READ TIME: 10 MINUTES | SPONSORED CONTENT
—
Revival Gold recently released its PEA for the Mercur gold project in Utah, which is a brownfield, heap-leach operation. The company believes can fast-track them to cash flow within two years. The PEA outlines a 95,600 oz/year gold production profile, with capital costs and permitting timelines significantly lower than typical U.S. projects. The conversation explores the permitting assumptions, metallurgical challenges (especially around carbonaceous material) planned drilling to convert inferred ounces, and the company’s broader strategy around financing, future feasibility work, and maintaining shareholder value in a highly undervalued market environment.
TL;DR
- Permitting Timeline: Revival Gold projects a two-year permitting window for Mercur, citing private land access and a simplified regulatory path via Utah’s state-led permitting process.
- Metallurgical Work Central to De-risking: The company is focused on validating recoveries and understanding the distribution of carbonaceous material, which remains a key variable in project economics.
- Initial Drilling Will Focus on Resource Conversion: The 2025 program emphasizes infill and metallurgical drilling over step-out exploration to support a future PFS.
- Further Capital Will Be Required: Revival anticipates raising additional funds this year to continue advancing Mercur, though the structure and source of financing are still under consideration.
- Strategic Focus is on Mercur: While Beartrack-Arnett remains part of the broader portfolio, current development efforts are primarily concentrated on advancing the Mercur project.
Who was the PEA prepared for, and what is Revival Gold trying to prove with it?
According to CEO Hugh Agro, the recently released Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) for the Mercur project was produced primarily for shareholders, not regulators or suitors. “The initial use of it for us… is to demonstrate that the project we acquired just on a year ago ticked the boxes that we set out for it to tick,” Agro said. Those objectives, as outlined by the company, include increasing projected heap-leach production capacity and shortening the time to potential cash flow generation.
The company says the Mercur project, together with Revival’s flagship Beartrack-Arnett project in Idaho, could support a pro forma production rate of 160,000 oz/year of gold from first-phase heap-leach operations. However, the emphasis has now shifted toward Mercur, driven in part by shorter permitting timelines in Utah.
Can Revival really permit a mine in two years in the United States?
Revival claims that it can complete baseline studies and permitting within two years—a timeline that would be unusually short by U.S. standards. The justification, according to VP Engineering John Meyer, lies in the site-specific attributes:
- – The project is on private land, avoiding many of the complications tied to federal mining jurisdiction.
- – There are no perennial streams on site and groundwater lies below pit depth—two factors that reduce federal oversight.
- – The Utah Department of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM), not a federal agency, leads permitting. The company describes DOGM as “efficient and cooperative.”
Agro also emphasized that Mercur is a brownfield site, historically mined by Getty and later Barrick, which he argues provides technical confidence and a supportive local context. However, these claims remain assertions; the actual permitting process has only just begun, and no concrete timeline has yet been published.
What community consultations are required, and have they started?
Agro stated that community engagement efforts are in early stages. The company has held initial meetings with state regulators, consultants (e.g., cultural and wildlife), and Tooele County officials. “I can tell you in a nutshell it’s jobs, jobs, jobs,” Agro said, referencing the county’s stated priorities.
There have been no formal open houses yet, but Agro pointed to the company’s experience in Idaho, where Revival holds annual community meetings, as a likely model for Utah.
Are there implications from being next to a U.S. Army weapons facility?
The Mercur project’s nearest neighbor is a U.S. Army weapons destruction site. Revival does not currently anticipate security-related complications. “There’s a public highway between us… no issues with the public using that highway or the areas around it,” Agro stated. The company does not expect restrictions on personnel or equipment movement, though it acknowledged more work may be needed as the project progresses.
What drilling is planned in 2025, and when will it begin?
Drilling is expected to begin within one to two months, depending on snow clearance. Revival is currently finalizing drill targets, contracts, and logistics. The drilling program is expected to unfold in two phases.
Phase One will focus on:
- – Conversion of Inferred resources (~600,000 oz) to Indicated.
- – RC drilling for geologic and cyanide assay data.
- – Core drilling for metallurgical column test samples and geotechnical data.
Phase Two, later in the year, may include tighter infill drilling and step-outs. The company is prioritizing what Agro called “boring stuff” (conversion and metallurgy) over more speculative exploration.
Which targets will be drilled beyond infill?
The highest-ranked target for step-out drilling is the “Mercury Anomaly” in the South Mercur area, a structural corridor extending nearly 1 km beyond the existing resource, with no prior drilling. Agro described it as having strong structural preparation, good host lithology, and being shallow.
Other areas like Prey Ridge and West Dip may be revisited, but only after initial priorities are addressed. Details are expected to be finalized and disclosed within two months.
How much of the current PEA could be converted into a PFS?
Agro avoided giving a firm estimate but argued that the deposit is well drilled (over 260 km of drilling to date) and that the main limitation is not geological continuity but lack of metallurgical data. “It’s less of a burden than if we were talking about a deposit that hadn’t been extensively drilled and modeled,” he said.
The company’s approach, according to Agro, is to advance toward free cash flow rather than over-drilling for maximal resource definition up front.
What’s the internal target for the PFS?
When asked if the company hopes for a 1 Moz, 100,000 oz/year operation over 10 years in the PFS, Agro didn’t confirm explicitly but stated the company wants to maintain the scale and economics outlined in the PEA. He said the project has attracted outside attention due to its combination of “scale in the Western United States,” low jurisdictional risk, and a simplified flow sheet.
He also acknowledged that much of the company’s current focus is on marketing the PEA and sharing the data room with institutional and strategic players.
What specific metallurgical work is planned for 2025?
Metallurgical testing will expand upon 2024 work, especially around carbonaceous material. According to Meyer, Revival previously used AI and manual logging to map carbon content across historical drill logs and created a 3D model to inform mining schedules. Carbonaceous material will be stockpiled during the first eight years of mining and processed later to avoid fouling the heap.
Cyanide assays and column leach testing will continue throughout 2025 to improve spatial understanding of leachability.
Other studies include:
- – Pre-robbing and detox tests
- – Potential adjustments to crush size
- – Additional lithology-based column tests
The average heap-leach recovery assumed in the PEA is 75%. Column leach tests reportedly showed over 80% recovery in multiple lithologies, with rapid kinetics and over 90% of leaching completed in five days.
Meyer emphasized that the biggest uncertainty for the project is metallurgy: “That will be our focus… and that’s why we’ve got to get through the work.”
Are there comparable deposits in the U.S. or elsewhere?
Revival characterizes Mercur as a Carlin-style sediment-hosted gold system. According to Meyer, Mercur is unique in its deep pervasive oxidation. “Generally speaking, most deposits… get into sulfides at depth. That is just not the case here,” he said.
The geological model includes oxidized halo mineralization not mined by previous operators. The company believes there is exploration potential at depth, similar to Fourmile or Cortez in Nevada, but no such zones have been defined yet.
Agro claims the project’s grade is “twice that of some peers” and that its all-in sustaining cost (AISC) of $1,360/oz compares favorably to similar U.S. heap-leach projects, which he pegs at ~$1,550/oz.
Will Hugh Agro stay on as CEO if Revival goes into production?
Agro says yes. “I’m a mining engineer by training, 35 years in the business… I want to build the next go-to name in North America for gold,” he said. He positions the current phase (from ~$200M to ~$2B market cap) as the “sweet spot” for gold companies, and one where he intends to remain in charge.
Are geotechnical studies underway in 2025?
Yes, geotechnical assessments are happening concurrently with drilling. Meyer, a geotechnical engineer himself, said the company will collect undisturbed core samples around pit walls and analyze high walls from historic mining.
That said, geotechnical outcomes are not expected to be highly material due to shallow pit depths (max ~150 m). “Would we dramatically see a big delta in resource? Probably not,” Meyer said.
Why use a 5% discount rate in the PEA, and how realistic is it?
Agro acknowledged that 5% is not representative of Revival’s actual cost of capital. “The reason why we do 5% NAVs in the industry isn’t because the cost of capital is 5%. It’s because it allows us to compare one NAV to another,” he said.
Revival is projecting $300M in annual revenue and $150M in annual margin at current gold prices. According to Agro, the project’s modest initial capital requirement ($28M pre-production, $350M LOM) and U.S. jurisdiction have attracted banks, royalty companies, and private equity groups.
What’s the ideal financing strategy?
Agro declined to outline a preferred structure but was critical of early-stage royalties and streams. “We trip up in this industry by giving value away too soon,” he said. Instead, he hinted at continuing to pursue strategic investments, like a recent deal with Dundee Corporation.
The company trades at ~0.1x NAV and ~$8/oz in the ground, according to Agro. He cited a “disconnect” in small-cap valuations and argued that investors will eventually return to fundamentals and free cash flow.
How much more money is needed before FID?
Revival spends ~$10M/year on development and expects to continue at that pace. Agro said this figure could fluctuate depending on capital market conditions and share price but described it as a reasonable run rate through PFS and into construction readiness.
The company has 4–6 months of cash on hand as of early 2025 and will need to raise additional capital this year to maintain momentum.
When will the PFS be published?
The company has not committed to a date. Agro said a more specific roadmap would be released in “a couple months,” but broadly expects to be shovel-ready within 2.5 years.
Is Beartrack-Arnett taking a backseat?
Yes and no. Revival says it has not abandoned Beartrack-Arnett but acknowledges that Mercur is now the priority. “If I’ve got to spend a dollar on one thing or the other, my choice is going to be to move towards sustainability with free cash flow, and Mercur’s tops on the list,” Agro said.
Over the past year, Revival has advanced permitting, geophysical, and geochemical work at Beartrack but has not committed to near-term drilling.
What’s Revival doing about investor marketing in 2025?
Revival has engaged a marketing firm under a $100,000 contract to increase digital exposure. Agro cited the need to reach passive investors and liquidity-driven buyers who operate differently than traditional mining funds. “We’ve got a great story… if we’re not going to tell it now at $3,100 gold, I don’t know when we’re going to tell it,” he said.
What keeps management up at night?
Meyer: metallurgy. “It’s the biggest focus for us this year. We’ve got to firm that up,” he said, citing legacy data gaps and the need to validate recovery estimates with new test work.
Agro: hostile takeover risk. “We’ve got to be always thinking about the possibility that we get shortchanged with a bid… before we’re ready to maximize the value for our shareholders,” he said.
Revival Gold CEO Interview
IMPORTANT WARNING
Please note that Revival Gold has paid for the creation of this content. This website is a business that charges for the creation and publication of content. This means there will always be a potential conflict of interest which means you can never rely on anything said herein.
By consuming this content, you acknowledge that Resource Talks and/or its affiliates and/or their personnel may own, have owned, or will own interests in and/or may have a business relationship with some or all companies/entities mentioned/featured in this publication. You further acknowledge that entities which may be referenced or featured in this publication or their related parties may hold an interest in Resource Talks or its affiliates, which may create further conflict of interest.
The information provided herein is general & impersonal in nature and meant for entertainment purposes only. The reader acknowledges and agrees that the information does not constitute a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any security or instrument or to participate in any trading strategy. The author is not a licensed investment advisor. He is just another talking head on the internet. He might own shares of companies mentioned in this publication. Always assume he doesn’t know much more than a potato does. The mining & exploration space is among the riskiest sectors to invest in. The risk of anything mentioned in this publication is 100% loss of capital. If you don’t read the official documents provided by the company on http://www.SedarPlus.ca, you will lose all of your money.
