BajaNomad - Baja Mining Confirms Robust Economics at Boleo

Baja Mining Confirms Robust Economics at Boleo

BajaNews - 1-15-2010 at 04:55 PM

http://www.benzinga.com/pressreleases/m89060/baja-confirms-r...

01/15/10
(Press Release)

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwire - Jan. 15, 2010) - Baja Mining Corp. today announced that an updated capital cost estimate and economic model have confirmed that its 70%-owned Boleo deposit in Baja California Sur, Mexico, can be developed economically at an after-tax internal rate of return (IRR) of 25.6% based on 100% equity. The project, which has a minimum scheduled mine life of 23 years, has a NPV of $1.306 billion using an eight percent discount rate and an average life of mine cash cost of negative $0.29/lb for copper, net of by-product credits. All dollar amounts are stated in U.S. dollars and are on an equity basis (i.e. assume no debt or related finance charges).

Highlights of Boleo project update

- Proven and probable reserves for minimum 23-year mine life.
- Negative $0.29/lb for copper average life of mine cash cost, net of by-product credits.
- Remaining estimated capital costs of $889 million (including $92.3 million contingency).
- Average annual production, for the first six years of full production:

- Copper cathode: 56,697 tonnes
- Cobalt cathode: 1,708 tonnes
- Zinc sulphate monohydrate: 25,364 tonnes

- 265 million tonnes of measured and indicated resources grading 1.50% copper equivalent.
- 159 million tonnes of inferred resources grading 1.15% copper equivalent.
- After-tax IRR of 25.6% using SEC guidelines, or 27.9% at current market prices.
- After-tax NPV (at 8% discount rate) of $1.306 billion using SEC guidelines or $1.473 billion at current market prices.

"We are pleased that the updated capital and operating cost estimates confirm the robust economics of the Boleo project," says Baja President and CEO John Greenslade. "This update now provides a strong foundation for completing construction financing and recommencing construction of the mine and processing facility in order to move to production as soon as possible."

Mr. Greenslade says "there is also significant upside potential for Boleo which is endowed with a rich resource of manganese. We will shortly commence a feasibility study to quantify this potential which could substantially add to the project's value."

The current update incorporates plant capital cost estimates prepared by ICA Fluor Daniel, S. de R.L. de C.V., operating cost estimates prepared by the Company and reviewed by ICA Fluor, and owner's costs prepared by the Company. A revised geological model, in accordance with NI 43-101, has been prepared by Wardrop, A Tetra Tech Company and used by Agapito Associates, Inc. (AAI) to prepare the current mine plan. The initial capital cost for the mine was prepared by AAI, however mine sustaining capital and operating costs were prepared by the Company. The Company utilized these cost estimates to prepare the financial projections. In doing so, the capital and operating costs were adjusted to reflect leasing of certain equipment, and to capture costs incurred in the fourth quarter of 2009. An updated NI 43-101 compliant technical report (the "Technical Report") will be filed within 45 days of today's date.

Capital Cost Estimate

The total project cost remaining, including Engineering, Procurement, Indirects, Construction Management, Owner's Costs, and an 11.6 % overall Contingency, but excluding leased equipment, is $889 Million. A summary of estimated capital costs is listed below:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capital Cost Breakdown Total Capital to be Spent ($'000)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining & Tailings 68,914
Process Plant 321,033
Site Services & Infrastructure 84,022
Buildings 9,072
--------------------------------
Total direct costs 483,041
Construction Indirects & Freight 70,029
EPCM 52,391
Contingency 92,297
--------------------------------
Total Construction Costs 697,758
--------------------------------
Owner's Costs & Pre-development Costs 141,101
--------------------------------
Total Cost Before W/C and Financing 838,859
--------------------------------
First Fills, Reagents, Spares and
Working Capital 50,616
--------------------------------
Total Estimated Capital Costs 889,474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs, all dollars are third quarter 2009.

Production and Operating Costs

Start-up of the process plant is scheduled for the second half of 2012, based on funding the project during the first half of 2010, in accordance with the following production schedule:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Case Production Summary
----------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yrs Yrs Yrs
Yrs 1(1) Yrs 2-7 Yrs 8-10 11-13 14-20 21-23
----- ------- -------- ----- ----- -----
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ore Treated 2,174 3,100 3,100 3,100 3,100 3,021
(kt/y)
Grade: % Cu 2.04 2.02 1.74 1.39 0.91 0.61
% Co 0.074 0.071 0.061 0.070 0.074 0.059
% Zn 0.40 0.47 0.52 0.58 0.62 0.81
% Mn 2.45 2.55 2.58 2.93 3.08 4.95

Production (t/y):
Copper 40,221 56,697 49,009 39,161 25,701 17,249
Cobalt 710 1,708 1,481 1,699 1,802 1,398
Zinc Sulphate
Monohydrate 9,027 25,364 28,482 30,469 33,054 36,760
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Note: year 1 is a ramp-up year and partial year production for cobalt
and zinc sulphate monohydrate estimated at 8 months

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Operating Costs (expressed in $/tonne of ore treated)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yrs Yrs Yrs
Yrs 1 Yrs 2-7 Yrs 8-10 11-13 14-20 21-23
----- ------- -------- ----- ----- -----
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining 15.36 14.91 11.89 7.90 8.62 7.47
Process 19.36 18.96 17.87 17.63 17.60 18.45
G&A, Sales 9.70 7.54 7.36 7.07 6.66 6.64
Total ($/t) 44.37 41.41 37.12 32.60 32.87 32.56

Cash cost(i) $/lb
of copper 0.49 (0.04) (0.07) (0.43) (0.80) (0.78)
Cash Flow
$000/yr 216,002 316,432 233,539 204,462 148,931 97,749
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Cash cost/lb of Cu is net of cobalt, zinc and sulphuric acid credits.
Cash flows are after-tax, using Base Case SEC guideline prices of
$2.91/lb Cu, $26.85/lb Co and $1,175/tonne ZnSO4 H2O.

Project Economics

Project economics are presented for three cases: 1) Base Case; 2) Case 2 using lower prices; and 3) January 2010 prices. No manganese production is assumed for any of the cases.

1) Base Case:

Base case project economics use the weighted average three-year trailing price (in accordance with SEC guidelines) of $2.91/lb for copper; $26.85/lb for cobalt; and $1,175/tonne for zinc sulphate monohydrate.

2) Case 2:

$2.25/lb for copper; $20/lb for cobalt; and $1,100/tonne for zinc sulphate monohydrate.

3) January 2010 Price Case:

Prices as of January 8, 2010 were $3.40/lb for copper; $21.17/lb for cobalt; and $1,000/tonne for zinc sulphate monohydrate.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Prices Case 2 Prices Jan '10 Prices
----------- ------------- --------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
IRR - Pre-tax 28.7% 23.0% 31.2%
IRR - After tax 25.6% 20.4% 27.9%
NPV(ii) @ 0% $3,749 $2,547 $4,024
NPV @ 5% $1,922 $1,230 $2,122
NPV @ 8% $1,306 $815 $1,473
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Note: all NPVs are after-tax

Sensitivities

The project is most sensitive to four key variables: the copper price, cobalt price, capital costs, and operating costs. The sensitivity of the after-tax IRR and NPV (at an 8% discount rate) relative to the Base Case (without manganese) are shown in the table below to indicate the effect of + or - 10% changes in the key variables.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Tax IRR NPV @ 8% ($Millions)
------------- --------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-10% Base Case +10% -10% Base Case +10%
----- --------- ----- ------- --------- -------
Copper price 23.2% 25.6% 27.9% $1,111 $1,306 $1,505
Cobalt price 25.0% 25.6% 26.1% $1,246 $1,306 $1,367
Capital cost 27.7% 25.6% 23.7% $1,361 $1,306 $1,250
Operating cost 26.3% 25.6% 24.8% $1,379 $1,306 $1,234
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Project Description

The Boleo Cu-Co-Zn-Mn Project is located on the east coast of Baja California Sur, Mexico, near the town of Santa Rosalia. The deposit contains seven mineralized seams (mantos), stacked within a single formation, all dipping gently to the east towards the Sea of Cortez in a step-like fashion, due to post depositional faulting.

The Project consists of approximately 11,000 hectares of mineral concessions and 7,000 hectares of surface occupancy rights, each assembled as a contiguous titled block. The Project is located within the "buffer zone" of the El Vizcaino Biosphere, a Mexican National environmental reserve. An Environmental Impact Manifest (EIM) was submitted in early 2006, and approved by the Mexican authorities in December 2006. The Company has also received authorization to commence development of the Project within the Biosphere.

The Project is to be developed as a series of underground mines using conventional soft rock mining methods, coupled with several small open-cut mines feeding ore to a processing plant using a two stage leaching circuit followed by solid/liquid separation and solvent extraction - electrowinning steps to produce copper and cobalt metal and crystallization to produce zinc sulphate monohydrate.

Both surface and underground mining operations have been designed by AAI to extract ore for the first 23 years at a full mining rate exceeding 3.1 million dry metric tonnes per annum. Approximately 67 million tonnes of ore will be mined from underground operations and three million tonnes from surface open cuts.

The process plant has been designed to treat 3.1 million dry metric tonnes per annum at maximum head grades of 2.2% copper, 0.1% cobalt and 0.67% zinc through an integrated hydrometallurgical facility to produce LME Grade 'A' copper cathode; high purity (greater than 99.8% Co) cobalt cathode; and zinc sulphate monohydrate.

Resource Model

Since completion of the Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) in 2007, the Company, in conjunction with Wardrop, has prepared a revised geological model that incorporates drill results not included in the DFS, has added recoveries to the CuEq formula and has placed all geological data into a UTM grid format that is more compatible for long term mine planning. A National Instrument 43-101 geological report is currently being finalized for filing on SEDAR. Total reported Measured, Indicated and Inferred resources, estimated using 3D block models, are based on Copper equivalent (CuEq)(1)(3) cut-off grade of 0.5%.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Tonnes
Block Model (millions) CuEq.% Cu% Co% Zn% Mn%
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Resources
Measured 85.8 1.59 0.82 0.07 0.50 3.04
Indicated 178.9 1.46 0.74 0.05 0.71 3.32

Total M & I 264.7 1.50 0.76 0.06 0.64 3.23

Inferred 159.9 1.15 0.47 0.04 0.70 2.93
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Mn is not considered in the equivalency formula.
(2) Mineral resources are inclusive of mineral reserves. Mineral
resources which are not mineral reserves do not have
demonstrated economic viability (mineral reserves can be found
in a Feasibility Summary Report dated 2007 and filed on SEDAR).
(3) CuEq% equals (Cu% x Cu-Pr. x Cu-Rec. + Co% x Co-Pr. x Co-Rec. +
Zn% x Zn-Pr. x Zn-Rec.) / Cu-Pr. Prices used are $1.50/lb Cu;
$15.00/lb Co; $1.20 /lb Zn; recoveries used are 91.2% Cu, 78.5%
Co, 65.5% Zn

Manganese opportunity

The Boleo deposit is endowed with a rich resource of manganese that can be recovered in the form of manganese carbonate. The majority of demand for manganese follows trends in global steel production and is marketed in a number of different product forms. The market for manganese carbonate is limited but the Company has shown that this material can be further processed into electrolytic manganese metal (EMM) and manganese sulphate monohydrate. Prices and demand for a number of manganese products have recovered following the downturn in the global economy in 2008. Although manganese is not included in the current economic evaluation, the Company continues to assess the future potential of manganese carbonate sales as an intermediate product and further processing potential and anticipates it will commence a feasibility study on manganese production in 2010.

Thomas C. Stubens, M.A.Sc., P.Eng a Senior Geologist with Wardrop at the time the mineral resource model and Technical Report were generated, and a Qualified Person, has reviewed this disclosure and states that it fairly and accurately represents the information in the Technical Report that supports the disclosure. Tim Ross of AAI, a Qualified Person, has reviewed the underground mine plan and production schedule and the disclosure contained herein regarding the same and accepts responsibility for such disclosure. Thomas Gluck, Manager Process Metallurgy for Boleo, a Qualified Person, has reviewed the process plant discussion and the disclosure contained herein regarding the same and accepts responsibility for such disclosure.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF BAJA MINING CORP.

JOHN W. GREENSLADE, PRESIDENT

Some of the statements contained in this release are forward-looking statements, such as statements that describe the anticipated mine life; the Company's expected NPV and IRR of the project; expected future metal prices; expected timing of start-up; expected timing of a manganese feasibility study; expected timing for construction and other statements. Since forward-looking statements are not statements of historical fact and address future events, conditions and expectations, forward-looking statements by their nature inherently involve unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors well beyond the Company's ability to control or predict. Actual results and developments may differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements. Material factors that could cause actual revenues to differ materially from those contained in such forwarding-looking statements include (i) fluctuations on the prices of copper, cobalt, zinc and manganese, (ii) interpretation of contract terms, (iii) accuracy of the Company's and consultants' projections, (iv) the Company's ability to finance, receive permits for, obtain equipment, construct and develop the El Boleo Project, (v) the effects of weather; operating hazards; adverse geological conditions and global warming, (vi) impact of availability of labor, materials and equipment; and (vii) changes in governmental laws, regulations, economic conditions or shifts in political attitudes or stability.

These forward-looking statements represent the Company's views as of the date of this release. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Readers should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors -The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits U.S. mining companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only those mineral deposits that a company can economically and legally extract or produce. We use certain terms in this press release such as "measured," "indicated," and "inferred" "resources", which the SEC guidelines strictly prohibit U.S. registered companies from including in their filings with the SEC. U.S. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F which may be secured from us, or from the SEC website at http://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml.

wessongroup - 1-15-2010 at 05:40 PM

Boy, I feel better now "Total reported Measured, Indicated and Inferred resources, estimated using 3D block models, are based on Copper equivalent (CuEq)(1)(3) cut-off grade of 0.5%", cuz if they didn't use the "3D block models" boy they would be in trouble....

Coupled with the "forward-looking" statements which can not be relied upon as "they can not predict the future", and the "Qualified Persons" acceptance that the "technical report" supports the "disclosure" and accepts "responsibility" (now what would that be) and that the technical reports have been prepared by the Companies hired Consultant "Terta Tech" who has a sub entity of the parent do the tech work..

Good to see such strong corner stone in place for the advancement of this "project"

By the way, where was Boleo, just my two cents

rts551 - 1-15-2010 at 05:47 PM

They are also counting on mining on Ejido land from what some land owners are telling me. One had them run off after they dug exploratory holes on his property

tripledigitken - 1-15-2010 at 06:15 PM

Now if they would just add a line item in their budget for environmental remediation. For the future mining and from the last go around.

wessongroup - 1-15-2010 at 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tripledigitken
Now if they would just add a line item in their budget for environmental remediation. For the future mining and from the last go around.

Exactly, thank you very much..

David K - 1-15-2010 at 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wessongroup
...

By the way, where was Boleo, just my two cents

It was the name of the French mining company that developed Santa Rosalia in the late 1800's to about 1956.

rts551 - 1-15-2010 at 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K

Quote:

Originally posted by wessongroup
...

By the way, where was Boleo, just my two cents

It was the name of the French mining company that developed Santa Rosalia in the late 1800's to about 1956.

The French company operated until 1954 when the tax payment exemption expired and was shut down due to bankruptcy.

David K - 1-15-2010 at 07:24 PM

Great story! :bounce:

Paula - 1-15-2010 at 07:28 PM

from the section above titled "Manganese opportunity":

"Thomas C. Stubens, M.A.Sc., P.Eng a Senior Geologist with Wardrop at the time the mineral resource model and Technical Report were generated, and a Qualified Person, has reviewed this disclosure and states that it fairly and accurately represents the information in the Technical Report that supports the disclosure. Tim Ross of AAI, a Qualified Person, has reviewed the underground mine plan and production schedule and the disclosure contained herein regarding the same and accepts responsibility for such disclosure. Thomas Gluck, Manager Process Metallurgy for Boleo, a Qualified Person, has reviewed the process plant discussion and the disclosure contained herein regarding the same and accepts responsibility for such disclosure."

I'm not familiar with the term "Qualified Person". To the best of my knowledge there is no "Qualified Person" status in the United States of America, so maybe it is a Canadian thing. It does appear to be quite weighty and important in the above paragraph.

So what I would like to know is how one goes about becoming a Qualified Person as opposed to a mere qualified person. What might the qualifications be? Is there a board of certification of Qualification? And might I be able to become certified as qualified to be a Qualified Person? :light:

Seriously, I really fear for the future health and economy of the lovely little town of Santa Rosalia, and I'm afraid this project will end in disappointment over the long term.

edited to add one letter d.

[Edited on 1-16-2010 by Paula]

k-rico - 1-15-2010 at 07:58 PM

I was curious about the uses of cobalt so did some googling. Turns out it's used in lithium-ion batteries.

Mr. Greenslade says "there is also significant upside potential for Boleo which is endowed with a rich resource of manganese."

Guess what, so is manganese.

http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-5A.htm

Electric cars use lithium-ion batteries.

Maybe that's why this mine is again profitable.

monoloco - 1-15-2010 at 11:31 PM

Quote:

I think that the inhabitants of that lovely little town who's economy has depended on mining for a couple of hundred years might disagree.

wessongroup - 1-16-2010 at 12:03 AM

Soon or later it will play out.. what will they have then? Take a good look at ex mining towns and the legacy of the operations..

Google the toxicity of cobalt and manganese and consider this lack of information on the "ramp up"

I'm not fully aware of Mexico's Labor Safety requirements.. it's been a number of years since I worked with them.. but, would venture there are Laws and Regulations on the books, but very weak enforcement for the workers exposed to various harmful materials, not counting the people living in the immediate area

Not saying the people don't need work, would only hope the "project" would encompass ALL parameters, not just financial and that the supporting data be study closely by disinterested third parties to ensure a positive results for all..

[Edited on 1-16-2010 by wessongroup]

The Gull - 1-16-2010 at 05:45 AM

Aren't we just the big bag of judgmental people?

Extracting raw materials from the Earth has been going on since Adam (or close to that time). Santa Rosalia exists because of el Boleo. That the city has a boom and bust economy means what? As compared to our current world wide sophisticated economy which relies on the price of gold and oil - extracted from the Earth?

People.

Wise up. This is what happens everyday in the world. If you don't agree with it, leave with the next visit of space aliens in your area.

Hopebama wants a green world with electric cars, Santa Rosalia can dig it!

Would you rather have a prospectus for a poppy field or a meth lab run by El Teo, Ltd?

I AGREE WITH YOU!

ELINVESTIG8R - 1-16-2010 at 05:56 AM

wessongroup - 1-16-2010 at 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Gull
Aren't we just the big bag of judgmental people?

Extracting raw materials from the Earth has been going on since Adam (or close to that time). Santa Rosalia exists because of el Boleo. That the city has a boom and bust economy means what? As compared to our current world wide sophisticated economy which relies on the price of gold and oil - extracted from the Earth?

People.

Wise up. This is what happens everyday in the world. If you don't agree with it, leave with the next visit of space aliens in your area.

Hopebama wants a green world with electric cars, Santa Rosalia can dig it!

Would you rather have a prospectus for a poppy field or a meth lab run by El Teo, Ltd?

Of course your right about "how it works".. sadly.. still think we should review what is proposed and review it with a fine tooth comb ...

I would however expect a prospectus to be "well thought out", which this one did not appear to be close too.. as for me.. I would like the horse to make a come back..

On the drug issue.. know it's not good for anyone, but then neither is booze, cigarettes, and a lot of other things.. but still think that individual choice should be allowed..(as long as it does not impact public safety and tax rates to support those who have chosen incorrectly) if you want to drink a half gallon of Wild Turkey a day, it's your business, and throw down a few for me, they had to change their minds on that one and make it legal again after finding they can not control what the "people" want in a free society.. and we are the people.. the Government is in fact US .. it's not a building some place... some times it appears that we are sorely lacking in just plain "common sense".. this stuff isn't all that hard in my book

Which some might want to consider on the whole drug thing.. and yeah, I'm keenly aware what it does to individuals, families and society (I have family which has been impacted) .. perhaps the Government should get out of the "business" of trying to control "adaptive radiation" of our and other species ... and just deal with what we vote for.. not what they think is "BEST" for us.. once in the State and Federal seats of Government... just my two cents

Now start in.... for those of your that can't sleep either

Geo_Skip - 1-16-2010 at 07:05 AM

Wessongroup, your comments about the "reliability" of a Canadian based mining promotion are well founded. Their claims are based on unregulated and undefined terms in a financial and geological sense. The value of the propose operation is based on Blue Sky projections and absurdly skewed assumptions.

TetraTech provided the "Facts" it's client pays for. Sad truth from my direct industry experience in statistical computer modeling for the mining industry.

Major environmental damage can be bequeathed to the residents based on some speculators wild projections and ill conceived gamble.

wessongroup - 1-16-2010 at 07:09 AM

Can you share a bit about the "computer modeling" would be very interested in someone who uses same.. have no experience nor knowledge.. would be very helpful if it's not a really tough subject to get ones "arms around".. thanks in advance

only modeling I did was with clay...

[Edited on 1-16-2010 by wessongroup]

[Edited on 1-16-2010 by wessongroup]

The Gull - 1-16-2010 at 07:19 AM

... I thought you were going to report that your only modeling was done in front of a camera :lol:

If that was the case, your opinions would fit with all the other "stars" who are out to save the world.

wessongroup - 1-16-2010 at 07:30 AM

This old carcass is not going to close to the front of any camera.. :lol:

monoloco - 1-16-2010 at 07:35 AM

It's called NIMBY (not in my back yard) Everyone wants computers, cell phones, flat screens, etc. and they don't care where the raw materials come from as long as it's not their neighborhood. If one really wants to save the environment then they should quit using items that depend heavily on the extraction of minerals. Is it better for these minerals to be extracted in a country with environmental laws like the U.S. or Mexico or would you rather they were mined in some third world sh** hole with absolutely no regard for the environment?

wessongroup - 1-16-2010 at 07:54 AM

Like I said, I would welcome the horse... and your point is not lost on me.. would only say.. "wants" as compared to "needs"..

In another post I related what I have seen done over the past 40+ years in the name of "progress".. well, take a look at the condition of our Planet.. just saw where Mars is the next big "goal".. you guessed it, more.. and more and more.. has this been fully evaluated as to the long term impacts on the Planet Earth.. I think not, rather a stop gap measure to insure we don't freak out over the possability of not having more and/or enough

Perhaps that is good, I'm not sure at this point in my life... just looking at Haiti, FAA won't has to put a hold on all traffic.. your in approach and holding for at least 30 minutes, and there is no fuel on the ground.. does carrying capacity ring a bell...

LET'S ALL TAKE A BREATH AND GIVE OUR PLANET EARTH A HUG!

ELINVESTIG8R - 1-16-2010 at 08:04 AM

[Edited on 1-16-2010 by ELINVESTIG8R]

Interesting or not info

bajaguy - 1-16-2010 at 08:05 AM

From a recent article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal:

Nevada mines produced commodities worth a record $6.1 billion in 2008, according to the state Division of Minerals. Gold mining produced $4.97 billion of the state total.

Mining in Nevada provides high-wage jobs to 14,000 Nevadans.

Unemployment in mining counties is 6.5 percent, compared to more than 12 percent statewide. Gold mining largely occurs in Eureka, Elko and other counties in Northern Nevada.

Mines in Nevada produce 80 percent of the gold mined in the entire country. Gold sold today for $1,131 per ounce, near its all-time record. Between 6 million and 7 million ounces of gold are extracted each year from Nevada mines.

While most gold in the United States is mined in Nevada, gold is found in many countries around the world and in states like Alaska and Utah.

In order to produce a lot of gold, the geological endowment and the social-political environment have to be attractive. If they aren’t, mining would go elsewhere.

wilderone - 1-16-2010 at 09:00 AM

Gold isn't copper.
Nevada isn't Baja California.
Unemployment, wage, working conditions, remediation - all worlds apart from US standards. Do some research on Canadian mining atrocities.

I think this sums it up - speculative at best: "The United States Securities and Exchange Commission permits U.S. mining companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only those mineral deposits that a company can economically and legally extract or produce. We use certain terms in this press release such as "measured," "indicated," and "inferred" "resources", which the SEC guidelines strictly prohibit U.S. registered companies from including in their filings with the SEC. U.S. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure . . ."

So if they don't get enough investors to pay for it all, how can it proceed?

The Gull - 1-16-2010 at 09:24 AM

Sr. Slim has enough money for el Boleo to start-up.

gnukid - 1-16-2010 at 09:31 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/07/us-scientists-mountaintop-mining

US scientists demand government ban on mountaintop mining

Mountaintop mining should be banned for causing vast and permanent destruction to US environment and exposing its people to serious health consequences such as birth defects, a new study says today.

An article in the journal Science, by a team of 12 ecologists, hydrologists, and engineers, provides the most comprehensive analysis so far of the damage done by the controversial mining practice.

The process involves shaving off up to 1,000 vertical feet of mountain peak – including ancient forests – to expose thin, but highly prized, seams of coal.

Margaret Palmer, an ecologist at the University of Maryland Centre for Environmental Science, who led the study, said the science left no excuse for the Obama administration not to ban the highly destructive practice.

"Scientists are not usually that comfortable coming out with policy recommendations," she said, "but this time the results were overwhelming."

The article described river and forest systems that have been disrupted well downstream from the original dumping spot of mining debris. It also said there was virtually no chance of restoring mountain, forests or streams once the mining companies have moved on to new seams.

"There is a lot of evidence suggesting that there is significant degradation, and there just isn't the evidence at all that they can reverse this," said Emily Bernhardt, an environmental biologist at Duke University, who was another co-author.

She said there were signs that contamination from the mining debris was spilling into drinking water and wells. The debris is already killing off fish. In heavily mined southern countries, 50- 60% of young fish were deformed because of high concentrations of selenium.

"That was quite an eye-opener," said Dennis Lemly, a biologist at Wake Forest University and one of the authors. He warned the fish population could soon be wiped out. "The deformed young fish – that is really the red flag. You can see right away that you are over a serious threshold."

Selenium concentrations in fish caught in some of West Virginia's rivers were twice as high as in other states that had declared them unfit for human consumption. West Virginia authorities issued a health warning – but not a ban.

"To put it quite bluntly, my jaw dropped because right away I saw concentrations that were far above toxic thresholds," added Lemly.

The authors also logged significant dangers to human health, including lung cancer, and chronic heart lung and kidney disease, as well as birth defects.

Today's report – reinforced by the rare demand from scientists for specific government action – deepens the pressure on the Obama administration from environmentalists and liberal supporters to ban mountaintop mining.

Obama administration officials had promised to toughen the lax environmental regulations of the George Bush era. But grassroots activists in West Virginia accuse the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of continuing to greenlight new projects – albeit with some additional restrictions on the mining companies.

Earlier this week, the EPA outraged activists by giving the go-ahead to two new mines. EPA officials argued that the new conditions imposed on the mining operator, Patriot Coal, would bury only three miles of mountain stream – instead of the six miles of waterways that would have been filled with debris under the company's original plan.

Until today's article, Mountaintop mining consequences, much of the research on the effects of mountaintop removal had been left to government scientists, and there was little understanding in the broader academic community of the sheer scale of destruction.

As many as 500 mountaintops across West Virginia, Virginia and Kentucky have already been replaced by dry flat plateau, and 1,200 mountain streams have been buried beneath dumped rock and dirt. By 2012, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that more than 2,200 square miles of Appalachian forest will disappear.

At some sites, the mining companies have tried to rebuild the silhouette of the old mountain, or replant. But mostly they leave the mountain missing its crest.

In any event, there is no undoing the damage, and the scientists said the seriousness of the environmental and public health impacts compelled the EPA to ban mining.

"I think it is very clear. It is very compelling, and it would be a disservice to the people who live there to say we just have to study it more," said Michael Hendryx, a community medicine professor at the University of West Virginia. "The monetary costs of the industry in terms of premature mortality and other impacts far outweighs any benefits."

monoloco - 1-16-2010 at 11:40 AM

I'd rather see mining developed in a place like Santa Rosalia that has already been impacted than to see one developed in a pristine local. For that matter I would rather see a mine in the hills above SR than another golf course hotel development on the coast. I'm sure that the locals in SR could use the jobs that a mine would bring.

David K - 1-16-2010 at 11:48 AM

Yes... the need is for the resources and jobs.

It is Mexico, we Norteamericanos don't really want to sound like we are telling them what they can do in their country, do we? :light:

There would be no Santa Rosalia if not for the copper and the French... It already is a mine. :light:

rpleger - 1-16-2010 at 02:12 PM

This is going to turn S. Rosalia into a boom town...the coast south to Mulege will be effected. by a building boom...This is good.

wessongroup - 1-16-2010 at 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Yes... the need is for the resources and jobs.

It is Mexico, we Norteamericanos don't really want to sound like we are telling them what they can do in their country, do we? :light:

There would be no Santa Rosalia if not for the copper and the French... It already is a mine. :light:

Believe the thrust of the query was the accuracy of the (Press Release) from an entity and their stated “projections” and “research” conducted by their paid consultant.

The people of Mexico most certainly have "their" right to do anything they wish with their Country.

And I do not recall statements of anyone that the Mexican people should be denied work of any type.

The point raised, was directed towards the "press release" which was posted here on Baja Nomads

Would add I have serious doubt that the Government of Mexico will be making any decisions on this issue based on what was/is posted here.

This was merely a cursory "review" of information posted, and the apparent shortcomings of same.

Mining is and will continue, in Mexico, as one of the largest operators is found in Mexico “Grupo México”. Who is the parent of ASARCO LLC, currently in chapter 11 in the States, and has left a total of 20 superfund sites around the Nation. Which the people of the United States will be cleaning up some day.

Would just hope to see a business approach which includes all factors for the benefit of Mexican People and their Country, both short and long term.

We in the United States have a legacy of mining operations which have left serious environmental and health problems for the people of the United States to deal with.

The sharing of our knowledge and experiences I would hope could be viewed as helpful not negative and/or hurtful to the Mexican people, as that would be the intent.

CaboRon - 1-17-2010 at 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rpleger
This is going to turn S. Rosalia into a boom town...the coast south to Mulege will be effected. by a building boom...This is good.

FYI:

Wrong area ...

This project is in the mountains west of Todos Santos and south of La Paz. There is more than one Santa Rosalia, this one being close to El Triempho in Baja California Sur.

BajaNomad - 1-17-2010 at 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaNews
The Boleo Cu-Co-Zn-Mn Project is located on the east coast of Baja California Sur, Mexico, near the town of Santa Rosalia.

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon
This project is in the mountains west of Todos Santos and south of La Paz. There is more than one Santa Rosalia, this one being close to El Triempho in Baja California Sur.

Ron, your comment may need further clarification or elaboration.

:?:

ELINVESTIG8R - 1-17-2010 at 10:47 AM

BajaNomad I think you need to bring in that BIGGGG Policeman to interrogate CaboRon! That should do the trick to get him to talk! :lol:

monoloco - 1-17-2010 at 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon

Quote:

Originally posted by rpleger
This is going to turn S. Rosalia into a boom town...the coast south to Mulege will be effected. by a building boom...This is good.

FYI:

Wrong area ...

This project is in the mountains west of Todos Santos and south of La Paz. There is more than one Santa Rosalia, this one being close to El Triempho in Baja California Sur.

Ron, It is El Rosario that is close to El Triumfo.

rts551 - 1-17-2010 at 11:10 AM

Quote:

There would be no Santa Rosalia if not for the copper and the French... It already is a mine. :light:

And David, look at what got left. some call it blight. It is only recently that they have been able to pull themselves part way out of a very depressed state

Graham - 1-17-2010 at 11:31 AM

This headstone marks the grave of Angele Bailly, died April 11, 1897 at the age of nine and a half months “regrettee de son pere et de sa mere.”

Santa Rosalia has always been one of my favorite destinations in Baja. My wife Bonni and I spent many happy weeks hiking and car camping, rockhounding, exploring and communing with the spirits in the many peaceful canyons about the town.

From the Hotel Frances to the Boleo company headquarters to the smelter and harbor, and up into all the canyons where the ores were extracted from hundreds of miles of underground workings Santa Rosalia oozes history. In places it is a virtual museum of industrialism.

There are many old cemeteries with many hundreds of graves scattered around the long abandoned mining camps. I sure hope they will be treated with respect and consideration and not simply bulldozed aside.

SR284a_6_1.jpg - 47kB

Graham - 1-17-2010 at 11:41 AM

Above Arroyo Soledad

SR090a_3_1.jpg - 49kB

rts551 - 1-17-2010 at 11:48 AM

Thanks Graham. I agee

ELINVESTIG8R - 1-17-2010 at 12:17 PM

Here are the graves of two sisters married to Espinoza men and their two children all who died during childbirth. The graves are located near Rancho El Metate, San Juan de Dios. Photo taken from North to South.

These two adobe ruins were their homes. Photo taken from West to East.

wilderone - 1-18-2010 at 11:39 AM

"The Boleo Cu-Co-Zn-Mn Project is located on the east coast of Baja California Sur, Mexico, near the town of Santa Rosalia. The deposit contains seven mineralized seams (mantos), stacked within a single formation, all dipping gently to the east towards the Sea of Cortez in a step-like fashion, due to post depositional faulting.

The Project consists of approximately 11,000 hectares of mineral concessions and 7,000 hectares of surface occupancy rights, each assembled as a contiguous titled block. The Project is located within the "buffer zone" of the El Vizcaino Biosphere, a Mexican National environmental reserve. An Environmental Impact Manifest (EIM) was submitted in early 2006, and approved by the Mexican authorities in December 2006. The Company has also received authorization to commence development of the Project within the Biosphere.

The Project is to be developed as a series of underground mines using conventional soft rock mining methods, coupled with several small open-cut mines feeding ore to a processing plant using a two stage leaching circuit followed by solid/liquid separation and solvent extraction"

So the project is in a biosphere; will use toxic, liquid open leach pits; will slope to the Sea of Cortez (pollution plume); and doesn't speak of remediation of the national environmental preserve after 23 years of operation.

Bajahowodd - 1-18-2010 at 12:33 PM

CaboRon was referring to a wholly different Canadian project for gold mining that could have negative impact in the Todos Santos area.

http://www.mexidata.info/id2510.html

Paula - 1-18-2010 at 04:51 PM

In CaboRon's original post, he didn't refer to any projuect, he just posted an article that clearly deals with the El Boleo project in Santa Rosalia north of Mulege. He must have been quite confused, as in his post on page 2 of this thread he mentions mining in "the mountains to the west of Todos Santos."

Bajahowodd's link is alarming, and coupled with Ron's article, one could reasonable conclude that Canadian mining companies are deceptive, exploitative, and dangerous, showing total disregard for countries and peoples far from their home offices. Mexico would do well to be wary of both Baja Mining Co. and Vista Gold.

Bajahowodd - 1-18-2010 at 05:04 PM

Paula- The original post on this thread was a news story not posted by Ron. It did indeed refer to the mining operations at Santa Rosalia. I do think that your warning about Canadian mining companies should be taken to heart. I'm just guessing here, but I would imagine that Canada, with its vast expanse of open land and it's relatively small population, just doesn't or hasn't had to come to grips with the potential rape of the land that uncontrolled mining interests have done and continue to do.

Paula - 1-18-2010 at 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
Paula- The original post on this thread was a news story not posted by Ron. It did indeed refer to the mining operations at Santa Rosalia.....

This is exactly what I said. And his later comment showed that he was probably confused when he posted it as to where it was located. He spoke in his second post of a gold mining operation being done by Visita Gold, apparently in the mountains under the sea "west of Todos Santos" :lol:

I will write more clearly next time.

[Edited on 1-19-2010 by Paula]

CaboRon - 1-18-2010 at 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
CaboRon was referring to a wholly different Canadian project for gold mining that could have negative impact in the Todos Santos area.

http://www.mexidata.info/id2510.html

Thankyou, you are right

Baja Files Updated Technical Report and Amended Financial Statements

BajaNews - 3-9-2010 at 07:07 AM

© Marketwire 2010
March 9, 2010

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA -- (Marketwire) -- 03/08/10 -- Baja Mining Corp. (TSX: BAJ)(OTCQX: BAJFF) today announced that, further to its news release dated January 15, 2010, it has filed an updated NI 43-101 compliant technical report (the "Technical Report") on the Boleo Project. The Technical Report can be found on Baja's website at www.bajamining.com and on SEDAR at www.sedar.com .

The "Updated Technical Report" dated February 24, 2010, prepared by Michael Shaw, P.E.; Thomas Gluck, PhD; David Dreisinger, PhD; Scott Britton, P.E.; Terry Hodson, P.Geo. (all of Baja); and Timothy Ross (of Agapito & Associates), all Qualified Persons, projects an average annual production for the first six years, of the currently scheduled initial 23 years of plant production, of 56,697 tonnes of copper cathode, 1,708 tonnes of cobalt cathode and 25,364 tonnes of zinc sulphate. The project has proven and probable reserves that support a mine life of more than 25 years. Average life-of-mine (currently anticipated at 25 years of mining and 23 years of process plant) cash costs (based on the three year trailing average metal prices, as of December 31, 2009, in accordance with SEC guidelines) are negative US$0.29 per pound of copper, net of by-product credits for cobalt and zinc, and with no credit for manganese.

In conjunction with the filing of the base shelf prospectus and related filings in the United States reported earlier today, March 8, 2010, Baja has filed amended consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2008 and for the interim period ended September 30, 2009 plus the amended management discussion and analysis for the period ended September 30, 2009. The financial statements have been reconciled, as required by the filing of the Registration Statement, to US GAAP Item 18. In addition, during the review for the filing of the amended financial statements for the prospectus, Baja discovered an error in the cash flow statement of the September 30, 2009 interim financial statements.

Certain cash flows arising from changes in project vendors' deposits were incorrectly presented as part of changes in working capital within operating activities. The receipts (amounting to $6.6 million) are considered cash receipts from the repayment of advances and should therefore have been included as part of investing activities, thereby reducing the cash flows invested in mineral properties during the three and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2009.

As at September 30, 2009 this adjustment had no effect on the Company`s earnings or on the interim consolidated balance sheet. Amended consolidated financial statements and the Company's management discussion and analysis have been filed and are available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com : www.sedar.com , as well as on the Company's website at www.bajamining.com : www.bajamining.com .

Baja Mining is a Vancouver-based publicly traded mine development company (TSX: BAJ)(OTCQX: BAJFF) with a 70% interest in the Boleo copper-cobalt-zinc-manganese project located near Santa Rosalia, Baja California Sur, Mexico. A Korean syndicate holds the remaining 30%. Baja is the project operator. The target date for commissioning Boleo is 2012.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF BAJA MINING CORP.

JOHN W. GREENSLADE, PRESIDENT

Some of the statements contained in this release are forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933 and U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and forward-looking information within the meaning of Canadian securities laws, such as statements that describe the anticipated mine life; the Company's expected NPV and IRR of the project; expected future metal prices; expected timing of start-up; expected timing of a manganese feasibility study; expected timing for construction and other statements. Since forward-looking statements are not statements of historical fact and address future events, conditions and expectations, forward-looking statements by their nature inherently involve unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors well beyond the Company's ability to control or predict. Actual results and developments may differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements. Material factors that could cause actual revenues to differ materially from those contained in such forwarding-looking statements include (i) fluctuations on the prices of copper, cobalt, zinc and manganese, (ii) interpretation of contract terms, (iii) accuracy of the Company's and consultants' projections, (iv) the Company's ability to finance, receive permits for, obtain equipment, construct and develop the El Boleo Project, (v) the effects of weather; operating hazards; adverse geological conditions and global warming, (vi) impact of availability of labor, materials and equipment; and (vii) changes in governmental laws, regulations, economic conditions or shifts in political attitudes or stability.

These forward-looking statements represent the Company's views as of the date of this release. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Readers should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Cautionary Note to U.S. Investors - The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits U.S. mining companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only those mineral deposits that a company can economically and legally extract or produce. We use certain terms in this press release such as "measured," "indicated," and "inferred" "resources", which the SEC guidelines strictly prohibit U.S. registered companies from including in their filings with the SEC. U.S. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F which may be secured from us, or from the SEC website at www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml : www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml .

The Toronto Stock Exchange neither approves nor disapproves the information contained in this news release.

Contacts:
Baja Mining Corp.
John Greenslade
President
604-685-2323
604-629-5228 (FAX)
www.bajamining.com

bajario - 4-23-2012 at 07:37 AM

A little cost overun and a few more board members resigned. My stock is taking a beating this morning.

Baja Mining Provides Update For Costs of the Boleo Project; Announces Director Resignations

Vancouver, April 23, 2012 – Baja Mining Corp. (TSX:BAJ - OTCQX: BAJFF) today announced the preliminary results of its current capital cost review of the Company’s 70 percent owned Boleo copper-cobalt-zinc project and three resignations from the Board of Directors.

Capital Cost Review

While the review is not yet complete, Baja has identified a projected cost increase of approximately $246 million after exhausting existing contingency and cost overrun facilities. Financing for the Boleo project was based on a 2010 projected go-forward funding requirement of US$1.143 billion. The projected $246 million cost increase represents a 21.5% increase over the 2010 funding requirement.

The projected cost increase is attributable to a variety of pressures including change of scope, design improvements and price increases in key consumables such as steel and fuel. This current estimate exceeds previous forecasts, which were based in part on cost trend analysis. More robust systems are being implemented to improve forecasts and project controls going forward and the Company will provide further information regarding such controls shortly. Nevertheless, the increase is consistent with increases experienced by other mining development projects.

The Company is reviewing the updated cost projections for accuracy and is exploring the potential of various options to defer or reduce costs. In addition, and in consultation with the lenders for the Boleo project and Baja's strategic partners, Baja is considering the most efficient and non-dilutive options for funding its 70% of the budget shortfall. To date, Baja has been successful in minimizing dilution to existing shareholders by providing a financing package 70% comprised of debt and non-equity contributions and is committed to providing the most effective funding to complete the Boleo project.

Under the Boleo project's lending agreements, the projected cost increase requires Baja and its Korean Partners to fund the shortfall. Baja has initiated discussions with the Boleo project's lenders and Baja's partners to develop an acceptable remedy within the next two months allowing the Boleo project to continue drawing on available loan facilities. Baja is cognizant that raising additional funding from the Boleo project's lenders may subject the project to further risk management strategies as required by its lenders including but not limited to additional cost overrun facilities beyond the $100 million already funded and applied to its projected cost increase.

The Company’s Korean partners continue to support the project and are working with Baja and the project's lenders to develop and execute the funding plan. Baja also reports that development of the Boleo project continues on a schedule which is consistent with production targets. As previously disclosed, copper production at the Boleo project is targeted for the first half of 2013.

Director Resignations

Baja also announces the resignations of Graham Thody, Tom Ogryzlo and Wolf Seidler from the Company’s Board of Directors, temporarily reducing the size of the board to three members, of whom two are independent. The Company is working to appoint new independent nominees to the Board to replace the departing directors as swiftly as possible and will keep shareholders apprised of progress.

rts551 - 4-23-2012 at 07:46 AM

Hope they can get it back on track. Sounds like the Korean investors are still supportive.

chuckie - 4-23-2012 at 11:31 AM

If the shelf life of this project is indeed 23 years, its a good thing. I have toured this mine, tours are available by contacting the PR person, and it is pretty impressive.Both from a production standpoint and from at least stated concerns about environmental issues. Like many of the subjects on this forum, there are alot of "Experts" with no first hand knowledge of the subject upon which they are experts. Santa Rosalia is a busy place now...Thats good...I therefore am qualified as a"knowledgeable person"...I have at least been in the place.....

Skipjack Joe - 4-23-2012 at 12:56 PM

Environmental damage?

This is nothing. Wait until they hook up with El Arco and see what they do to the desert.

chuckie - 4-23-2012 at 01:31 PM

Are they now hooking up with El Arco? I must have missed that part....If memory serves, not long ago (this year) the Mexican government denied permits for a new mine in Baja, due to environmental concerns....

Skipjack Joe - 4-23-2012 at 02:16 PM

I'm going to relay what Beto told me this summer. For those that don't know, Beto is a resident of El Arco that resides in San Francisquito. A good, hard working man.

The mining operation at El Arco (don't know if it's Boleo) has bought all the ejido land between El Arco and the Cortez. That's a done deal. The intent is to build the road to San Francisquito and a dock in the bay. It's my understading that the ores would be driven to the coast where ships would transport it further. It's my understanding that this conglomerate now owns part of the coastline. My thinking is that the ore would be transported to Santa Rosalia where further refinement would take place.

Is there any hope of stopping this, I asked.

Why would you want to, replied Beto.

Apparently the only hiccup is that this whole setup would be passing through some environmentally protected area. But he didn't think this would amount to much.

I'm just reporting it as I heard it. I was sad beyond belief.

rts551 - 4-23-2012 at 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
I'm going to relay what Beto told me this summer. For those that don't know, Beto is a resident of El Arco that resides in San Francisquito. A good, hard working man.

The mining operation at El Arco (don't know if it's Boleo) has bought all the ejido land between El Arco and the Cortez. That's a done deal. The intent is to build the road to San Francisquito and a dock in the bay. It's my understading that the ores would be driven to the coast where ships would transport it further. It's my understanding that this conglomerate now owns part of the coastline. My thinking is that the ore would be transported to Santa Rosalia where further refinement would take place.

Is there any hope of stopping this, I asked.

Why would you want to, replied Beto.

Apparently the only hiccup is that this whole setup would be passing through some environmentally protected area. But he didn't think this would amount to much.

I'm just reporting it as I heard it. I was sad beyond belief.

The biosphere?

Skipjack Joe - 4-23-2012 at 02:50 PM

Would love to hear anyone confirm or deny Beto's assertions.

I don't know if it's a biosphere.

rts551 - 4-23-2012 at 03:44 PM

Interesting Igor. Why wouldn't they just use existing roads and bring it to the Pacific coast at GN.

And on edit: I believe it is part of the Vizcaino Biosphere.

[Edited on 4-23-2012 by rts551]

goldhuntress - 4-23-2012 at 04:10 PM

Grupo Mexico owns the El Arco mine and I heard very soon are doing an open pit mine there. Very sad.

rts551 - 4-23-2012 at 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by goldhuntress
Grupo Mexico owns the El Arco mine and I heard very soon are doing an open pit mine there. Very sad.

Why is it sad?

Grupo Mexico has open pit mines in Arizona and New Mexico, and probably some other states. Check out their holdings in Sonora Mexico.

To them Baja Caifornia/Baja California Sur are just other areas with resources to be used.

Skipjack Joe - 4-23-2012 at 05:17 PM

A little research confirmed my fears:

(Reuters) - Latin American miner Grupo Mexico is set to build a major new copper mine at a remote site in northern Mexico now that strong copper prices justify the development costs of the company's biggest project in decades.

The EL Arco project, at the heart of the Baja California peninsula, will produce 190,000 tonnes of copper from 2012, the Mexico City-based miner said on Wednesday.

Grupo Mexico has owned the site for years but did not start construction because of high development costs, said Xavier Garcia, chief executive of the company's Mexican mining unit.

Among those costs, Grupo Mexico will build an electricity plant to power El Arco, and is investing in sea water treatment plants to provide water for operations.

The company also will build houses, schools and health clinics for El Arco's workers, and will pave existing roads to carry copper to ports like Santa Rosalia on the Sea of Cortez, Garcia said.

Garcia said shifts in global demand meant copper prices were unlikely to dip below $1.20 a lb in the foreseeable future, making El Arco viable.

"This is one of the few projects in the world totally proven with very reasonable costs of production," Garcia said.

He forecast copper would close 2007 at between $2.80 and $3.00 per lb., and said the mine, when open, could operate comfortably at $1.20 to $1.50 per pound of copper.

Copper for July delivery ended down 3.75 cents at $3.40 a lb in New York on Wednesday.

The mine will be located halfway between the Pacific Ocean and the Sea of Cortes on the narrow Baja California peninsula, 70 km (43.5 miles) from the whale watching town of Guerrero Negro.

Garcia said the environmental assessment had been approved, and the company was waiting for permits to begin work. He said the mine would meet high sustainability standards.

Baja California, popular with U.S. retirees and vacationers, is considered important environmentally for its diverse wildlife and desert ecosystem.

El Arco will produce 50,000 tonnes of copper cathodes and 140,000 tonnes of copper in concentrates.

Garcia said the project had reserves of 1 billion tonnes containing about 0.50 percent copper sulphate and total investment would reach $1.75 billion, including the power generator.

Grupo Mexico announced on Tuesday it would invest $4.1 billion in Mexican mines and projects over the next five years.

Garcia said that sum included El Arco. He said the company would not need to issue debt to fund the expenditure, except perhaps for the power plant.

Grupo Mexico (GMEXICOB.MX) hopes to double its current global copper output within the next six to seven years to reach about 1.3 million tonnes of copper per year, Garcia said.

The company also has mines in Peru and owns bankrupt U.S. miner Asarco, currently controlled by a creditors' committee.

Mexico's mine union is threatening to strike over safety conditions at nine Grupo Mexico mines and plants, including the giant Cananea copper mine. On Wednesday the union postponed the start of the strike by five days until June 15.

Grupo Mexico shares dropped 0.61 percent to 64 pesos on Wednesday.

rts551 - 4-23-2012 at 05:31 PM

Date of news. I think those strikes were all resolved. They do have a poor record when it comes to Unions. Oh OH.

Sounds like a lot of investment Water, power etc) in the middle of Nowhere.

Quote:

Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
A little research confirmed my fears:

(Reuters) - Latin American miner Grupo Mexico is set to build a major new copper mine at a remote site in northern Mexico now that strong copper prices justify the development costs of the company's biggest project in decades.

The EL Arco project, at the heart of the Baja California peninsula, will produce 190,000 tonnes of copper from 2012, the Mexico City-based miner said on Wednesday.

Grupo Mexico has owned the site for years but did not start construction because of high development costs, said Xavier Garcia, chief executive of the company's Mexican mining unit.

Among those costs, Grupo Mexico will build an electricity plant to power El Arco, and is investing in sea water treatment plants to provide water for operations.

The company also will build houses, schools and health clinics for El Arco's workers, and will pave existing roads to carry copper to ports like Santa Rosalia on the Sea of Cortez, Garcia said.

Garcia said shifts in global demand meant copper prices were unlikely to dip below $1.20 a lb in the foreseeable future, making El Arco viable.

"This is one of the few projects in the world totally proven with very reasonable costs of production," Garcia said.

He forecast copper would close 2007 at between $2.80 and $3.00 per lb., and said the mine, when open, could operate comfortably at $1.20 to $1.50 per pound of copper.

Copper for July delivery ended down 3.75 cents at $3.40 a lb in New York on Wednesday.

The mine will be located halfway between the Pacific Ocean and the Sea of Cortes on the narrow Baja California peninsula, 70 km (43.5 miles) from the whale watching town of Guerrero Negro.

Garcia said the environmental assessment had been approved, and the company was waiting for permits to begin work. He said the mine would meet high sustainability standards.

Baja California, popular with U.S. retirees and vacationers, is considered important environmentally for its diverse wildlife and desert ecosystem.

El Arco will produce 50,000 tonnes of copper cathodes and 140,000 tonnes of copper in concentrates.

Garcia said the project had reserves of 1 billion tonnes containing about 0.50 percent copper sulphate and total investment would reach $1.75 billion, including the power generator.

Grupo Mexico announced on Tuesday it would invest $4.1 billion in Mexican mines and projects over the next five years.

Garcia said that sum included El Arco. He said the company would not need to issue debt to fund the expenditure, except perhaps for the power plant.

Grupo Mexico (GMEXICOB.MX) hopes to double its current global copper output within the next six to seven years to reach about 1.3 million tonnes of copper per year, Garcia said.

The company also has mines in Peru and owns bankrupt U.S. miner Asarco, currently controlled by a creditors' committee.

Mexico's mine union is threatening to strike over safety conditions at nine Grupo Mexico mines and plants, including the giant Cananea copper mine. On Wednesday the union postponed the start of the strike by five days until June 15.

Grupo Mexico shares dropped 0.61 percent to 64 pesos on Wednesday.

Skipjack Joe - 4-23-2012 at 05:42 PM

Yes, they were. They delayed the El Arco project by 3 years. That means things will start rolling in 2015:

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2010/06/08/strike-broken-gr...

It must have felt like getting back together with a long-lost and much-loved partner. Actually, it probably felt even better: on Monday, Grupo México finally regained control of its Cananea copper mine after police dispersed a strike that closed down operations nearly three years ago.

Why authorities didn’t act months ago is still a mystery. After all, the country’s Supreme Court ruled as long ago as February that the strike declared by workers protesting health and safety conditions was illegal.

There is little probability that regaining control will undermine the powerful position labour unions hold in key sectors of the Mexican economy, or even that this week’s events will significantly weaken union power in the country’s mining sector. The fact that workers were able to carry out a three-year strike at all against the world’s second-biggest copper mining company is testament to the movement’s abiding strength.

The main point is rather that Cananea, which once produced more than one-third of the country’s copper output, is about to open up again. And that is good news for the company – and for Mexico.

First off, it means that Grupo México can kick-start production. The company says that the strike resulted in a production loss of at least 530,000 tons of copper – equivalent to more than $3m a day during the almost three years of the mine’s closure. The company estimates that it will need to invest about $100m to get the mine back to where it was prior to the strike, when output was about 190,000 tons a year. It also believes it can return to those levels possibly by the end of this year.

Second, the company now appears free to dust off a $3.5bn investment project at Cananea that would more than double production to 460,000 tons in the coming years. Moreover, uncertainty over the project’s future had also led to delays in another of Grupo México’s expansion plans: El Arco, a copper mine in Baja California in which the company had intended to sink $2bn. El Arco was held up because the plan was to use processing capacity at Cananea to handle some of its output.

LaPazGringo - 4-23-2012 at 06:12 PM

I think what these Mexicans need is to hire a bunch of opinionated gringos to tell them exactly what it is they're doing wrong. Their problems could all go away if they'd just listen as we criticize the hell out of them. :rolleyes:

The most laughable part was saying the mine is bad for Santa Rosalia. :lol:

Just incredible...

chuckie - 4-23-2012 at 07:06 PM

+10...As usual too many experts...Cananea is in Sonora, just South of Bisbee Az....which I think is the deepest open pit mine in the .....How many of the experts have been to Bisbee, Cananea, or Santa Rosalia?....At this point in time using the USA as a Model for other countries economies is somewhat questionable, as is our environmental record....

rts551 - 4-23-2012 at 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chuckie
+10...As usual too many experts...Cananea is in Sonora, just South of Bisbee Az....which I think is the deepest open pit mine in the .....How many of the experts have been to Bisbee, Cananea, or Santa Rosalia?....At this point in time using the USA as a Model for other countries economies is somewhat questionable, as is our environmental record....

I have. but not an expert, onky curious and living in proximity to all 3 sites. Grupo Mexico's biggest problems in the US have been with Union support of the striking Cananea miners and court battles over environmental/bankrupsy problems of ex-parent company ASARCO. We got it the Tucson news constantly.

for an excellent chronology...check out
http://www.theirminesourstories.org/?p=1225

Skipjack Joe - 4-23-2012 at 09:53 PM

Quote:

You mean we can only talk about what we do and not what we read? Why?

Who claimed to be an expert?

Is this your way of putting down those who speak on a subject that you have better knowledge?

That's a really poor attitude.

chuckie - 4-24-2012 at 06:35 AM

Really?

wilderone - 4-24-2012 at 07:32 AM

3-9-10: "Certain cash flows arising from changes in project vendors' deposits were incorrectly presented as part of changes in working capital within operating activities."

That was a clue - no suprise then:

"A little cost overun and a few more board members resigned. My stock is taking a beating this morning."

The sutff of stock fraud suits.

Pescador - 4-24-2012 at 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
Would love to hear anyone confirm or deny Beto's assertions.

I don't know if it's a biosphere.

Yes, the whole area from Santa Rosalia north and clear across the peninsula is part of the Vizcaino Biosphere.

http://www.parkswatch.org/parkprofile.php?l=eng&country=...

[Edited on 4-24-2012 by Pescador]

LaPazGringo - 4-24-2012 at 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by chuckie
Really?

Don't feed the trolls, chuckie. That's the advice they gave me. Maybe you'll be better at it than I have been so far.

chuckie - 4-24-2012 at 01:54 PM

Thats why the one word response....

Juanita - 5-14-2012 at 04:14 PM

From: Baja Mining Corp. <info@bajamining.com>
Subject: [Baja Mining Corp.] Announces Update on Progress of Funding Solution
To: "leads@list.bajamining.com" <leads@list.bajamining.com>
Date: Monday, May 7, 2012, 5:39 AM

Baja Mining Announces Update on Progress of Funding Solution

Vancouver, May 7, 2012 – Baja Mining Corp. (TSX:BAJ - OTCQX: BAJFF) today provided an update on the progress of its efforts to develop a funding solution for the recently announced capital cost overruns at its Boleo Project.

The Company met in Seoul, South Korea last week with the members of the Korean consortium who are Baja’s partners in the Boleo project (the “Consortium”). During the meetings Baja discussed the Boleo project capital cost increases and various potential minimally dilutive funding alternatives, including a subordinated debt financing to fund a significant amount of the cost overruns. A written proposal has been prepared for presentation to the Consortium, subject to the approval of Baja’s reconstituted Board.

The Company has also delivered confidentiality agreements to several third parties for their possible participation in the project. In addition, the Company has also initiated preliminary discussions with members of the brokerage industry, however equity markets remain difficult.

Any decisions on funding will be subject to the approval of the reconstituted Board of the Company.

While discussions with the Consortium have been positive and the Consortium members remain supportive of the Company and the project, the Company is concerned that an approval process in regards to the potential funding solutions being investigated may not be completed as quickly as required even if approved by the Consortium.

Swift approval is important because no further funds will be available from Baja’s senior loan facilities until an acceptable funding solution is provided to the Company’s primary lenders. The Company’s project subsidiary has a May 4, 2012 cash position of US$41 million with access to a further US$24 million in its restricted intermediary account. The Company’s projected burn rate is US$60 million in May, US$75 million in June and US$60 million in July.

Baja has implemented an aggressive cash flow management strategy, but the project will not be able to proceed without a cash injection by approximately mid-June 2012. The Company is assessing its current obligations and what steps will be required if it cannot come to a timely financing arrangement.

Further cost saving measures continue to be reviewed in an effort to reduce or defer costs. The Company is looking at the benefit of deferral of the cobalt and zinc circuits and believes deferral could result in upfront savings of $85 million.

Juanita - 5-14-2012 at 04:23 PM

From: Baja Mining Corp. <info@bajamining.com>
Subject: [Baja Mining Corp.] Announces Resignation of Greenslade, Appointment of New Chairman and Interim CEO and Appointment of Special Committee
To: "leads@list.bajamining.com" <leads@list.bajamining.com>
Date: Monday, May 14, 2012, 5:31 AM

Baja Mining Announces Resignation of Greenslade, Appointment of New Chairman and Interim CEO and Appointment of Special Committee

Vancouver, May 14, 2012 – Baja Mining Corp. (TSX:BAJ - OTCQX: BAJFF) today announced the resignation of John Greenslade as a director of Baja. Mr. Greenslade has also resigned from his positions as Baja’s CEO and President.

Baja’s Board has commenced the search for a new CEO. Tom Ogryzlo has been appointed as interim CEO to replace Mr. Greenslade while that search is underway, and with Baja’s Chief Financial Officer Rowland Wallenius and Chief Operating Officer Adam Wright, forms Baja’s leadership team.

Lorie Waisberg, who joined the Board of Directors on May 6, 2012, has been appointed as the chairman of the Board of Directors, replacing Giles Baynham, who served as Baja’s chairman since January 2012. Mr. Baynham continues to serve as a director of Baja.

Baja’s reconstituted Board is assessing Baja’s financing needs and is actively engaged in seeking a solution. A special committee of the Board which does not include Mount Kellett nominee Stephen Lehner has been formed to consider Baja’s financing alternatives. Further information will be provided on the status of Baja’s efforts as it becomes available.

Mount Kellett has withdrawn the petition announced in its press release of May 4, 2012, and is among the parties who have entered into confidentiality agreements with Baja permitting them to conduct due diligence on Baja and the Boleo Project.

For further information please contact Tom Ogryzlo at 604-685-2323 or via email info@bajamining.com.

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

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please send an email to: info@bajamining.com

wessongroup - 5-14-2012 at 05:43 PM

rts551 ... good link... and of note... it's not even the "parent" company ... :lol:

Juanita - 5-18-2012 at 07:57 AM

The most understandable part is the Management Discussion and Analysis for the First Quarter Ended March 31, 2012, see http://www.bajamining.com/investors/financials/2012. Still on the same theme of a need for additional financing by mid-June at the latest.

Juanita - 5-31-2012 at 06:48 AM

From: Baja Mining Corp. <info@bajamining.com>
Subject: [Baja Mining Corp.] Provides Update on Liquidity and Corporate Developments
To: "leads@list.bajamining.com" <leads@list.bajamining.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 30, 2012, 5:17 AM

Baja Mining Provides Update on Liquidity and Corporate Developments

Vancouver, May 30, 2012 – Baja Mining Corp. (“Baja”) (TSX:BAJ - OTCQX: BAJFF) provides the following update on liquidity and recent corporate developments.

As of May 29, 2012, Baja held directly US$27 million in cash and cash equivalents. On May 24, 2012, Baja’s 70% owned subsidiary, Minera y Metalurgica del Boleo S.A. de C.V. (“MMB”), made an equity cash call of US$21 million which is due June 23, 2012. Baja intends to use US$14.7 million of its US$27 million to meet its pro rata share of the cash call, and the Korean Consortium which owns 30% of MMB be required to meet its pro rata obligation of US$6.3 million. Lender approval is a condition to the injection of the capital into MMB, and is being sought.

As of May 29, 2012, MMB held US$41 million of cash, which includes US$23.9 million which was released from the project account on May 17, 2012. Together with the proceeds of the US$21 million cash call, Baja expects MMB to have adequate cash to fund its operations at a reduced level through mid-July 2012, subject to change based on a variety of factors including, without limitation, actions by creditors, vendors, contractors, lenders and other stakeholders.

Baja continues to evaluate the potential suspension of the construction of the cobalt and zinc circuits and is in discussions with the project lenders and the Korean Consortium regarding this possibility. Baja believes suspending completion of the of the cobalt and zinc circuits will reduce copper commissioning risk, improve the ramp-up of copper production, reduce construction man-hours worked during 2012, and defer approximately US$85 million in capital expenditures until after the completion of the copper circuit. In view of the funding shortfalls at the Boleo Project, Baja is unable to provide a definitive estimate of the expected copper circuit commissioning date at this time, and withdraws all previous timing guidance.

Baja has engaged SRK Consulting (“SRK”), an internationally recognized mining consultancy, to provide an independent review of Baja’s plans and assess the cost to complete the Boleo Project, a schedule for project completion (assuming the availability of sufficient financing) and projected operating costs. This work will provide the basis for assessing financing options and for Baja seeking to raise its share of funds necessary to complete the Boleo Project. Senior SRK personnel have visited the Boleo site but their work is not sufficiently advanced to permit any conclusions at this time. Baja expects to receive SRK’s report before the end of June.

Baja has also engaged Turner & Townsend, an international construction management consultancy, to identify and implement improvements in Baja’s project management capability. This work will focus on project controls, schedule, and EPCM management.

Baja has engaged BMO Capital Markets (“BMO”)to assist in considering financing options and possible sources of funding. A data room has been established and is being made available to parties who execute the required confidentiality agreement and which Baja considers, with the advice of BMO, to have the resources and inclination to transact. A Special Committee of the Board made up of independent directors has been constituted with the assistance of independent legal counsel to work with BMO on interested party transactions which may involve related parties.

While there is encouraging activity, there can be no assurances that Baja will be successful in finding requisite financing to complete the Boleo Project. The funding for cost overruns required under the project's financing documents is unlikely to be obtained by the mid-June 2012 deadline, and accordingly Baja is seeking a standstill or waiver from its project lenders for sufficient time to enable the necessary diligence to be completed and a realistic financing plan for the Boleo Project to be completed. In the interim, Baja has tightened expenditure authorizations and reporting requirements and reduced project and head office expenditures. These steps will assist Baja in monitoring and preserving its limited cash resources.

In an effort to preserve cash, Baja announces a workforce reduction at its Vancouver, BC office of approximately 40% of the staff and consultants effective May 25, 2012. Baja management and the Board of Directors thank each affected person for their service. Baja recognizes that this is a difficult development for the staff and consultants and is a decision made by management, in consultation with the Board, in the best interests of Baja and its stakeholders.

Baja’s management and Board, with the assistance of Endeavour Financial, are working with lenders to the project and Baja’s 30% joint venture partners to ensure that such parties remain fully informed of developments and to seek their support to complete the project.

A number of questions regarding disclosure and other governance matters have been raised by regulators and shareholders. These matters are being investigated by the Board of Directors with the assistance of independent counsel, Fasken Martineau, a leading Canadian law firm.

Baja’s Annual General Meeting will be held in Vancouver on June 21, 2012. In addition to the election of directors and the appointment of auditors, shareholders will be asked for a temporary suspension of the shareholders’ rights plan (“SRP”) and to create a class of preference shares. The request for shareholder approval of the suspension of the SRP and the authorization to create preference shares are being taken to provide the Board of Directors, and its Special Committee, with maximum flexibility and speed of execution as financing solutions are considered over the next few months. The suspension of the SRP, assuming shareholder approval, is limited to the acquisition of securities directly from the Company and approved by the Board of Directors. The suspension would not permit any single shareholder to acquire more than 20% of the outstanding shares in market transactions without triggering the SRP, subject to the existing exceptions under the SRP.

For further information please contact Baja’s Interim CEO Tom Ogryzlo at 604‐685‐2323 or via email info@bajamining.com.

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

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, please send an email to: info@bajamining.com

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

Baja Mining Corp. | BAJ:TSX - BAJFF

TCQX

T 604 685 2323 | F 604 629 5228 |

500-200 Burrard Street | Vancouver | BC | V6C 3L6 | Canada | www.bajamining.com

This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. Baja Mining Corp., 500-200 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC, V6C 3L6 Canada www.bajamining.com.

chuckie - 5-31-2012 at 11:47 AM

Uh Oh!

Juanita - 6-20-2012 at 09:06 AM

From: Baja Mining Corp. <info@bajamining.com>
Subject: [Baja Mining Corp.] Obtains Standstill Agreement from Lenders, Funds Cash Call
To: "leads@list.bajamining.com" <leads@list.bajamining.com>
Date: Wednesday, June 20, 2012, 5:49 AM

Baja Mining Obtains Standstill Agreement from Lenders, Funds Cash Call

Vancouver, June 20, 2012 – Baja Mining Corp. (“Baja”) (TSX:BAJ - OTCQX: BAJFF) today announced that the lenders to its 70% owned subsidiary, Minera y Metalúrgica del Boleo S.A. de C.V. (“MMB”) have agreed to a 45-day standstill in relation to the Boleo Project financing.

The lenders agreed to refrain from exercising rights and remedies under the Boleo Project financing agreements until August 1, 2012 with respect to certain defaults and events of default that are currently outstanding or that may arise during the standstill period.

MMB recently made a US$21M cash call to its shareholders. Baja provided its 70% share (US$14.7M) and the Korean Consortium provided its 30% share (US$6.3M). This cash injection will enable MMB to continue its current level of critical path activities at the Boleo Project, including all contractors continuing to work on the copper circuits. Cash forecasts indicate that this level of effort can be maintained through August 1, 2012.

As a result of the standstill and the funding of MMB by its shareholders and with the support of lenders, project partners, financial advisors and vendors, Baja has additional time to identify and evaluate potential financing options and possible sources of funding. The Company’s advisors, including SRK Consulting, continue to work to complete their due diligence on the Boleo Project, and BMO Capital Markets continues to actively canvass potential strategic and financial interested parties.

For further information please contact Baja’s Interim CEO Tom Ogryzlo at 604‐685‐2323 or via email info@bajamining.com.

bajario - 6-21-2012 at 06:24 AM

Today's the annual shareholders meeting. Maybe some good news will be blurted out.

I'm wondering if construction stops what will happen to the city os Santa Rosalia. I'm not sure if most of the work force is from town or from all over. When Loreto Bay shut down work there were alot of transplants kind of waiting around to see if it was going to restart. Hope all these people, especially if local, don't end up out of work for an extended amount of time. This project was porbably a nice shot in the arm for this area during a diffficult time.

And my stock rebounds.

Juanita - 8-30-2012 at 06:59 AM

As of August 28, 2012. Baja Mining Corporation has completed stage I financing with a Korean consortium contributing U.S. 90 million dollars to its subsidiary Minera y Metalurgica del Boleo S.A. de C.V., which already was invested in the mine in Santa Rosalia, and bringing their interest to 51%.

David K - 8-30-2012 at 08:41 AM

Work on the new loading pier/dock just north of Santa Rosalia was ongoing last July...

LancairDriver - 8-30-2012 at 09:30 AM

Baja Mining Corp. BAJ.TO
52 week high- $1.15
52 week low - $0.04
Today - $0.15
All Mining is way down worldwide as demand falls. Hope for the Baja economy's sake the mine hangs on.(Also for the stockholders)

bajario - 8-30-2012 at 08:31 PM

I'm an investor in it this project for the last couple of years. I swore it was my ticket to the good life of a Baja future sooner than later. Now it's up in the air. I'm in Bajff. It's tripled in the last 3 days from .06 but looks like it might pull back. Which is still well under my average. Oh well. I'm always a gambler swinging for the fences. I drove by in July when they knew $$ was running dry but were still working on the pier and all around. Maybe they know something I do't. Matter of fact they should know something I don't. Always a dreamer I'll be.

Burbs - 8-31-2012 at 02:14 PM

In favor of the success of the Boleo Mine, we have always asked the question to the important persons working there:
Are you going to start like a race horse, but finish like a turtle?
We almost invested in the mine when things were real good. We were very excited for the area's progress potential with the mine and the business it brings.
Lots of the people who work the mine setting it up come by here, or they used to. Now many or most are gone. Good people with a belief in the mine and it's potential. Most left/fired with none of the bonus promised by the mine directors. Not one of these persons that I know got their bonus paid. I believe the top guys got their monies and the ones left holding the bag are the Koreans' with the stockholders a distant thought.
Where is the ore? Is this a giant scam?
These are my questions.

PlanB - 9-1-2012 at 08:12 AM

The Vancouver exchange and its antics are best reviewed by reading:

FLEECING THE LAMB: THE INSIDE STORY OF THE VANCOUVER STOCK EXCHANGE.
Cruise, David and Alison Griffiths; written in1988, but quite appropriate for a review of Baja Mining.

We can hope that the Koreans will make the project a success; and as such, provide jobs in a safe working environment.