• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
July Presentation
 

July Presentation

on

  • 672 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
672
Views on SlideShare
221
Embed Views
451

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

6 Embeds 451

http://www.pretivm.com 409
http://pretivm.com 33
http://www.pretiuminc.ca 4
http://www.pretivm.com. 2
http://72.32.141.116 2
http://pretivm.ca 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    July Presentation July Presentation Presentation Transcript

    • VALUE THROUGH GOLD July 2011
    • DISCLAIMERForward Looking InformationThis Presentation contains ‘‘forward-looking information’’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-lookinginformation may include, but is not limited to, information with respect to the anticipated production and developments in our operations in future periods, our planned exploration and development activities, theadequacy of our financial resources, the estimation of mineral resources, realization of mineral resource estimates, costs and timing of development of the projects we currently intend to acquire (the “Projects”), costsand timing of future exploration, results of future exploration and drilling, timing and receipt of approvals, consents and permits under applicable legislation, our executive compensation approach and practice, thecomposition of our board of directors and committees, and adequacy of financial resources. Wherever possible, words such as ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘expects’’ or ‘‘does not expect’’, ‘‘budget’’, ‘‘scheduled’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘forecasts’’,‘‘anticipate’’ or ‘‘does not anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘intend’’ and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, havebeen used to identify forward-looking information. Statements concerning mineral resource estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward-looking information to the extent that they involve estimates of themineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions orfuture events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as ‘‘expects’’, ‘‘anticipates’’, ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘projects’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘assumes’’, ‘‘intends’’, ‘‘strategy’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘potential’’ orvariations thereof, or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) are notstatements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events orresults to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking information. Many of these risks are listed and described in our final short-form prospectus dated April 4, 2011 (the “Prospectus”), which isavailable for review on SEDAR at www.sedar.com under our profile. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and futureevents could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Forward-looking information involves statements about the future and is inherently uncertain, and our actual achievements or other futureevents or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, those referred to in theProspectus under the heading ‘‘Risk Factors’’. Our forward-looking information is based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date the statements are made, and we do not assume anyobligation to update forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable law. For the reasons set forth above, prospective investorsshould not place undue reliance on forward-looking information.National Instrument 43-101Technical and scientific information contained herein relating to the Projects is derived from National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant technical reports “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate onthe Snowfield Property” and “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Brucejack Property” dated February 18, 2011, a preliminary economic assessment entitled ‘‘Technical Report and PreliminaryEconomic Assessment of the Snowfield Brucejack Project’’ dated October 28, 2010 (the “Preliminary Assessment”) and a preliminary economic assessment dated June 3, 2011 on the Brucejack Project. We have filed theTechnical Reports and Preliminary Assessment under our profile at www.sedar.com. Technical and scientific information not contained within the Preliminary Assessment and Technical Reports for the Projects havebeen prepared under the supervision of Mr. Kenneth C. McNaughton, an independent “qualified person” under NI 43-101.This presentation uses the terms “measured resources”, “indicated resources” (together “M&I”) and “inferred resources”. Although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations (under NI 43-101),the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources maybe materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource will be converted intomineral reserves.In addition, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever beupgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre feasibility studies, or economic studies, except for a Preliminary Assessment asdefined under NI43 101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.U.S. Securities Law DisclaimerOur securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), or the securities laws of any state of the United States and, subject to certainexceptions, may not be offered or sold within the United States. Investors resident in the United States will be required to acknowledge that the securities are "restricted securities" within the meaning of Rule 144, andthat if in the future an investor decides to offer, resell, pledge or otherwise transfer any of the securities, it may do so only (a) to the Corporation; (b) outside the United States in accordance with Rule 904 of Regulation Sunder the Securities Act and in compliance with applicable Canadian and provincial laws and regulations; (c) within the United States in accordance with Rule 144, if available, and in compliance with any applicablestate securities laws of the United States; or (d) in another transaction that does not require registration under the Securities Act or any applicable state securities laws of the United States.Our securities have not been approved or disapproved by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or by any state securities commission or regulatory authority, nor have any of the foregoing authoritiespassed on the accuracy or adequacy of any offering document provided in connection with the offering of these securities.CurrencyUnless otherwise indicated, all dollar values herein are in Canadian $. 1
    • Why Pretivm?Our projects in northern British Columbia are delivering value through gold Brucejack Project Gold Opportunity Quickest path to production Economics potentially very favorable PEA completed June 2011; possibly straight to feasibility Lower capital requirements; can be financed alone Snowfield Project Bulk-tonnage presents in gold  Long-term gold call option  Joint engineering study  Rare asset of its size underway to examine worldwide in favorable economics of combining political jurisdiction Snowfield and Seabridge’s KSM project in one operation 2
    • GOLD: SUPPLY AND DEMAND 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000Tonnes 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Mine Production Demand Source: GFMS Gold Survey 3
    • GOLD INVESTMENT: IMPACT OF CHINA Physical Bar Investment 1400 Indian S-C China Europe North America Other 1200 1000 800 Tonnes 600 400 200 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 -200 Source: GFMS Gold Survey 2011 4
    • WORLD GDP GROWTH VS. GOLD PRICE ($/oz) (trillions) $1,400 $80 $75 $1,200 World GDP $70 in trillions of US$ $1,000 $65 $800 $60 Gold Price per ounce in US$ $55 $600 $50 $400 $45 $200 $40 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Source: World Bank and GFMS 5
    • LARGE-SCALE NORTH AMERICAN GOLD PROJECTS 120.0 (NDM) 100.0 40.4Gold Resources (mm oz.) 80.0 Inferred Resources Measured + Indicated Resources (SEA) 60.0 Pretivm 14.5 (NG/ABX) 21.6 40.0 4.4 66.9 (DGC) (OSK) 45.3 5.1 0.9 (ITH) (CKG) 20.0 (ANV) 34.1 37.9 4.9 2.6 2.7 20.5 22.5 15.3 17.2 16.1 - 6
    • BRUCEJACK AND SNOWFIELD PROPERTIES 7
    • BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE HISTORY  High-grade resource  908 drill holes  120,000 meters of drilling  5.3 kilometers of underground development  Previously permitted for mine development1960-1980 1980-1985 1986-1989 1990 1992 1999-2000 2009-2010 2011Exploration Extensive Underground Feasibility Mine Acquisition of Exploration resumes Preliminaryof known exploration development study Development Newhawk by with drilling at Economicbase and resulting in of West Zone completed for Certificate Silver Standard Galena Hill, the Assessment onprecious identification (5,276 meters) West Zone. granted. Resources Inc. newly-discovered Brucejack high-grademetals of several completed in From 1986 to Further and 60% of Bridge Zone, Gossan gold completed.targets north zones. Drilling 1989. 1990, $37 exploration in project; Hill and SG zones. Exploration permitand then focuses (Newhawk JV) million spent 1994; care and remaining 40% Holes at Galena Hill and road permitsnorthwest of on southern developing maintenance. in 2001. Care and encounter visible granted.Brucejack areas of West Zone and (Newhawk JV) maintenance. gold. Follow-up (Pretivm)Lake. property on exploration. (Silver Standard) drilling in 2010(Granduc) including Road encounters further West Zone. construction visible gold. (Esso) permit granted Brucejack Project in 1991. acquired by Pretivm. (Newhawk JV) (Silver Standard) 8
    • BRUCEJACK PROJECT Intrusion-related gold/silver vein systems +70,000 meters of drilling planned for 2011 Resources increased 134% from 2010 to 2011 Mineralization remains open in ALL directionsBrucejack Bulk-Tonnage Resource Summary - February 2011(1)(Based on a cut-off of 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne) Grade Contained Metal Tonnes Au Ag Au Ag (mt) (g/t) (g/t) (mm oz) (mm oz)Measured 11.7 2.25 75.56 0.85 28.4Indicated 285.3 0.80 9.57 7.34 87.8Measured & Indicated 297.0 0.86 12.17 8.18 116.2Inferred 542.5 0.72 8.67 12.56 151.2(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions are: Au US$1,025/oz. (71%); Ag US$16.60/oz. (70%) 9
    • BRUCEJACK – HIGH-GRADE Multi-kilo gold intercepts 5km existing underground development at West Zone High-grade PEA completed June 2011; update to commence after 2011 drillingBrucejack 5.0g/t Grade & Tonnage Resource Summary - February 2011(1,2) Grade Contained Metal Tonnes Au Ag Au Ag (mt) (g/t) (g/t) (mm oz) (mm oz)Measured 1.95 7.95 241.25 0.498 15.10Indicated 1.72 7.33 123.19 0.406 6.82Measured & Indicated 3.67 7.66 185.84 0.903 21.92Inferred 4.71 12.54 49.24 1.898 7.45(1)@ 5.0 g/t cut-off within the 0.30 grams of au-equiv/tonne optimized pit shell.(2) Metal price and recoveries assumptions are: Au US$1,025/oz. (71%); Ag US$16.60/oz. (70%) 10
    • BRUCEJACK LONG SECTION N Valley of the Kings S High-grade gold/silver Galena Hill Zone Bridge Zone Shore Zone West Zone73/74 zone Planned +800m hole Open Open Open 98 zone Existing 5 km of underground Gold Grade Legend workings 200 m >0.35 g/t Au 200 m Viewing window depth: 1,200m 11
    • VALLEY OF THE KINGS: CROSS-SECTION SU-29 SU-84 SU-106 SU-12 SU-77 SU-40 12
    • HIGH-GRADE RESOURCE AREASN S Galena Hill VOK Zone West Zone Existing 5 km of underground workings 250 m Gold Grade Legend >3.0 g/t Au 250 m 13
    • JUNE 2011 BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE PEA(1) High-grade gold-silver underground mine(2) Average processing rate of 1,500 tonnes/day producing gold-silver doré; Capital cost of US$281.7 million; operating costs of C$158.36/t milled(3) Total life of mine (16 years) production of 2.16 million ounces of gold and 14.72 million ounces of silver Pre-Tax Economic Results Production Summary Base Spot Price Yrs Life of Case Case 1 – 10 MineGold Price (US$/oz) 1,100 1,536.30 Average Annual ProductionSilver Price (US$/oz) 21.00 37.86 Gold (oz) 173,200 135,000NPV @ 5% (US$ mm) 662 1,416 Silver (oz) 1.1 million 918,000IRR (%) 27.1 48.3 Total ProductionPayback (yrs) 4.2 2.5 Gold (oz) 1.73 million 2.16 millionExchange rate (US$:C$) 0.93 1.02 Silver (oz) 11.15 million 14.72 million(1) Source: Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project, effective date June 3, 2011.(2) Underground mining for first 12 years followed by small-scale open pit mining.(3) Operating cost for underground operation. Open pit operating cost estimated at C$68.77/tonne milled. 14
    • SNOWFIELD PROJECT Iron Cap Zone (SEA)  Located 65km northwest of Stewart, BC Snowfield Open Pit (September 2010 PA)  Gold-enriched porphyry deposit with copper, silver, molybdenum and rhenium Mitchell Zone mineralization (SEA)  Joint engineering study underway with Seabridge Gold Inc. examining economics of Sulphurets Zone Snowfield+KSM (SEA) Snowfield Mineral Resource Summary – February 2011(1),(2) Contained Grade Metal Tonnes Au Ag Cu Mo Re Au Ag Cu (mm (mm (bil Kerr Zone (mt) (g/t) (g/t) (%) (ppm) (ppm) oz) oz) lbs) (SEA) Measured 189.8 0.82 1.69 0.09% 97.4 0.57 4.98 10.3 0.38 Indicated 1,180.3 0.55 1.73 0.10% 83.6 0.50 20.93 65.4 2.60 Measured & 1,370.1 0.59 1.72 0.10% 85.5 0.51 25.92 75.8 2.98 Indicated Inferred 833.2 0.34 1.90 0.06% 69.5 0.43 9.03 50.9 1.10(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions: Au US$1,025/oz (71%); Ag US$16.60/oz (70%); Cu US$3.0/lb (70%); Mo US$19.00/lb (60%); Re US$145.00/oz. (60%)(2) Mineral resource estimate at 0.30g/t AuEq cut-off. 15
    • 2010 SNOWFIELD/BRUCEJACK PA(1) Open pit operation with 27-year mine life Attractive strip ratios: Snowfield (0.57:1) Brucejack (2.95:1) Capital expenditures of US$3,465 million; operating costs of US$9.38/t milled(2) Milling throughput of 120,000 t/day producing:  Gold-silver doré  Copper-gold-silver concentrate  Molybdenum-rhenium concentrate Average Annual Production Preliminary Assessment Results and Gold Price(3) Yrs Life of Base Spot Price 1–8 Mine Case(4) Case(5) Gold (000 oz) 960 700 NPV @ 5% (US $mm) 2,302 5,951 Silver (000 oz) 7,855 4,162 IRR (%) 12.4 21.7 Copper (000 lb) 39,531 44,582 Payback (yrs) 5.3 3.5 Molybdenum (000 lb) 3,514 3,668 Mine Life (yrs) 27 27 Rhenium (kg) 9,379 9,011 Gold Price (US$/oz) 878 1,235 (1) Source: Technical Report and Preliminary Assessment of the Snowfield-Brucejack Project, effective date September 10, 2010. (2) Capital cost includes US$454.5 million contingency. Operating costs converted from C$ at an exchange rate of 1.00 : 0.92 (C$ : US$). (3) Results are presented on a pre-tax basis as disclosed in the Preliminary Assessment dated October 28, 2010. (4) Metal prices used: US$14.50/oz Ag, US$17.00/lb Mo, US$2.95/lb Cu and US$7,811/kg Re. (5) Metal prices used: US$19.03/oz Ag, US$15.88/lb Mo, US$3.26/lb Cu and US$5,311/kg Re (as at August 27, 2010). 16
    • FOCUSED ON OBJECTIVESProjectsAcquiredIPO raisesUS$285M Management appointments Resource Updates Joint engineering study with Seabridge examining Snowfield + KSM Higher-grade gold resource +70,000-meter Brucejack drill program outlined at Brucejack; 33% One of first holes encounters 18, 755 g/t gold, a increase in record grade for project combined project bulk tonnage gold Brucejack High- resources. grade PEA 173,200 oz gold per/year for first 10 Update Brucejack years Resource Estimate Update Brucejack High-grade PEADec. 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012 17
    • COMMUNITY RELATIONS & SUSTAINABILITY Pretivm’s management team has been cooperatively engaging with local community leaders in Stewart, BC region for over 10 years Our Local Hire Policy ensures that the benefits of our exploration success extends to stakeholders through jobs and supply/service contracts Community members are actively involved in environmental monitoring and archaeological survey work to progress the projects 18
    • RESOURCE COMPARISON: BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE 20.0 18.0Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Grade (g/t) 16.0 14.0 Red Lake 12.0 Brucejack 10.0 Efemcukuru Kensington Jerritt Canyon Eleonore 8.0 El Penon Quimsacocha 6.0 Musselwhite Casa Berardi 4.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Resources (mm oz) Brucejack gold resources based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne within the 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne optimized pit shell. Source: Intierra Ltd. 19
    • CAPITAL STRUCTURE(1) Shareholders by Type Shareholders by Geography Silver Asia, 14% Standard, 22% Management, Institutions, Canada, 39% Europe, 17% 5% 50% Retail, 23% USA, 30% (millions) Public Float 68.0 Silver Standard Shares 18.9 Total Issued and Outstanding Shares 86.9 Incentive Options 5.1 Total Fully Diluted Shares Outstanding 92.6As of July 15, 2011; ownership calculated on an undiluted basis.(1) Assumes the exercise of 5,750,000 share purchase warrants each exercisable to purchase one share of Pretivm owned by Silver Standard Resources Inc. at $12.50 until April 8, 2012. 20
    • MANAGEMENT TEAM & BOARD(1) Noel Dunn Robert Quartermain, B.Sc, M.Sc, P.Geo, D.Sc Lead Director President & Chief Executive Officer, Director Partner, Niantic Partners LLC Joseph Ovsenek, B.Sc, P.Eng, LLB Vice President & Chief Development Officer, Director Ross Mitchell, CA Director Former CFO, Silver Standard Resources Inc. Ken McNaughton, M.A. Sc., P.Eng. Vice President & Chief Exploration Officer John Smith Director Chief Executive Officer, Silver Standard Resources Inc. Peter de Visser, CA Chief Financial Officer Tom Yip, CA Ken Konkin, P.Geo Director Project Manager, Snowfield & Brucejack Projects Chief Financial Officer, Silver Standard Resources Inc. (1) All senior management and directors are shareholders of Pretivm 21
    • WHY PRETIVM? 22
    • BRUCEJACK DRILLING 23
    • BRUCEJACK CAMP 24
    • Contact Head office Common Shares Phone: 604-558-1784 Pretium Resources Inc. TSX:PVG Fax: 604-558-4784 570 Granville St. Issued: 86.9 millionToll-free: 1-877-558-1784 Suite 1600 Fully diluted: 92.0 million invest@pretivm.com Vancouver, BC 52-week hi/low: $14.19/$5.75 www.pretivm.com Canada V6C 3P1 Market capitalization (at July 18, 2011) $946 million