if gold prices rise to $4,000/oz

🪙 Revival Gold – Updated Snapshot (Late 2025) Latest official info

• Shares outstanding (basic): ~272.4 million as of Sept 25, 2025. (Revival Gold -)
• Fully diluted shares: ~317.7 million as of Oct 15, 2025. (Revival Gold -)
• AISC / cost indicator: For the Beartrack‑Arnett Project PFS earlier, an AISC proxy of ~US$1,235/oz was cited. (Crux Investor)
• Key projects: Beartrack‐Arnett (Idaho) – ~4 M oz + growing resource. (Revival Gold -) Mercur (Utah) – ~1.6 M oz resource at 0.6 gpt, drill/PEA advancement. (MINING.COM)

⚠️ Risks

• Development timeline risk: These are still developers rather than producing mines; moving from resource → permit → build → production takes time.
• Cost inflation / AISC risk: While earlier AISC proxies are ~US$1,235/oz, actual full-scale operations may run higher due to inflation, scale, logistics.
• Share dilution: To finance development the company may issue new shares, which dilutes per-share value.
• Commodity price dependency: Upside scenarios assume very high gold prices (US$4,500-5,000/oz); if gold remains lower, FCF and valuation compress.
• Permitting / execution / resource expansion risk: Success depends on drilling, engineering, permitting going smoothly; any hiccup delays value realization.

⚡ Catalysts

• Beartrack‐Arnett PFS / engineering update advancing to mine-build stage (heap-leach starter pit).
• Mercur project PEA / resource upgrade, potential near-term mine permit / heap-leach restart.
• Financing and development decision for one or both projects (i.e., project financing secured, partner involvement, capex committed).
• Sustained gold price appreciation (moving toward US$4,000-5,000/oz) which would re-rate the company due to high leverage.
• Exploration success (resource growth beyond the stated ~4 M oz + ~1.6 M oz) which extends mine life or increases yearly output.

🗺️ Risks & Catalysts Mapped to Timeline 2025–2026

🚧 Risks: Drill/PEA delays at Mercur; Beartrack permitting/heap-leach start delays; cost escalation; share dilution. ⚡ Catalysts: PEA release at Mercur; heap-leach starter pit permit/POE at Beartrack; securing financing for build-out.

2027–2028 🚧 Risks: Construction overruns; ramp-up issues; initial AISC higher than projected; gold price weakness. ⚡ Catalysts: First production from Beartrack-Arnett starter; initial ounces produced; cost discipline demonstrated.

2029+ 🚧 Risks: Scaling up to 250,000 oz/year (your target) may hit limits; sustaining capex, resource replacement risk, long-term gold price risk. ⚡ Catalysts: Combined production from both projects hits target; steady FCF generation; company re-rated as mid-tier producer.

📊 Re-Valued FCF Scenarios Assumptions for modeling:

• Production target: 250,000 oz/year
• AISC assumption: Use ~US$1,235/oz (proxy from Beartrack)
• Shares outstanding: use basic ~272.4 M for per-share math (and note FD ~317.7 M)
• Price decks: Gold = US$4,500 & US$5,000; also include silver = US$100 & US$150 (though Revival is gold-focused; silver overlay optional)
• Multiples: ×10, ×15, ×20

Scenario A: Gold = US$4,500/oz

• Margin per oz = 4,500 − 1,235 = US$3,265/oz
• Annual FCF = 250,000 × 3,265 = US$816.3 million
• Valuations:   • 10× → US$8.163 B → ~US$30.0/share (8.163B ÷ 272.4M)   • 15× → US$12.245 B → ~US$45.0/share   • 20× → US$16.326 B → ~US$60.0/share

Scenario B: Gold = US$5,000/oz

• Margin per oz = 5,000 − 1,235 = US$3,765/oz
• Annual FCF = 250,000 × 3,765 = US$941.3 million
• Valuations:   • 10× → US$9.413 B → ~US$34.6/share   • 15× → US$14.120 B → ~US$51.9/share   • 20× → US$18.827 B → ~US$69.2/share

🎯 Conclusion

• With ~272 million shares outstanding (basic) and using a conservative AISC proxy of ~US$1,235/oz, the upside under your 250k oz/year target at gold US$4,500-5,000/oz shows potential values in the US$30-70/share range (basic).
• These are high-end bull scenarios: they assume successful execution of both Beartrack-Arnett + Mercur to hit 250k oz/year, plus gold reaching US$4,500-5,000/oz.
• If any of those assumptions fail (lower gold price, higher costs, slower ramp, share dilution) the outcomes compress significantly.
• From a risk/reward perspective, Revival Gold appears well-positioned among US gold-developers (strong projects, insiders aligned) but still carries typical development risk.