🚨 Why a “Safe” Mining Jurisdiction Isn’t Always the Best | Sprott Money
Sprott Money Aug 22, 2026
Summary
A 'safe' mining jurisdiction can still host projects that never get built, so the label alone does not protect an investor's capital.
Evaluate jurisdictions in three layers — central government, provincial government, and local community — because receptivity at each level decides whether a mine gets built.
The guest warns investors can overpay for a great-looking project in a safe jurisdiction, and the price is wasted if construction never starts.
Less conventional, higher-risk jurisdictions can hide bargains when governments and communities welcome a project able to generate metals and shareholder value.
Key points on Silvercorp Metals Inc
- Lon Shaver says the company goes into its mining jurisdictions 'eyes wide open', assessing the central government, provincial, and community levels before committing to a build.
- The host notes Silvercorp has worked in these jurisdictions for a while, which he says gives it an advantage over companies trying to enter them.
- As the host states, its shares trade in both Canada and the U.S. under the symbol SVM.
Lon Shaver's takeaways
- Top takeaway Argues a nominally 'safe' jurisdiction can be the worse bet: you can overpay for a great-looking project on paper that is never allowed to be built.
- Says a jurisdiction must be judged at three levels — central government, provincial, and community — especially whether communities are receptive to a mine's benefits and trade-offs.
- Suggests bargains may sit in riskier, off-the-beaten-path jurisdictions where governments and communities welcome a project, which he says can then generate metals and value for shareholders.