2. DISCLAIMER
Forward Looking Information
This Presentation contains ‘‘forward-looking information’’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-
looking information may include, but is not limited to, information with respect to the anticipated production and developments in our operations in future periods, our planned exploration and
development activities, the adequacy of our financial resources, the estimation of mineral resources, realization of mineral resource estimates, costs and timing of development of the projects we currently
intend to acquire (the “Projects”), costs and timing of future exploration, results of future exploration and drilling, timing and receipt of approvals, consents and permits under applicable legislation, our
executive compensation approach and practice, the composition of our board of directors and committees, and adequacy of financial resources. Wherever possible, words such as ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘expects’’ or
‘‘does not expect’’, ‘‘budget’’, ‘‘scheduled’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘forecasts’’, ‘‘anticipate’’ or ‘‘does not anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘intend’’ and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results
‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, have been used to identify forward-looking information. Statements concerning mineral resource estimates may also be
deemed to constitute forward-looking information to the extent that they involve estimates of the mineralization that will be encountered if the property is developed. Any statements that express or
involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, using words or phrases such as
‘‘expects’’, ‘‘anticipates’’, ‘‘plans’’, ‘‘projects’’, ‘‘estimates’’, ‘‘assumes’’, ‘‘intends’’, ‘‘strategy’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘potential’’ or variations thereof, or stating that certain actions, events or results
‘‘may’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘would’’, ‘‘might’’ or ‘‘will’’ be taken, occur or be achieved, or the negative of any of these terms and similar expressions) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking
information. Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ from those expressed or
implied by the forward-looking information. Many of these risks are listed and described in our final short-form prospectus dated April 4, 2011 (the “Prospectus”), which is available for review on SEDAR
at www.sedar.com under our profile. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information,
there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events
could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Forward-looking information involves statements about the future and is inherently uncertain, and our actual achievements or other
future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, those
referred to in the Prospectus under the heading ‘‘Risk Factors’’. Our forward-looking information is based on the beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date the statements are made,
and we do not assume any obligation to update forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable law. For the reasons
set forth above, prospective investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information.
National Instrument 43-101
Technical and scientific information contained herein relating to the Projects is derived from National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) compliant technical reports “Technical Report and Updated Resource
Estimate on the Snowfield Property” and “Technical Report and Updated Resource Estimate on the Brucejack Property” dated February 18, 2011, a preliminary economic assessment entitled ‘‘Technical
Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Snowfield Brucejack Project’’ dated October 28, 2010 (the “Preliminary Assessment”) and a preliminary economic assessment dated June 3, 2011 on the
Brucejack Project. We have filed the Technical Reports and Preliminary Assessment under our profile at www.sedar.com. Technical and scientific information not contained within the Preliminary
Assessment and Technical Reports for the Projects have been prepared under the supervision of Mr. Kenneth C. McNaughton, an independent “qualified person” under NI 43-101.
This presentation uses the terms “measured resources”, “indicated resources” (together “M&I”) and “inferred resources”. Although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations
(under NI 43-101), the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The
estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues. There is no guarantee that all or any part of
the mineral resource will be converted into mineral reserves.
In addition, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will
ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre feasibility studies, or economic studies, except for a
Preliminary Assessment as defined under NI43 101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.
U.S. Securities Law Disclaimer
Our securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), or the securities laws of any state of the United States and, subject
to certain exceptions, may not be offered or sold within the United States. Investors resident in the United States will be required to acknowledge that the securities are "restricted securities" within the
meaning of Rule 144, and that if in the future an investor decides to offer, resell, pledge or otherwise transfer any of the securities, it may do so only (a) to the Corporation; (b) outside the United States in
accordance with Rule 904 of Regulation S under the Securities Act and in compliance with applicable Canadian and provincial laws and regulations; (c) within the United States in accordance with Rule
144, if available, and in compliance with any applicable state securities laws of the United States; or (d) in another transaction that does not require registration under the Securities Act or any applicable
state securities laws of the United States.
Our securities have not been approved or disapproved by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or by any state securities commission or regulatory authority, nor have any of the
foregoing authorities passed on the accuracy or adequacy of any offering document provided in connection with the offering of these securities.
Currency
Unless otherwise indicated, all dollar values herein are in Canadian $.
TSX, NYSE:PVG 2
3. Why ?
Brucejack hosts a significant high-grade gold resource:
• 5 million ounces Measured & Indicated (9.3 Mt @ 16.62 g/t gold )
• 3 million ounces Inferred (4.0 Mt @ 25.67 g/t gold)
Catalyst for near-term production
Advancing as a stand-alone project
Brucejack and Snowfield global gold
resources total 66 million ounces within
a growing gold camp in northwestern B.C.
3
5. BRUCEJACK PROJECT CHRONOLOGY
Brucejack Gold Resources Growth
80,000 35
70,000 30
Gold resources (mil)
60,000
25
50,000
20
Meters
40,000
15
30,000
10
20,000
10,000 5
0 0
2009 2010 2011
M&I Au Inf Au Meters drilled
Exploration resumes.
5.3 km Discovery of Valley of the • Updated PEA on
underground Kings Zone. Brucejack high-grade
Exploration development of Mine Development Acquisition by Pretivm (Q1)
West Zone Certificate issued (December 2010) • Feasibility Study (Q4)
1960-1980 1986-1989 1993 2009-2010 2012
1980-1985 1990 1999-2000 2011
West Zone West Zone Acquisition by • PEA on Brucejack
discovery Feasibility Study Silver Standard high-grade (June)
and definition completed Resources Inc. • 72,144-meter drill
program (May-Oct)
• Resource update
(November)
5
7. BRUCEJACK EXPLORATION DRILLING
Gold resource: 1980-1994 – Newhawk Valley of the Kings Zone
421,000 oz M&I 908 DDH/120,000m
82,700 oz Inferred West Zone
Gold resource: 2009-2010 – Silver Standard Valley of the Kings Zone
8.2M oz M&I 110 DDH/50,946m
12.6Moz Inferred
Valley of the Kings Zone
Gold resource: 2011 – Pretivm
12.9M oz M&I 176 DDH/72,144m
18.2M oz Inferred
500m
>0.3 g/t gold
North – South
Existing 5km underground workings
500m
TSX, NYSE:PVG 7
8. VISIBLE GOLD
SU-260 (2011)
17,750 g/t Au
0.5 m
SU-230 (2011) SU-195 (2011) SU-115 (2011)
7,420 g/t Au 5,740 g/t Au 18,755 g/t Au
1.0 m 0.5 m 0.6 m
SU-84 (2010) SU-29 (2009) SU-12 (2009)
5,480 g/t Au 5,344 g/t Au 16,948 g/t Au
0.4 m 0.5 m 1.5 m
8
9. BRUCEJACK NOVEMBER 2011 RESOURCE
Brucejack Project 5.0 g/t Grade & Tonnage Estimate – November 2011(1)(2) 29 intercepts grading over 1,000 g/t gold
(Based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne)
Contained 79 intercepts grading over 100 g/t gold
Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver
(millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz)
Measured 2.4 7.93 236.1 0.60 18.0 97 drill holes /42,000 m for 5.0 g/t resource
Indicated 6.9 19.99 60.9 4.46 13.6
M+I 9.3 16.92 105.6 5.06 31.6
Inferred 4.0 25.67 20.6 3.33 2.7
(1)(3)
Brucejack Project Underground Sensitivity – November 2011
(Based on a cut-off of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne)
Contained
Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver
(millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz)
Measured 2.4 7.29 241.2 0.57 18.9
Indicated 6.1 24.13 53.3 4.76 10.5
M+I 8.6 19.35 106.7 5.33 29.4
Inferred 4.0 25.73 22.0 3.29 2.8
(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions are: Au US$1,200/oz. (71%); Ag US$22/oz. (70%)
(2) 5.0 g/t cutoff within the 0.30 grams of au-equiv /tonne optimized pit shell
(3) The Underground Sensitivity is a sensitivity study of the Brucejack underground potential and is
not meant to supercede or replace the results of the bulk-tonnage mineral resource estimate. SU-115 intersected gold grading 18,754 gpt over 0.60 meters
Sensitivity results are not reported within a constraining Whittle pit shell.
9
20. BRUCEJACK ENGINEERING STUDIES
Advancing Brucejack’s potential for
near-term production
June 2011 PEA(1) based on 5.0 g/t cut-off gold resource of 903,000
ounces Measured and Indicated and 1.9 million ounces Inferred:
– Average annual production years 1-10 of 173,000 ounces of gold
– Capex of US$281.7 million
– Operating costs of C$158.36/t milled
– 5% NVP of US$1.426 billion(2)
– Internal rate of return of 48%(2)
Update to PEA anticipated Q1 2012
Feasibility study anticipated Q4 2012
(1)Source: Technical Report and Preliminary Economic Assessment of the Brucejack Project, effective date June 3, 2011
(2)Spot Price Case metals prices of US$1,536.30/oz gold and US$37.86/oz silver
20
21. BRUCEJACK HIGH-GRADE COMPARISON
25.0
Brucejack
Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Grade (g/t)
(2011)
20.0
Kirkland Lake
15.0 Red Lake
Brucejack
(2010)
10.0 Cerro Negro
Jerritt Canyon Eleonore
Kensington El Penon
Quimsacocha
5.0 Casa Berardi
0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0
Measured & Indicated + Inferred Gold Resources (mm oz)
Brucejack gold resources based on a cut-off grade of 5.0 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne within the 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne optimized pit shell.
Source: Intierra Ltd.
21
22. VALUE CREATION: CASE STUDY
Andean Resources acquired for $3.6 billion by Goldcorp
in Q4 2010 for Cerro Negro Project
At Feasibility-stage with exploration potential
Gold resources at time of acquisition, December 2010:
– Indicated Resources of 2.54 million ounces (13.8 million tonnes at 5.71 g/t)
• Includes Probable Reserves of 2.07 million ounces at 9.03 g/t Au
– Inferred Resources 0.52 million ounces (5.02 million tonnes at 3.24 g/t)
Gold reserves and resources at March 31, 2011 (post acquisition by Goldcorp)
– Probable Reserves of 4.26 million ounces (13 million tonnes at 10.19 g/t)
– Indicated Resources of 0.38 million ounces (4.67 million tonnes at 2.50 g/t)
– Inferred Resources of 0.72 million ounces (4.51 million tonnes at 4.98 g/t)
22
23. LARGE-SCALE NORTH AMERICAN GOLD PROJECTS
120
Iron Cap Zone
(SEA)
(NDM)
Snowfield Open Pit
(September 2010 PA)
100
Mitchell Zone
(SEA)
Gold Resources (mm oz.)
80
66.9
(PVG)
(SEA) Sulphurets Zone
60 12.9 (SEA)
Brucejack
18.2 (NG/ABX)
40
45.3
(DGC)
(OSK)
37.9
Snowfield
25.9 (ITH)
20 40.4
Kerr Zone
20.5
(SEA) 22.5 15.3
14.5
9.0
4.4 5.1 4.9
0 0.9
Measured + Indicated Resources Inferred Resources
23
24. BRUCEJACK PROJECT GLOBAL RESOURCE
Gold/silver vein systems within lower grade
envelopes
Mineralization remains open
Brucejack Project 1.25 Grade & Tonnage Estimate –
November 2011 (1),(2)
Contained
Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver
(millions) (g/t) (g/t) (million oz) (million oz)
Measured 9.3 3.08 102.2 0.92 30.6
Indicated 64.8 3.62 23.7 7.53 49.4
M+I 74.1 3.55 33.6 8.46 80.0
Inferred 78.5 2.68 16.3 6.76 41.2
Brucejack Project Bulk-Tonnage Mineral Resource Estimate –
(1)
November 2011
(Based on a cut-off grade of 0.30 grams of gold-equivalent/tonne)
Contained
Category Tonnes Gold Silver Gold Silver
(millions) (g/t) ( g/t) (million oz) (million oz)
Measured 12.2 2.50 81.6 0.99 32.1
Indicated 293.0 1.26 10.5 11.91 99.3
M+I 305.3 1.31 13.4 12.89 131.5
Inferred 813.7 0.70 7.7 18.20 201.2
(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions are: Au US$1,200/oz. (71%); Ag US$22/oz. (70%)
(2)@ 1.25 g/t cut-off within the 0.30 grams of au-equiv/tonne optimized pit shell.
24
25. SNOWFIELD PROJECT
One of the largest undeveloped gold
deposits in the world
Joint engineering study underway with
Seabridge Gold examining economic
synergies of KSM + Snowfield
Joint study anticipated Q1 2012
Snowfield Mineral Resource Summary – Feb. 2011(1,2)
Grade Contained Metal
Tonnes Au Ag Cu Mo Re Au Ag Cu
(mm (mm
(mt) (g/t) (g/t) (%) (ppm) (ppm) (bil lbs)
oz) oz)
Measured 189.8 0.82 1.69 0.09% 97.4 0.57 4.98 10.3 0.38
Indicated 1,180.3 0.55 1.73 0.10% 83.6 0.50 20.93 65.4 2.60
Measured &
1,370.1 0.59 1.72 0.10% 85.5 0.51 25.92 75.8 2.98
Indicated
Inferred 833.2 0.34 1.90 0.06% 69.5 0.43 9.03 50.9 1.10
(1) Metal price and recoveries assumptions: Au US$1,025/oz (71%); Ag US$16.60/oz (70%); Cu
US$3.0/lb (70%); Mo US$19.00/lb (60%); Re US$145.00/oz. (60%)
(2) Mineral resource estimate at 0.30g/t AuEq cut-off.
25
26. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY & SUSTAINABILITY
Pretivm’s Social Responsibility Policy reflects our
commitment to establishing positive, trusting
relationships with First Nations, local communities
and other key stakeholders
We are working to ensure that communication with
local communities is open and continuous, and that
the benefits of our exploration success can extend to
them
We will collaborate with community leaders to
explore training and employment opportunities
Pretivm’s management team has been
cooperatively engaging with local community
leaders in the Stewart, BC region for over 10 years
We have begun the consultation process with
community leaders concerning the Brucejack high-
grade opportunity
26
27. PVG SHARE PERFORMANCE
Share Return from January 1, 2011 – January 6, 2012 (%)
Pretivm
Pretivm S&P/TSX Global Mining Index XAU Index
27
28. SHAREHOLDING & ANALYST COVERAGE
Silver Top Five Shareholders(1,3) (shares in millions)
Standard,
22% Silver Standard Resources 18.913
Institutions, Royce & Associates 6.346
Management,
50% Carmignac Gestion 5.400
5%
Robert Quartermain 2.876
Retail, 23% Norges Bank Investment 2.094
Capital Structure(1,2) Analyst Coverage
Public Float 68.0 CIBC Brian Quast
Silver Standard Shares 18.9 Citibank Alex Hacking
Total Issued & Outstanding Shares 86.9 Cormark Securities Richard Gray
Incentive Options 5.2 Dahlman Rose Adam Graf
Total Fully Diluted Shares Outstanding 92.1 GMP Securities Craig West
Salman Partners Ash Guglani
Working Capital (at September 30) C$33.0 million UBS Dan Rollins
(1)Assumes the exercise of 5,750,000 share purchase warrants each exercisable to purchase one share of Pretivm owned by Silver Standard at $12.50 until April 7, 2012.
(2)As of September 30, 2011; ownership calculated on an undiluted basis.
(3)As of January 8. Source: IPREO, SEDI
28
29. MANAGEMENT & BOARD
Robert Quartermain, B.Sc., M.Sc., P.Geo, D.Sc.
President & Chief Executive Officer,
Director
Joseph Ovsenek, B.A. Sc., P.Eng., LLB
Vice President & Chief Development Officer,
Director
Ken McNaughton, M.A. Sc., P.Eng.
Vice President & Chief Exploration Officer
Ian I Chang, M.A. Sc., P.Eng.
Vice President, Project Development
(L to R): John Smith, CEO, Silver Standard; Tom Yip, CFO, International
Tower Hill Mines; Robert Quartermain; Ross Mitchell, former CFO, Silver
Standard Resources Inc; Joseph Ovsenek; Noel Dunn, Managing Director,
Liberty Metals & Mining, Liberty Mutual Group Asset Management
Ken Konkin, P.Geo.
Project Manager
Peter de Visser, CA
Chief Financial Officer
TSX, NYSE:PVG 29
(1)All senior management and directors are shareholders of Pretivm
30. CONTACT HEAD OFFICE COMMON SHARES
Phone: 604-558-1784 Pretium Resources Inc. TSX:PVG
Fax: 604-558-4784 570 Granville St. Issued: 86.9 million
Toll-free: 1-877-558-1784 Suite 1600 Fully diluted: 92.0 million
invest@pretivm.com Vancouver, BC 52-week hi/low:
www.pretivm.com Canada V6C 3P1 $14.19/$6.01
Market capitalization
(at January 6, 2012)
$1.191 billion
30