The cost of stream financing for copper miners
*Please note that this report only includes an Excel data file if this is indicated in "What's included" below
Report summary
Table of contents
-
Executive summary
- Valuation and cost of stream and NSR financing
- Streaming and NSR contracts have become less profitable for providers
-
Valuations suggest streaming is increasingly attractive for producers
- A positive shift in the cost of capital for miners
-
The impact of stream finance is relatively small on the global cost curve
- Copper Mine Cost Model (CuMAM) and adding stream/royalty contracts into a scenario
- Sensitivity to the inclusion of an NSR royalty or streaming contract
- Conclusions and outlook
-
Appendix
- Background – Streams/royalty agreements, an alternative form of financing
- A brief history of share price performance of streaming/royalty companies compared to copper and gold miners
Tables and charts
This report includes the following images and tables:
- Base case metal price assumptions
- Bear case metal price assumptions
- Bull case metal price assumptions
- Valuations for 31 streaming and royalty contracts – valued under our base case scenario
- The cost of stream financing for copper miners: Image 1
- Degree of contract leverage to metal price changes (Bull versus Bear case scenario)
- Relationship between life of contract (LoC) yields and capital raised from 2004 until 2015
- C1 cash cost sensitivity for mines affected by stream financing
- C3 cost sensitivity for mines affected by streaming and royalty financing
- Indexed price performance of the major stream/royalty financiers compared with copper and gold miners
What's included
This report contains:
Other reports you may be interested in
Montecristo copper mine
A detailed analysis of the Montecristo copper mine.
$2,250Karchiga copper mine project
A detailed analysis of the Karchiga copper mine project.
$2,250Ambaji copper mine project
A detailed analysis of the Ambaji copper mine project.
$2,250