Waterberg pea presentation

100 %
0 %
Information about Waterberg pea presentation
Investor Relations

Published on February 20, 2014

Author: pgroupm

Source: slideshare.net

Waterberg PEA Presentation 14 February, 2014

Disclosure This presentation has been prepared by Platinum Group Metals Ltd. (“Platinum Group” or the “Company”). Information included in this presentation regarding the Company’s mineral properties has been compiled by R. Michael Jones, P.Eng, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and a nonindependent Qualified Person for purposes of National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”), based on the independent technical reports, and Other Information filed by the Company with the Canadian securities regulators and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The authors of the technical reports have reviewed and consented to the use of the material from their reports in the Disclosure Record.. For more detailed information regarding the Company and its mineral properties, you should refer to the Company’s independent technical reports and other filings with the Canadian securities regulators and the SEC, which are available at www.sedar.com and www.sec.gov, respectively. Scientific or Technical information contained herein is derived from the Company’s technical reports, including the “Updated Technical Report (Updated Feasibility Study Western Bushveld Joint Venture Project 1 (Elandsfontein and Frischgewaagd)” dated November 20, 2009 with an effective date of October 8, 2009 (the “2009 UFS”) prepared by Gordon I. Cunningham, Charles J. Muller, Timothy V. Spindler and Byron Stewart, which include more detailed information with respect to the Company’s properties, including the dates of such reports and the estimates included therein, details of quality and grade of each resource, details of the key assumptions, methods and parameters used in the resource estimates and the 2009 UFS and a general discussion of the extent to which the resource estimates and the other estimates and projections included in the reports may be materially affected by any known environmental, permitting, legal, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. Scientific or technical information contained herein related to the Waterberg Project is derived from the Company’s technical reports including the “Revised and Updated Mineral Resource Estimate for the Waterberg Platinum Project” dated September 3, 2011 prepared by Ken Lomberg which includes more detailed information. The Waterberg Joint Venture PEA is preliminary in nature and there is no certainty of that the resources will be converted to a higher category or to be shown to be viable. CAUTIONARY NOTE TO UNITED STATES INVESTORS As a Canadian issuer that is eligible to use the U.S./Canada Multijurisdictional Disclosure System (MJDS), the Company is permitted to prepare a prospectus and this presentation in accordance with Canadian securities laws, which differ in certain respects from U.S. securities laws. In particular, this presentation uses the terms “mineral resource”, “measured mineral resource”, “indicated mineral resource” and “inferred mineral resource”. While these terms are recognized and required by Canadian securities laws, they are not recognized by the SEC. In addition, “reserves” reported by the Company under Canadian standards may not qualify as reserves under SEC standards. U.S. investors are cautioned not to assume that any part of a “measured mineral resource” or an “indicated mineral resource” will ever be converted into a “reserve.” Under U.S. standards, mineralization may not be classified as a “reserve” unless the mineralization can be economically and legally produced or extracted at the time the reserve determination is made. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. U.S. investors are urged to read the statement in the filed prospectus under the heading “Cautionary Note to United States Investors” for further information. Historical results or feasibility models presented herein are not guarantees or expectations of future performance. Information included in this presentation, the Company’s independent technical reports and the Company’s other public statements related to its mineral properties has been prepared in accordance with securities laws in effect in Canada, which differ from U.S. securities laws. The 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. The Company uses certain terms in this presentation, such as “resources,” that the SEC’s guidelines strictly prohibit U.S. registered companies from including in their filings with the SEC. You are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 40-F annual report, which may be secured from us, or from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. This presentation also contains information about adjacent properties on which the Company has no right to explore or mine. The Company advises you that the SEC’s mining guidelines strictly prohibit information of this type in documents filed with the SEC. Investors are cautioned that mineral deposits on adjacent properties are not indicative of mineral deposits on the Companies properties This presentation is not an offer to sell, or a solicitation to buy, any securities in any jurisdiction. The Toronto Stock Exchange and the NYSE.MKT LLC have not reviewed and do not accept responsibility for the accuracy or adequacy of this presentation, which has been prepared by the Company. PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 1

Forward Looking Statements Certain of the statements made herein, including statements regarding the timing of future activities and achievements by the Company, future anticipated exploration and development programs of the Company’s WBJV and Waterberg projects, business plans, funding models for the WBJV Project 1 platinum mine, statements regarding the project finance loan and other financing, potential required equity contributions and cost overrun accounts, potential mining scenarios and timing of production at the WBJV Project 1 platinum mine, the possibility of qualified empowerment partners investing in the WBJV Project 1 Platinum Mine and the outcome of further developments with regard to Wesizwe, business trends and future operating factors, price estimates and anticipated platinum supply and deficits are forward-looking and subject to important risk factors and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company’s ability to control or predict. In addition, resource estimates and feasibility study results constitute forward-looking statements to the extent that they represent, respectively, estimates of mineralization that may be encountered upon additional exploration and estimates of the capital and operating expenses, metals and currency prices and other operating conditions that may be encountered in the future. Forward-looking statements in this presentation include, without limitation, the extent and timing of exploration programs and exploration results, the results of the PEA, including the planned construction period, the post-tax NPV and peak funding estimates, the risks and opportunities outlined in the PEA, the potential tonnage, grades and content of deposits, timing, establishment and extent of resources estimates, potential production from and viability of the Company’s properties, production and operating costs and permitting submission and timing. Forward-Looking Statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that may cause the actual events or results to differ materially from those discussed in the Forward-Looking Statements, and even if events or results discussed in the Forward-Looking Statements are realized or substantially realized, there can be no assurance that they will have the expected consequences to, or effects on, the Company. Factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from current expectations include, among other things: additional financing requirements; the Company’s history of losses and ability to continue as a going concern; the fact that most of the Company’s properties contain no known mineral reserves; delays in, or inability to achieve, planned commercial production at the Company’s properties; discrepancies between actual and estimated mineral reserves and mineral resources, between actual and estimated development and operating costs, between actual and estimated metallurgical recoveries and between estimated and actual production; fluctuations in the relative values of the Canadian dollar as compared to the South African Rand and the United States dollar; metal price volatility; a default under the proposed project loan facility, if consummated, including as a result of delays in the start-up of the WBJV Project 1 platinum mine; the ability of the Company to retain its key management employees or procure the services of skilled and experienced personnel; conflicts of interest among the Company’s directors and executive officers as a result of their involvement with other mineral resource companies; any disputes or disagreements with the Company’s joint venture partners or any failure of the Company or such joint venture partners to fund their obligations under applicable joint venture agreements; exploration, development and mining risks and the inherently dangerous nature of the mining industry, including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected formations, safety stoppages (whether voluntary or regulatory), pressures, mine collapses, cave ins or flooding and the risk of inadequate insurance or inability to obtain insurance to cover these risks and other risks and uncertainties; property and mineral title risks, including defective title to mineral claims or property; changes in national and local government legislation, taxation, controls, regulations and political or economic developments in Canada, South Africa or other countries in which the Company does or may carry out business in the future; equipment shortages and the ability of the Company to acquire the necessary access rights and infrastructure for its mineral properties; environmental regulations and the ability of the Company to obtain and maintain necessary permits, including environmental authorizations; competition in the mineral exploration industry; and risks of doing business in South Africa, including but not limited to, labour, economic and political instability as well as the factors described or referred to in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended August 31, which is available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com , and is included as part of the Company’s Form 40-F annual report filed with the SEC at www.sec.gov and in the Company’s prospectus dated December 21, 2012. You are advised to review these risk factors, and not to place undue reliance on Forward-Looking Statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to update publicly or release any revisions to Forward-Looking Statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by law. PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 2

Project Objective Conduct a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) to study the  technical and financial viability of the Waterberg Resource  Goals • • • • Prove a positive business‐case to advance the project Establish a preliminary estimate of value Eliminate fatal‐flaws Identify way‐forward, critical‐path and long lead‐time items Investors are cautioned under U.S. and Canadian standards, mineralization may not be classified as a “reserve” unless the mineralization can be economically and legally produced or extracted at the time the reserve determination is made. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. All of the Waterberg Resources are classified as Inferred. PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 3

Project Study Anatomy Objective   Feasibility Prefeasibility    Is this the right opportunity? Is the opportunity consistent with the overall business strategy?  Does the potential value from the opportunity justify further investigation?  The thoroughness of evaluation of alternative technology, costing and implementation approaches.  Have areas of opportunity and risk been investigated in later stages to enhance value?  The best project size, scope, technical and production solution has been selected and is a viable business concept aligned to business strategy  Demonstration that all the discarded project options have been studied and are clearly inferior and have no probability of re-emerging as viable options  A workable plan for taking the concept through the Feasibility development stage  Develop a Proven Business proposition at the appropriate level of detail and accuracy for implementation funding PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX Capital Cost + / -30%  To identify major options for opportunity realisation Confirm alignment with the business case Assess the potential value of the opportunity Define the work required to assess the opportunity Establish a plan for the Prefeasibility phase Costs Capital Cost + 25% to –15% Concept / PEA  Key Focus Areas Capital Cost + 15% to – 5% Phase 4

PEA Summary Key Findings • • • • • • Deposits well‐suited to high‐volume, mechanised‐mining  Relatively shallow and accessible via ramps and declines The large resource and the three access points provide a quick build‐up and a long‐life project  supporting 600kt per month of production, 655,000 ounces Platinum, Palladium and Gold/yr Steady State The deposit can be exploited at a good margin over at least a 20 year life, indicating a positive  business case based on the PEA assumptions Optimisation opportunities exist from a project phasing perspective and a mining and access  methodology perspective Additional deposits can be included in subsequent phases to extend mine life and/or expand  production volumes  Justifies progression to prefeasibility study PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 5

Location Map PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 6

Waterberg - Schematic Cross-Section Tonnage Pt (g/t) Mt 166.7 0.98 Pd (g/t) 1.97 Au (g/t) 2PGE+Au (g/t) Pt:Pd:Au 2PGE+Au (koz) 0.32 3.26 30:60:10 17,523 PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 7

Cross Section T- Layer 1000m 132m T Zone F Zone PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 8

Cross Section F 1000m 241m T Zone PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 9

Scope of study and expected deliverables 1 Resource • • • • • Mining Processing Infrastructure Financials Acquire Geological Block Model Desktop validation of borehole data, assay data, rock density Validation of model preparation, wireframes Validation of Mineral resource estimate, cut off grade, geo statistics and mineralogy Review of Geo-Hydrology Validation current Geological Data and Model 10

Scope of study and expected deliverables 2 Resource • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Mining Processing Infrastructure Financials Assessment of Geotechnical Parameters Review of strat column on selected boreholes Identify depth of weathering Review of deposit, hanging wall and footwall, Validation Summary Report of Geotechnical Parameters Identify epicentre for surface infrastructure and initial access point Establish production requirement in line with Company Strategic Plan Understand deposit architecture Identification of alternative mining methods and selection of preferred option for scoping study Establish optimum access option to deposit Establish Mine Design Criteria Rock Engineering Design for preferred mining method Conceptual Ventilation Design for preferred Mining Design Option Develop Mine design and production schedule in “Mine 24D” Contops Shift Roster Shifts 2 x 10 hour shifts 365 days per year less 13 Public Holidays 352 days and 704 shifts per year 11

Scope of study and expected deliverables 3 Resource • Mining Processing Infrastructure Financials Using limited test work available and using past experience of similar designs, • • • select a modular concentrator plant to match the mining throughput Assign metallurgical recoveries Compile an operating and capital cost estimates Recoveries and Treatment Terms 2E&Au recovery T  88.3% 2E&Au recovery F  82.9% Cu recovery T  86.6% Cu recovery F  74.1% Ni recovery T   82.9% Ni recovery F   59.2% Tolling terms 2E&Au  85.0% Tolling terms Cu  67.5% Tolling terms Ni  72.5% 12

Scope of study and expected deliverables 4 Resource • • • • • • • • • Mining Processing Infrastructure Financials Identify mine access Determine Battery Limit for Scope of Study i.e. from ROM stockpile, waste rock handling and tailings disposal Surface and underground layouts and logistics Recruitment, training and housing options Confirm availability and sources for main utilities, electrical power, and water Permitting i.e. MRA and EIA/EMP Provide roadmap for future options-, trade-off studies, value engineering and processes Determine sources for benchmarking Roadmap Execution Plan for SLP 13

Scope of study and expected deliverables 5 Resource • • • • • • • • • • Mining Processing Infrastructure Implementation  and Financials Risk Assessment of Implementation Plan Establish Work Breakdown Structure Establish Company Rules with regards to definition of Capital and Operating Cost battery limits Develop “Class 0” Cost estimate for all related Mining and Engineering Infrastructure (Integrated cost and schedule) Develop "Class 0" Implementation schedule for all related Mining and Engineering Infrastructure Establish Labour Profiles for chosen Mining Plan Collate appropriate benchmark parameters Develop operating cost model for preferred mining method Develop utility cost model Develop Financial Valuation Model. (DCF, NPV, IRR) 14

PEA Assumptions Resource • Rhodium has been excluded from the contribution in the Financial Valuation Mining • Equipment selection for mining methods; Step Room & Pillar and Sub‐level Open Stoping • • Used preliminary metallurgical recoveries from the SGS test work  Recent plant designs treating 260ktpm to 300ktpm used for costing purposes and factorised to  accommodate the 600ktpm required for Waterberg A 600ktpm plant was constructed for PPRUST around 2008. Footprint of this plant used as a guide  for plant and for surface layouts No alternative processing options exist ‐ a complete processing facility would have to be  constructed for 600ktpm capacity Processing • • Infrastructure • • Concentrate would be transported by road to the Polokwane smelter or an alternative location A tailings and waste dumps would be constructed to accommodate the waste mining product and  concentrator tailings Financials • • • • • • • • All figures in 2014 money terms, no escalation added Optimisation was estimated to offset commercial scale discounts in recovery at this level of study Corporate Tax of 28% has been applied Royalties Min=0.5% and Max=7% on gross sales Labour Plans for mining & engineering, P75 labour rates used Diesel price R13.50/litre Electricity R0.82c/Kwh Support and Stores rates used for bulk service mining PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 15

Public Involvement The Process of Community Consultation by PTM • PTM completed the process of consultation as part of the prospecting permit process in  accordance with the requirements of the MPRDA • This process also forms part of the prospecting Environmental Management Plan (EMP)  which has been approved by the Regulator DMR PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 16

Public Involvement (cont’d) • During community  consultations, have  demonstrated the process of  exploration so that the  people can fully understand  the exploration processes. • Community forums have been established • PTM has been well received throughout the region • Meet regularly to discuss issues pertaining to the ongoing  prospecting programme  • Have assisted the various  communities with water supply by drilling  water boreholes • Have employed unskilled labourers from the communities PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 17

Inferred Resources – Sept 2013 Waterberg Updated Mineral Resource Estimate Inferred 2PGE+Au Resource Estimate, September 2, 2013 Layer Thickness Tonnage Pt Pd Au 2PGE+Au Pt:Pd:Au 2PGE+Au Cu Ni (koz) (%) (%) Cu (t) Ni (t) 0.10 14,500 8,400 0.18 0.10 69,400 37,600 5,948 0.18 0.10 83,900 46,000 30:65:5 11,575 0.07 0.17 78,800 202,200 30:60:10 17,523 0.10 0.15 162,700 248,200 (avg m) Mt (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) T1 2.30 8.50 1.04 1.55 0.47 3.06 34:51:15 842 0.17 T2 3.77 39.16 1.16 2.04 0.84 4.04 29:50:21 5,107 T Total 3.38 47.66 1.14 1.95 0.77 3.86 30:50:20 F Total 3.0 to 30.0 119.05 0.91 1.98 0.13 3.02 166.71 0.98 1.97 0.32 3.26 Total Note: The T1 and F layers are reported with a 2g/t 2PGE+Au cut-off The T2 layer is reported based on the selection of a mining cut of a minimum of 2m consistently across all deflections Update Inferred Mineral Resource, Dated September 3, 2013, Ken Lomberg, Coffey Mining, Independent Qualified Person – www.sedar.com. PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 18

Mining Methods • Aspects that influence the mining method decision: ‐ Examine methods suitable for massive and moderately thick deposits ‐ The deposits have a relatively difficult dip of 38○ ‐ Mining methods must address all associated safety issues, and ‐ Be able to deliver high volumes PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 19

Mining Methods (cont’d) • The following criteria were used to establish a scoring system in the Analytical  Hierarchy Process (AHP): ‐ Shortest time to production ‐ Quickest return on investment (ROI) ‐ High volumes ‐ Flexibility ‐ Selectivity ‐ Safety ‐ Cater for the dip and thickness PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 20

Mining Methods (cont’d) • Initially 13 mining methods were considered:  Sub‐level cave (massive) – (unacceptable surface subsistence)  Open pit (massive) – (massive material removal)  Drift and fill (massive) – (cost, limited production output)  Reef boring (moderate thickness) – (not suitable for high tonnages)   Contour drift and fill (moderate thickness) – (cost/availability of fill)  Longitudinal room and pillar (moderate thickness) – (extensive pre‐ development required, limited selectivity)  Block cave (massive)  Cut and fill (massive)   Trough mining (moderate thickness).  Long hole stoping (moderate thickness)  Step room and pillar (moderate thickness)  Super F Zone  ‐ Sub‐level open stoping (massive)    T & F Zones ‐ Room and pillar (moderate thickness) – adapted to “modified  step room and pillar   ‐ Excluded  ‐ Considered  ‐ Selected PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 21

AHP Results – Moderate T and F Zones Criteria Modest Zones Overall Mining Method Rating Hi The mining methods were evaluated  against the following criteria:  Score        Lo MSR LH Shortest time to production Quickest return on investment (ROI) High volumes Flexibility Selectivity Safety Allow for the dip and thickness TM • Methods considered: • • • Modified Step Room & Pillar (MSR) Longhole Room & Pillar Tabular Stoping (LH) Trough Mining ™ • Modified Step Room and Pillar Mining best for moderate T and F deposits PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 22

AHP Results – Super F Zone Criteria Super F Overall Mining Method Rating Hi The mining methods were evaluated  against the following criteria:  Score        Lo SLS CF Shortest time to production Quickest return on investment (ROI) High volumes Flexibility Selectivity Safety Allow for the dip and thickness BC • Methods considered: • • • Sub‐Level Open Stoping (SLS) Cut and Fill (CF) Block Caving (BC) • Sub‐Level Open Stoping (SLS) best for Super F zone deposits PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 23

Unlocking The Potential Room and pillar  Trough mining  Reef boring  Long hole stoping  Contour drift and fill Step room and pillar Longitudinal room and pillar  Block cave (massive) Sub‐level cave (massive) Open pit (massive) Sub‐level open stoping (massive) Cut and fill (massive) Drift and fill (massive) Step Room & Pillar Sub‐level Open Stoping Super F zone 30‐40 degree dip >10m thick T zone and F zone 30‐40 degree dip 3‐10m thick PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 24

Mine Design Criteria – Mechanised Mining Development Advance Rates : • Decline – 110m per month per decline  (system advance) • Flat development – 200m/month/crew • Raise boring – 55m/month including pilot  drilling Modified Step Room and Pillar (MSRP) • On Reef Decline dimension 5 x 5m at an  apparent dip of 8⁰ • Drives 5 x 5m as per MDC • Pillar size 5 x 5m • Distance between pillars 10m • Extraction ratio – 83% Sub‐level Open stoping (SLOS) • Rib Pillars – 5m wide • Rib pillar spacing 15m skin to skin • Vertical distance between drill drives – 20m  footwall to footwall • Crown pillar – 20m  • Ring spacing – 2m • Drill drives per stope 5 – Consisting of crown  pillar level, production drive 1, production drive  2, production drive 3, production drive 4 • Tons per ring 1348t • Production drill metres/ton blasted – 0.8m/6 • Production drill metres/machine/day – 280m/day • Rib Pillar in‐stope – 30m • Rib Pillar between stope – 30m • Extraction ratio – 79%  PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 25

Longitudinal Section Decline and Access Schematic 1413m 224m Shallow T Portal from  Surface Super F 372m Portal from  Surface 225m North F Note: Vertical Red and blue lines are vent holes PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 26

Blue-print Design – T Zone Up, and down‐ cast vent holes Surface portal Decline Cluster Step, room&  pillar  PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 27

Blue-print Design – Super F Zone Up, and down‐ cast vent holes Decline Cluster Surface portal Production  ramps and  stopes PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 28

Combined Tonnage Profile 8,000,000 7,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 T Zone North F PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 2036 2034 2032 2030 2028 2026 2024 2022 2020 2018 2016 0 2014 Tonnes 6,000,000 Super F 29

Bulk Services – Electrical Supply • Discussions have been initiated with Electrical Power Supplier  (Eskom) • Upgrades and conversions to existing networks are planned to be in place by  2018 • Milestone is considered a high risk to the Project, as there is no alternative  supply besides self‐supply (Power Generation) • A dedicated HV power line will be installed from the Knobel Substation to the  Mine Site • The overhead line will feed into the 100MVA incomer substation provided for  the Project. • From this point power will be distributed to satellite substations, primarily the  Concentrator and the 3 decline systems • Provision has been made for the approximate 28km overhead line in the  Project Cost Detailed work to  be done in next phase 30

Bulk Services – Water • Indication that there is little ground water available on site to be used for mining  and processing plant • The expected Project consumption of 30 Ml per day will be supplied from the  planned water supply upgrade Project in the area West of Polokwane • The formal water supply expansion plan terminates short of the project site and a  dedicated supply line approximately 19km in length will be provided for the Mine  Supply • A provision has been allowed in the Project Estimate for the installation of a water  supply line • The planned supply network may not have the capacity to supply the Mine  requirement and additional costs may be incurred to increase the supply capacity  of the planned network  Further discussions with relevant authorities needed to further understand           risk issue 31

Bulk Services – Access Roads • The current drilling area is some  38km to 45km from the N11  National Road • The route to the Waterberg drill  sites are via rural roads from the  N11 • New haul roads and access roads  will have to be constructed 32

Process slide 2 x 300ktpm processing plants planned. 1st to be commissioned in 2018, 2nd end 2019 33

Assumptions Pricing Assumptions Current/Spot Platinum (US$ / oz)  Palladium (US$ / oz)  Gold (US$ / oz)  Copper (US$ / lb)  Nickel (US$ / lb)  R/US$  1,380.00 708.00 1,259.00 3.25 6.51 11.13 Basket Price T Zone F zone Super F Zone Total Current Spot $/oz R/oz $/oz R/oz $/oz R/oz $/oz R/oz 1,014.40 11,290.25 934.83 10,404.62 934.68 10,402.99 961.57 10,702.24 PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 3 Year Trailing  Average 1,586.06 701.04 1,548.84 3.58 8.35 10.00 3 Year Trailing  Average 1,129.60 11,296.00 1,005.23 10,052.33 1,005.03 10,050.34 1,047.04 10,470.41 34

Key Metrics – Ounce Profile LOM(1) Ounce Profile 800,000 700,000 oz/annum Steady State Production  (655 000 oz) Gold 600,000 500,000 Palladium 400,000 300,000 200,000 Platinum 100,000 0 Recovered Ounces Total Concentrate Steady State Ounces 11 409 412 655 000 Platinum 3 381 234 194 000 Palladium 6 901 055 397 000 Gold 1 127 123 64 000 Note: (1) – LOM can be extended, at depth and along strike PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 35

Key Metrics – Operating Costs Key Operating Costs Direct Cost (R/t) 363 Processing Cost (R/t) 112 Transport (R/t) 26 Operating Cost (R/t) 501 Operating Cost ($/oz) 555 Production Cost  ($/oz) 626 Direct Costs (R’m), excl. Processing ‐ R362.51/t Power, R49.39, 13% Water, R0.75,  0% Services, R31.81,  9% Labour, R 89.91,  25% Explosives, R5.91,  2% Tyres, R 13.25, 4% Maintenance, R  59.76, 16% Diesel, R  47.58, 13% Support, R25.61, 7% Stores, R38.54, 11% PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 36

Key Metrics – Capital Costs Capital Requirements per Summary Work Package Area Capital to Full  Sustaining  Capital Production (R'm) (R'm) R                    ‐ R              3,004 R                    45 R                    22 R                  569 R                    ‐ R                  543 R              1,057 R                  811 Total (R'm) MIning Services Mining Development Development Equipment Drilling Engineering Infrastructure Surface Infrastructure Project Management Financial Costs Contingencies R                         24 R                   2,014 R                       965 R                       135 R                   1,221 R                   4,155 R                       305 R                   1,418 R                   1,536 R                      24 R                5,018 R                1,010 R                  157 R                1,790 R                4,155 R                  848 R                2,475 R                2,347 Total Excluding Escalation R           11,774 R         6,051 R       17,824 Contingencies,  13% Peak Funding Peak Funding (R’bn) 8,853  Peak Funding (US$M) 885 % Capex to Full Production Mining  Development,  17% Development  Equipment, 8% Financial Costs,  12% Drilling,  1% Project  Management, 3% PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX Surface  Infrastructure,  35% Engineering  Infrastructure,  10% 37

Key Metrics – Cashflow Cash Flow 20,000 15,000 Cashflow Revenue Cumm Cashflow Cumulative cashflow R20.9bn 10,000 8,000 First production  2018 6,000 10,000 4,000 5,000 Cashflow (R'm) Cumulative Cashflow (R’m) 25,000 2,000 0 0 (5,000) (10,000) (2,000) Project  construction  starts Jan 2016 (4,000) Peak funding R8.8bn Financial Return Undiscounted NPV   (R’m) 20,851  NPV @ 7.5%  (R’m) Pre‐tax NPV @ 7.5%  (R’m) Post‐tax IRR Pre‐tax IRR Post‐tax Payback 8,047   5,088  16.4% 14.0% 2024 PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 38

High-level Project Schedule Project Phases Current Phase File  Mining  Right  Application Complete PEA Deliverables • Proven Business  Case • No fatal‐flaws • Forward work‐ plan Remainder of 2014 Prefeasibility Study Action Steps • Additional exploration drilling • Geological modelling • Metallurgical test work • EIA / EMP / Permitting • Improve business case • Perform option trade‐offs Deliverables • Single Option selected • Ratified and optimised business‐ case Est. Cost ~R100m 2015 Feasibility Study  Action Steps • Improve confidence in  engineering • Operational readiness study • Prepare for implementation Deliverables • Full detailed‐design and  costing • Implementation plan Jan 2016‐2020 Project Construction and Ramp‐up 2018 First production End‐2020 Full‐ production  600ktpm Project is moving into Prefeasibility phase with a positive PEA outcome PLG: NYSE MKT PTM: TSX 39

Add a comment

Related presentations

Gage-Cannon Investor Services

Gage-Cannon Investor Services

November 10, 2014

Gage-Cannon helps ventures accelerate organic growth or obtain equity funding, and...

Mavenir Analyst Day

Foro MAB Sevilla 13 de noviembre de 2014

ING Q3 2014 Earnings Report

ING Q3 2014 Earnings Report

November 5, 2014

Analyst presentation third quarter 2014 results. ING posts 3Q14 underlying net pro...

Related pages

Waterberg PEA Presentation - Platinum Group Metals

Project Objective Conduct a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) to study the technical and financial viability of the Waterberg Resource
Read more

Waterberg pea presentation - Investor Relations

pea potenciales evocados actualizaciones en neurologia infantil issn 0025-7680 647 medicina (buenos aires) 2007; 67 (6/1): 647-660 indicaciones medicas y ...
Read more

September 2014 Presentation on the Waterberg Region

Presentation on the Waterberg Region September 2014 Mining & infrastructure developments – an update on our prospects for growth
Read more

Site Visit Itinerary

Site Visit Itinerary 1 February 13th (Waterberg Site Visit) 6:30 am – Breakfast at Sundown Ranch 7:15 am – Bus Transport to Charter Fights at Pilanesberg
Read more

Platinum Group Metals - Platinum Group Metals Waterberg Update

Presentations; Annual Reports ... Platinum Group Metals Waterberg Update. 07/22/2014. ... (Maseve), and all technical details of the Waterberg PEA.
Read more

Capital Markets and Shareholder Backing

This presentation has been prepared by Platinum Group Metals Ltd. ... Assessment (PEA) for Waterberg JV completed indicating robust economics.
Read more