Skip to main content
Case Study

Project Blackfern — Mining Net Asset Value

A 2-hour Natural Resources / Mining Valuation case study with a complete model answer

120
Minute Format
2
Deliverables
6
Concepts Tested
Advanced
Difficulty

The Situation

Blackfern Metals Corporation (NYSE: BFM) is a mid-capitalization copper producer headquartered in Denver, with two operating mines and one development project that have almost nothing in common. Corravale is an open-pit copper and molybdenum mine in Arizona: the largest asset in the portfolio and the shortest-lived, with nine years of reserve left.

Blackfern Metals Corporation

Sector
Natural resources — copper mining, across an open-pit copper and molybdenum mine, an underground copper, gold and silver mine, and an unbuilt copper development project
Size
Geography
United States (Arizona), Peru and Zambia — three jurisdictions, and in this sector three different discount rates
Ownership
Situation

The Prompt

50 per share in cash. Build the net asset value.

120 minutesEnergy, Power & Natural ResourcesModeling

Supporting Materials

What you are handed at the start of the case, in the format a real process would use.

Requires Diamond Tier
Unlock
  • Blank modeling template

    XLSXUnlock
  • Metals and mining research and transactions database extract

    XLSXUnlock

What You Have to Produce

The deliverables, in the order the committee will read them. The exercise runs 120 minutes.

Requires Diamond Tier
Unlock
  1. PART 1

    The technical report, totaled and read properly

  2. PART 2

    From an ore grade to a dollar

  3. PART 3

    Three mines, three schedules, three real discount rates

  4. PART 4

    C1 cash cost and all-in sustaining cost

  5. PART 5

    The development project

  6. PART 6

    Resources exclusive of reserves

  7. PART 7

    The corporate bridge

  8. PART 8

    The market cross-checks

  9. PART 9

    Adequacy, the counter and the reservation price

How to Approach It

The order a strong candidate works in, and why. This is the shape of the answer — the finished answer deck and Excel model are in the solution set below.

Requires Diamond Tier
Unlock
  1. 01

    Decide what kind of asset this is before you value it

  2. 02

    Fix the real-versus-nominal convention before the first cell

  3. 03

    Let the jurisdiction set the discount rate, and say so

  4. 04

    Keep the royalty inside the mine and the stream outside it

  5. 05

    Risk once, and say the factor

  6. 06

    Read the multiple the sector actually trades on

  7. 07

    Print the arguments that go against you

Key Concepts

The ideas this case is built on. Know these cold and the case becomes a question of execution rather than knowledge.

Net asset value for a mining company

The sector's primary valuation method, and it is a discounted cash flow struck asset by asset rather than on the corporation. Each asset is scheduled to the end of its reserve life off a third-party technical report, taxed at its own jurisdiction's rate and discounted at its own real rate, then the asset values are summed and the corporate items bridged: capitalized overhead, any streaming or royalty obligation, and net debt. There is no terminal value anywhere in it, because orebodies deplete and the forecast ends when they do. A second discounted cash flow struck on consolidated EBITDA would be the same cash counted twice, on a coarser basis than the technical report already provides, and at one discount rate that fits none of the jurisdictions.

Price to net asset value, and why it varies by jurisdiction

Producers trade at a fraction of their own net asset value, and that fraction is the sector's own multiple in the way an earnings multiple is a generalist's. It moves with jurisdiction: assets in Australia, Canada and the United States command a higher multiple than assets in Chile, Mexico and Peru, which in turn command more than assets in frontier jurisdictions. The spread compensates for permitting risk, fiscal-regime risk and expropriation risk that a discount rate alone does not capture. Two things follow. A trading multiple and a control multiple are different statistics — the function of a control premium is to close the discount at which shares trade — and a company whose assets straddle tiers should be read against a blend rather than against a single median.

C1 cash cost and all-in sustaining cost

Two unit costs that tell different stories about the same mine. C1 is the cash cost of producing a payable pound, net of by-product credits, and it makes a mine with meaningful gold, silver or molybdenum output look very cheap because the credits are subtracted from the cost rather than added to the revenue. All-in sustaining cost adds the capital a mine has to spend simply to keep producing, which is far heavier underground than in an open pit. A company ranked on C1 alone has been ranked on how much of its revenue happens not to be its primary metal; a company ranked on all-in sustaining cost alone has lost the information about by-product exposure. Both belong on the page, and neither includes corporate overhead, which is capitalized once in the bridge.

By-product credits and payability

Contained metal is a geological fact and payable metal is what gets paid for, and three separate haircuts sit between them. Metallurgical recovery is the share of contained metal that reports to concentrate. Payability is the share of the metal in that concentrate that a smelter actually pays for, and it is typically in the mid-nineties for copper and lower for precious by-products. Treatment and refining charges are the smelter's fee, struck per dry tonne of concentrate and per payable unit respectively — which means they do not move with the metal price and therefore behave nothing like a percentage royalty. A model that applies a price to contained metal overstates revenue by roughly a fifth, and every subtotal beneath it still foots.

Reserves versus resources, and what conversion risk is

A mineral reserve is the part of a resource that a study has shown can be mined economically: it sits in a mine plan with tonnes, grades and capital attached. A resource is material that has been drilled to a level of confidence — measured, indicated or inferred — without that demonstration. Valuing a resource as though it were a reserve credits it with a mine plan nobody has written and capital nobody has committed. The two honest treatments are to convert it at a stated factor and mark it against the host mine's own value per pound, or to mark the contained pounds at what the market has paid for comparable ground. Both are legitimate; applying both to the same pounds is not, because a market price for in-ground metal already embeds the conversion risk a conversion factor exists to capture.

Streaming and royalty obligations

A net smelter return royalty is a cost of the orebody. It reduces the cash a mine produces, it is inside C1 and inside all-in sustaining cost, and it belongs in the asset's own schedule. A metal stream is a financing: a company sold future production for cash it has already spent, and what remains is a delivery obligation that runs with the mine and survives a change of control. The convention is to model the asset gross of the stream and deduct the present value of the obligation once, in the corporate bridge, after tax — an obligation deducted before tax against an after-tax asset value is overstated by the tax rate. A buyer inherits the stream, so a seller cannot be paid for ounces it has already sold.

Mine life and reserve replacement

Reserve life is reserves divided by the current production rate, and it is the statistic an earnings multiple is silent about. A producer with eight years of reserve and a producer with twenty-two generate the same EBITDA per pound and are not worth the same multiple of it, which is why a short-lived producer can be the cheapest company in its peer group on EV/EBITDA and not be cheap. Reserve replacement — pounds added by drilling against pounds depleted by mining — is the forward-looking version of the same fact. A company that replaces less than one times its depletion is shortening its own life every year it operates, and that is frequently the reason a company ends up in play.

The commodity price deck

The single largest judgment in a mining valuation, and the reason no net asset value should ever be quoted without one. Spot held flat, published consensus, and a long-run incentive price — the price at which new supply gets built — are three different forecasts, not three degrees of conservatism, and they can put a bid above net asset value on one and materially below it on another. The deck typically moves the answer further than the discount rate does, which is worth demonstrating rather than asserting: run the value across decks and rates together and let the grid show which axis the argument actually sits on.

What Makes It Hard

The specific traps in this case — the places candidates lose the assessment without noticing.

Requires Diamond Tier
Unlock

Check Your Answer

Type the figures you produced and find out how many are right before you open the worked answer. You get a verdict and, where you are off, a pointer to the part of the build to re-check — never the number itself. Everything you type stays on this device.

How to type a figure. Digits, with an optional unit: 1,234.5, $1,234.5, 2.6x, 21.4%. For a negative use (20.0) or -20.0. Enter as many decimals as you carried — precision is never penalised.

Your Figures

  • percent — type 20.0 for 20% · graded within ±1%

  • $ per share · graded within ±1%

  • $ in millions · graded within ±2%

  • $ in millions · graded within ±2%

  • a multiple — type 2.6 for 2.6x · graded within ±0.5%

  • percent — type 20.0 for 20% · graded within ±1%

  • a plain count · graded within ±0.5%

  • $ per share · graded within ±1%

  • $ per share · graded within ±1%

  • $ in millions · graded within ±2%

  • percent — type 20.0 for 20% · graded within ±1%

What the Case Asked For

The arithmetic is only half of it. Tick off what you actually produced — this half is yours to score, because nothing can grade a written recommendation from a checkbox.

The Model Answer

The worked answer in full: answer deck and Excel model, built the way a banker would actually build them. It is a reference, not a submission — a strong answer under the clock is far shorter.

What the Solution Covers

  • NAV off a technical report
  • Reserve and resource categories
  • C1 cash cost and all-in sustaining cost
  • By-product credits and payability
  • Price-to-NAV multiple by jurisdiction
  • Mine life and reserve replacement

Answer Deck

Full model answer, banker-formatted

Upgrade to Diamond

Sign up and upgrade to Diamond to unlock the answer deck, the Excel model and the audio walkthrough.

Get Started

The Excel Model

The model is linked and tied out end to end — every schedule, every formula and every check, in the file itself.

Downloads are available to Diamond members

Excel Model and PowerPoint Deck and Answer Deck (PDF) — yours to open, edit and rebuild

Upgrade

Walkthrough

A conversational walkthrough of how to approach the case under time pressure — where to start, what to cut, and how the recommendation gets defended.

Audio Walkthrough

60s Free Preview
Requires Diamond Tier

How to approach Project Blackfern — Mining Net Asset Value

60-second preview — upgrade to Diamond for the full walkthrough

Unlock

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a mining net asset value case study in an investment banking interview?

It is a sector case in which the subject is valued asset by asset off a third-party technical report rather than off an earnings multiple. You schedule each orebody to the end of its reserve life — tonnes, grade, recovery, payability, strip ratio, sustaining capital and closure — discount each one at a real rate set by the jurisdiction it sits in, sum them, then bridge to equity by deducting capitalized corporate overhead, any streaming or royalty obligation and net debt. The answer is a net asset value per share, and the market's price to net asset value is quoted against it. It appears in metals and mining and natural resources groups, and it tests something the generalist cases do not: whether you can value a wasting asset without importing a terminal value.

How should you allocate 120 minutes across this case?

A working budget that sums to 120: about 20 minutes reading the prompt, the technical report summary and the raw extract and deciding which transactions belong in each of the four precedent sets before you type anything; about 75 minutes at the keyboard, split roughly 12 on the worked mine's unit costs and its three-deck block, 26 on the other two assets and the stream, 12 on the precedent screens and the resource marks, 15 on the bridge and the sensitivity, and the balance on the market cross-check and the recommendation pages; and about 25 minutes on the deck, which is the second deliverable. The template measures 1,028 cells to fill, which collapse to 150 distinct formulas once the fill-right repetitions are counted properly — most of the workbook is one formula copied across a thirteen-year horizon, three price decks or twelve sensitivity columns. That arithmetic only works because two of the twelve tabs are handed over complete and the first mine arrives worked as the pattern the other two are built to.

Why is there no terminal value in a mining net asset value?

Because the asset runs out. A technical report schedules production until the declared reserve is mined, and the cash flow ends on the same date for the same reason — the last line in a mine model is a closure cost, not a sale. A terminal value assumes the business keeps generating cash into perpetuity, which for a depleting orebody means assuming reserves nobody has declared and, usually, that nobody has found. If a company can extend its life through drilling or acquisition, that shows up as resources valued explicitly, with a conversion factor attached, or as a development project risked for its permit — not as a growth rate in a perpetuity formula. Putting a terminal value on a mine plan is the clearest single signal that the archetype has not been understood.

What is the difference between C1 cash cost and all-in sustaining cost?

C1 is the cash cost of producing a payable pound — mining, processing, site overhead, treatment and refining charges and royalties — stated net of by-product credits. All-in sustaining cost adds the capital a mine must spend to keep producing at the same rate. The gap between them is large and it is not the same size at every mine: an underground operation spends far more per pound on sustaining development than an open pit does, so a mine can have the lowest C1 in a portfolio and not be the lowest-cost mine on an all-in basis. C1 also flatters an asset with meaningful by-products, because the credit is subtracted from cost rather than added to revenue. Quote both, and keep corporate overhead out of both — it is capitalized once in the net asset value bridge, and charging it in a unit cost as well is the same dollars twice.

How do you value mineral resources that are not reserves?

By choosing one of two treatments per category and never both. Measured and indicated material inside an operating mine's footprint shares that mine's metallurgy and would be processed through a plant that already exists, so it can be converted to a reserve-equivalent at a stated factor and marked at a stated fraction of the host mine's own net asset value per payable pound . The fraction is lower because converted tonnes sit at the back of a mine plan and carry capital nobody has committed. Inferred material has no schedule and no metallurgy behind it, so it is marked directly at what the market has paid per contained pound for comparable ground. The discipline is that a market price for in-ground metal already embeds conversion risk, so applying a conversion factor on top of it risks the same pounds twice.

How should a streaming agreement be handled in a mining net asset value?

As a financing, deducted once, after tax, in the corporate bridge — not as a cost inside the mine. The company received cash years ago and spent it; what survives is an obligation to deliver metal at a fraction of its spot price, and that obligation runs with the mine and survives a change of control. So the asset is modeled gross of the stream, with every by-product credit the orebody produces, and the present value of the metal forgone net of the ongoing payment is deducted alongside net debt. Two errors are common. Running the stream through the mine's cash flow and also deducting it in the bridge charges the same dollars twice. Deducting it before tax against a net asset value that is already struck after tax overstates it by the tax rate. A royalty is the opposite case: it is a cost of the orebody and it belongs inside the mine.

Why do copper producers trade below their net asset value?

Because the market is pricing things the net asset value does not: permitting and fiscal risk in the jurisdictions the assets sit in, the odds that a declared reserve is actually mined as scheduled, the cost of the equity issuance a growth project will eventually require, and — most of all — how many years of production stand behind the number. The discount is systematic rather than idiosyncratic, which is why it is worth reading by jurisdiction tier: assets in Australia, Canada and the United States trade at a higher fraction of net asset value than assets in Latin America, which trade higher than assets in frontier jurisdictions. It also has a direct consequence for an adequacy analysis, because a control transaction and a trading share are different things. The function of a control premium is to close that discount, so a bid that lands at roughly one times net asset value can look like an extraordinary premium to a share price and be an ordinary price for the assets.

Why are precedent transactions split into four sets in this case?

Because a whole company, a producing mine, a drilled resource package and a block of exploration ground are four different purchases and the price per unit of each says something different. A whole company carries control and a corporate structure, and the statistic it yields is a multiple of net asset value. A producing mine carries a pit and a mill that exist, and it prices per pound of reserve. A measured and indicated resource package prices per contained pound for material somebody has drilled but nobody has scheduled. Exploration ground prices for a hypothesis, at a small fraction of the resource price — and that ratio is the market's own statement about what a resource category is worth. Blending them into one median produces a number that describes none of the four, and using a resource median to mark reserves, or the reverse, misprices whichever it was not struck for.

About This Natural Resources / Mining Valuation Case Study

Natural Resources / Mining Valuation case study for investment banking interviews. 120-minute format covering nav off a technical report, reserve and resource categories, c1 cash cost and all-in sustaining cost. Includes the full prompt, a model answer deck, a tied-out Excel model and an audio walkthrough.

This case study sits in Investment Banking, under Energy, Power & Natural Resources. Every case ships with the full prompt, the supporting materials, a complete model answer and an audio walkthrough of the judgment behind the recommendation.

120-Minute Format

The time limit a real assessment would give you

Answer Deck

Included in the model answer

Excel Model

Included in the model answer

Audio Walkthrough

How to approach the case under time pressure

200K+ students have used IB Vine to help land offers at top firms.

Moelis & Co.

umich.edu
Diamond Tier

I loved IB Vine. I’m going into Private Capital Advisory (PCA); you have the lessons on there for PCA and that was actually a game changer. I went into those interviews and knew about the core PCA concepts like net asset value, primary fundraising vs. secondary advisory, etc. I swear I was on IB Vine like a few hours a day. The opportunity to have that learning section and go through the questions people submit and everything — there’s no better tool out there. I loved the guides/lessons. The user interface is amazing. The way you’ve simplified it is so spectacular — it’s just so much easier to digest. It’s fun to use too; I’d rather use IB Vine than scroll through a guide. To be honest, I think the product is perfect. I genuinely owe you a big thanks.

Moelis & Co.

smu.edu
Diamond Tier

IB Vine is a tool we really love to use in the club I’m a part of, and there’s really no other resource like it. You guys do a phenomenal job with the question bank. I recruited specifically for Energy banking, and IB Vine was my most used resource for generalist questions (which were about 50% of my interview questions; the rest being Energy-specific); the majority of such questions I saw in interviews were at least similar (if not the same) to the ones on IB Vine.

Perella Weinberg

umich.edu
Diamond Tier

Once I read through the BIWS learning guides, I really didn’t refer to them again. I didn’t even really run through the 400 question guide once I found IB Vine, which I heard about through one of my classmates. We even get a free subscription (like most business schools) to Wall Street Prep, and if I’m being completely honest, I never even logged in to WSP. IB Vine is pretty much the only tool I used (along with our club question bank & mock interviews with peers) and it was invaluable for recruiting.

Cantor Fitzgerald

babson.edu
Diamond Tier

What a platform, made such a huge difference. I did superdays at Evercore, PJT, M. Klein and Barclays among others from a non-target school and did not miss a single technical in any interview process through prepping with IB Vine.

Barclays

ufl.edu
Pro Tier

Very accurate questions and all of the solutions are easy to follow. At least 10 of the questions I studied through this platform appeared in my Round 1 or Superday interviews.

TD Securities

umich.edu
Diamond Tier

THANK YOU SO MUCH IB VINE, I COULD NOT HAVE DONE THIS WITHOUT YOU, SERIOUSLY!!! IB Vine was the best website ever. I spent at least two hours on this daily (seriously) from October through I get my offer in February.

Citadel

uchicago.edu
Pro Tier

I’m doing public equities this summer and next. I know the name is “IB Vine” but at the undergrad level a lot of the technicals across public equities are the same as investment banking. I recommend your software to all my friends!

Piper Sandler

cmc.edu
Pro Tier

I loved this site! 1000% this is the best resource I used in the process.

Lazard

amherst.edu
Diamond Tier

This was the greatest tool ever. I genuinely enjoyed running through the technicals/behaviorals and it was very helpful!

Houlihan Lokey

wustl.edu
Diamond Tier

IB Vine was the most helpful resource I had during recruiting. I will continue to promote it to other students at WashU and elsewhere.

Jefferies

georgetown.edu
Diamond Tier

Awesome product, helped me crush my technicals in my interviews and land a great role. Thank you, seriously was a huge help.

Morgan Stanley

wharton.upenn.edu
Diamond Tier

Very helpful to get real-life questions unlike the 400 guide, especially for merger math. Built deeper understanding of key concepts.

Houlihan Lokey

princeton.edu
Diamond Tier

Extremely helpful study tool that carried me through the recruitment process from start to end.

Evercore

uchicago.edu
Diamond Tier

You guys are doing great work over there with IB Vine. Absolute staple for interview prep.

Rothschild

colorado.edu
Diamond Tier

IB Vine was incredibly helpful and I am forever thankful for all the help.

RBC

oberlin.edu
Diamond Tier

IB Mock was amazing - I used it for multiple hours. Also the flashcards and the lessons features on IB Vine were fantastic. Thank you!

Dragoneer

queensu.ca
Diamond Tier

IB Vine is such a great platform, really impressive. There is so much value in this. The audio podcasts / mock interview library are pretty incredible.

Case Study Preparation

Explore All Case Studies

100+ case studies, each with the full prompt, supporting materials and an audio walkthrough; most also ship a model answer deck and a tied-out Excel model.

Every case has a public page like this one. The member library is the signed-in index members work through.