• Like
  • Save
June 2012 Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

June 2012 Presentation

on

  • 195 views

June 2012 Presentation

June 2012 Presentation

Statistics

Views

Total Views
195
Views on SlideShare
195
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

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

    June 2012 Presentation June 2012 Presentation Presentation Transcript

    • Corporate Presentation June 2012
    • CAUTIONARY STATEMENT Forward Looking Information This Presentation contains ‘‘forward-looking information’’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking information may include, but is not limited to, information with respect to the anticipated production and developments in our operations in future periods, our planned exploration and development activities, the adequacy of our financial resources, the estimation of mineral resources, realization of mineral resource estimates, costs and timing of development of the projects we currently intend to acquire (the “Projects”), costs and timing of future exploration, results of future exploration and drilling, timing and receipt of approvals, consents and permits under applicable legislation, our executive compensation approach and practice, the composition of our board of directors and committees, and adequacy of financial resources. Wherever possible, words such as ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘expects’’ or ‘‘does not expect’’, ‘‘budget’’, ‘‘scheduled’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘forecasts’’, ‘‘anticipate’’ or ‘‘does not anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘intend’’ and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, have been used to identify forward-looking information. Statements concerning mineral resource estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward-looking information to the extent that they involve estimates of the mineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as ‘‘expects’’, ‘‘anticipates’’, ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘projects’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘assumes’’, ‘‘intends’’, ‘‘strategy’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘potential’’ or variations thereof, or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking information. Many of these risks are listed and described in our final short-form prospectus dated March 19, 2012 (the “Prospectus”), which is available for review on SEDAR at www.sedar.com under our profile. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Forward-looking information involves statements about the future and is inherently uncertain, and our actual achievements or other future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, those referred to in the Prospectus under the heading ‘‘Risk Factors’’. Our forward-looking information is based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date the statements are made, and we do not assume any obligation to update forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable law. For the reasons set forth above, prospective investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. National Instrument 43-101 Technical and scientific information contained herein relating to the Projects is derived from National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant technical reports (“Reports”) “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Snowfield Property” and “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Brucejack Property” dated February 18, 2011; ‘‘Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Snowfield Brucejack Project’’ dated October 28, 2010 ; “Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project” dated June 3, 2011; and “Technical Report and Updated Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project” dated February 20, 2012. We have filed the Reports under our profile at www.sedar.com. Technical and scientific information not contained within the Reports for the Projects have been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Kenneth C. McNaughton, an independent “qualified person” under NI 43-101. This presentation uses the terms “measured resources”, “indicated resources” (together “M&I”) and “inferred resources”. Although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations (under NI 43-101), the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource will be converted into mineral reserves. In addition, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre feasibility studies, or economic studies, except for a Preliminary Assessment as defined under NI 43-101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable. Currency Unless otherwise indicated, all dollar values herein are in Canadian $. 2
    • Why ? Major high-grade gold resource located in Canada Valley of the Kings remains open; other high grade targets Feasibility study underway 3
    • BRUCEJACK PROJECT LOCATION 4
    • BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE RESOURCE (1) West Zone Mineral Resource Estimate – April 2012(4) Contained(3) Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver (mil) (g/t) (g/t) (mil oz) (mil oz) Measured 2.4 5.85 347 0.5 26.8 Indicated 2.5 5.86 190 0.5 15.1 M+I 4.9 5.85 267 0.9 41.9 Inferred(2) 4.0 6.44 82 0.8 10.6 Valley of the Kings Mineral Resource Estimate – April 2012(4) Contained(3) Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver (mil) (g/t) (g/t) (mil oz) (mil oz) Indicated 8.9 17.3 14.5 4.9 4.1 Inferred(2) 12.7 25.5 11.6 10.4 4.7 (1) Mineral Resources which are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, marketing, or other relevant issues. The Mineral Resources in this news release were estimated using the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM), CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves, Definitions and Guidelines prepared by the CIM Standing Committee on Reserve Definitions and adopted by CIM Council. (2) The quantity and grade of reported Inferred resources in this estimation are uncertain in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to define these Inferred Resources as an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result in upgrading them to an Indicated or Measured Mineral Resource category. (3) Contained metal may differ due to rounding. (4) The Mineral Resource estimate is defined using 5 m by 5 by 5 m blocks in the well drilled portion of West Zone (5 m by 10 m drilling or better) and 10 m by 10 m by 10 m blocks in the remainder of West Zone and in Valley of the Kings. 5
    • VISIBLE GOLD Brucejack Top 20 High-grade Gold Hits Interval Depth Gold Hole Gold (g/t) (meters) (meters) (oz/ton) SU-115 0.6 60.6 18,755 547.0 SU-260 0.5 68.4 17,750 517.7 SU-12 1.5 273.0 16,948 494.3 SU-316 0.5 302.6 9,110 265.7 SU-230 1.0 305.7 7,420 216.4 SU-150 0.5 76.4 6,670 194.5 SU-376 0.65 77.7 6,142 179.1 SU-40 1.64 648.0 5,850 170.6 SU-195 0.5 349.4 5,740 167.4 SU-260 (2011) SU-84 0.44 198.0 5,480 159.8 SU-29 0.5 560.0 5,344 155.9 SU-349 0.5 5.4 5,240 152.8 SU-115 0.51 76.1 4,209 122.8 SU-132 0.5 57.68 4,060 118.4 SU-249 0.5 115.6 3,880 113.2 SU-239 1.0 310.0 3,460 100.9 SU-176 0.5 335.8 2,810 81.9 SU-54 1.59 53.6 2,490 72.6 SU-115 (2011) SU-195 (2011) SU-345 0.7 162.2 2,470 72.0 SU-338 0.64 336.3 2,350 68.0 SU-316 0.54 566.2 1,855 54.0 SU-341 0.5 175.6 1,840 54.0 SU-106 0.69 240.4 1,710 49.9 SU-150 0.5 59.0 1,640 47.8 SU-325 0.59 224.0 1,590 46.0 6 SU-84 (2010) SU-29 (2009) SU-226 0.52 335.0 1,465 42.7
    • BRUCEJACK GEOLOGY Valley of the Kings West Zone Valley of the Kings Aerial photo showing synclinal axis plunge TSX, NYSE:PVG 7
    • VALLEY OF THE KINGS – PLAN VIEW 8
    • VALLEY OF THE KINGS – LONG SECTION 9
    • VALLEY OF THE KINGS – SECTION 325 10
    • VALLEY OF THE KINGS – SECTION 525 11
    • VALLEY OF THE KINGS – SECTION 650 12
    • VALLEY OF THE KINGS Valley of the Kings Long Section View North-Northwest Isometric projection of Block Model 10m x 10m x 10m Blocks Open 5.0 g/t Au-Eq Cut-off Indicated gold resourcesValley of the Kings Mineral Resource Estimate – April 2012(4) Inferred gold resources Contained(3) Open Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver Open (mil) (g/t) (g/t) (mil oz) (mil oz) Indicated 8.9 17.3 Open4.9 14.5 4.1 Inferred(2) 12.7 25.5 11.6 10.4 4.7 13
    • ADVANCING NEAR-TERM PRODUCTION February 2012 Updated PEA (1) Based on 5.0 g/t cut-off gold sensitivity(2) of 5.33 million ounces M&I (8.6Mt @ 19.35 g/t gold) and 3.29 million ounces Inferred (4.0Mt @ 25.73 g/t gold): Project Economics (base case, pre-tax US$0.93:C$1) Processing & Production Summary Gold Price US$ 1,100 Processing rate 1,500 tpd Silver Price US$21 Mine life 24 years Net Cash Flow US$5.133 billion Total gold 6.9 million oz production Net Present Value US$2.262 billion Average annual gold 325,000 ounces (5% discount) production (Yrs 1-12) Capex US$436.3 million Mining costs C$103.60/t milled Internal Rate of 29.8% Total operating costs C$170.90/t milled Return Gold recovery 95.7% (gravity and Payback 4.1 years flotation (1) Source: Technical Report and Updated Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project, effective date February 20, 2012 (2) Announced November 28, 2011Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The PEA is preliminary in natureand includes inferred mineral resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerationsapplied that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. There is no certainty the PEA will be realized. 14
    • BRUCEJACK PROJECT CHRONOLOGY Brucejack High-grade Gold Resource Growth 18 16 Gold resources (mil) 14 12 Brucejack 10 Fault 8 6 4 2 Valley of the Kings 0 (Historic) Feb. 2011 Nov. 2011 Apr. 2012 Camp Inferred Au Indicated Au Measured Au • Initial high-grade 5.3 km resource (Feb) underground Exploration resumes. • 72,144-meter drill development of Mine Development Discovery of Valley of the program (May-Oct)Exploration West Zone Certificate issued Kings Zone. • Resource update (Nov)1960-1980 1986-1989 1993 2009 2011 1980-1985 1990 1999-2000 2010 2012 West Zone West Zone Acquisition by Acquisition by Pretivm • Updated PEA on Brucejack discovery Feasibility Study Silver Standard high-grade and definition completed Resources Inc. • Snowden high-grade resource • Feasibility Study underway 15
    • SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY & SUSTAINABILITY  Pretivm’s Social Responsibility Policy reflects our commitment to establishing positive, trusting relationships with First Nations, local communities and other key stakeholders  We are working to ensure that communication with local communities is open and continuous, and that the benefits of our exploration success can extend to them  We will collaborate with community leaders to explore training and employment opportunities  Pretivm’s management team has been cooperatively engaging with local community leaders in the Stewart, BC region for over 10 years  We have begun the consultation process with community leaders concerning the Brucejack high- grade opportunity 16
    • BRUCEJACK PROJECT INFRASTRUCTURE 17
    • PLANS FORWARD TO PRODUCTION Key milestones • Complete Feasibility Study • Complete exploration decline for underground test sample from Valley of the Kings • Complete initial 25,000m • Extract test sample from surface drilling in Valley Valley of the Kings (10,000 of the Kings tonnes) • Baseline studies/wildlife • Basic and detailed assessment (ongoing) engineering • Construction • First Nations and • Submit Environmental • Begin commissioning• Completed stakeholder consultation Assessment Certificate • Ramp-up updated PEA (ongoing) (EAC) application • Production (H2) Feb 2012 H1 2012 2013 2015 April 2012 2012/H2 2014 • Completed • File Project Description • Anticipate EAC high-grade • Initiate exploration decline issue Resource from West Zone historic • Underground Estimate workings to Valley of the development Kings • Begin construction • Complete additional drilling in Valley of the Kings • Complete access road to Highway 37 18
    • BRUCEJACK PROJECT PLANS FOR 2012  Infill drilling completed  (7 drills, 25,000 meters)  Updated high-grade resource  Expected Q3/12  Feasibility study in progress  Expected Q1/13  Project Description  File Q3/12  Expansion drilling  Site preparation underway  Exploration Road  Expect completion Q4/12  Underground program  Planning underway 19
    • WEST ZONE West Zone Long Section View Northeast Isometric projection of Block Model 5m x 5m x 5m Blocks 5.0 g/t Au-Eq Cut-off West Zone Mineral Resource Estimate – April 2012(4) Measured gold resources Contained(3) Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver Indicated gold resources (mil) (g/t) (g/t) (mil oz) (mil oz) Measured 2.4 5.85 347 0.5 26.8 Inferred gold resources Indicated 2.5 5.86 190 0.5 15.1 Historic workings (5.3km) M+I 4.9 5.85 267 0.9 41.9 Inferred(2) 4.0 6.44 82 0.8 10.6 TSX, NYSE:PVG 20(1,2,3,4) See table notes slide number 10.
    • PROPOSED UNDERGROUND PROGRAM Valley of the Kings West Zone Historic underground workings (5.3km) Proposed exploration declineValley of the Kings Mineral Resource Estimate – April 2012 (1,4) West Zone Mineral Resource Estimate – April 2012 (1,4) Contained(3) Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver Contained(3) (mil) (g/t) (g/t) (mil oz) (mil oz) Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver Measured 2.4 5.85 347 0.5 26.8 (mil) (g/t) (g/t) (mil oz) (mil oz) Indicated 2.5 5.86 190 0.5 15.1 Indicated 8.9 17.3 14.5 4.9 4.1 M+I 4.9 5.85 267 0.9 41.9 Inferred(2) 12.7 25.5 11.6 10.4 4.7 Inferred(2) 4.0 6.44 82 0.8 10.6 21(1,2,3,4) See table notes slide number 5.
    • BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE COMPARISON Valley of the 25.0 Kings (2012) Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Grade (g/t) Indicated: 20.0 4.9 mm oz @ 17.3 g/t Au Kirkland Lake Inferred: 10.4 mm oz @ 25.5 g/t Au 15.0 Red Lake Brucejack (2010) 10.0 Cerro Negro Kensington Eleonore Jerritt Canyon El Penon Quimsacocha 5.0 Casa Berardi 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 17.0 Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Resources (mm oz)April 2012 Valley of the Kings High-Grade Gold Mineral Resource based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne.Source: Intierra Ltd. 22
    • VALUE CREATION: CASE STUDY Andean Resources acquired for $3.6 billion by Goldcorp in Q4 2010 for Cerro Negro Project  At Feasibility-stage with exploration potential  Cerro Negro gold reserves and resources at March 31, 2011 (post acquisition by Goldcorp)  Probable Reserves of 4.26 million ounces (13 million tonnes @ 10.19 g/t)  Indicated Resources of 0.38 million ounces (4.67 million tonnes @ 2.50 g/t)  Inferred Resources of 0.72 million ounces (4.51 million tonnes @ 4.98 g/t) 23
    • PVG SHARE PERFORMANCE Relative Performance January 1, 2011 – June 22, 2012 (%)Gold ($) (%) Pretivm + 125% Pretivm S&P/TSX Global Mining Index XAU Index 24
    • SHAREHOLDING & ANALYST COVERAGE Top Shareholders(2) (shares in millions) Silver Standard, Silver Standard Resources 19.063 20% Royce & Associates 9.263 Management, Institutions, Fidelity Management 6.482 5% 50% Passport Capital 3.730 Carmignac Gestion 3.545 Retail, 23% Robert Quartermain 2.876 Norges Bank Investment 2.409Capital Structure(1) (shares in millions) Analyst CoveragePublic Float 74.6 CIBC Jeff KilleenSilver Standard Shares 19.1 Citibank Alex HackingTotal Issued & Outstanding Shares 93.7 Cormark Securities Richard GrayIncentive Options 7.0 Dahlman Rose Adam GrafTotal Fully Diluted Shares Outstanding 100.7 GMP Securities Craig West Salman Partners Ash GuglaniWorking Capital (at Mar. 31, 2012) C$22.6 million Scotiabank Ovais HabibCommon share offering gross proceeds UBS TBD C$80.5 million Very Independent Research John Tumazos(at May 9, 2012)(3)(1)As of June 26, 2012; ownership calculated on an undiluted basis.(2)As of June 26, 2012. Source: IPREO, SEDI 25(3)See news release dated May 9, 2012
    • MANAGEMENT & BOARD Robert Quartermain, B.Sc., M.Sc., P.Geo, D.Sc. President & Chief Executive Officer, Director Joseph Ovsenek, B.A. Sc., P.Eng., LLB Vice President & Chief Development Officer, Director Ken McNaughton, M.A. Sc., P.Eng. Vice President & Chief Exploration Officer Ian I Chang, M.A. Sc., P.Eng. Vice President, Project Development (L to R): John Smith, CEO, Silver Standard; Tom Yip, CFO, International Tower Hill Mines; Robert Quartermain; Ross Mitchell, former CFO, Silver Standard; Joseph Ovsenek; Noel Dunn, Managing Director, Liberty Metals & Mining Ken Konkin, P.Geo. Project Manager Peter de Visser, CA Chief Financial Officer 26(1)All senior management and directors are shareholders of Pretivm
    • An investment in Gold Advanced-exploration gold company in Canada, in an area of permitted gold mining Major high-grade gold resource at Brucejack:  Valley of the Kings 4.9 M oz Indicated (8.9 Mt @ 17.3 g/t gold ) 10.4 M oz Inferred (12.7 Mt @ 25.5 g/t gold) Advancing Brucejack with feasibility study in progress and underground test sample planned 27
    • APPENDIX: BRUCEJACK BULK TONNAGE Gold/silver vein systems within lower grade envelopes Mineralization remains open Based on November 2011 bulk tonnage resource Brucejack Project Bulk-Tonnage Mineral Resource Estimate – (1) November 2011 (Based on a cut-off grade of 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne) Contained Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver (millions) (g/t) ( g/t) (million oz) (million oz) Measured 12.2 2.50 81.6 0.99 32.1 Indicated 293.0 1.26 10.5 11.91 99.3 M+I 305.3 1.31 13.4 12.89 131.5 Inferred 813.7 0.70 7.7 18.20 201.2 Brucejack Project 1.25 Grade & Tonnage Estimate – (1),(2) November 2011 Contained Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver (millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz) Measured 9.3 3.08 102.2 0.92 30.6 Indicated 64.8 3.62 23.7 7.53 49.4 M+I 74.1 3.55 33.6 8.46 80.0 Inferred 78.5 2.68 16.3 6.76 41.2(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions are: Au US$1,200/oz. (71%); Ag US$22/oz. (70%)(2)@ 1.25 g/t cut-off within the 0.30 grams of au-equiv/tonne optimized pit shell. 28
    • APPENDIX: SNOWFIELD PROJECT Large –Scale North American Gold Projects Iron Cap Zone 120 (SEA) (NDM) Snowfield Open Pit 100 Gold Resources (mm oz.) (September 2010 PA) 80 66 (SEA) Mitchell Zone 60 (SEA) (NG/ABX) (PVG) 40 49 20 40 38 26 Sulphurets Zone 15 9 (SEA) 0 4 Pebble KSM Donlin Gold Snowfield Measured + Indicated Resources Inferred Resources Snowfield Mineral Resource Summary – Feb. 2011(1,2) Grade Contained Metal Tonnes Au Ag Cu Mo Re Au Ag Cu (mm (mm (mt) (g/t) (g/t) (%) (ppm) (ppm) (bil lbs) oz) oz)Measured 189.8 0.82 1.69 0.09% 97.4 0.57 4.98 10.3 0.38Indicated 1,180.3 0.55 1.73 0.10% 83.6 0.50 20.93 65.4 2.60Measured & 1,370.1 0.59 1.72 0.10% 85.5 0.51 25.92 75.8 2.98IndicatedInferred 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. 29
    • CONTACT HEAD OFFICE COMMON SHARESPhone: 604-558-1784 Pretium Resources Inc. TSX/NYSE:PVGFax: 604-558-4784 570 Granville St. Issued: 88.1 millionToll-free: 1-877-558-1784 Suite 1600 Fully diluted: 95.0 millioninvest@pretivm.com Vancouver, BC 52-week hi/low: $18.15/$7.89www.pretivm.com Canada V6C 3P1 Market capitalization (at June 18, 2012): $1.5 billion