Mine Evaluation in a Changing Investment Climate

Most analysts find that progress has been evolutionary in any technologic field. To be sure, a few discrete breakthroughs can usually be identified, but viewed in its entirety, the curve of technologic progress over time tends to be relatively smooth with few discontinuities. Even in those cases where a major scientific discovery is achieved, the rate of technologic progress is limited by the often surprisingly slow rate of commercializing the concept into usable products. Whereas discovery and invention tend to be discrete events, technical innovation is often a painfully slow process. In spite of overall gradual change, technologic progress in most fields, when viewed in retrospect, tends to reveal certain relatively homogeneous periods where little change is evident, separated by episodes of accelerated progress. Thus, open-pit mining over the past century has changed from predominately train haulage to truck haulage and is now experiencing a major increase in belt haulage. Ore reserve estimation is another field that fits the same pattern, and the history of mine evaluation lends itself to a similar analysis. Evaluating mine investment opportunities is a fascinating aspect of mining. The unique set of risks inherent to every mining project is particularly intriguing. Geologic risks are most obvious, since faulty ore grade and tonnage estimates are among the leading causes of mine failures. Wide swine's in mineral commodity prices are usually cited as another major risk in mining. Because any ore deposit is a finite resource and the miner has limited discretion in selecting a mining sequence, mines are generally at the mercy of notoriously fickle commodity markets. There is a tendency for many mine investment analysts to feel that mineral market uncertainties are unprecedented in severity. Of course, prices in other markets rise and fall also-in some cases as precipitously as with minerals. However, two other mining characteristics tend to compound this marketing risk. First, the preproduction development period for a new mine is characteristically long. Under extremely favorable conditions, a significant mine may be developed in as little as two years, but the norm is four to six years or more. Second, mining is among the most capital intensive industries, consistently ranking near the top among all industrial sectors in assets per employee, and near the bottom in annual sales dollars per dollar of assets. Thus, mine investors typically have large sums invested for a long time before the outcome of the venture is determined by notoriously unpredictable markets. This is not a business for the faint of heart, and the importance of sound investment decision making is obvious. The high risk and technical complexity of mining operations have combined to require greater attention to financial evaluation by mining engineers than by most engineers in other specialties. Nearly all early mining engineering textbooks dealt with problems in mine valuation in a detailed manner; and, today, the sophistication of capital investment analysis is high in the mineral industries. Traditional Mine Valuation Methods Although some evaluation process has no doubt accompanied nearly every mine development throughout history, a formalized quantitative approach first emerged in the last half of the 19th century with the establishment of academic programs in mining engineering. The philosophy and approach to mine valuation that evolved at this time were, with periodic minor refinements, considered the standard for nearly a century. Only after 1960 did major changes begin to occur. The traditional approach to mine valuation reflected the investment community's historic attitudes toward risk. Mines were generally considered too risky for debt financing, and virtually every new mine was financed from internally generated funds or new equity subscriptions. The investment evaluation methods that evolved focused on mining's higher risk relative to other