Critical Asset Shortage: Is The Next Inflation Shock Already Here? | M. Colin Joudrie

I'm here today with Colin Jandry, CEO of Selker Copper Mines. Selker Copper has very important developments that we're going to be talking about today, but importantly, we're going to be going over Colin's outlook on the entire metals complex and what's next for the economy. What is copper, Dr. Copper, signaling to investors right now? Welcome to the show, Colin. Good to see you again. Good to see you as well, David. Thank you for making the time. Selker Copper, ticker SCMI on the TSXV, has some very important drilling updates as well as financing updates, but we're going to get to that in just a minute. Investors should be paying attention to copper for what reasons right now, Colin? We observed that copper fell during the onset of the Iran war alongside stocks, alongside gold. So the notion that copper behaved as a risk-on asset is still prevalent even today on the 1st of May. And the fact that copper has rebounded to near new all-time highs, Colin, what does that signal to you? I think it's a broader recognition of just the nature of the complex in terms of broader supply, but also the demand function that's increasingly part of everyday life in the modern sort of economies. So I think if I just take it through three sort of pieces as I see it, the investments in mines and major new copper production has really lagged over the last decade. And people can come up with a bunch of reasons why. But the reality is, is we're just not replacing existing production with new production quickly enough. So many of the big minds that have been the stalwarts of the producing environment for many years, they're getting older. Grades are declining a little bit. It's getting more expensive and harder to expand and meet that sort of production platform that was there before. And we're just sort of seeing that in a way that we really haven't seen it in the past. And that's because demand has just increased. So that's sort of per capita growth consumption that you see globally. And it's not just electrification. It's other things as well. It's the transmission. It's the use. It's battery storage, et cetera. It's how the modern economy is using copper is just sort of increasing at a pace that demands more production. So you get that supply, demand and balance. And there are times where it moves a little bit unpredictably. But I think the macro story over the last three to five years is really reflective of that increasing pressure on demand. And that's you're seeing that in prices. So I was actually pretty pleased to see that the market didn't react more violently to the sort of issues in the Middle East and that it's rebounded quite positively. I think it's a very strong indicator of the next few years. I have observed that copper and gold have been trading pretty much in lockstep with each other for the last couple of months. And then I actually went back further on the chart, Colin. I asked myself, was this always the case? And the answer is no. It's not always the case. There's not a perfect correlation between copper and gold. But if you zoom out, you'll see that more or less over the last 30 years or so, they've more or less moved in the same direction. Now, you've been a geologist in this space for decades. Can you explain this phenomenon, why copper and gold has broadly traded together? Thankfully, I'm a geologist and I'm not an economist, so it's going to be interesting for me to explain this. But I do think there's a couple of things going on. There is increasingly a connection between the availability of gold above ground and copper above ground. They tend to form in similar deposits, particularly some of the bigger copper gold deposits. That's why they're called that. And I do think you're seeing a little bit of that sort of demand, not demand, supply scarcity on the gold side as well a little bit. So they are starting to come into line. I don't know really all of the underlying economics behind it. But I will say from a supply perspective, it's more often not that you will now hear the words copper and gold in the same phrase when you talk about a deposit. Many of the major companies that we hear about, they're all talking about whether they're a major gold producer, they want more copper exposure. If they're a major copper producer, they want a little bit more gold exposure. So I think that's a little bit of it, David. On the flip side, does that mean there's fewer and fewer pure copper deposits and I guess also pure gold deposits remaining in the world? Discovery is discovery, right? We'll always surprise ourselves with discovery in my view. I mean, man, mankind or humankind is we have this sort of view that we know stuff. The reality is, you know, go back to the 1970s and read, you know, some of the things about availability and limited resources. All of those predictions from very, very smart people have never come true. We now have more copper to find in the ground. We have more gold to find in the ground. We have more oil to find in the ground than there was, you know, many, many years ago. And it's just because technology, we're getting better at it. The issue is getting it out of the ground. That's the more important issue, I think, more broadly. And that's what I think investors should be paying attention to. When investors are pricing or forecasting cash flow for a producing mine, they have to look at the type of deposit. Is it generally easier and more cost effective to extract copper from a pure copper deposit or a polymetallic ore that contains copper and other metals? It's a great question. There's a spectrum on that answer, obviously. I do think the simpler the deposit, the simpler the metallurgy of the deposit, generally speaking, it's a bit easier to recover the metals. So copper, you know, when it's mixed with zinc or nickel, as an example, those ones you have to be a bit careful about from the recovery perspective. Gold is a little different. Gold tends to be a minor element or even if it is in there, it tends to be in the minerals that form the copper. So I think those ones are a bit easier. What I would say, it's more about the grade. The grade is one of those big determinants in this concept of economies of scale. The mining industry has moved towards economies of scale as the bellwether. And I think there are important substories behind that of which sell-car copper is one. We're going to talk about the grade and deposit structure of sell-car copper in just a bit. Going back to the copper market itself, where it's now at $5.99, almost $6. dollars and like i mentioned right at the cusp of new all-time highs colin what's driving the copper market right now i'm not talking about in 10 years where electrification continues to be a story right now today i mean i do think and we talked about this i think david in our first interview together i mean clearly sort of the geopolitical situation out there is informing a lot about how commodities are trading um oil is evident and from a disruption perspective today Copper, I think, is a little bit about tariffs and some of the tariff infrastructure that's been put in place. And the market needs to react to that. So I think you've seen a stockpiling of refined copper in the U.S. in advance of that as a protective measure. And that puts pressure on the broader availability of copper. So I think that's one of the things that you're seeing in terms of today's pricing. That sort of geopolitical uncertainty is driving some of that price. I do think there's another element for sure that's just about the broader availability of concentrate and how it gets to the smelting complexes. You're seeing negative TCRCs. That's the first time that's really happened in sort of the industry for decades, if not ever. And that's a reflection of the lack of primary supply in concentrate. And these smelters, they just need that material. So they're pulling it as hard as they can. And again, I think that that features in the prices you're seeing today. How does the supply shock on oil, which ultimately cause a price shock, affect consumption and demand for critical minerals and base metals such as copper? Boy, that's an interesting question. I think one of the things that we all have to be mindful of is that the use of diesel and hydrocarbons is a big part of the production cycle. So there's a connect there. But in terms of how people actually use it and what copper allows you to do in the absence of, you know, available or cost effective oil and gas, I think is all about energy. So whether it's solar or some of the alternative energy sources, that's a big driver for copper. You know, if you have to burn bunker fuel to produce electricity, you are in a bad spot at the moment. So I think you'll see a little bit more of that moving towards renewables as one should. And that takes time, though, David. But I do think that that's one thing that people can think about. Where is the copper in your home? And is it helping me deal with the prices out there? If you own an EV right now, you're probably pretty happy. Do you see that copper and the base metals, basically, and gold for that matter, hitting new all-time highs this year? Is that a signal for higher inflation in the economy to come? I know this is not an economics discussion, but I think investors are looking at this as a signal. What would you say to this? Oh, it's embedded in there. I think for sure that will start to hit the bottom line in the fullness of time. But you know what? It's a cost of living. And we want the benefits of now cell phones and charging stations and transmission and whatnot. It's there. I actually think in the end of the day, we're still very cost effective in terms of getting metals into society in a cost effective and sustainable way. So I think it's just what it is. I think the six dollars is more about what incentive price is required to bring new copper into production. So we're right now in a place where the incentive price is excellent and it should generate a lot more activity across the complex. The broader question around economics and how people make decisions in their homes, I do think is a really relevant one. I think, you know, you saw a little bit of an uptick uptick under Biden with EVs and the EV push. I think the the challenges that we now face is a bit of a backlash on that. And I think those folks who made those EV purchases are probably, like I said, pretty happy. Over your career as a geologist, what have you observed in terms of technological developments in the mining space? You talked about how technological advancements have contributed to more efficiency or higher efficiency in mining. Has the mining industry learned anything from the oil industry, for example? the fracking moment in the oil and gas sector, has that translated to technological developments within the base metals and precious metals mining complex? I think that the industry is pretty good at adopting what I would call sort of cost efficiencies because we have to. I think the broader mining industry is quite good at that. If they see something where there's a cost advantage, they'll adopt it very quickly. I think true technology adoption and leadership in the mining industry is probably a bit slower than in some other industries. And I think that's just because it's a riskier industry, in my view. The capital that we deploy, it's significant. It's kind of immovable. It has to work, right? There really can be no issues about it functioning the way it's designed. So I do think it's a little bit slower to adopt some technologies. What I think is the most exciting part about what the industry is doing is it's just now respecting the data that it generates. I think for the first time in my career, I'm seeing some of the operations really understanding they need to collect more data, try to take advantage of that in the context of AI, and just think outside the box a little bit more. But the reality is the fundamental truth exists. Rocks are rocks. They're hard to describe and they're hard to find. And we just need to really make sure that we're boots on the ground and doing this work as best we can. I think the industry is doing well. It could do better, though. Better in what sense? Well, I think, again, when I think about the data that's really relevant and important, I think our industry, and it's not dissimilar to other industries, we get very siloed in what we do. So in our industry, it's about geology, and then it's about metallurgy, and then it's about mining and then it's about water and environment etc tends to be those activities are a bit siloed but i can argue that the geology that we discover when we discover a deposit is not just about the copper it's about the other minerals that are there and how they affect the entire processing chain in a positive or negative way the better that we get at translating that and having a robust conversation at that i think the industry gets a lot better the second part no go ahead no no please continue. I think the second part is just communications. I think there are days when we're when some individual companies and groups within our industry are just really, really good at communicating with community, society, First Nations, governments, the broader complex. And then every now and then we turtle or we ostrich, right? The head in the sand and we hunker down. I think the more we communicate and the more that we're out there doing these kind of conversations, the better off we all are. The $6 copper price that I alluded to earlier, is that high enough for copper explorers, developers like yourself, and producers alike to really amp up the total output of copper in our society? In other words, what is the incentive price for copper production to really start to ramp up? I got to think it's right around here, David. What I see when I look at the sort of peers that are out there, the bigger companies, the mid-tiers, etc., you are seeing a real push now. You're seeing exploration uptick, etc. And it's all because of that incentive pricing dynamic. I do think that still the response is slower than maybe the metal price suggests. And some of that's because permitting takes longer, etc. But I think it's also the muscle memory in our industry isn't great. Most of the big projects that you've seen executed over the last number of years have been late, slow, and more cost. And that's not because they have to be that way. I think we're just out of practice building. So the incentive price, I think, is there. Now we have to respond to it. And we are, I think, but it could be more. And there's some actors that would argue it even has to be more activity and more investment and more aggressive sort of pursuit of new copper. And it's not just a matter of the price. It's a matter of national security, a lot of people would argue. The United States labeled copper a critical mineral last year in 2025 I believe August And all throughout 2025 one of the biggest stories within the critical mineral space is China exporting critical minerals and tightening its export of critical minerals in response to the trade war. Now, people in North America and arguably the United States, the White House, would want to see more diversification of the sources for which they find their critical minerals, including copper. But the reality is copper is primarily controlled in terms of refining, controlled by China. China dominates global copper and critical minerals refining. So going back to your question about the incentive, well, the incentive is actually national security. So what needs to be done? Well, I mean, you just have to actually follow through on your policies as it pertains to permitting and make it go faster. You're seeing Canada, you know, with the major projects office as an example. I think that's more of a response mechanism as opposed to really addressing the fundamental problem of permitting lag and permitting timelines. The US is doing a similar sort of thing. They've got the Fast 41 programs there that are incentivizing development within the lower 48 as an example. I mean, everybody's going to do their best to respond to this. The world economy is pretty integrated though. In all honesty, our job is to get the metal out of the ground and it's to make sure that it gets to the destinations that it needs to be so that consumers can actually buy it and use it. You're never going to remove, at least in the near term, the flow of materials to China because that's where the smelting is happening. What you have to do is hope that it flows back out the way that it should. And right now, the incentive for the Chinese is to make sure that that metal is available, at least copper. I think some of the other very bespoke rare earth metals, etc. That is much more of a geopolitical thing. And you're seeing people sort of react accordingly, whether it's in Canada, the US or Europe. And they'll catch up. In the end, they will catch up. The copper one's a little more complicated. Leading to the Selkirk copper story, then let's talk about something a little bit closer to home, which is what the Canadian government is doing. So you're operating in Yukon, and UConn, as the American and Canadian audience, as we know, is in Canada, the northern part of Canada. What makes UConn unique as a jurisdiction? Let's talk about that. And let's talk about what the Canadian government federally is doing to help with this expediting the production output of copper, should we say? Yeah, well, we'll start with the UConn first. I think, first of all, Yukon is a unique part of Canada in so many ways. And I learn more about it every day as I travel there and spend time with communities and the Yukoners. But from a mining minerals exploration discovery, the mineral endowment in the Yukon is exceptional. Some of the world's type deposits are there, whether it's in zinc or in tungsten and even in copper in some areas. But also increasingly there's some really exceptional gold deposits that are being advanced through exploration and development so it from an endowment perspective it's a great place to be it's a great place to go and aspire to discovery and and to do it in a way that that makes real sense for for investors it's a big territory there's not a lot of people there's not a lot of infrastructure so there's still a bit of a frontier like character to it like we're looking at the even Even in our property area, we're looking at areas that haven't been touched in over 50 years. Some of them are a little bit remote, et cetera. Not that remote in the grand scheme of things. But my point is the endowment's great. The more time we spend on the ground and then we get that discovery mentality working, the better off we will be. And the Yukon's a great place to do that. I think the second part that I'm learning about the Yukon is there is this sort of infrastructure advantage part and infrastructure disadvantage. disadvantaged. As I said, it's a big territory. There are some very remote places. Fortunately for us, Selkirk Copper is on the infrastructure advantage side of the Yukon. That's really helpful for us. We have roads, grid power, we have existing facilities site. So that's a big advantage for us. That allows us to explore a little more cost effectively. And when we do find something, we don't have to spend as much money, you know, building the non-mine infrastructure like roads and power, et cetera. So that's kind of the Yukon. I think the other thing that's important to understand is it's a real frontier culture. They are very proud of the work that they can do. They've done some things very well, but they're trying to evolve the overall permitting landscape and make things just better from an environment, from an engagement, from a sustainability perspective. And that story continues to evolve. And we're really happy as a company to be participating in that in a meaningful way. And then, you know, for us, the other thing is First Nations involvement. We're a bit of a unique company. We're the first publicly traded mining company in Canada, in North America, as far as I'm aware, where we have a majority equity stake held by a First Nation group, the Selkirk First Nation. And that's a real significant sort of aligning feature in terms of how we advance the work, the re-permitting on this asset, because the Selkirk First Nation have a voice, they have an opinion, and it will be heard by the government. And that's helpful for us because we think that will at least advance our permitting efforts in a timely manner. We can't just rely upon that one voice. But at the end of the day, it's a big part of how we're operating. On the economy of Yukon, by the way, so let's just address this. I wonder if investors have asked you where you're going to find labor. By you, I mean miners operating in Yukon. Take a look at these stats. So as of March 2026, the territory of Yukon has a 3.9% unemployment rate compared to the national average of, I think, 6.7%. So significantly lower than the rest of Canada, the national average. So is there a shortage of labor to fill? The labor question is, it's a Canada wide one, it's probably a bit more pointed in the Yukon, as you've noted, it's a really attractive jurisdiction, and there are jobs there. But I think the mining industry in general, for the trades that we're looking for, and for the technical sort of high technical sort of trades, that would support the mining activity. Historically, there's a fly in and fly out component to it. The fortunate thing for us is that this is an asset with a very positive history. I get phone calls from people who operated and worked at the asset before asking to come back. There's a sort of a, there's like a feel good nature of this asset. It's in a beautiful part of the country. You know, it's not super complicated. It's a comfortable camp and the work is meaningful. So I think we'll be okay. But at the end of the day, we will have to bring certain people in and we'll have to fly them in and fly them out as appropriate. My hope is that we also take advantage of some of the local talent that might not be reflected in those job statistics that you referred to. I think there is a portion of the Yukon that might not be reporting there the way that it should. So part of our objective is to make sure that we access some of those folks and get some training programs in place, you know, where they can get and enter the more formal economy as appropriate. To my understanding, it's quite common for miners operating in the north or other remote regions in Ontario, for example, to hire staff and team members from outside the province. It's pretty common. I don't think we'll be able to support this with 100% Yukoners. I mean, our objective is to maximize local employment, maximize local benefits, and we're putting systems in place to make sure that that happens, even just tracking invoices, where does it go, et cetera, because it's important, right? And if we measure it, it will get done. But ultimately, we'll have to tap the market more broadly to make sure that we get the employees that we need. People can check out our last interview with Colin, linked down below for a broad overview of the company. Today, we're going to talk about some recent events, company developments, and drill a bit deeper, pun intended, into the geology of the deposits. So Selker Copper reports additional intersections of high grade from phase one drill program at the Mintel Copper Gold Silver Mine. This came out just yesterday. Colin, just from a high-level perspective, explain why this drill program is significant. And you told me offline a couple of days ago, this was the largest drill program in Yukon over the last 10 years. So what does largest mean? Give us a sense of the scale. So, I mean, we started this program in the fall, and it was targeted to be a 50,000-meter program in phase one, important phase one because that means there'll be a phase two but that 50 000 meters is effectively on an annual basis it's the largest program in the last 10 years on on a standalone basis and there's been some big programs right there's a few on the gold side etc that have been in that 40 to 45 000 meter range this one just happens to be bigger and it surprised me as well but the whole focus of this is to really make sure that we are upgrading our understanding of the asset it's not just about grade. That's an important part of it. Obviously, we need grade to survive. But this is really bringing a geoscience focus back into this asset, a place where I think it's been underexplored and underdrilled for many years. So part of that recognition is just to get out there, drill those holes and move forward. What the results are showing is exactly that. We've got about five main zones that we're targeting our drilling at, and it's around extension and expansion, a little bit of infill drilling where appropriate, and then discovery within the main property zone. Of the sort of 175 holes that we drilled, what ended up being a 52,288 meter program, we've had about 87% success rate in all of that. That means we hit what we thought we were going to hit, and it's been positive. This latest set of results is very, very good. it's doing three things in my view in the areas where we knew we had good grade and higher grade it's just further augmented that given us better definition and that's what i would call sort of the minto north target as well as uh the copper keel zone what it's also done is it's found some higher grade that we didn't know was there both in the 118 zone which is an open pit target as well as in the um uh ridgetop deposit area which is also an open pit we found some higher grade lenses that again we're not in the in the thinking there so that's really positive and then the last thing is we've had a couple discoveries right so beneath the 118 and the ridgetop pits a little bit deeper level we've hit lenses that weren't uh in the previous modeling that's great um and same sort of thing in what's called the deep main zone or the underneath the open pit which is known as the main zone we've also hit mineralization there that was previously unknown so the program's done what it's intended to do. Our job in the background now is to consolidate all this information, get all the assays out and put that into a new mineral resource estimate, which will come out contemporaneous with a preliminary economic estimate in mid of this year. So that's really the focus of the work is to get this good drilling information in there, update the mine plans, update the modeling, get a new expression of the mineral resources that we have and put it in the context of economics going forward. So I got to tell you, I'm pretty surprised a little bit that we're hitting as positively as we have. The intention is always to be successful. And I just think the team's done a very good job. And we are going to follow this up with additional drilling going forward to support the feasibility study that will start after we issue that PEA. The news released flagged a reanalysis. It says reanalysis was necessary. and here drew results reported here include this particular hole which was drilled in late October release of results from this hole were delayed due to and to necessary reanalysis flagged by our check assay protocols how often does this happen and can you tell us about why a reanalysis was necessary yeah it actually happens more frequently than I think people think that's why we have this big section called QAQC protocols so quality analysis quality control and every company has it and it happens fairly frequently, probably around somewhere between two and four percent of the samples that go through are often flagged. And the main thing is to have a process in place and to act on it. So our team did. I think this is even more relevant for higher grade samples. So this is a high grade copper gold deposit. We are intersecting often zones where we'll get grades over a meter thick that will be as high as 20 percent copper. in this particular hole, 6% copper was one of the averages across a broad section. And we just want to make sure that we're getting that right. So that's what the QAQC process is. And I think it's important we communicate that to shareholders. So that's why we included it in here. It did delay the release of those assays a little bit. So again, that's why we've included it. But in the end, we've got good quality data. It's informing what we're doing the right way. And we move on. It says here, QAQC insertion rates approximate 15% of all samples at set intervals. If you increase that 15% to, let's say, 30% or 40%, do you think you would minimize the need for reassessment and reanalysis and then actually expedite drill results? No, no, that's not the way it actually works. I think that that number is perfectly appropriate. By adding more doesn't necessarily help you. I see. But it's just a part of the process. So again, some people might advocate for actually less than that. I think we've hit that at the right sort of level. And it's important that we follow it. Remember, we have visual logs. We have then sort of the interpretation of the visual logs. And then we have the assays. And the whole process is we continually look at this and make sure the data is doing what we think it's supposed to be doing. So there's a pretty robust process. The check assay protocol is more a statistical thing. It just says, what does the geostatistics tell us that we should do? And we're following that. I'm just trying to understand what moved the stock. So April 30th, the stock went up 11% on the day. It came down a bit since then. Was that primarily due to the release of this drill result? I think it's a combination of things. We had a busy week. I think there's a couple of things going on here. When we launched our sort of bought deal offering on April 9th, we had a very, very good response then. And then we upsize that very quickly after that, basically the next day. So I think the market is seeing that as a really positive reflection of what we're doing. And obviously we closed the financing on the 30th So I think the market was reading into that a little bit We also had a very positive announcement where the First Nation was following on their rights to participate adjacent to that financing And there were some really good expressive comments there from the new chief, Chief Jeremy Harper, about how they view the project, how they view the working relationship between us and the company. And again, I think the market wants to see that because they recognize the importance of First Nation and community support. And then the last thing is, you know, I think the results are par for the course. But I do think the market is just starting to absorb and understand that this is good grade mineralization. We continue to tell the story that we expected and we're getting those results. So I think the market's responding. I mean, the last thing, and I always say this, you know, the market is an animal of the day. So it is what it is. Good days are good days. Bad days are bad days. Yesterday happened to be a good day. Well, hopefully more good days to come. Now, on the financing that you mentioned, so $20 million bought deal upsized to $30 million. Tell us about the plans for the use of proceeds as well as the relationship with the Selkirk First Nation. That's a discussion itself that we'll talk about in a bit more detail. But specifically, the Selkirk First Nation's participation in this financing. What does it tell us more and tell us about the use of proceeds? Well, I think there's two things that it tells me. The first is that this First Nation is commercially aware. They have processes that they have about how they manage their own funds, and that's important. They have governance protocols in place, but they're also quite responsive. This is a First Nation that just went through a leadership transition. It happens every three years. chief and council turns out and then you get a new chief and council coming in and at the end of the day they reacted in a very positive and thoughtful way they wanted to participate they followed their governance protocols and they did I think that that just tells us that this is a well-governing and thoughtful first nation and that's great and we all should be celebrated for good governance whether it's the the country or it's a company or it's a community I think that that's very good. So I've learned through this process just how important that is for them and how they've adapted it so that they can work within the capital markets timeframes. I think the second part that's, I think, really important here to reflect is this is an approach of alignment. We want to be aligned not just with the First Nation, but also with community, etc., how we do things. This is one really good example where you're seeing that alignment in their voice and in their actions. I think this is great. And we'll just continue to work with them. People should know that this is a constant daily conversation between ourselves and the First Nation leadership. And then we also have First Nation citizens working for us on our management team. It's part of the DNA and the ethos that we want. And I want the market to understand this. This is important. Okay, let's come back to the Salkirk First Nations in just a minute. But going back to the bought deal, $30 million raised, what's your plan for the process? What's the use? Yeah. So I think we've got a plan to make a plan, which continues to be what I keep saying to folks. So we will do more resource drilling, and that will be in the form of infill and upgrading the resources going forward in the feasibility study. We will continue to advance our engineering and design work, both to complete the PEA, but also to then carry that forward into the feasibility study, which will start sort of in Q3. And then we're also doing a fairly significant body of work on permitting or re-permitting and amending the permits on the asset. And then maybe most importantly is that as of April 1st, we've also taken on a broader care and custody of the site. So we're now responsible for all the day-to-day sort of activities on the site, which includes managing the camp, fuel costs, energy costs, etc. So a portion of those funds is going to go to that. Lastly, you've got our overhead sort of G&A costs that are just all about advancing this work in a timely fashion. And so far, so good. But that is something that we have to fund. And we are bringing on some new people onto the team where needed, some new mining professionals, some additional geoscientists to just support the broader program and start to do some exploration as well outside of the claims. This will be the first time this summer where we're actually doing a bit of a more district wide program. So there'll be some of the dollars going in that direction as well. But think of it as an integrated and somewhat comprehensive program. we're trying to make sure that we have a plan and that we execute the plan. And then we, when in the Margaret Thatcher world, you know, if you go back in time, someone asked her at one point in time, but you've changed your decision. When we get information out of all this work that we do that suggests we might need to modify the plan, we will. But our main objective is just to go execute what we already have. With copper at new all-time highs or close to new all-time highs, have investors asked you, Colin, can you raise more money to expedite the drilling process, basically get this thing up and running ASAP? You have a timeline, 2028 to production, which we can talk about. But now is the time to expedite that, bring that to 2027. Have you had these conversations? I have. And they come in three forms. I get some folks just saying, drill, baby, drill, don't worry about the studies and don't worry about the restart. I get others that are like, why aren't you in production today? And then I get maybe the more balanced sort of conversation that says, what do you need to get into production? And what do you need to get in production with the highest confidence that you actually can do it, that it's permitted and everyone accepts it? So I'm trying to, I'm not trying to hedge my bets. I strongly believe in the middle road. We will do the drilling. We will get the resource to find. We will understand this deposit as best we can and we will get into production as quickly as we can, but we need integrated, coherent, understandable permits. And that's been a bit of a challenge on this asset in the past. And I'm not interested in making that mistake. Again, we are going to get this right because it deserves to be gotten right. The 12 to 15 year targeted mine plan that we have here, that will be the longest mine plan that this asset's seen. That's a really admirable objective for us. We're going to get there. We're going to get really close to that 12 to 15 years in this first pass in the PEA. And then we'll build upon that going forward. So I like the conversation with the shareholders where they're asking and they're challenging sort of our approach to this, but we need to get this right. And so we're going to take the middle road, but that's our road. It's not a compromise. It's what we think is the right thing to do. And explain to investors, please, from a geologist perspective, what needs to be done to expedite the drilling program? Is it even just a function of output? Like the more drills, drill holes you put in the ground, the faster you'll get results. Does it work like that? It does a little bit, but again, so we have four drills going and our average production rate from the last drill program is about 94 meters per day per drill. That is excellent. Like on an industry-wide perspective, that's fantastic. We had some of the drill productivity as high as 200 meters per day for the drilling. So our productivity is right where it needs to be. We could add another drill. But what I will say, this site is not a huge site. We have only so many places where we can drill at the same time safely and still maintain the road network and all of that sort of work. So we've found that the four drills is about the right balance. I think the other thing, remember, we're not a fully operating mine again. We're still in this sort of restart phase. We're a pre-production asset. We have to fly people in, we have to fly people out. We're limited in some of the things that we can do. I think four is the right number. And again, these are big drill programs that we're doing. We're about to start another big drill program. So no, I think we're doing about as good as we can. I'm concerned a little bit about adding a fifth or a sixth drill in terms of A, the quality of the work, the environmental management of it and then safety the more drills you add the more people the more hands more feet more issues that you present i think we're in a good spot if if i do see an opportunity to improve this and bring it faster i will but i think the real gating item here is not the drilling it's important it's tactically important we have to get it done quickly and and and appropriately what i think the longer term or the bigger gating item is the re-permitting process. We could do a ton and ton of work here and drill our brains out until we're satisfy ourselves on that. But if we don't have a permitting strategy that supports it, it will be for naught. So I think we have to just make sure we're balanced in that. I'm probably more focused on a timeline perspective on permitting than I am about drill productivity. Let me just address that extreme question of why aren't you producing now? It's actually not that terrible question when you think about it. Selkirk, like you mentioned, is operating on a restart. So there's existing infrastructure. There's a history already. Why not just skip the drilling, get a PEA done this summer, and then just start producing next year? Yeah. Because the permits don't allow us to do that the way I think they should. We have many authorizations that allow us to do certain things, but not on an integrated basis that allow us to keep this mill filled at 4,100 tons per day. Remember, the last operator here, one of their major errors and and it's unfortunate is they assumed that they could produce from both underground and an open pit configuration based on the permits that they thought they had and fill that mill at 4100 tons per day that didn't turn out to be the case we've gone through the process of evaluating all of the permits that exist we need to amend them and update it them so that we can actually do this i'm not gonna we're not going to be producing at 40 throughput rates on the mill because we will run out of money and we'll go bankrupt just like the last group. So we're going to get these permits right and they're going to help us get us where we need to get to. Okay. And how long would that take? So right now we're targeting the submission of the re-amended permits or the amended permits for Q3 of this year. So probably like October 1st-ish. And the idea there, sorry, Q4, early Q4. And the idea there is that's about a nine to 12 month process to go through those amendments. It's called a category two assessment within the YESAB process. That's Yukon Environment Socioeconomic Board. And so that's our sort of process right now. And that's what we're assuming. And you'll see that in our sort of timeline charts, et cetera. But that's sort of the idea. And, you know, my guess is some of those sub permits might take a little bit longer, but the overarching permitting process and the authorization, I think we'll get in a reasonable timeframe. Once we have all of that in place, we can then make the restart decision. I want to talk about the 2028 production timeline in a little bit more detail in our next episode. This is a series of stay tuned to follow Colin and and I on this channel in a few months. But today, just broadly speaking, the 2028 restart timeline, what would move that timeline either up or down? If there were delays, will cause these delays, for example? I think the main one is permitting. I think that's still probably the one. Sorry, I don't mean to interrupt, but is permitting something that is within the control of the company? If I'm an analyst in the bank and I have to make an assumption as to when this would be done and I have to make a risk analysis, I have to ask how much of this is something that the company can control and do? In an absolute answer to that, it is not in our control. In an influence and a direction and a communication perspective, we can absolutely help it. So we've approached this in a very transparent way. We're trying to set out a plan of engagement and communications with the different regulatory authorities and the different folks such that everybody knows what's going on and they can resource it appropriately and we can get them the information that they need to expedite or manage those permits in a timely fashion. This is a two-step process every day, two steps forward, one step back. My experience more broadly in the industry is the company has to advocate on this in terms of communication. Whether we like it or not, not all of these regulators or these agencies or these committees that are struck to help us, they don't all communicate that well together. So our job is to make sure that they communicate, that there are no surprises, that information, emails, reports get to the right person quickly. And that's just a process and we can influence that. And so we are resourcing this with some of the best permitting people the Canadian North has had. Our SVP of permitting is a guy by the name of Matthew Pickard, and he's been very successful in these efforts. He's really a good person, knowledgeable, understandable. And when I say good person, he's affable. Like he's not aggressive and angry person. He's a sort of happy person. And again, we're making sure that work's done right, but we're also making sure people are comfortable and they understand what we're trying to do and what we expect of them. So I think we, I call it project managing the permits. And it's just like we would project manage a drill program or a construction program. You set the objectives, you clarify them with all the parties and you help resource it. And then you do your best to hit those timelines. So if I were to be a really difficult interviewer here right now, call them and say, look, and I'm not singling out copper. In general, any developer in your stage, you don't actually know when you're going to be in production because of this difficulty of not assessing when the permitting will be done. It's not 100% within your control. So you don't actually know how to respond to this. So I don't think it's that I don't know. I can't tell you with 100% certainty that on such a date, this will happen. But what I can say is that we have the resources, we have the relationships, and we have the plans to get there. If I miss that by a day and a shareholder is upset with that, that's fine. The shareholder has that right. But what I'm telling you is that we will get into production and we may miss it by a day, as an example, but we've got the resources and the relationships and the understanding to get there. Quite honestly, if we do this well and everybody else lives up to their obligations, it actually could be earlier. So there's nothing here in this plan that is heroic. A big part of my training in the industry is stretch objectives are important How we communicate those stretch objectives are important But a stretch objective is not unachievable It just an objective And we can get there I think our objectives here are not heroic, as I said. We're not making any heroic assumptions. We're working with the information that we have. If the rules change, we'll pivot and we'll modify our behavior and our approach to things. I actually think that this is achievable and we're going to get there. But your question is a good one. It's sort of like when you go home at night and you sort of say, do you 100% know exactly how your spouse or partner is going to respond when you show up at home, even though you clean the kitchen when you left in the morning, you sent the text messages and you communicated. The reality is you can only do your best. So that's what we're doing. and so far so good right so far so good yeah i i think the word investors are frustrated i'm you know just using your company as an example this happens across the board is you know investors don't know what the government in this case the spouse is going to react is there is there a guideline that investors can use like presidents that they can follow and say look company xyz has done this in the past therefore it'll probably take five years because that took them five years? Ask me the question and I will answer it. So from my perspective, I can tell you that there are certain elements of the work that we're doing that are very understandable. No risk, very understandable. We can communicate that. The part that's hard to understand is where the other person on the other side of the table sits. But that's why we project manage it. That's why we communicate it. But I'm here. The best way for shareholders to measure what we're doing is look at what we said. Did we hit the timeline? Did we achieve the work that we said we're going to do? And did we communicate clearly about any changes? So we've only been in existence since November 4th. And in my view, we've hit our major timeline. The first one was completion of the drill program. Not only did we complete 50,000 meters, we completed 52,288. Out of the 175 holes We drilled, we hit 87% on our objective. That's fantastic. We're basically on cost. Our next measurement point is the PEA, and it will be issued mid-year this year. And if it's not, I expect to get phone calls. Let's close off by talking about your relationship with the Stalker First Nations. This is a very interesting topic. I like us to educate the public on how a relationship like this works, because this affects not just your company, but also any other company with a similar arrangement. So I'm looking at your slide deck. This is dated January, 2026. There's probably an update at this point, Colin. Yeah. Correct me if I'm wrong. But the Selkirk First Nations as of January owns 22% of their total shares outstanding. Before we go into a little bit more detail as to how this relationship works, my first question is to what extent they have control over operations because they own 22% of the company? It's a really topical question, and it's going to come up again and again, including with our First Nation shareholders, etc. So the reality is we have a board of directors, we have a shareholder group, and we have governance that wraps around that. The Selkirk First Nation, because of their significant equity interest, have the right to nominate directors, and they have nominated those directors, and we happily accepted them. They are an influential part of how the board operates, I'm accountable to the board of directors. The board of directors is accountable to the shareholders largely. So there's a really strong relationship there. And these two nominees are very experienced people, both commercially and in First Nation relations between natural resource development and activities in the Yukon. They're mature, they're independent, and they're thoughtful. So the nature of the conversation is I have to defend what we're doing at the asset level and in our operating plans to that board. And then they will authorize or they will not authorize what we're doing. And their obligation is to report back to their shareholder being the Selkirk First Nation as to how that proceeds. That's one aspect of it. The second part is how do you actually operationalize this in the right way? So we have policies and procedures that are in the process of being updated and will continue to be updated where we seek direct input from the Selkirk First Nation on those policies, procedures. It could be around safety, could be around environment, workplace respect, workplace safety, all of those sorts of things. And we want to make sure that we're integrating, you know, First Nations cultures, experience, knowledge into that. That's a process that will continue to evolve, but that's what we do sort of day to day. And then the last element is, how do we work with the First Nation on the ground and First Nation citizens? So, it was really important for us to make sure that we had Selkirk First Nations part of the executive team. So we do have that. And they're not just placeholders. It's just a body in a chair. They have real responsibilities and accountabilities, and they have an equal voice around the management table. And their job is to express those views, and our job is to hear them. And then the last part is we have a framework agreement that's essentially, it's called a cooperation agreement. And that's an agreement that other people would call an impact benefits agreement that guides how we work with the First Nation day to day, whether it's contracting, employment, training or contributions to the local community. And again, that's something that we take very seriously and we work on every day. So what's I think for shareholders, what's important to note is imagine that there was a name there that wasn't the Selkirk First Nation and it was company X or person Y and they held a 20 percent equity stake. What how would I treat them and how would they treat me as part of the management team? They would want their voice heard. They would want to hear your view because they're paying us for our opinion. And at the same time, they want to know that they can influence the outcome and they can bring an ethos to the company that might outlast the CEO or the management team. So that's how this works. And it's no different than any other company. And whenever a developer or explorer is operating on or near First Nations land and property, you know, you probably at some point this company went through the same thing. You have to ask, well, what is the path going forward? What is the partnership that we want to see? You mentioned to me that you also have a 1.5% royalty offered to the First Nations, Selkirk First Nations. From my perspective, if I were an investor in Selkirk Copper, in this company, I would ask, what is the most cost efficient way to enter into a partnership? Why not just lease the land? Why also offer them equity as well as a royalty? What is a partnership that ultimately yields the highest shareholder return? For me, the shareholder, you know, is it necessary to offer equity in addition to royalty? You know, why not just buy parts of the land or lease the land and move on? Yeah, it's a great question. So let's go back to the starting point on this one. This asset went into bankruptcy. This nation, the Selkirk First Nation, acquired it with 100% of their funds. So it's not like we gave them equity in the company, they gave us the asset. So they vended their asset in, they owned it 100%. They vended it into the vehicle, because they realized they needed a few things. They needed a mechanism to raise capital that could advance the advance of the restart. They also needed a mechanism to attract a management team and the professionals, they know they're not a mining company. So they took a very rational set of decisions, but they had some high objectives too. We will vend this asset in, you will go raise a minimum amount of capital, you will put a professional team around it, and you will work with us on the go forward plans such that this restart can actually happen and hit the targets that they have for environment, sustainability, and profitability. So that's how they're approaching it. So they earned their right. They earned their equity right by their own hard dollars. The one and a half NSR is a historic right. It's a royalty that preexisted. It was already there. I think it's a really strong commercial aligning piece. I think it's great that we have a royalty that pays directly to the First Nation when this asset is in production. Not today. It's when it goes back into production. So that's a further incentive for them to assist de-risking the permitting or re-permitting of this asset. They know as much about permitting in the Yukon as I do. They've lived it, they've watched it, they've been frustrated by it, but they also are very constructive in their approach to it. I think the most significant thing for shareholders to understand is we can de-risk the re-permitting and restart of this asset because we have a First nation shareholder that cares and believes in it. Remember, the First Nation, some people would say, is the de facto permitting agent. The government has a process in place, but ultimately they have to consult with the First Nation and the First Nation has to agree. Our approach is there are no surprises here. The First Nation will know exactly what our plans are, what we're proposing for the re-permitting. They will already have agreed to it in principle. They will still have their right to have a voice. But at the end of the day, I think that's the real kicker here is that we just talked about permitting. When will the permit come? Can you give me an absolute certain date? I can't, but I can tell you with a First Nation relationship, I have a way better chance of getting there on time, on scope than without it. So shareholders should be overjoyed for this. So if I were to simplify this and let me know if I'm off track here, you've entered into a JV with a partner who knows the land, has operated there before, and can help you expedite permitting. That's right. And the only thing I would say different is it's a commercial operating partnership. It's not a joint venture. It's not a sensor stricto joint venture. I see. Okay, thank you very much. That was a very thorough update. What's the next milestone that investors need to watch for? So I would pay attention to two or three things as they come. The next is we're still about 63% way of releasing the assays from this first big program. That will continue over the next couple of months. Probably by the end of May, we'll have all of it out. So there'll be at least one, sorry, two, if not three more releases on the drill program. And then for us, the big marker here in the near term is the issuance of an updated mineral resource estimate and a preliminary economic assessment. They will be at the same time, basically in the same set of documents. That's for mid-year. that's going to be the first economic update on this potential redevelopment or restart that the market's seen. And it's the first economics with the removal of the gold and silver stream. So investors need to recognize, again, 65% of the value here is in copper, 35% in gold and silver. This will be the first time that we will show economics on this with 100% of the value of the rock attributable to the operator. So this is that PEA. I don't want to overstress it. It's an important step. But again, I would be looking to that. And then the stuff that goes beyond that, what's our plan to go into the feasibility? And will there be any other timeline updates? Right now, we're holding the line on all of our key milestones, completion of the feasibility study in 2027, mid 2027, and restart in mid 2028. And finally, I maybe we can touch on this in a bit more detail next time. But you came from tech resources, you were there for years and going from one of the world's largest extractors and producers and refiners of metals to an explorer, you've carried skill sets that are applicable from the large company to the small company. What are these skill sets? And ultimately, how is it different? I mean, we know it's different, but just how? No, no, it's a great question. So I had a phenomenal career with, I started with a company called Cominco Limited, which was part of the family or the group of companies of tech that ultimately was combined into tech resources that we know today. But what I think is really interesting, people ask me is, oh, you've come from a really big company mentality to now a small, nimble sort of junior. I think that the history of the tech group of companies is actually the reverse of a big company mentality. When I grew up in that organization, it was very entrepreneurial. It was very, very hands on, very familial. Lots of incentives to take risks. And I think that that's how I sort of was trained in the industry. Be technically competent. Make sure you ask the right questions. Expose yourself to new information and whatnot. And then but take decisions, right? Take owner focused sort of decisions. You know, don't worry about who brews the pot of coffee in the morning. Get up and do it and be helpful and help their employees be successful. but also, you know, take some ownership for the things that you do. So that part's super comfortable. I think I'm really enjoying this, that transition, because it's kind of going back to my roots. Being entrepreneurial, being an owner for the decisions that we take and helping the people around us make good decisions. I think on the big company side, one of the things I was really lucky about, I got the chance to lead Tech Resources' copper development portfolio for about seven years, the last sort of seven years of my career with the company. And I learned everything about the technical studies, the importance of working through the silos of information, thinking about the commercial strategies, and then also making sure that permitting was following a pace. All of those I get to apply here. And I get to apply them in a very straightforward sort of way with minimal numbers of committees and whatnot. We still do the technical work the best way we know how. We've got the top geoscientists working on this, in my view. We've got an amazing engineering team, and we're commercially nimble. So I think this is about the perfect mix right now, and I must say I'm enjoying it. I'm learning a lot. Student of the industry is sort of my calling, but yeah, it all applies, and it's all going quite well. Excellent. Well, we'll talk a little bit more about that in detail next time. Thank you very much. Don't forget to follow Selkirk Copper and Colin's work in the link down below website there. Thank you very much. I really appreciate your time. And I like the questions. Ask hard questions. Keep asking the hard questions because that's what this is about. Thank you. We'll work hard to get the word out there and educate our investors. Thank you again for watching. Don't forget to like, subscribe.