← Analysis page  ·  Charles Cryer hub  ·  Research hub

Actionable insights — The billion-tonne copper project nobody knows about

Not what Cryer is selling but how the copper and project screens work: read smelter treatment charges as a tightness gauge, sort supply shocks by how long they last, screen for independent tier-one deposits, and size a jurisdiction discount against its catalysts — reusable on any copper developer.
2026-SEP-15 · VRIC Media · Charles Cryer (CEO, Oroco) · ▶ Watch · full analysis · transcript
How to read this page: each insight is a method, a boxed line showing how it was applied here, and a "watch for" list for re-running it. Cryer is Oroco's CEO pitching his own company and the host is a shareholder — use the methods, discount the conclusions. Timestamps deep-link into the video.

1:17 1. Read TC/RCs as the physical-tightness gauge

The repeatable method
  1. Track copper concentrate treatment and refining charges (the fee smelters charge miners), not just the LME/COMEX price.
  2. Falling TC/RCs mean smelters are competing for scarce concentrate; negative TC/RCs mean smelters are paying miners — the market is physically short.
  3. Use a sustained low or negative reading to confirm that a price rally is supply-driven rather than speculative.
Here: TC/RCs moved from about +$90/t to −$150/t in some areas — "smelters are paying miners," which he reads as proof of how tight physical copper is (Copper).
Watch for

1:17 2. Sort supply shocks by duration

The repeatable method
  1. Split every supply story into short-term (a single mine outage, an input shortage), cyclical (years of under-investment, grade decline, ageing plants) and structural (a lasting demand shift).
  2. Fade the short-term layer when pricing; build the long-term view on the cyclical and structural layers, which take a decade to fix.
Here: short-term = Grasberg (FCX) and Hormuz cutting sulfur for SX-EW producers; cyclical = 20 years of low capex, falling grades, Chile's weak H1; structural = electrification plus AI power demand — "we haven't really got to the crunch yet" (4:10).
Watch for

7:33 3. The "cupboard is nearly bare" screen for M&A targets

The repeatable method
  1. List every global copper exploration and development project.
  2. Filter to those still in independent hands (not owned by a major) with significant scale — roughly a billion tonnes or more.
  3. Rank the survivors on buildability: depth, grade, strip ratio, infrastructure, capex (a ~US$1B project beats a US$3–4B one), jurisdiction.
  4. The top of that list is where majors must go to refill reserves — the likely takeout candidates.
Here: RFC Ambrian's 2018 screen put Santo Tomas (OCO.V) on its short list of independent billion-tonne projects; he says only "a couple of handfuls" remain, fewer still with a ~US$1B capex.
Watch for

24:35 4. Price a jurisdiction discount against a policy change

The repeatable method
  1. Compare market cap to the project's published NPV (adjusting for the commodity price used and cost inflation).
  2. Identify why the gap exists — often a legacy political narrative rather than current law.
  3. Look for concrete evidence the narrative is stale: new permits actually granted, a national-priority designation, expedited permitting.
  4. The re-rating trade is the gap between the legacy discount and the new reality, gated by study milestones.
Here: ~US$170M cap vs a US$1.48B NPV at $4 copper — "Mexico is the short answer." New open-pit permits this year and inclusion as the only mining project in Plan Mexico are his evidence the AMLO-era discount is outdated (15:20).
Watch for

Methods distilled from the public YouTube video (VRIC Media, 2026-09-15). Issuer interview — the guest is Oroco's CEO. Not investment advice.