The document discusses Pretivm's Brucejack and Snowfield gold projects in northern British Columbia. It summarizes the high-grade underground resource at Brucejack, which has over 5 kilometers of existing underground workings. A preliminary economic assessment completed in June 2011 for the high-grade areas of Brucejack estimated average annual production of over 130,000 ounces of gold, a capital cost of $281.7 million, and operating costs of $158.36 per tonne milled over a 16-year mine life. The document also notes the large bulk-tonnage gold resource identified at Snowfield, which could provide long-term potential if developed in conjunction with a neighboring project.

1. VALUE THROUGH GOLD
July 2011

2. DISCLAIMER
Forward Looking Information
This Presentation contains ‘‘forward-looking information’’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking
information may include, but is not limited to, information with respect to the anticipated production and developments in our operations in future periods, our planned exploration and development activities, the
adequacy of our financial resources, the estimation of mineral resources, realization of mineral resource estimates, costs and timing of development of the projects we currently intend to acquire (the “Projects”), costs
and timing of future exploration, results of future exploration and drilling, timing and receipt of approvals, consents and permits under applicable legislation, our executive compensation approach and practice, the
composition of our board of directors and committees, and adequacy of financial resources. Wherever possible, words such as ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘expects’’ or ‘‘does not expect’’, ‘‘budget’’, ‘‘scheduled’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘forecasts’’,
‘‘anticipate’’ or ‘‘does not anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘intend’’ and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, have
been used to identify forward-looking information. Statements concerning mineral resource estimates may also be deemed to constitute forward-looking information to the extent that they involve estimates of the
mineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. Any statements that express or involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or
future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as ‘‘expects’’, ‘‘anticipates’’, ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘projects’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘assumes’’, ‘‘intends’’, ‘‘strategy’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘potential’’ or
variations thereof, or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) are not
statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or
results to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking information. Many of these risks are listed and described in our final short-form prospectus dated April 4, 2011 (the “Prospectus”), which is
available for review on SEDAR at www.sedar.com under our profile. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-
looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future
events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Forward-looking information involves statements about the future and is inherently uncertain, and our actual achievements or other future
events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, those referred to in the
Prospectus under the heading ‘‘Risk Factors’’. Our forward-looking information is based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date the statements are made, and we do not assume any
obligation to update forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable law. For the reasons set forth above, prospective investors
should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information.
National Instrument 43-101
Technical and scientific information contained herein relating to the Projects is derived from National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant technical reports “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on
the Snowfield Property” and “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Brucejack Property” dated February 18, 2011, a preliminary economic assessment entitled ‘‘Technical Report and Preliminary
Economic Assessment of the Snowfield Brucejack Project’’ dated October 28, 2010 (the “Preliminary Assessment”) and a preliminary economic assessment dated June 3, 2011 on the Brucejack Project. We have filed the
Technical Reports and Preliminary Assessment under our profile at www.sedar.com. Technical and scientific information not contained within the Preliminary Assessment and Technical Reports for the Projects have
been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Kenneth C. McNaughton, an independent “qualified person” under NI 43-101.
This presentation uses the terms “measured resources”, “indicated resources” (together “M&I”) and “inferred resources”. Although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations (under NI 43-101),
the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may
be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. There is no guarantee that all or any part of the mineral resource will be converted into
mineral reserves.
In addition, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be
upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre feasibility studies, or economic studies, except for a Preliminary Assessment as
defined under NI43 101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.
U.S. Securities Law Disclaimer
Our 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 certain
exceptions, 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, and
that 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 S
under 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 applicable
state 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 authorities
passed on the accuracy or adequacy of any offering document provided in connection with the offering of these securities.
Currency
Unless otherwise indicated, all dollar values herein are in Canadian $.
1

3. 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

4. GOLD: SUPPLY AND DEMAND
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
Tonnes
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

5. 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

6. 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

7. LARGE-SCALE NORTH AMERICAN GOLD PROJECTS
120.0
(NDM)
100.0
40.4
Gold 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

8. BRUCEJACK AND SNOWFIELD PROPERTIES
7

9. 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
development
1960-1980 1980-1985 1986-1989 1990 1992 1999-2000 2009-2010 2011
Exploration Extensive Underground Feasibility Mine Acquisition of Exploration resumes Preliminary
of known exploration development study Development Newhawk by with drilling at Economic
base and resulting in of West Zone completed for Certificate Silver Standard Galena Hill, the Assessment on
precious identification (5,276 meters) West Zone. granted. Resources Inc. newly-discovered Brucejack high-grade
metals 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 permit
and then focuses (Newhawk JV) million spent 1994; care and remaining 40% Holes at Galena Hill and road permits
northwest 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

10. 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 directions
Brucejack 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 28.4
Indicated 285.3 0.80 9.57 7.34 87.8
Measured & Indicated 297.0 0.86 12.17 8.18 116.2
Inferred 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

11. 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 drilling
Brucejack 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 15.10
Indicated 1.72 7.33 123.19 0.406 6.82
Measured & Indicated 3.67 7.66 185.84 0.903 21.92
Inferred 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

12. BRUCEJACK LONG SECTION
N Valley of the Kings S
High-grade gold/silver
Galena Hill Zone Bridge Zone
Shore Zone
West Zone
73/74 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

13. VALLEY OF THE KINGS: CROSS-SECTION
SU-29
SU-84
SU-106
SU-12
SU-77
SU-40
12

14. HIGH-GRADE RESOURCE AREAS
N 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

15. 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$158.36/t milled(3)
 Total life of mine (16 years) production of 2.16
million ounces of gold and 14.72 million ounces
of silver
Pre-Tax Economic Results Production Summary
Base Spot Price Yrs Life of
Case Case 1 – 10 Mine
Gold Price (US$/oz) 1,100 1,536.30 Average Annual Production
Silver Price (US$/oz) 21.00 37.86 Gold (oz) 173,200 135,000
NPV @ 5% (US$ mm) 662 1,416 Silver (oz) 1.1 million 918,000
IRR (%) 27.1 48.3 Total Production
Payback (yrs) 4.2 2.5 Gold (oz) 1.73 million 2.16 million
Exchange 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. FOCUSED ON OBJECTIVES
Projects
Acquired
IPO raises
US$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 PEA
Dec. 2010 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2011 Q1 2012
17

19. 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

20. RESOURCE COMPARISON: BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE
20.0
18.0
Measured & 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

21. 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 92.6
As 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

22. 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

23. WHY PRETIVM?
22

24. BRUCEJACK DRILLING
23

25. BRUCEJACK CAMP
24

26. Contact Head office Common Shares
Phone: 604-558-1784 Pretium Resources Inc. TSX:PVG
Fax: 604-558-4784 570 Granville St. Issued: 86.9 million
Toll-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