Read a gold mine production schedule as a year-by-year forecast, not as a promise or a single headline-ounce figure. Then trace those annual tonnes and grades through recovery, costs, capital spending and cash flow. Before comparing projects, align the reports’ dates, study stages, cost scopes, units and economic assumptions.
Start with the report’s context
A technical report is a dated model for a particular project and case. Record these details before interpreting its production or cost headline:
- Report and study stage: identify the report title and whether it describes a preliminary assessment, pre-feasibility study, feasibility study or another stage.
- Effective date and jurisdiction: assumptions and designs can change between reports. The 2025 Mount Milligan report, for example, describes changes to price assumptions, pit design, recovery, throughput, capital and operating costs, and the resulting schedule. Read the Mount Milligan technical report.
- Case and ownership: confirm which project configuration or ownership basis the figures represent.
- Currency and economic basis: note the currency, gold-price and exchange-rate assumptions, and whether the economic results are pre-tax or after-tax.
- Resource or reserve basis: check whether the mine plan is based on mineral reserves or also includes resources outside the reserve case.
- Discount rate: record the rate used for NPV, since timing affects discounted value.
Under British Columbia’s consolidated National Instrument 43-101 disclosure rules, a technical report’s economic analysis includes principal assumptions, annual cash-flow forecasts using the production schedule, and measures such as NPV, IRR and payback. Read the consolidated regulation.
Read the production schedule year by year
Find the annual schedule and follow each period across its rows or columns. The labels vary by report, but the key items are usually tonnes mined, ore tonnes processed, grade, recovery and gold production. Note any strip ratio, stockpile movements, pre-production period, ramp-up, peak-production years, decline and closure.
Windows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallOutdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware match#1 Best Overall
Distinguish the ounce measures
Check whether a row reports contained, recovered, payable or sold gold. They are not interchangeable: contained ounces are in the material before recovery; recovered ounces reflect the processing assumption; payable ounces account for the amount eligible for payment under the applicable terms; and sold ounces refer to metal sold. Use the report’s definitions rather than inferring them from a column heading.
Reconcile the annual figures to the mine-life total
Add or otherwise reconcile annual production to the life-of-mine (LOM) total, checking that the report uses the same schedule and production measure in both places. A total can hide timing: two plans with similar LOM ounces can produce different annual cash flows if their ramp-up, peak output or declining years differ. NI 43-101 calls for annual cash-flow forecasts using the project’s annual production schedule, so check that the economics follow the schedule being presented.
Rank #2
Separate capital costs from operating costs
Capital expenditure (CAPEX) pays for construction and development and may include initial or pre-production capital, sustaining capital during operations, and closure or reclamation costs near or after production. Inspect the report’s scope rather than assuming one headline number includes every item. Look for owner’s costs, indirect costs, contingency, working capital, taxes, royalties and closure treatment.
Operating expenditure (OPEX) may be divided among mining, processing, general and administrative (G&A), transport, royalties, treatment and refining, and selling or marketing. Reports group these differently. Mount Milligan’s 2025 report lists mining, processing, administration, transportation, royalties, treatment/refining, and selling/marketing; Côté’s 2018 feasibility report groups its base-case LOM operating costs into mining, processing and G&A. Mount Milligan report; Côté Gold feasibility report. Map categories to common definitions before comparing totals, and account for categories one report includes that another omits.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Check the denominator on every unit cost
A cost stated per tonne mined, per tonne milled or processed, or per ounce produced or sold answers a different question. Do not compare a per-tonne-mined figure directly with a per-tonne-processed figure. Likewise, “cash cost” and “all-in sustaining cost” (AISC) are not synonyms for total project cost; use the report’s definitions and reconciliation to see what each includes.
Use project examples as examples, not benchmarks
IAMGOLD/SLR Consulting’s 2018 Côté feasibility report estimates base-case LOM operating costs of US$2,947 million: mining US$1,366 million (46%), processing US$1,283 million (44%) and G&A US$298 million (10%). It also reports an average total operating cost of US$14.52 per tonne processed, comprising US$6.73 for mining, US$6.32 for processing and US$1.47 for G&A. These are distinct measures—total cost, category shares and cost per processed tonne—and belong to the report’s specific case and scope. Côté Gold feasibility report.
Rank #4
Centerra Gold’s 2025 Mount Milligan technical report gives an operating-cost estimate of US$7,156 million, or US$14.82 per tonne, over its stated estimate basis. It covers categories including mining, processing, administration, transportation, royalties, treatment/refining and selling/marketing. This is a project- and report-specific estimate, not a general cost benchmark for gold mines. Mount Milligan technical report.
Inspect how the estimate was assembled
Look for the basis behind both quantities and rates. Useful disclosures explain the mine design and phased schedule, labor and equipment assumptions, metallurgical testwork, fuel and reagent consumption, vendor quotations, contractor inputs, benchmarks and historical operating data. Also check the estimate date, currency, escalation and exchange-rate assumptions, contingency, exclusions, and who prepared or reviewed each estimate. NI 43-101 requires disclosure of major cost components and an explanation and justification of the estimate basis.
Best Value
The Côté report illustrates the level of detail to look for: mining quantities were developed from first principles and phased mine planning; process costs drew on first principles, testwork, salary and benefit guidelines, recent vendor quotations and historical benchmarks; G&A used first principles and benchmarks; and closure costs came from a detailed estimate with stated adjustments. Such detail shows how the estimate was built; it does not establish that assumptions will be realized or imply a universal accuracy range. Côté Gold feasibility report.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Trace the schedule into the economics
Follow the annual mine plan into revenue, costs and cash flow. Check when capital is spent relative to production, whether ramp-up costs appear, how sustaining capital is timed, and when closure payments occur. Confirm how taxes, royalties and other government interests are modeled. Read the gold-price and exchange-rate assumptions alongside the cost currency.
NPV reflects both cash-flow amounts and timing, discounted at the report’s stated rate. IRR and payback also depend on the sequence of cash flows. Compare pre-tax results with pre-tax results, and after-tax with after-tax, rather than mixing bases. Review the report’s sensitivities, where provided, for gold price, grade or recovery, capital cost, operating cost and exchange rates. A favorable base case remains conditional on its assumptions, mine design, schedule and approvals; it is not a guarantee of production or return.
Compare projects only after aligning their assumptions
Before ranking mines by cost per ounce or NPV, reconcile the basis of comparison across these dimensions:
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
- Study stage and effective date.
- Reserve or resource basis and mine life.
- Annual production profile, grade, recovery and throughput.
- Estimate currency, price date, exchange rate and escalation.
- CAPEX scope, contingency, sustaining capital and closure treatment.
- OPEX categories and unit-cost denominators.
- Pre-tax or after-tax basis, discount rate, taxes, royalties and sensitivities.
If those definitions are not aligned, a ranking may reflect differences in scope or assumptions rather than a meaningful difference in project economics.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
