround, cut loss
Abrasilver Res. ABRA.v May'22 C$0.42 24-Apr-22 C$0.33 -21.4% sold to reduce Ag exposure
Strategic Metals SMD.v May'22 C$0.42 31-Jan-21 C$0.30 -28.6% trade flatlined 1.5 years
Discovery Silver DSV.v Jun'22 C$1.77 24-Oct-21 C$1.39 -21.5% Cutting Ag exp.& raising cash
Element 29 ECU.v Jul'22 C$0.58 6-Mar-22 C$0.30 -48.3% sold to cut Cu exposure
2015 to 2021 annual closed positions in appendices below, 2009 to 2014 closed positions in editions IKN553 or earlier
13

Now for a few notes on some of the covered companies:
Amerigo Resources (ARG.to): Our main copper play peaked midweek and had a sucky
Friday, closing 2c down on the week but as this
ten-day chart comparing ARG to the main copper
producer ETF (COPX) and the copper spot price
(HG00), its overall performance wasn’t out of the
ordinary, merely in-line. That still sucks, though.
All this is happening in a quiet newsflow period,
we haven’t had an official release from ARG since
its 2q22 results were filed back on August 3rd.
However, we have had updated corporate
presentations in that time and the latest arrived
on the company website last Monday (8). Most
of its content is the same as in previous
slideshows, but Slide 17 stood out as it franks
this house’s take on the financials at ARG:
Our house position for this year has been that U$3.00/lb copper is the breakeven baseline for
the company, that U$3.40/lb copper would be enough to cover the company’s operational
requirements and its 3c/quarter standard dividend on an indefinite basis and that at U$3.80/lb
and above the “top-up” or bonus dividends are in play again. This table largely agrees with the
house call and that’s a good thing.
Pure Gold (PGM.v): We cover the PGM 3q22 production numbers in ‘Market Watching’ below,
here we quickly note the share price action via a ten-day hourlies chart and on that…
…it could have been worse. The stock was knocked back to (what looks like its new) default
position at 14c and stayed there, with some extra volume on the NR but neither was there a
14

rush to get out or get in. Overall, the market seems to recognize that the Q4 newsflow is what
matters the most for this story and share price.
Rio2 Ltd (RIO.v): Still in the penalty box and likely to stay there until we get some news,
though there are a couple of things to mention. Firstly, RIO managed to see some moderate
buying action early week, in line with many other juniors at the time. That’s a repeated story on
the week and we saw the same in many other
stocks, but it’s not a given in a “broken story”.
This also gets a mention due to the second
thing and I’ve thought hard about what I
should/should not say on this.
This isn’t the time or the place to spread
rumours about a stock, less one that’s been
beaten up badly for its permitting issues, even
less due to my “Don’t give up on Rio2” stance
and decision to hold through on a large*
position. So rather than getting into the weeds
and talking up details or names, I’m going to
keep it general and say that on two occasions
in the last few days, rumours concerning financial instos interested in taking a piece of Fenix in
return for what they could offer arrived at this desk.
This may be the reason the stock price got nibbled at last week but I for one hope that Rio2
doesn’t commit too deeply with any third party at the moment. We know it has some cash
treasury and enough to tide it over for a few months, we also know that the process to sell
some non-core royalties is in progress, as revealed four editions ago in IKN695 dated
September 11th (extract):
“…the process of selling non-core royalties held by the company and unrelated to
Fenix is advanced and timing on any announcement is more a case of getting the
contracts into good order, rather than any lack of will from either party. It may take a
month, maybe a little more but in general terms the company is fully confident of
raising the money it will require to get it through the Chilean appeals process.”
Therefore and until we know more about progress on the appeal, I’d be leery about seeing a
larger deal appear with a new third party looking for a piece of Fenix at a cut price. Leery yes,
but not automatically negative as the “right partner” would lend kudos to the story. But in
general terms, now is not the time to dilute asset ownership. Finally, the story in today’s
‘Regional Politics’ section entitled, “Chile: Mines closed and permitting tracks withdrawn” is
worth the time and eyeballs of RIO.v longs, as it notes another example of the type of
treatment now being handed out to businesses from the clearly anti-development people
running Chile’s SEA. At some point Boric will have to do something and that day will be a good
one for Rio2.
Minera IRL (MIRL.cse): The company refused to give any word or information to the market
regarding the protest that halted production of the Corihuarmi mine, so we can only assume
they will pretend it didn’t happen. No word on
whether the protest continues from local
IRL: Corihuarmi quarterly sales
media, either, though the September
production numbers show a sharp drop in gold
shipments to just 1,190oz in the month, which
is likely connected to the protest and mine
gate roadblocks. This makes the preliminary quarter shipment number 5,206oz gold.
In other news, we are now five weeks away
from the next penalty payment due to Cofide
15
2225 2165 7895 1326 9494 4075 5146 6095 5915 0294 7465 1386 5785 3106 9526 0776 7605 9425 6025
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000 3000
2000
1000
0
81q1 81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 22q3
Oz Au
source: IRL filings

if the company doesn’t settle its bridge loan debt, with an extra U$1.368m subtracted from the
amount Cofide would owe MIRL in return as for 15th
November. It therefore stands to reason that if MIRL
has a pending deal for the mine that the closure
would happen before the next penalty kicks in (the
buyer would have less to pay back).
In trading, small volumes early week saw MIRL drop
to 6.5c and a new low for 2022. Some even smaller
volume late week painted it back to 9.5c. The plain
fact is that nobody cares and until there’s a
significant change in the C-suite, I can’t blame them.
Superior Gold (SGI.v): After some decent bidding early week that pushed SGI up to 42c on
Tuesday, it was frustrating to watch SGI lose the 40c
line on Friday (but only because I’m not a buyer at the
moment) but the Fed-dominated macro moves made it
understandable. Still, grrrr.
SGI normally declares its quarters’ production on week
three of the following month, which means we
probably have a week and a half (or so) to wait for
news on the Plutonic 3q22 preliminary production
numbers and as such, you’ll get another small
reminder this time next weekend. Suffice to say this
weekend that after two mediocre productions quarters
the company needs to meet its revised guidance and
come in with a better number.
QC Copper & Gold (QCCU.v): It’s mostly on light volume and therefore rather fragile, but the
rally in QCCU has brought it back 26% from its lows in late July and Friday’s close was the best
price since May became June. So I’ll take it.
Goldshore Resources (GSHR.v): Unchanged on the week, GSHR shot out the stalls on
Monday amid plenty of rah-rah noise around the stock, its price action a good reminder of what
happens when a widely touted exploreco turns sour.
Along with the general improvement in mining stocks on Monday (GDXJ popped by 5.2% that
day), GSHR pimped its ride with a NR on Tuesday entitled (9) “Goldshore Intersects 62.8m @
0.88% Copper Equivalent at North Coldstream with Significant Cobalt Assays”. This is a
secondary target to the Northeast of the main Moss Lake drilling target and as it’s a previously
16

worked open pit mine, the company was always likely to hit something nice with a scout drill
program. They promo’d with the “strategic metals”
angle, with commentary such as “These copper and
cobalt results confirm that North Coldstream has
important critical mineral value and highlights
multiple deposit styles in the district, which is a
hallmark of important mineral districts worldwide.”
We remind readers that there are a lot of high-
traffic newsletter writers and brokerage advisors
underwater on this stock, all with a vested interest
in seeing it higher as soon as possible in order to
relieve bagholder clients. They won’t think twice
about pumping such a stock fast and loud, which
goes a long way to explain Monday’s reaction as
well as the breathless prose about GSHR being the next EV trade…hey, perhaps Elon Musk will
make a bid? However, economic reality is the other side of underwater retail The result is a
stock that popped 30.8% at the opening bell Monday and immediately attracted those looking
to liquidate into strength.
However, the bagholders are a double-edged sword and one of the reasons we are interested
in GSHR as a trade vehicle, as it’s the constant disappointment and selling pressure that’s
pushed the stock this low in the first place. These days GSHR shows good alpha to peers, it
does enough volume for traders to position and current holders are disgruntled, a set of
conditions in the fliptrader’s favour if sector turns in our favour. The task is to get the entry
timing right and the moral of the story in that chart is not to buy the first flush, as until Friday
the sector was looking reasonable positive even as GSHR traded back to a generally available
21c. That would have been a nice price with better macro news and something to keep in mind
as we approach Thursday and the CPI reading.
The Copper Basket
After forty weeks of 2022, The Copper Basket shows a loss of 47.27% level stakes:
company ticker price 1/1/22 Shares out Market Cap current pps gain/loss%
1 Copper Mtn CMMC.to 3.42 210.166 382.50 1.82 -46.8%
2 Marimaca Cop MARI.to 3.77 88.118 308.41 3.50 -7.2%
3 Western Copper WRN.to 2.00 151.451 271.10 1.79 -10.5%
4 Oroco Res OCO.v 2.04 203.4 176.96 0.87 -57.4%
5 Nevada Copper NCU.to 0.71 448.437 107.62 0.24 -66.2%
6 Aldebaran Res. ALDE.v 0.84 138.401 88.58 0.64 -23.8%
7 Regulus Res. REG.v 1.06 101.85 87.59 0.86 -18.9%
8 Hot Chili HCH.v 1.53 109.223 87.38 0.80 -47.7%
9 Meridian Min MNO.to 1.18 153.735 67.64 0.44 -62.7%
10 C3 Metals CCCM.v 0.16 645.379 25.82 0.04 -75.0%
11 Kutcho Copper KC.v 0.88 103.94 24.95 0.24 -72.7%
12 Element 29 Res ECU.v 0.58 79.24 22.19 0.28 -51.7%
13 QC Copper QCCU.v 0.34 129.06 21.94 0.17 -50.0%
14 Doré Copper DCMC.v 0.79 66.123 20.50 0.31 -60.8%
15 Coast Copper COCO.v 0.13 41.335 2.27 0.055 -57.7%
NB: All stocks in CAD$ Portfolio avg -47.27%
The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Our 2022 Copper Basket returned a mixed bag of
results last week with eight winners (CMMC.to, OCO.v, MARI.to, NCU.to, WRN.to, HCH.v,
ECU.v, QCCU.v), one unchanged stock (COCO.v) and six losers (MNO.to, REG.v, CCCM.v,
17

ALDE.v, KC.v, DCMC.v) but the most obvious dynamic was the way the big winners were all
concentrated at the top of the market cap league
table. The three double figure percentage 10% The Copper Basket 2022, weekly evolution
winners on the week were Copper Mountain 0%
(CMMC.to up 18.2%), Marimaca Copper Corp -10%
(MARI.to up 12.2%) and Oroco Resources
-20%
(OCO.v up 10.1%) and it so happens that all the
-30%
stocks with a market cap of over C$100m were
-40%
positive on the week. As for the biggest loser,
-50%
that was C3 Metals (CCCM.v down 20.0%) and
-60%
with all those, our basket average improved by
exactly 1.15% on the week, so now you know.
In general, the copper stocks followed the pattern
of the other metals sectors and faded with all the
rest on Friday and that negative jobs print for
equities. This week’s price chart is self-explanatory
and doesn’t need a lot else from me, so I’ll limited
copper market comment to this (10) insert from a
Reuters rolodex member:
“Despite the ongoing supply disruptions,
concerns over macro headwinds and recession
fears are dominating copper’s sentiment and
prices for now,” said ING commodities
strategist Ewa Manthey.
In other words, another talking head mentioning
the two clear dynamics of the current copper market. In the bear corner the financial wonks
and their deference to Dr. Copper, in the bull corner the real world fundies people wondering
how much real world metal is left for real world customers.
In macro news, Fitch Ratings published a long report on how it sees the future for the so-called
“energy transition metals” (whatever happened to the early-year buzzphrase of “future facing
metals”?) including its views on cobalt, nickel, lithium etc, as well as studies on the supply side
and the likely demand growth from sectors such as EV transport. When it came to copper, they
brought in copper consultancy company CRU to help with the call and here are a couple of
charts from that part of the presentation (10a):
It wasn’t exactly samo samo, but the message Fitch sent out was roughly similar to other
financial entities in that they expect the copper market to move to supply deficit by 2025 and
when 2032 comes around, the overall deficit may be as high at 6.4mmt. In order to cover that
shortfall, Fitch estimates the copper mining sector will need to invest U$105Bn (with a B) in
new projects and that, ladies and gents, is an awful lot of money looking at not so many
projects.
18
ts1naJ ht9naJ ht61 dr32 ht03 ht6bef ht31 ht02 ht72 t6raM ht31 ht02 ht72 dr3rpA ht01 ht71 ht42 1yam ht8 ht51 dn22 ht92 ht5nuj ht21 ht91 ht62 dr3yluj ht01 ht71 ht42 ts13 t7gua ht41 ts12 ht82 t4pes ht11 ht81 ht52 n2tco ht9
source: IKN calcs

Meanwhile in China, we’re now just one week away from the start of the big ruling party
conference at which President Xi is expected to be ratified as (glorious? dear?) leader for the
next five year period, thereby cementing his legacy. We’ll have more on that and what it might
mean to the copper (and metals) market next weekend.
Now for our regular weekly look at inventories in the three official world copper systems with
data supplied as always by the reliable Chilean beancounters, Cochilco:
 In another quiet week due to another public holiday in China mainland, aggregate
stocks rose by 7,773 metric tonnes (mt) to close Friday at 214,743mt.
 The holiday meant SHFE was closed for the
week and its stock level remained unchanged
at 30,459mt.
 The only significant move came at the LME,
where a total of 8,025mt copper landed at its warehouses and for a change, the adds were
split between Asia and Europe. Stocks have
climbed gradually in recent weeks to the
current 143,775mt. Cancelled warrants
dropped a little further to 6,875mt and are
now at what’s likely to be a low ebb.
 Another small and inconsequential drawdown at the Comex, stocks dropping 252mt and
closing the weekend of 40,509mt. No biggie.
The dedicated SHFE charts are unchanged on the week, so just the one to mark time.
Shanghai Futures Exchange Warehouse Stocks, 2014 to date
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
19
31'13ceD dr32 ht02 ht51 ht01 ht5tco ht03 ht52 dn22 ht71 ht21 ht6pes ts1von 5102ht72ced ts12 ht71 ht21 ht7guA dn2tcO ht4ceD ht92 ht62 ts12 ht61 ht01 7102
ht5von
ts13 ht52 dn22 ht42 ht91 ht41 ht9 9102
dr3bef
ts13 ht62 ts12 ht51 ht01 0202ht5naj 0202ts1ram ht62 ts12 ht61 ht11 0202ht6ced ts13 ht82 dr32 ht81 ht21 ht7 2202dn2naj ht72 ht42 ht91 ht41 ht9
LME: Cu tonnage under cancelled warrant
Mt Cu
|
source: Cochilco
Now for of notes on three of our basket stocks:
Meridian Mining (MNO.to): In IKN698 last weekend, we weren’t too impressed by the 43-
101 compliant maiden resource estimate (MRE) published by MNO on its Cabaçal project. For
sure it’s the first stage of many but as summed up at the end of the note…
“…they haven’t presented the market with any reason to buy into this story on the
back of this MRE. And that, in a market looking for excuses to liquidate positions and
go to cash, is going to dump your stock.”
MNO tried to rally on Monday, but once the
market levelled out seller appeared and after
playing around with a few timescales on its price
chart, this three month variety does the fairest
job of context:
That’s an (equal) new low for the stock price and
that sounds right to this desk. Not the first time
I’ve mentioned it and it’s not as if I’ve avoided all
00142 52074 57334 00714 52045 05205 52027 52418 52926 05694 57332 52271 05761 52511 57471 52581 52862 00642 00743 57924 00914 52975 05174 05803 04441 0588 0018 5786
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000 40000 30000
20000
10000
0
dr3rpa ht01 ht71 ht42 1.yam ht8 ht51 dn22 ht92 ht5nuj ht21 ht91 ht62 dr3yluj ht01 ht71 ht42 ts13 ht7gua ht41 ts12 ht82 ht4pes ht11 ht81 ht52 dn2tco ht9
mt Cu
source: Cochilco

the losers this year, but after having this stock on my short-list for a trade earlier in the year I
consider this a bullet missed.
Copper Mountain (CMMC.to): We tackle CMMC in today’s ‘Market Watching’ section, as the
news of its deal to sell its Eva property in Australia is a clear positive for the stock and in
particular, its financial position.
Hot Chili (HCH.ax): Rarely does the thinly traded Canadian TSXV listing trade out of step with
the heavier volume main Australian listing, but over the last two weeks HCH.v is around 10%
behind HCH.ax on the arbitrage. The Oz listing also saw a lack of trading on Friday, potentially
because its year-end financials were posted after the close Friday. The numbers look in order
and the casual Canadian observer may want to study the filing to see how much more
Australians get to find out about a company compared to the opaque Canadian regulations.
We may see the TSXV stock play catch-up to the main listing when trading re-starts on
Tuesday. There may even be a small flip bargain available to the nimble traders among this
audience (I won’t be partaking, being about as nimble as a hippo).
The Producer Basket
After forty weeks of 2022, the Producer Basket shows a loss of 20.33% to level stakes:
company ticker price 1/1/22 Shares out MktCap(U$Bn) current pps gain/loss%
1 Newmont NEM 62.02 797.44 33.97 42.60 -31.3%
2 Barrick GOLD 19.00 1779 27.54 15.48 -18.5%
3 Franco-Nevada FNV 138.29 191.192 22.97 120.16 -13.1%
4 Agnico Eagle AEM 53.14 454.904 19.40 42.64 -19.8%
5 Wheaton PM WPM 42.93 450.3 14.53 32.27 -24.8%
6 Gold Fields GFI 10.99 887.72 7.61 8.57 -22.0%
7 Kinross Gold KGC 5.81 1296.5 4.85 3.74 -35.6%
8 B2Gold BTG 3.93 1055.6 3.37 3.19 -18.8%
9 Alamos Gold AGI 7.69 392.503 3.07 7.82 1.7%
10 Sandstorm SAND 6.20 223.79 1.10 4.90 -21.0%
All prices and stock quotes in U$ Port. avg -20.33%
An overall improvement of 0.61% on the week which threatened to be a lot better until Friday,
that jobs report and the ensuing sell-off took
most of the profit away from the sector. It was
also a mixed result for the components, with five
winners (NEM, FNV, AEM, GFI, AGI) and five
losers (GOLD, WPM, KGC, BTG, SAND) and while
most of those were small moves on either side,
both ends had their outliers. To the positive Gold
Fields (GFI up 5.9%) out-performed to the upside
thanks to its Rand arbitrage to the US Dollar and
to the downside, Sandstorm (SAND down 5.2%)
under-performed for a second week running
despite closing its recent bought deal fully filled.
The beating will continue until morale improves.
However, one cheer for Alamos Gold (AGI) which
is back in the green for 2022, a rare beast indeed in the PM space so well done McCluskey.
As for our relative performance, GDX did better than our list of ten by around 0.25%
20

(Sandstorm again, grrrr) and we’re now 1.75% ahead of the benchmark.
Sandstorm Gold (SAND) (SSL.to): SAND makes the comments section for the second
weekend running but this time, its newsflow was expected. First on Tuesday morning the
company announced (11) the closing of its U$80m bought deal and to the surprise and shock of
absolutely nobody, the overallotment was fully taken and gross proceeds ended at U$92m.
Then came SAND’s 3q22 preliminary sales NR (12), the royaltyco’s equivalent of the early
production news and the company reported 22,600 AuEq for the quarter, which stack up like
this compared to previous quarters:
SAND: AuEq sales per qtr
21
17041
00461 98271 00161
39331 02901 86021
59751 00471 40081 41551 68561 14781 67291
00622
25000
22500
20000
17500
15000
12500
10000
7500
5000
2500
0
91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 22q3
The 2022 Producer Basket: Weekly performance and
40% comparative to GDX control
30%
20%
10%
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
AuEq Oz
source: company filings
This was a good quarter and we’ll see the detailed breakdown when the financials are filed (in
November), but with Lundin Gold (LUG.to) having filed its own strong quarter and SAND’s
newly acquired royalty on FDN, that must be at least a part of the new total. However, it’s the
type of quarter they need to deliver this year in order to justify the balance sheet expansion
and on that subject, we close by showing that despite the much-vaunted (by the company
itself) share buyback program, SAND’s share count has risen over the years and particularly in
2022. We don’t know the exact 3q22 number yet,
but adding the latest placement result to the last
known number gets us to just under 224m shares
out.
One of the major contributors has been insiders
making whole on their cheaply priced incentive
options, RSUs and warrants as the people at the
centre of this stock duly feather their nests. As for
the stock, that’s now down 21% compared to
GDX over the last ten days, which represents over
U$220m in market cap. That compares to the
U$92m in gross proceeds SAND received from
this unwelcome bought deal so all in all, you can definitely put me in the “unimpressed with this
management team” category.
ts1naJ ht9naJ ht61 dr32 ht03 ht6bef ht31 ht02 ht72 t6ram ht31 ht02 ht72 dr3rpa ht01 ht71 ht42 1yam ht8 ht51 dn22 ht92 ht5nuj ht21 ht91 ht62 dr3luj ht01 ht71 ht42 ts13 ht7 ht41 ts12 ht82 t4pes ht11 ht81 ht52 n2tco ht9
The 2022 Producer Basket: Percentage difference
5.0% between GDX benchmark & basket (negative = IKN ahead)
4.0%
ikn 3.0%
gdx control
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
-1.0%
-2.0%
-3.0%
source: NYSE, IKN Calcs -4.0%
ts1naJ ht9naJ ht61 dr32 ht03 ht6bef ht31 ht02 ht72 t6ram ht31 ht02 ht72 dr3rpa ht01 ht71 ht42 1yam ht8 ht51 dn22 ht92 ht5nuj ht21 ht91 ht62 dr3luj ht01 ht71 ht42 ts13 ht7 ht41 ts12 ht82 t4pes ht11 ht81 ht52 n2tco ht9
source: IKN calcs, NYSE data
SAND: Shares Out
32.771 12.471 8.091 70.191 52.591 5.491 98.491 47.291 56.191 22.291 42.291 502
97.322
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
source: company filings/IKN ests
serahs
fo
snoillim

The TinyCaps List
After forty weeks of 2022, the TinyCaps show a loss of 39.48% to level stakes:
company ticker price 1/1/22 Shares out Mkt Cap current pps gain/loss%
Aurelius Min AUL.v 0.24 45.836 3.67 0.08 -66.7%
Golden Pursuit GDP.v 0.13 34.638 4.50 0.13 0.0%
Infield Min INFD.v 0.06 48.445 1.70 0.035 -41.7%
Kingfisher Met KFR.v 0.30 103.007 19.57 0.19 -36.7%
Latin Metals LMS.v 0.12 57.686 5.77 0.10 -16.7%
Manitou Gold MTU.v 0.06 344.57 12.06 0.035 -41.7%
Melkior Res MKR.v 0.295 24.011 5.52 0.23 -22.0%
Precipitate Gold PRG.v 0.105 129.322 7.76 0.06 -42.9%
Signature Res SGU.v 0.07 238.4 3.58 0.015 -78.6%
Winshear Gold WINS.v 0.08 61.585 2.77 0.045 -43.8%
This section attempts to track the tinycap mining sub-sector of the market, our ten companies
chosen under the following criteria to put together a list representing the state of play in the
sub-sector of tinycap exploration company stocks. At least, that’s the plan.
 Market capitalization of under $20m. They have to be tiny. In two cases I’ve stretched the window a
little and allowed sub-U$20m market capper in that are just over the C$20m level, but the spirit is unaltered.
 A “non broken” stock price and project story. There are literally hundreds of tinycap juniors of the right
size, but it was a particularly depressing exercise to trawl through the whole of the TSXV and find companies
that are small enough, but with life in them. The vast majority of sub-$20m stocks are broken stocks, either
traded to death on the exchange or with projects that are a bust or with entrenched management more
interested in their monthly paycheck than anything else.
 Likelihood of meaningful newsflow in 2022. This connects to the company’s “unbroken” status, as we
want news and potential catalysts from companies with projects that can work.
 Decent management if possible. When you are down among the little guys it doesn’t pay to be too
choosy, but still I preferred companies that have teams or people with good peer reputations.
Another 2022 low for the basket average as it pushed at the neg40% line. Just two winners
from our ten (INFD.v, MKR.v) on the week and
15% TinyCaps, 2022 weekly tracker
another four remained unchanged (KFR.v,
10%
LMS.v, SGU.v, WINS.v), which means four 5%
losers and among those, big percentage losses 0%
-5%
were taken by Manitou (MTU.v down 30.0%)
-10%
and Aurelius (AUL.v down 23.8%). -15%
-20%
-25%
Zero love for the tinycaps this year, here are a
-30%
few notes on no fewer than four of the -35%
components; they may be tiny and performing -40%
badly, but at least they’re not boring.
22
dn2naJ ht9
naJ
ht61naJ dr32 ht03 ht6bef ht31 ht02 ht72 ht6ram ht31 ht02 ht72 dr3rpa ht01 ht71 ht42 ts1yam ht8 ht51 dn22 ht92 ht5nuj ht21 ht91 ht62 dr3yluj ht01 ht71 ht42 ts13 ht7gua ht41 ts12 ht82 ht4pes ht11 ht81 ht52 dn2tco ht9
source: IKN calcs, TSX data

Aurelius Minerals (AUL.v): Down by over 50% since
mid-August, AUL took a whacking all through
September, the losses continue this month and on
Friday evening, we probably found out why when the
company filed to SEDAR that Resource Capital
Investment (the Rick Rule controlled segment of the
Sprott empire) has been dumping part of its large
position in the stock. The filing is to September 30th so
the recent lumpy volume days (right) are likely
connected to this.
Winshear Gold (WINS.v): Unchanged on the week, WINS had some positive news that went
unrewarded when announcing Friday morning (13) it had received its DIA drill permit for a
“…helicopter-supported drill testing of the Coritiri gold anomaly at the Gaban Gold Project, Puno
Orogenic Gold Belt, southeastern Peru.” A very overdue permit, but better late than never and
in the words of CEO Richard Williams, “Subject to availability of funding, we plan to commence
a heli-borne drill program after the coming rainy season ends in April 2023.” The condition in
that sentence sounds like share dilution to me, but it’s also a company with contacts in the right
places and shouldn’t have a problem in raising enough capital for a drill program and upcoming
dilution aside, this program will mostly likely happen on that schedule. For sure it means two
quarters of nothing while the rainy season in the zone gets out of the way and that won’t help
the appetite for share son the open market. However and overall, there’s now a decent reason
to continue watching WINS and it’s likely to stay on the TinyCaps list for 2022. There’s also the
latent potential of a payout from its Africa arbitration process (see the NR link above for more),
but that’s dragging on (surprise surprise) and while there’s a possible cash boost at some point
one shouldn’t hold one’s breath on that.
Precipitate Gold (PRG.v): Another to receive drill permits, PRG announced (14) on Thursday
“the receipt of the government permit for diamond drill testing at the Motherlode Gold
Project…within the Burin Peninsula of southern Newfoundland, Canada.” PRG is looking to put
2,000m in on its first pass program and has a couple of specific targets in mind. One to watch
from the sidelines.
Manitou Gold (MTU.v): No matter that I underscored the risk involved with buying a story at
these prices, it’s only right to feature MTU again
this weekend after talking the stock up last week
in IKN698 and considering its trade potential due
to several fronts of action. That’s because…
…the stock dropped back a cool 30% to its
previous baseline 3.5c on the week and what’s
more, the trading on Friday looks like a distressed
seller willing to take any price offered.
So…errrr….if you liked it at 5c you’ll love it at 3½?
No sorry, I’m not that cynical, nor am I trying to
make this pennycrapper sound like something it is
not as there’s always high risk in playing around at
these levels and a penny either side make a big
percentage difference. However, the likely newsflow we outlined last weekend is still valid today
and at 3.5c, the downside risk for new money is obviously lower.
NB: Please be clear that The Tiny Dogs is NOT a list of recommended tinycap stocks. It is a list of companies with
market caps of under $20m offering a reasonable representation of the wider tinycaps market. It’s possible in the future
I may buy shares in one or several of these stocks, at the moment both my opinion and wallet are strictly neutral.
23

Regional politics
Brazil: Lula is favourite but not a lock for October 30th
It’s not as if there was a big break in the Brazilian election season last weekend, perhaps it
stopped for the day of the first round vote but we kicked straight back in to full campaign mode
for the now-scheduled October 30th run-off between Lula da Silva (48%) and Jair Bolsonaro
(43%). In our reaction note last weekend in IKN698 we mentioned that Lula is still favourite to
win the big prize and that view concurs with the majority of political commentaries out of Brazil
last week, as well as the latest surveys taken by the polling companies but on that point, the
failure of nearly all pollsters to predict the result last weekend has added fuel to the Jair
Bolsonaro’s argument about “fixed elections”.
The five point gap between Lula and Jair was either lower or much lower than the predictions
from the polling company in the two weeks before the vote, with arguably the only companes
to have got it right being the seven points with two point margin of error called by both Parana
Pesquisas and Atlas. We were certainly a long way from the 18 point difference predicted by
IPEC for (the admittedly left-leaning daily) Globo, or the 15 points gaps called by the
supposedly big and reliable pollsters Datafolha and Quaest. The political chatter to explain
(excuse) these poor polling predictions has two main thrusts:
 Ultimately, the expected tactical voting happened but not in the way expect or called by
the Lula camp. Instead, supporters of Ciro Gomes mostly transferred to Bolsonaro and
he saw his expected vote drop from around 9% to his eventual 3%. We also saw some
leakage from the eventual third placed Simone Trebet, who was polling around 7% and
finished with just over 4% of votes.
 The Bolsonaro camp had run a reasonably effective campaign amongst supporters,
asking them not to engage with the polling companies if asked for their opinions. This
seems to have resulted in a fair percentage of people who eventually voted Bolsonaro
not figuring in polling company calculations and in that way, skewing the harvested
results.
Indeed, one of the biggest survey failures of all came from the pollster IPEC, which predicted
an 18 point gap between the top two candidates. And when IPEC was one of the first out the
blocks last week with their read on the outcome of the October 30th second round run-off,
calling total votes 51% Lula and 43% Bolsonaro (55% to 45% valid votes) its announcement
was met by a new round of bitter criticism from incumbent President Bolsonaro who said in a
press conference the next day (15) (translated), “The polling company clownfest* has started
again….eight points the difference! It’s increased to eight!” He may have a point, because
subsequent polls since the IPEC (used to be known as IBOPE) survey put Lula around four
points in front on the popular vote and five points in valid votes, which isn’t a landslide but does
make him clear favourite for the 30th. All that is fair enough, the slings and arrows of the
election etc, but the growing doubt and breach between what people were told what they see
allows Bolsonsaro more political space to reject and refuse to accept the result on October 30th
if Lula confirms favouritism and wins. Regarding that, the scene is set for most of the 4% of
Trebet voters to move to Lula, as well as at least half of the Gomes vote percentage, which
would be enough to get him over the line. That wouldn’t be a landslide by any means and
would add more doubt to the result, so the best chance of getting a more robust result would
be to see a higher percentage participation. The 20% of voters who stayed away was a high
number and if Lula wants to win convincingly (or Jair wants to come from behind and win), that
will need to improve.
In another gauge of the race, this report (16) on odds taken at midday on Wednesday October
5th have six online betting companies handicapping a Lula victory at between 65% and 70%,
with Bolsonaro on 30% to 35%. That sounds about right to this desk and ties in with the first
impressions last weekend on news of the round one totals: Lula is strong favourite to be next
President, but is no shoo-in.
*The wonderful Brazil Portuguese word he used is “palhaçada”, literally “clownery”.
24

Chile: Mines closed and permitting tracks withdrawn
This week’s main mining headline out of Chile is the news from the Lundin Mining Alcaparrosa
mine in the Atacama Desert, the with the large sinkhole that opened up and made international
headlines a couple of months ago. On Friday Mining Minister (17) Marcela Hernando visited the
mine and, after a couple of meetings, announced the definitive closure of the “Gaby” zone at
the mine, the part that saw the sinkhole open. “The sector of the Gaby zone, which is directly
related to the subsidence, is closed definitively and will never be mined again.” She also
announced that the State would look to recover the water lost to the sinkhole, “We are
interested in recovering the 1.3m cubic metres of water that at the moment is trapped deep
below….our intention is to replenish the aquifer (3with this water) and we are studying
alternatives.”
We also got the first idea of the trouble the mining company is in, as Chile’s Environmental
Superintendence (SMA) has filed a “Very serious” demand against the company for “irreparable
environmental damage, as well as another “serious” demand for over-mining as well as opening
a couple of other processes for infractions in the way the company has been transporting
minerals. The government will allow the mine to re-start operations in zones unconnected to
the Gaby zone, but the legal processes now open against the company may mean they lose
their permits and must close, or alternatively fines of up to U$13m.
All that makes good copy among Chile’s rank and file and gives the impression of a ministry
“doing things, however more interesting to these pages is the story of another example of the
new people in its environmental oversight agency, the SEA, overstepping the mark in very
much the same way as they did with Rio2 Ltd (RIO.v) at Fenix. However, this time the
companies involved have decided to withdraw their permit application instead of getting it
rejected and at the same time, kick up a political fuss. This time it’s not a mining project,
instead it’s a wind farm project in the Southern Magallanes region of the country (a good place
for a wind farm). The U$500m investment is no small beer and a JV between private capitals
renewable fuels company HIF and the newly formed green energy arm of Chile’s State power
generation company, ENEL.
It made headlines this week (18) when the JV loudly announced it was withdrawing its permit
application and putting its investment in the country on ice and while the JV didn’t mention Sea
directly, it took reporters about a minute to work out what had happened. The company said
(translated):
"The companies believe that the observations made by some public organisms in the
evaluation process for this wind farm surpass the habitual standard, given that (the
companies) have submitted all documentation required by law. Faced with these
exceptional demands, it is necessary to understand what extra demands may be
incorporated and which would definitively make projects of this type in the region
impossible."
Meanwhile and on the other side of the argument, when Chile’s major daily La Tercera asked
Chile’s Environmental agency, the SEA, for comment, it replied that it had detected a
“considerable lack of information” in the permit application for the project.
To be clear, the SEA is the same body behind the plethora of permit rejections we have
documented on these pages since new President Gabriel Boric came to power in March and put
his people in charge of the bureau, those project rejections include the Anglo Los Bronces
expansion which is now advancing its appeals track (U$3Bn) and of course, Rio2 at Fenix.
We’ve also seen Chile’s Chamber of Mining SONAMI turn up the heat on the fun and games
coming out of SEA, so this delayed investment is another that Boric will need to answer to of
the same ilk.
Mexico: a reminder on Guerrero
The mining scene in Mexico recently has been a “no news = good news” as despite AMLO
rumblings about “no new permits” in his daily populist-style utterances (which is silly, permits
are coming out as per normal) or law projects being presented to Congress to nationalize the
25

whole industry (garnering great headlines, but zero chance of making it out of committee),
there’s been little to upset the applecart recently in the country’s mining sector. We even saw
Equinox (EQX.to) (EQX) resolve one of the regular community blockades and protests at its Los
Filos mine in Guerrero State in less than a week (it used to take Goldcorp months).
Therefore, this news report (19) is worth considering when the subject is Guerrero, because the
lack of recent bad headlines doesn’t mean Guerrero has suddenly turned over a new leaf:
MEXICO CITY (AP) — Attackers gunned down a mayor, his father and 16 other people
in the southern Mexico state of Guerrero on Wednesday, authorities said.
State Attorney General Sandra Luz Valdovinos told Milenio television late Wednesday
that 18 people were killed and two were wounded in the town of San Miguel Totolapan.
Among the dead were Mayor Conrado Mendoza and his father, a former mayor of the
town, she said. Two additional people were wounded.
Images from the scene showed a bullet-riddled city hall.
The report continues with unpleasant details and ends this way:
San Miguel Totolapan is a remote township in Tierra Caliente, which is one of Mexico’s
most conflict-ridden areas, disputed by multiple drug trafficking gangs.
In 2016, Totolapan locals fed up with abductions by the local gang “Los Tequileros”
kidnapped the gang leader’s mother to leverage the release of others.
Here’s a map of Guerrero and the location of last
week’s massacre, which isn’t so far away from the
big gold mines run by Torex and Equinox, but just
30km as the crow flies and a near neighbour of the
Altaley (ALTA.v) Campo Morado operation, one of
the two reasons we like the potential offered by
ALTA as a trade. I didn’t mention much about the
ongoing political risk factor in any eventual trade in
ALTA, but it would definitely be part of the eventual
trade decision on pulling the trigger (excuse the
morbid pun) and last week’s news came as a
reminder of the risks involved with exposing your
money to this corner of the country.
Colombia: Government anti-mining sentiment rising
We leave this week’s the most interesting development in regional mining to last. Thursday’s
Town Hall Meeting in the regional city of Bucaramanga was dominated by the speech and
declarations made by the country’s new Minister of the Environment and Sustainable
Development, Susana Muhamad, and anyone hearing her (as well as the favourable reception
she garnered) will be clear on the way the Petro government is going to make life difficult for
mining companies to develop their projects.
This report (20) is the best on the event, as it gives the originals of the following extended
quotes (translated) from Minister Muhamad, though this link (21) to will also take you to
another report from the reliable Caracol Radio on the event and the clear anti-mining scenario
now cooking for the sector.
“I’m not interested in an agreement with the large scale mining companies.”
These words were spoken by Susana Muhamad, Minister of the Environment and
Sustainable Development, during her speech at the Town Hall Meeting in the capital of
the Santander region this Thursday, called to discuss the future of the páramos (high
country wetlands) in the region and in the rest of Colombia as regards their boundaries
and territorial protection.
In front of hundreds of attendees, the national government Minister vowed to
guarantee the environmental protection of these ecosystems and announced that law
projects (administrative acts) are already being prepared in order to “place limits” on
large scale mining.
26

Minister Muhamad then made reference to the sentence handed down by Colombia’s Supreme
Court a few weeks ago and first mentioned by President Petro at the mining conference we
reported on in IKN694 dated September 4th:
“We agree with the sentence handed down by the Council of State (i.e. the branch of
Colombia’s Supreme Court covering governmental and administrative matters) about
putting order into the mess created (in the previous government). They awarded
concessions indiscriminately to economically influential groups with no regard for the
public interest. We are very worried about the devastating mining that’s moving on (the
Santander region) and it’s more about mafia-type groups, not traditional miners.”
She also alluded to changes coming in the country’s current mining law, ones that weren’t likely
to be to large-scale mining’s advantage:
During the meeting (…) Muhamad said that a law project was being formulated that
would demand an environmental permit for mining exploration in the country and she
said that she supported this initiative:
“The current Mining Code creates imbalances that have terrible environmental effects.
IUt makes traditional miners into illegal miners and leaves them out of consideration for
any State help, meanwhile it has handed over all the terrains to multinational mining
companies.”
And to make sure the message got through, this:
“I’m not interested in an agreement with the large scale mining companies. My main
interest as the environmental authority of the country, is to order its territory around
water and with the communities that live here. We are preparing administrative acts to
make wide-ranging decisions regarding large-scale mining and the strategic
ecosystems of Colombia. Before the first 100 days of this government are up, hope to
expedite administrative acts concerning the court sentence of August 4th to place
environmental limits on large-scale mining.”
For the record, President Petro reaches his 100 day mark on November 14th, so according to
his Environment Minister the fun begins in less than five weeks’ time. Caracol radio in its report
added a couple of interesting details (also translated):
During the meeting, the Minister wore the t-shirt of the “Committee for the Defence of
Water and of Santurbán” (Comité de Defensa del Agua y de Santurbán), the
environmental group that has organized protest marches against mining projects in the
páramo de Santurbán area of direct influence. Caracol Radio also learned that the
Ministry of the Environment has appointed Mayerly López, one of the most influential
local environmentalist and member of the committee, to be its local liaison officer.
And then…
The next morning the mayor of Bucaramanga, Juan Carlos Cárdenas, demanded a
meeting with the Minister of Mines and Energy, Irene Vélez, during a radio interview on
Caracol Radio. He said that he had three fundamental issues; first that the páramo de
Santurbán were protected and for this to happen, the mayor said that “the
environmental permit for the mining megaproject has to be denied.”
The project he refers to is of course the Soto Norte project, owned by Arabian capitals MINESA
and now being developed as a JV with Aris Mining
(ARIS.to). Here’s a screenshot of part of the ARIS
homepage (22) (right) to which I find it easy to take
the under: No they’re not. They aren’t going to get the
chance.
As for the share price, its C$3.46 close on Friday means
ARIS has a market cap of C$470.9m and while plenty of
that is covered by the operations recently imported into
the structure by the merger with GCM Mining and its
Marmato gigs, that also means ARIS welcomed the debt
loads carried by GCM and with plenty of its value riding
on the general outsiders’ assumption that Soto Norte
27

goes ahead, there’s still plenty of space for this stock price to fall.
Market Watching
Pure Gold (PGM.v) 3q22 production numbers
On the morning of Thursday October 6th, the troubled Canadian gold producer and vehicle for
my new and small speculation on its turnaround, Pure Gold Mining Inc (PGM.v) (PUR.L)
announced its 3q22 production totals, as well as a few other details of its production quarter at
the PureGold (ex-Madsen) mine, Red Lake ON CA. Here’s the headline table from the NR (23):
On the open blog that morning I called those production numbers (24), “The low side of
acceptable. Not great, not a disaster”. Then a little further down in the NR, the company
offered up its guidance for 4q22, i.e. the current quarter and here’s that table:
for context on that, here are the tracking charts as seen in our we first presented in our main
report on PGM, “The turnaround case for Pure Gold Mining (PGM.v)” in IKN697, dated
September 25th along with the updated charts. I’m going to try to offer up an easy way of
visualizing the PGM results and guidance for 4q22 compared to the previous IKN Weekly
estimates, so hopefully it doesn’t confuse too much (Well, I think it’s easier but you might think
my brain is twisted). To the left (and slightly smaller) you get three of the charts as seen in
IKN697 and to the right, their updated versions with the new numbers as seen above:
TO THE LEFT (AND SMALLER) THE OLD CHART. TO THE RIGHT, THE UPDATED CHART
PGM: Gold produced/sold, per qtr
28
4292 2386 2838 0017 6787 0053 1409 05701
12000
10000
8000
6000 4000
2000
0
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 22q3 tse22q4
PGM: Gold produced/sold, per qtr Oz Au
Au prod
Au sold
source: company filings, IKN ests
4292 2386 2838 0017 6787 0053 00011 00531
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000 6000 4000
2000
0
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
Oz Au
Au prod
Au sold
source: company filings, IKN ests

First (above) production and sales. We were looking for 11,000 oz produced (and sold) in 3q22
and 13,500 oz produced and sold in 4q22. As things have turned out, PGM produced 9,041oz in
3q22 and for 4q22, we split its guidance down the middle and now pencil in 10,750oz. Those
new numbers are clearly lower than our previous guesstimates. This is the main reason why I
called the results NR “the low side of acceptable”, the next two charts have details.
TO THE LEFT (AND SMALLER) THE OLD CHART. TO THE RIGHT, THE UPDATED CHART
PGM: Total material milled
29
40484 21364
82036
92115 29805 02454
00057 00008
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000 40000
30000
20000
10000
0
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
mt
source: company filings, IKN ests
We previously expected material milled at Madsen at 75,000mt in 3q22 and then a forecast of
80,000mt for 4q22. The reality was 66,042 for the quarter just gone and guidance of 74,000mt
for the current quarter. For Q3 PGM reported nine days of unexpected downtime at the mill due
to a couple of small problems that are now fixed. That caused most of the headwind on
tonnages processed and if they’d had a clear run, the total would have been close to our total
(without quite getting there).
As for the Q4 guidance, we’re splitting the difference on the company guidelines at 74kmt and
if that turns out to be the number, it’s somewhat lower than our previous guess that assumed
PGM would be able to run its mill at over the nameplate capacity of 800tpd, as they’d previously
alluded. However, if they manage to reach the top end of guidance they’ll be close to our
previous estimate (perhaps Christmas holidays make the difference). As for average grade…
TO THE LEFT (AND SMALLER) THE OLD CHART. TO THE RIGHT, THE UPDATED CHART
PGM: Avg grade milled, per qtr
80.3 2.4 8.4 8.4 72.4 85.2 9.4 5.5
6
5
4
3 2
1
0
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
PGM: Total material milled
g/t Au
source: company filings, IKN ests
…our previous estimate was for an average of 4.9 g/t in 3q22 and 5.5 g/t in 4q22, based on the
way the company would be further out of the McVeigh zone by this quarter and total feed from
the higher grading and more reliable Austin South zone. On this, PGM’s results for 3q22 at
4.5g/t were slightly disappointing and again, they may be playing it safe by offering a guidance
range that averages at 4.75 g/t Au and we’ll see on that in about three months’ time, but for
the moment we keep our new estimate well inside the ranges.
Overall, those results and the Q4 guidance are below our previous estimates, however they do
confirm how PGM is digging its way out of its operational problems (pardon the pun) and as the
McVeigh muck becomes a thing of the past, its grade is going to improve through 2023. As for
throughput, its 9 day downtime last month is not a good optic. Any mine can hit glitches, this
40484 21364
82036
92115 29805 02454
24066 00047
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 22q3 tse22q4
mt
source: company filings, IKN ests
PGM: Avg grade milled, per qtr
80.3 2.4 8.4 8.4 72.4 85.2 5.4 57.4
6
5
4
3 2
1
0
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 22q3 tse22q4
g/t Au
source: company filings, IKN ests

mine doesn’t have the luxury of doing this now that its corporate financials are firmly in the
penalty box. PGM needs to deliver fully on production guidance in Q4 and restore some much
needed confidence in the team’s ability. However (and again, we look to 2023) PGM is all about
turning itself around so that it hits 2023 running and if it can get production up toward the
80kmt/qtr level by 1q23, the improved grade and (apparently) downward trend in costs means
it should start returning a meaningful profit, the difference between my presumptions of
IKN697 and today is that the company will probably need an extra quarter to get there.
So to our financials overview and we limit things to the two main charts, here’s revenues vs
costs and as a reminder, G&A, exploration etc are not included in mine COGS.
PGM: Revenues vs Costs
30
5.6
1.22
0.51
2.82
9.51
9.12
0.61
1.92
4.81
8.14
5.8
7.62
6.02
0.72
6.42
0.72
0.03
0.82
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4 tse32q1
C$m
Revenues COGS
source: company filings
Assuming sales = production and with a best guess on received price in Canadian Dollars, we
expect the mine gate losses to continue in 3q22, the gap being C$6.4m. The preliminary guess
on 4q22 is a reduction of a loss but it’s still in
PGM: Operating, pre-tax and net earnings
loss-making territory by C$2.4m. And while we
don’t have any formal guidance for 1q23 yet, 10
5
assuming a continued gradual improvement in
0
both tonnage milled and average grade we -5
should finally get positive cash flow from the -10
-15
mine in the first quarter of next year, gold
-20
prices permitting. -25
-30
This chart gives our ballpark on operating,
pre-tax and net earnings and we’re now
expecting two more quarters of losses, with
1q23 returning to breakeven (again, gold price caveat). Overall, PGM returned a lacklustre set
of numbers last week and as a result, the share price did this:
Back to the new default level at 14c after seeing some speculative buying early week as the
sub-sector rose. As for what’s next, the company in its latest presentation lays out the
upcoming milestones and they include the results of the pre-feasibility study due in a month’s
time, then 4q22 production numbers in January.
12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4 tse32q1
C$m
Op income
pre-tax income
Net income
source: PGM filings, IKN ests

But what most catches the eyes about the above list is what’s now missing, as during the
Denver Gold Show presentation CEO Mark O’Dea used a similar slide with an extra line item,
here’s a reminder:
Indeed, November will also include the 3q22 financial results (we now expect a loss) but also
the limit date on those 227m 18c warrants. It’s going to be interesting to see just how many of
those warrants get exercised, as our contention is that at least some of the larger holders, e.g.
AngloGold Ashanti, will be happy to exercise and position in the stock for 2023 as long as the
incremental improvement continues. There’s a lot riding on this warrant expiry (see IKN697)
and with the mine now expected to run at a loss for the final quarters of 2022, the cash that
would hit treasury from a successful take-up will likely decide whether the company needs to go
to market and run another dilutive placement or not. These charts assume most of the warrants
become fully paid-up shares and if they do…
100 PGM: Cash treasury per qtr
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
…the company would be a decent shape, despite the expected operating losses in the next
quarters. Above all, what we’re looking for is enough of a cash position to pay off its Sprott loan
and then get PGM through to positive free cash flow in 2023 at which point, the equity will start
to run. If not, it’s going to need to either raise more cash on the open market or refi its loan
and neither of those would be the signal we’d want as shareholders.
Discussion and conclusion: When opening the small speculative position after IKN697 (and to
bore you all stupid for the third successive week, it really was a small purchase) I tried to make
it clear that this was nobody’s idea of a riskless trade. That showed last week when PGM
returned lower than expected numbers for Q3 and low-ish guidance for Q4 and the selling back
down to the 14c was deserved, frankly. As a result, I’m not in any hurry to add to my very
small spec trade (I mentioned it was small, right) and will give PGM one more quarter to get
31
91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
source: company filings/IKN ests
srallod
fo
snoillim
100 PGM: Working Capital per qtr
80
60
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
-100
-120
-140
-160
-180
-200
91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
source company filings
srallod
fo
snoillim

itself together. As things stand and assuming gold at a constant price, I see this trade going in
one of three ways:
 It pops to over 18c on news of a successful warrants exercise period. If so, I’ll make a
call on whether to buy/hold/sell at that time.
 It has a better 4q22 and then guides strongly for 1q23. If so, I may add some to this
opener.
 It continues to slightly disappoint, so if the 4q22 production numbers fail to impress
when they’re announced in January, I will close this speculative trade and move on.
Long story short, after a lacklustre (but not disastrous) 3q22 PGM gets one more quarter to
convince there’s a profitable trade in the offing. If not, I won’t wait around to get diluted any
further.
Copper Mountain (CMMC.to): Two reasons to buy and two reasons to pass
Last week, the troubled and volatile copper producer based in BC Canada, Copper Mountain
(CMMC.to), brought good news to the market in this NR (25) dated October 6th, here’s the
headline:
Copper Mountain Mining Announces Agreement to Sell the Eva Copper
Project and the Australian Exploration Tenements for Total Consideration of
up to US$230 Million
Here’s how I broke that ticket price down in the reaction post on the blog that day (26):
“That ticket price includes U$170m cash and then two contingent payments of U$30m
each which may/may not kick in many years down the line, but even that U$170m cash
is A$263m at today’s forex so it’s a good win for CMMC and its 213.8m shares out (do
the forex math and it’s around CAD$1.09 per share).”
We covered the “CMMC rumoured to sell Eva” story back in the main fundies note in IKN679
dated May 22nd 2022 and back then, the story was that Australia’s Macquarie had been hired
to shop Eva and CMMC wanted A$300m. As things
turn out, buyer Harmony is getting Eva for slightly
less but it’s still a good result for CMMC and as a
result, the share price popped well last week (right).
However, that ten-day chart also bears witness to
selling and a price drop after the news had hit, which
brings on the subject for today’s update on the
company. So to cut down on the waffle and get
straight to the point, there are two good reasons to
pass on CMMC at its new price of C$1.81 with the
Eva sale now known, but there are also two good
reasons to buy. We start with the former.
Two reasons to pass
1) There’s a big seller: Between its entry via Altona (sellers of Eva to CMMC) and its own
market purchases, Australian fund Zeta Resources built a position of around 42m
shares but in the last 18 months, has selectively liquidated over 6m of those. That
means it still has nearly 36m shares of CMMC and as an active seller, may have used
last week’s news to dump more. Either way, Zeta’s attitude is something of a Sword of
Damocles hanging over the stock price, a latent threat on any real upside move.
2) The company has not delivered on guidance. There’s a question of confidence and
reliability hanging over CMMC after three consecutive quarters of lacklustre production
and financial results, with a series of issues affecting operations at the main Copper
Mountain mine and guidance for the year lowered as a result. We’ve covered these
misses fairly carefully over the year (and managed to miss the bullet by selling CMMC
early year, a separate story) and while on paper CMMC now looks cheap, it still has the
potential to disappoint on production and/or costs.
32

And now for the good news:
Two reasons to buy
1) The balance sheet.
This is the obvious advantage. Assuming the deal closes by the end of this quarter, then taking
into account expected budget capital works and a best-guess on operational profits (see
below), the cash injection from this deal should be a big one. With Eva carried at around
C$77m, CMMC is going to see a big benefit across its balance but the main event is treasury
and working capital, which we forecast in this way:
240 CMMC.to: Working Capital per qtr
200
160
120
80
40
0
-40
-80
-120
The cash ballpark for 2022 year-end is $200m, the working capital at $183m and with 213.8m
shares out, that’s a significant amount of cash per
share but the better way of valuing the company is on
its overall ledger. Here’s how we see Book Value per
share developing (right). The current BV/Share is
significantly above the share price, but when the Eva
sale kicks in the ratio is forecast at C$2.57. That share
price lag is mostly due to the failure to deliver on its
plans and guidance in 2022, but on that we now
consider the second reason to buy CMMC:
2) The mine plan
As long as CMMC can deliver, the updated mine plan
as seen in its recently delivered 43-101 technical report on the Copper Mountain mine (27)
should see the gap close between the current share price and net book value per share. As that
gap this weekend is 76c, it represents a 42% theoretical upside if CMMC can get out of the
penalty box and return to the type of valuation that a normal, functional mining operator should
be able to command and a reasonable place to pitch a first-pass price target.
We’ll find out soon enough whether CMMC can deliver on its plans when the 2q22 financials are
filed, probably around the end of this month. Please see previous editions, but in essence the
company is promising better grade now that it has worked though a low grade zone and caught
up on pre-stripping, as well as much lower costs that are guided to a maximum of U$32.5/lb for
2022. Regarding production, here’s our current best guess…
33
71q4 81q1 81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
source company filings, IKN ests
srallod
fo
snoillim
250 CMMC.to: Cash and ST
200
150
100
50
0
71q4 81q1 81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
source: company filings, IKN ests
2.80 CMMC.to: BV/share
2.60
2.40
2.20
2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
71q4 81q1 81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
source: company filings, IKN ests
CMMC: Copper production and sales, per qtr
274.71 268.71 290.81 978.81 439.81 428.71 350.32 217.81 625.52
105.72
515.52 696.12 604.22 614.42 396.61 193.91
422.31 784.31 152.31 398.21
02 02 42 42
30
25
20
15 10
5
0
02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
Mlbs Cu
Cu prod (mlbs)
Cu sales (mlbs)
source: company filings

….and we’re looking for CMMC to produce around 20m lbs copper in the current quarter.
However and more importantly, its revised guidance on AISC for the year means that the last
two quarters have to come in a lot cheaper, with this chart showing the maximum ASIC/lb Cu
we calculate over the 3q22 and 4q22 periods it can report to make its own revised guidance:
CMMC: AISC/lb Cu in USD, per qtr
34
87.1 31.2 37.1 78.1 58.1 82.2 72.2 41.2 76.1 34.1 85.1 64.1 38.1 77.1 45.2
54.4
56.3
8.2 6.2
5.00
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50 1.00
0.50
0.00
81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
U$
source: CMMC filings
There’s obviously some wriggle room in those calcs for a maximum of U$2.80/lb in 3q22 and a
maximum of U$2.60/lb in 4q22 and a lot will depend on the absolute poundage of copper
produced in either quarter, but they work as a guideline and by working on reasonable average
received prices for copper (and the minor credits from Au and Ag) our model for the P+L
overview now looks like this:
CMMC.to: Quarterly Earnings overview
952.03
910.24
713.74
82.69 687.58
146.66 571.27
675.81
781.9- 32
94
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
-20
2q20 3q20 4q20 1q21 2q21 3q21 4q21 1q22 2q22 3q22est 4q22est
source: company filings, IKN ests
srallod
fo
snoillim
revenues
COGS
Gross profit
There’s no reason to expect a massive gross profit in 3q22, but C$23m or thereabouts would
indicate the company was back on track. Then our best-guess C$49m for 4q22 would frank that
rebound in fortunes and around that time, CMMC could be taken seriously again. After taking
into account G&A and other expenses, this per-share breakdown of operating profits says
roughly the same thing, with a modest 7c
forecast for Q3 and a more robust 18.7c for Q4 CMMC: Operating EPS, per qtr
0.50
that would surely signal the return of CMMC as a 0.40
viable way of getting leverage to the copper 0.30
price. 0.20
0.10
The bottom line: The news out of CMMC last 0.00
week was strongly positive and on paper, the -0.10
-0.20
share price deserves to be above C$2.00 again
-0.30
on the new strength the U$170m cash will bring
to the balance sheet once the deal closes (those
2x U$30m potential future payments are neither
her nor there in real world terms, but a portion
of the ticket will probably make it to the long-term assets and add a little more heft). However,
I wasn’t surprised to see CMMC sell off on the news and that’s due to the two “reasons to pass”
outlined above.
71q4 81q1 81q2 81q3 81q4 91q1 91q2 91q3 91q4 02q1 02q2 02q3 02q4 12q1 12q2 12q3 12q4 22q1 22q2 tse22q3 tse22q4
source: company data, IKN calcs
retrauq
rep
erahs/$C

As stated on innumerable occasions recently, I’m not a buyer of anything in this current market
and the mantra to keep powder dry remains at the top of my tip sheet. So I’m not a buyer of
CMMC as a reaction to this news either, but that may change once we see the 3q22 production
and financial results that should be with us in three to four weeks’ time (CMMC is normally one
of the quicker juniors to report its quarter). If…and only if, the company can deliver on its
newly revised production guidance and costs, thereby returning a modest profit and showing
that it has indeed turned the corner after three poor quarters on the trot, there will be enough
fundamental reason to outweigh the risk involved with buying this somewhat unpredictable
company and using it as a way to add leverage to the copper trade thesis. So I’m not in a
hurry, but be in no doubt that the sale of Eva to Harmony has done a lot of good to CMMC’s
financials and as long as it can deliver on the new mine plan, will see its share price recover as
even Zeta wouldn’t be dumb enough to see at $2.00 when they know that by waiting a couple
of months into 2023, they can sell at $3.00.
Conclusion
IKN699 is done, we end with bullet points:
 If Copper Mountain (CMMC.to) returns a strong 3q22 and guides well for the final
quarter, it will be back in play as a leverage vehicle to play the moves in the metal.
 Pure Gold (PGM.v) needs to improve on that Q3. It has one more quarter to impress
me, otherwise I will tap out.
 Minera Alamos (MAI.v) is a great company in the making and somewhere down the
line, we’ll shake our heads in disbelief at all the 50c shares that were available in 2022.
 But for the time being, I’m going to keep my powder dry. And avoid Colombia.
 Enjoy your Monday off, Canada. Come back refreshed and ready on Tuesday.
I thank you in advance for any feedback. Our Top Pick stock is Minera Alamos (MAI.v). Flash
updates will be sent if required by events.
I wish you good trading fortune, ladies and gentlemen.
Best wishes, Mark
Footnotes, appendices, references, disclaimer
(1) https://nypost.com/2022/10/07/dow-tanks-as-jobs-growth-boosts-fed-hike-bets/
(2) https://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2022/10/schedule-for-week-of-october-9-2022.html
(3) https://iknnews.com/something-for-the-weekend/
(4) https://mineraalamos.com/
(5) https://mineraalamos.com/investors/presentations/
(6) https://mineraalamos.com/news/2022/minera-alamos-announces-positive-preliminary-economic-assessment-for-the-
cerro-de-oro-gold-project/
(7) https://mineraalamos.com/investors/events-webcast/
35

(8) http://www.amerigoresources.com/_resources/presentations/corporate-presentation.pdf?v=0.664
(9) https://goldshoreresources.com/goldshore-intersects-62-8m-0-88-copper-equivalent-at-north-coldstream-with-
significant-cobalt-assays/
(10) https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/energy-transition-means-more-metals/
(10a) https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/copper-dips-on-strong-dollar-recession-fears
(11) https://www.sandstormgold.com/news/press-releases/sandstorm-gold-royalties-announces-closing-of-bought-deal-
financing
(12) https://www.sandstormgold.com/news/press-releases/sandstorm-gold-royalties-announces-record-sales-and-
revenue-in-third-quarter-2022
(13) https://winshear.com/news/winshear-secures-dia-for-initial-drill-program-at-its-gaban-gold-project-in-peru/
(14) https://precipitategold.com/news/2022/precipitate-receives-drill-permit-for-motherlode-gold-project-in-
newfoundland-canada
(15) https://portaldeprefeitura.com.br/2022/10/06/recomecou-a-palhacada-disse-jair-bolsonaro-sobre-a-nova-pesquisa-
do-ipec-para-o-segundo-turno-das-eleicoes/
(16) https://veja.abril.com.br/economia/os-valores-pagos-em-casas-de-aposta-por-vitoria-de-lula-ou-bolsonaro/
(17) https://www.publimetro.cl/noticias/2022/10/08/ministra-de-mineria-anuncio-cierre-permanente-de-zona-minera-
conectada-con-socavon-de-tierra-amarilla/
(18) https://www.df.cl/empresas/energia/hif-y-enel-green-power-retiran-estudio-de-impacto-ambiental-de-faro-del-sur
(19) https://apnews.com/article/mexico-caribbean-city-9fe379560db8de04b89781bb4aed6420?
(20) https://www.vanguardia.com/area-metropolitana/bucaramanga/ministra-de-ambiente-anuncio-limites-para-la-gran-
mineria-CY5771150
(21) https://caracol.com.co/2022/10/09/dos-concejales-salen-a-las-calles-a-realizar-una-campana-de-cultura-ciudadana/
(22) https://www.arisgold.com/overview/default.aspx
(23) https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/10/06/2529302/0/en/PureGold-Achieves-Third-Quarter-Gold-
Production-Guidance-and-Announces-Fourth-Quarter-Outlook.html
(24) https://iknnews.com/pure-gold-pgm-v-3q22-productino-two-things/
(25) https://cumtn.com/investors/press-releases/2022/copper-mountain-mining-announces-agreement-to-sell-4744/
(26) https://iknnews.com/copper-mountains-cmmc-to-five-year-australian-flip/
(27) https://cumtn.com/investors/press-releases/2022/copper-mountain-mining-announces-a-57-increase-in-4720/
Stocks To Follow Closed Positions 2021
Closed in 2021 closed close price
Fiore Gold F.v jan'21 C$0.98 21-May-20 C$1.17 19.4% closed as part of rebalance
Norsemont Min NOM.cse feb'21 C$1.55 6-Set-20 C$0.70 -54.8% Cut loser to reduce Au exp.
Element 29 Res ECU.v feb'21 C$0.49 7-Feb-21 C$0.54 10.2% Cut Peru exposure
Kuya Silver KUYA.cse feb'21 C$1.66 8-Nov-20 C$2.51 51.2% Cut Peru exposure
Pucara Gold TORO.v apr'21 C$0.65 4-Oct-20 C$0.26 -60.0% Cut loser, Peru risk call
Copper Mountain CMMC.to apr'21 C$1.40 22-Nov-20 C$4.18 198.6% tgt hit, profit taken
New Gold NGD may'21 U$0.76 9-Feb-20 U$2.14 181.6% Sold to buy AGC, nice win
Orezone Gold ORE.v jun'21 C$0.79 21-Jun-20 C$1.61 103.8% sold on pop, leaky boat
Wolfden Res. WLF.v sep'21 C$0.30 11-Abr-21 C$0.19 -36.7% Failed spec trade, cut loss
Cartier Res ECR.v sep'21 C$0.32 21-Mar-21 C$0.235 -26.6% Failed spec trade, cut loss
Amarillo Gold AGC.v sep'21 C$0.31 30-May-21 C$0.30 -3.2% Capex story changed: Out
Excelsior Mining MIN.to oct'21 C$0.93 10-Mar-19 C$0.53 -43.0% May return in 2022
Royal Road Min. RYR.v nov'21 C$0.155 17-Mar-19 C$0.275 77.4% Closed on Nica pol risk
Aurelius Min. AUL.v dec'21 C$0.75 28-Jun-20 0.24 -68.0% cut end 2021, failed trade
Argonaut Gold AR.to dec'21 C$2.95 25-Jun-21 C$2.15 -27.1% cut on capex blowout
36

Stocks To Follow Closed Positions 2020
Closed in 2020 closed close price
TMAC Resources TMR.to Jan'20 C$3.41 20-Dec-19 C$3.61 5.9% TLS flip play, sold new year
Regulus Res REG.v Jan'20 C$1.10 20-Dec-19 C$1.30 18.2% TLS flip play, profit taken
Bonterra Res BTR.v Jan'20 C$1.90 9-Dec-19 C$1.66 -12.6% TLS flip play, loss taken
McEwen Mining MUX Jan'20 U$1.12 2-Dec-19 U$1.18 5.4% TLS flip play, profit taken
Core Gold CGLD.v Jan'20 C$0.255 7-Apr-19 C$0.305 19.6% arb trade, profit taken
HudBay Min HBM Jan'20 U$3.56 9-Dec-19 U$3.36 -5.6% TLS flip play, loss taken
Midas Gold MAX.to Feb'20 C$0.71 5-Jan-20 C$0.57 -19.7% sm & silly trade
Warrior Gold WAR.v Feb'20 C$0.08 3-Aug-18 C$0.05 -31.3% clean out non-perf sm stocks
Contact Gold C.v Feb'20 C$0.40 19-Aug-18 C$0.18 -55.0% clean out non-perf sm stocks
Sandstorm Gold SAND Feb'20 U$3.73 17-Apr-16 U$7.21 93.3% Sold during port rebalance
NexGen Energy NXE Feb'20 U$1.20 2-Dec-19 U$1.06 -11.7% TLS flip play, loss taken
MAG Silver MAG Apr'20 U$8.95 1-Mar-20 U$10.07 12.5% Sold to cut silver exposure
Alexco Res AXU Apr'20 U$1.69 7-Sep-17 U$1.69 0.0% sold to close Ag exp. in FY20
Bonterra Res BTR.v Jun'20 C$1.62 2-Feb-20 C$1.10 -32.1% under-performer cash moved
Regulus Res REG.v Jun'20 C$0.64 6-Apr-15 C$0.79 23.4% moved $ TMQ/MIN & Au stocks
Great Panther GPR.to Aug'20 C$0.60 21-Jun-20 C$1.10 83.3% Profit taken, good trade
Jaguar Mining JAG.v Aug'20 C$0.42 21-Jun-20 C$0.65 54.8% Profit taken, good trade
Sandstorm Gold SAND Aug'20 U$7.76 10-May-20 U$9.37 20.7% Profit taken, good trade
Integra Resources ITR.v Aug'20 C$2.23 13-Aug-18 C$5.40 142.2% Profit taken, good trade
Wesdome Gold WDO.to Aug'20 C$2.37 14-Oct-17 C$14.82 525.3% last 1/2 of big win closed
INV Metals INV.to Sep'20 C$0.40 17-May-20 C$0.45 12.5% Cut all Ecuador exposure
Cartier Resources ECR.v Nov'20 C$0.155 3-Aug-18 C$0.25 67.7% Exact close price TBA
Tinka Res TK.v Dec'20 C$0.195 19-Apr-16 C$0.195 0.0% Closed on a round trip fail
2015 to 2019 annual closed positions in appendices below, 2009 to 2014 closed positions in editions IKN553 or earlier
Stocks To Follow Closed Positions 2019
Closed in 2019 closed close price
Atico Mining ATY.v jan'19 C$0.55 24-Jul-16 C$0.32 41.8% patience ran out, made room
Candente Copper DNT.to jan'19 C$0.075 3-Ago-18 C$0.05 -33.3% tiny trade, made room for new
B2Gold BTO.to feb'19 C$2.11 12-Set-14 C$4.05 91.9% Took 1/2 profits, reduce size
Western Copper WRN.to mar'19 C$0.80 20-Ene-19 C$0.81 1.3% Spec trade that didn't work
B2Gold BTO.to mar'19 C$2.11 12-Set-14 C$4.15 96.7% Took rest of profit.
GT Gold GTT.v mar'19 C$1.17 10-Oct-18 C$0.90 -23.1% Took loss. Story changed
NovaGold NG apr'19 U$3.84 13-Ene-19 U$4.15 -8.1% Short that didn't work, sm loss
Zinc One Z.v jun'19 C$0.47 14-Set-17 C$0.025 -94.7% clearing out dead trade
Amarillo Gold AGC.v jun'19 C$0.24 22-Ago-18 C$0.20 -16.7% clearing out dead trade
New Gold NGD aug'19 U$1.44 31-Jul-19 U$1.23 14.6% ST short win thru Q2 earnings
IMPACT Silver IPT.v aug'19 C$0.39 21-Jul-19 C$0.46 18.0% took a quick profit
Fiore Gold F.v aug'19 C$0.34 26-May-19 C$0.56 64.7% Took profit, 2q19 avg
Chakana Copper PERU.v oct'19 C$0.84 22-Mar-18 C$0.16 -81.0% Exploreco trade fail. Want space
Wesdome Gold WDO.to oct'19 C$2.37 14-Oct-17 C$7.57 219.4% Sold half, profit taking
Superior Gold SGI.v oct'19 C$1.46 8-Abr-18 C$0.47 -67.8% Failed sm spec on Au. Moved on
Amerigo Res ARG.to nov'19 C$0.91 23-Set-18 C$0.50 -45.1% worst trade of year, hefty loss
Guyana Goldfields GUY.to dec'19 C$0.94 14-Abr-19 C$0.56 -40.4% taking the loss, financials weak
Tethyan Res TETH.v dec'19 C$0.30 8-Set-19 C$0.16 -46.7% tiny trade, word of probs in co
37

Stocks To Follow Closed Positions 2018
Closed in 2018 closed close price
Amarillo Gold AGC.v jan'18 C$0.38 24-Mar-17 C$0.31 -18.4% Cut away losing trade
Riverside Res RRI.v jan'18 C$0.39 27-Jun-16 C$0.31 -20.5% Cut away losing trade
Eros Res ERC.v jan'18 C$0.175 1-Mar-17 C$0.16 -8.6% CEO sudden exit, not good
Excellon Res EXN.to jan'18 C$1.54 9-Oct-16 C$1.66 7.8% 4q17 poor, one too many bad qtrs
Wesdome Gold WDO.to jan'18 C$1.68 15-Dec-17 C$2.06 22.6% Near-term trade block, took profit
Sabina G&S SBB.to apr'18 C$2.06 17-Dec-17 C$1.77 -14.1% Near-term trade, bad timing, small
B2Gold BTO.to May'18 C$2.11 12-Sep-14 C$3.67 73.9% sold 25% to reduce exposure
Lara Expl. LRA.v May'18 C$0.65 11-Feb-18 C$0.58 -13.8% Spec on Brazil didn't work
Solitario XPL June'18 U$0.72 19-Mar-17 U$0.41 -43.1% Failed trade, may return in 4q18
SolGold plc SOLG.to July'18 C$0.475 19-Nov-17 C$0.415 -12.6% cut, trade didn't perform
Pan American PAAS July'18 U$17.90 1-Jun-18 U$16.30 8.9% modest win on short position
NGEx Res NGQ.to Sep'18 C$1.01 22-Oct-17 C$1.00 -1.0% Closed to reduce Argentina exp
Sandstorm Gold SAND Oct'18 U$3.73 17-Apr-16 U$4.13 10.7% partial sale to raise cash for GTT
Aldebaran Res ALDE.v Nov'18 n/a n/a n/a n/a liquidate spin out of REG
Stocks To Follow Closed Positions 2017
Closed in 2017 closed close price
Continental Gold CNL.to Jan'17 C$2.68 22-May-16 C$4.17 55.6% trade closed, profit taken
Focus Ventures FCV.v Jan'17 C$0.23 1-Jul-12 C$0.05 -78.3% Give up, a disaster trade
Wesdome Gold WDO.to Feb'17 C$1.72 28-Aug-16 C$3.00 74.4% Target hit, sold, good trade
Belo Sun BSX.to Mar'17 C$0.90 30-Jan-17 C$0.90 0.0% failed near-term flip trade
Lara Expl. LRA.v Mar'17 C$1.15 8-Apr-12 C$1.05 -8.7% cut to make room for new trade
Rye Patch Gold RPM.v Apr'17 C$0.31 2-Sep-16 C$0.32 3.2% cut for doubts & new stock
Cordoba Min. CDB.v Jun'17 C$0.75 15-Sep-16 C$0.63 -16.0% closed
Constantine Metal CEM.v Aug'17 C$0.135 9-Apr-17 C$0.28 107.4% spec trade closed, good win
Red Eagle Min. R.to Sep'17 C$0.67 13-Dec-16 C$0.27 -59.7% IKN's biggest failure in years
Starcore Intl SAM.to Sep'17 C$0.61 10-Jan-15 C$0.31 -49.2% Patience ran out
B2Gold BTO.to Dec'17 C$2.11 12-Sep-14 C$3.39 60.7% sold small portion for liquidity
Stocks To Follow Closed Positions 2016
Closed in 2016 closed close price
Phoscan Chem FOS.to jan16 C$0.28 29-mar-15 C$0.265 -5.4% Buyout trade, bot but poor deal
True Gold TGM.v jan16 C$0.18 23-ago-15 C$0.25 38.9% okay trade, sold on pol risk
McEwen Mining MUX jan16 U$1.09 25-ene-15 U$1.20 10.1% sold due to lack of value
Lake Shore Gold LSG.to feb-16 C$1.10 07-abr-15 C$1.69 53.6% bot out, sold early in process
Atacama Pacific ATM.v feb-16 C$0.19 26-abr-15 C$0.40 110.5% sold for a double on big pop
New Gold NGD feb-16 U$2.06 24-ene-16 U$2.96 43.7% closed good near-term trade
Sandspring Res SSP.v mar-16 C$0.195 18-oct-15 C$0.32 64.1% Hit tgt, took profit
Teranga Gold TGZ.to mar-16 C$0.54 15-feb-15 C$0.60 11.1% disappointing trade
B2Gold BTG mar-16 U$0.85 13-ene-16 U$1.30 52.9% Separate trade on B2, hit tgt
Dalradian Res DNA.to mar-16 C$0.67 27-oct-13 C$1.00 49.3% Hit target, sold, good win
HudBay Min. HBM may-16 U$4.10 03-abr-16 U$4.36 -6.3% Short trade, poor timing
Nevada Sunrise NEV.v may-16 C$0.185 28-feb-16 C$0.23 24.3% V. small, no big deal either way
Richmont RIC jun-16 U$7.60 01-may-16 U$9.30 22.4% near-term trade, profit taken
INV Metals INV.to jul-16 C$0.25 03-abr-16 C$0.95 280.0% Trade closed on time
HudBay Min. HBM aug16 U$4.98 09-jun-16 U$4.80 3.6% short trade covered, no big deal
Miranda Gold MAD.v oct-16 C$0.125 03-jul-16 C$0.10 -20.0% tiny spec trade, didn't work
Avino G & S ASM nov-16 U$2.00 21-oct-16 U$1.40 -30.0% Abandon trade on bad bot deal
38

Stocks To Follow Closed Positions 2015
Closed in 2015 closed close price
Argonaut Gold AR.to jan'15 C$1.47 14-dec-14 C$2.53 72.1% Big gain small time, profit taken
Amerigo Res ARG.to jan'15 C$0.405 20-jul-14 C$0.285 -29.6% Given up on weak Cu prices
Reservoir Min. RMC.v jan'15 C$6.05 18-jun-14 C$4.12 -31.9% sold on Cu downturn
Coro Mining COP.to jan'15 C$0.075 26-jan-14 C$0.035 -53.3% sm, sold on Cu downturn
Fortuna Silver FSM mar'15 U$4.12 10-nov-14 U$3.75 9.0% Short used as hedge
GoldQuest Min. GQC.v mar'15 C$0.26 27-oct-13 C$0.085 -67.3% given up ghost
Rio Alto Mining RIO.to apr'15 C$2.30 07-apr-11 C$3.57 55.2% Top pick, bot out, big win
Timmins Gold TGD jun'15 U$0.60 19-apr-15 U$0.62 3.3% near-term trade, out of time
First Majestic AG jul'15 U$10.51 10-aug-14 U$4.55 56.7% horrible failed trade
NovaCopper NCQ.to jul'15 C$1.05 09-apr-14 C$0.50 -52.4% no more Cu exposure, sm sell
McEwen Mining MUX aug'15 U$0.695 21-jul-15 U$0.92 32.4% Closed nearterm flip for win
Midas Gold MAX.to sep'15 C$0.39 21-sep-15 C$0.35 -10.3% Sm. trade idea that didn't work
New Gold NGD oct'15 U$2.18 23-aug-15 U$3.05 39.9% trade closed, profit taken
Legend Gold LGN.v nov'15 C$0.085 01-mar-15 C$0.035 -58.8% tiny "land grab" idea, failed
Timmins Gold TGD nov'15 U$0.245 20-sep-15 U$0.15 -38.8% small near-term loser
Please note that due to space considerations closed positions 2009 to 2014 are now
available on request, or were published in any edition to IKN553 (end 2019).
Important Disclosure
The information and opinions contained within this report reflect the personal views of the author and therefore all
material within should not be construed as accurate or reliable or be utilized as advice for investment or business
purposes. Independent due diligence and discussions with ones own investment and business advisor is strongly
recommended. Accordingly, nothing in this report should be construed as offering a guarantee of the accuracy or
completeness of the information contained herein, as an offer or solicitation with respect to the purchase or sale of any
security or as an endorsement of any product or service. All opinions and estimates included in this report are subject to
change without notice. It is prohibited to copy or redistribute this report to any type of third party without the express
permission of the author.
39