One of The World’s Largest Publicly Traded Pure Molybdenum Producers

December 8 - 10, 2009

Cautionary Statements

This presentation contains “forward-looking information” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and applicable Canadian securities legislation which may include, but is not limited to, statements with respect to the timing and amount of estimated future production. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “plans”, “expects”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates”, or “believes” or variations (including negative variations) of such words and phrases, or state that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Thompson Creek and/or its subsidiaries to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Such factors include those factors discussed in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in Thompson Creek’s current annual information form which is available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and is incorporated in its Annual Report on Form 40-F filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission which is available at www.sec.gov. Although Thompson Creek has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results to differ from those anticipated, estimatedor intended. Forward-looking statements contained herein are made as of the date of this presentation and Thompson Creek does not undertake to update any such forward-looking statements, except in accordance with applicable securities laws. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

Readers should refer to Thompson Creek’s current annual information form which is available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and is incorporated in its Annual Report on Form 40-F filed with the SEC which is available at www.sec.gov and subsequent continuous disclosure documents available at www.sedar.com and www.sec.gov for further information on mineral reserves and mineral resources, which is subject to the qualifications and notes set forth therein.

Cautionary Note to United States Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources: This presentation uses the terms “Measured”, “Indicated” and “Inferred” Resources. United States investors are advised that while suchterms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize them. “Inferred Mineral Resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and as to their 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 other economic studies. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of Measured or Indicated Mineral Resources will ever be converted into Mineral Reserves. United States investors are also cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an Inferred Mineral Resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.

2

Thompson Creek Stock Price vs. S&P 500

3

TC Stock Price vs. S&P500November 2006-November 2009

02468

10121416182022242628

Nov-06

Dec-06

Feb-07Apr-07

May-07

Jul-07Sep-07

Oct-07Dec-07

Feb-08

Mar-08May-08

Jul-08Aug-08

Oct-08Dec-08

Jan-09

Mar-09May-09

Jun-09

Aug-09

Oct-09Nov-09

Stoc

k Pr

ice

(U.S

. Dol

lars

)

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

S&P5

00

TC SP500

• One of the largest, publicly traded, pure moly companies

• Strong cash position. Very low debt**

• Production increase planned in 2010 after production was curtailed in 2009 to conserve cash

• Measured + indicated mineral resources: 1.2 billion lbs Mo*Proven + probable mineral reserves: 600 million lbs Mo*

• Established North American operations. Experienced operations management. Excellent record of safety and environmental compliance.

• Organic growth potential* Mineral reserves and resources estimates for Thompson Creek Mine by Scott Wilson Roscoe Postle Associates. Mineral resources estimates by Wardrop Engineering for Endako Mine. Mineral resources estimates by Gary Giroux for the Davidson Deposit. Mineral reserves estimates for Endako Mine and Davidson Deposit by site personnel supervised by Ken Collison, P.Eng., former Chief Operating Officer, Thompson Creek Metals. Estimates exclude potential resources and reserves at the Mt. Emmons Deposit.** $14.3 million in debt, mainly equipment loans, outstanding on September 30, 2009.

Company Overview (NYSE: TC; TSX: TCM)

4

Map of Properties

United States of America

Idaho

British Columbia

Canada

Pennsylvania

Endako (75%)• Open Pit Mine• Concentrator• Roasting Facility

Endako (75%)• Open Pit Mine• Concentrator• Roasting Facility

Davidson Deposit• High Grade• Underground Deposit

Davidson Deposit• High Grade• Underground Deposit

Thompson Creek• Open Pit Mine• Concentrator

Thompson Creek• Open Pit Mine• Concentrator

Langeloth• Metallurgical Facility

Langeloth• Metallurgical Facility

5

Colorado

Mt. Emmons Deposit• High Grade• Underground Deposit

Mt. Emmons Deposit• High Grade• Underground Deposit

Production Estimates 2008-2010

6

Millions of pounds – contained Mo

2007 2008 2009 2010Guidance Guidance

Thompson Creek Mine 9.3 16.7 17 – 18 22 - 24

Endako Mine (75% share) 7.1 9.3 7 - 8 7 – 8

Total 16.4 26 24 - 26 29 – 32

Molybdenum Oxide production costs*

$7.54 $5.80 - $6.30 $6 – $7

Components:

Thompson Creek Mine costs/lb* $7.75 $5.75 - $6.25 $5.50 - $6.50

Endako Mine costs/lb* $7.15 $6 - $6.50 $7 - $8

*Molybdenum oxide production costs (US$/lb Mo) include all stripping costs and assume an exchange rate of US$1 = C$1.05 for Endako costs in Q4 2009 and 2010.

Capital Expenditures 2009

7

U.S. Dollars 2009 Estimate 2010 Estimate

Maintenance Capex-Operations $32 million $89 million

Endako Expansion Capex $29 million $209 million

Total $61 million $298 million

Cash/Investments (Sept. 30, 2009) $478.2 million

Revolving Bank Credit Facility $35 million

Cash Resources

First 9 Months 2009 Financials (US$)

8

Revenue $267.1 million

Operating cash flowNet income

$86.5 million$30.5 million

EPS basicdiluted

$0.25$0.24

Mo ProductionThompson Creek MineEndako Mine (75%)

13.5 million lbs5.5 million lbs

Production cash costs of which:

Thompson Creek MineEndako Mine

$5.59/lb

$5.50/lb$5.82/lb

Realized price

Cash + S-T Investments*Total debt*(*As at September 30, 2009)

$10.90/lb

$478.2 million$14.2 million

Thompson Creek Mine Idaho

9

• Mo Production Estimates: 17 - 18 million lbs in 200922 – 24 million lbs in 2010

• Estimated cash costs (Mo oxide): $5.75 - $6.25 per lb in 2009 $5.50 - $6.50 per lb in 2010

• Proven + probable mineral reserves: 277 million lbs Mo*

• Measured + indicated mineral resources: 445 million lbs Mo*

• 16-year mine life (2P mineral reserves)

*Mineral reserves and resources were estimated by site personnel and audited by Scott Wilson Roscoe Postle Associates Inc., based on a cut-off grade of 0.03%, an assumed long-term molybdenum price of US$10 per pound and updated costs, as of May 31, 2009.

Thompson Creek Mine Key Facts

10

Thompson Creek Mine Cross Section

11

1,000 feet

12

**Mineral reserves and resources were estimated by site personnel and audited by Scott Wilson Roscoe Postle Associates Inc., based on a cut-off grade of 0.03%, an assumed long-term molybdenum price of US$10 per pound and updated costs, as of May 31, 2009. The mineral reserves and resources were audited by John T. Postle, M.Sc., P.Eng., Christopher Moreton, Ph.D., P.Geo., and Kevin Scott, P.Eng., all of whom are qualified persons as defined in National Instrument 43-101. 2P mineral reserve estimate is included in the M+I mineral resources.

12

CategoryReserves

Tons(million)

ProvenProbable2P Total

91.872.8

164.6

Grade(%Mo)0.0940.0720.084

Contained Mo(million lbs)*

172.3104.9277.2

CategoryResources

Tonnes(million)

MeasuredIndicatedM+I Total

132.4194.0326.4

Grade(%Mo)0.0840.0570.068

Contained Mo(million lbs)*

222.6222.0444.6

CategoryResources

Tonnes(million)

Inferred 29.1

Grade(%Mo)

0.042

Contained Mo(million lbs)*

24.2

Thompson Creek Mineral Reserves and Resources

Endako Operation British Columbia

13

• TC’s 75% share Mo production Estimates: 7 - 8 million lbs in 20097 – 8 million lbs in 2010

• Estimated cash costs (Mo oxide): $6 - $6.50 per lb in 2009$7 - $8 per lb in 2010

Key Facts (100%):

– Mill capacity 31,000 tons/day; Mine life of 27 years

– Expansion/modernization project will raise mill capacity to 55,000 tons/day

– Proven and probable mineral reserves: 306 million lbs Mo*

– Measured and indicated mineral resource: 464 million lbs Mo** *Mineral reserves estimates by site personnel supervised by Ken Collison, P.Eng., former Thompson Creek Chief Operating Officer, based on a cut-off grade of 0.02%, assumed molybdenum price of US$10 per pound, and updated costs, as of December 31, 2008. **Mineral resource estimates by Wardrop Engineering Inc. based on a cut-off grade of 0.02%, as of April 30 2007.

Endako (75% owned)

14

Endako

15

16

*Mineral reserves are as of December 31, 2008 and have been estimated by site personnel supervised by Ken Collison, P.Eng., former Thompson Creek Chief Operating Officer, who is a qualified person as defined in National Instrument 43-101. Reserves are based on a cut-off grade of 0.02%, an assumed molybdenum price of US$10 per pound, and updated costs. **Mineral resource estimates are by Wardrop Engineering Inc. based on a cut-off grade of 0.02%, as of April 30, 2007. Greg Mosher, P.Geo., is the qualified person as defined in National Instrument 43-101 for the resource estimates. 2P reserves estimate is included in the M+I resources estimate. Numbers may not add due to rounding. 16

CategoryReserves

Tons(million)

ProvenProbable2P Total

135.7172.1307.8

Grade(%Mo)0.0510.0490.050

Contained Mo(million lbs)*

138.6167.7306.3

CategoryResources

Tonnes(million)

MeasuredIndicatedM+I Total

138.0354.1492.1

Grade(%Mo)0.0500.0400.043

Contained Mo(million lbs)**

152.2311.8463.9

CategoryResources

Tonnes(million)

Inferred 76.2

Grade(%Mo)

0.033

Contained Mo(million lbs)*

56.2

Endako (100%) Mineral Reserves and Resources

Langeloth Metallurgical Facility

17

• Roasting capacity approximately 35 million lbs per year of molybdenum oxide

• Major N. Am. producer of ferro-molybdenum

• Processing complex has 4 multiple-hearth Mo roasters

• 2 additional roasters committed to toll catalyst recycling involving other metals

• Low sustaining capex over the next decade

Langeloth Key Facts

18

Davidson Project - Hudson Bay Mountain

19

• Long-life, high-grade underground deposit near Smithers, B.C.

• M+I mineral resource 288 million lbs* contained Mo

• Project focused on processing ore at Endako, 200 kilometres away

• Application for environmental permit filed in September 2008

• Development decision delayed until economic conditions improve; permitting is proceeding

*Estimated by Gary Giroux, P.Eng., a qualified person under NI 43-101, as of April 10, 2007.

Davidson Project Key Facts

20

Davidson Underground Workings – Cross Section

21

Davidson Mineral Reserves and Resources

0.12 (0.20 MoS²) 77 0.169 288

0.18 (0.30 MoS²) 23 0.234 117

Cut-off Grade Tonnes Grade Contained Mo(% Mo) (million) (%Mo) (million lbs)*

*Mineral resources are estimated as of April 10, 2007 by Gary Giroux, P.Eng., a qualified person under NI 43-101. **Mineral reserves are proven and probable and are estimated as of December 31, 2007 by site personnel supervised by Ken Collison, P.Eng., former Thompson Creek Chief Operating Officer, a qualified person under NI 43-101. Reserve estimates were limited to only 10 years for feasibility study on planned shipment of ore to Endako.

22

Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources*

0.18 – 0.24% 7.3 0.265 43

Cut-off Grade Tonnes Grade Contained Mo(% Mo) (million) (%Mo) (million lbs)**

Proven and Probable Mineral Reserves – 10-Year Mine Plan**

Mount Emmons Deposit - Colorado

23

• One of the largest, highest-grade, undeveloped molybdenum deposits in the world

• Historical mineral resource: 760 million lbs contained Mo*

• Resource includes high-grade section: 180 million lbs contained Mo from 20.5 million tons grading 0.438% Mo at cut-off grade of 0.30% Mo*

• Well-delineated deposit. By 1983, $150 million had been spent on property development including approx. 157,000 feet of core drilling

• TCUSA is project manager with option to acquire 15% for $15 million, or 50% for $50 million, or 75% for $400 million incurred as payments (max. $6.5 million) to U.S. Energy or spending on the project.

• *A 1998 mineral resource estimate based on the concept of underground mining with a 6,000 tons per day mill was summarized in an April 10, 2007 Behre Dolbear & Company Inc. technical report filed on Sedar by Kobex Resources Ltd. It showed a historical mineral resource of 166,654,000 tons grading 0.38% MoS2 (0.228% Mo) at a cutoff grade of 0.2% MoS2 (0.12% Mo). This resource contains 760 million pounds of molybdenum (Mo). The historical estimates are the most recent estimates available, and Thompson Creek believes them to be relevant. However, the estimates should not necessarily be relied upon. Thompson Creek has not done the work necessary to have the historical estimates verified by a qualified person. The historical estimates were prepared under CIM standards in 1998, however they do not meet the current CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves adopted in 2005 and the historical resource classification has also not been further categorized into measured and indicated mineral resources. Thompson Creek is not treating the historical estimates as a current mineral resource estimate under National Instrument 43-101.

Mt. Emmons Project Key Facts

24

Current Project Evaluation Activities

• Pre-feasibility study

• Environmental baseline and pre-permitting activities

• Community relations program

• 2009 budget: $5 million to $7 million

• 2010 budget: $7 million to $9 million

Mt. Emmons Project

25

TC/TCM Common Shares (US$)**

Recent share priceCurrent market cap52-week low/highShares outstandingShare optionsWarrants (C$9 exercise price)

Shares fully dilutedDebt* (Sept. 30, 2009)

Cash Balances (Sept. 30, 2009)

Listings: NYSE:TC, TSX:TCM,*Mostly equipment loans ** Updated Dec. 4, 2009

Capital Structure

26

$12.00$1.7 billion$2.44/15.64139.2 million

5.1 million24.5 million

168.8 million$14.3 million$478.2 millionFrankfurt: A6RWarrants: TCM.WT

• Element 42 (symbol Mo) on periodic table

• Very high melting point (2,610 degrees Celsius)

• Strengthens steel, improves weldability, reduces brittleness

• Helps steel perform well in very high or low temperatures

• Powerful anti-corrosive in stainless and alloy steels

• Essential catalyst in petroleum refining for sulfur removal

• $5 billion industry at current moly prices

What is Molybdenum?

27

28

First Use of Molybdenum*

Chemicals 10%

Alloy Tool & High Speed Steels 11%

Super Alloys 6%

Cast Iron & Steels 8%

Molybdenum Metal 6%

Stainless Steels 25%

Constructional Engineering Steels 35%

*Estimates for 2008, including Mo in scrap. Source: International Molybdenum Association (IMOA).

29

15%

12%

12%

10%

9%

8%

7%

7%

5%

4%

2%

1%

8%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

Chemical & Petrochemical

Oil and Gas

Automotive

Mechanical Engineering

Other Process Industries

Power Generation

Architecture, Building & Construction

Other Transportation

Catalysts

Aerospace & Defense

Electronics

Consumer Goods

Others (incl. Pigments and Lubricants)

End Use of Molybdenum*

*Estimates for 2008, including Mo in scrap. Source: International Molybdenum Association (IMOA)

Moly Prices 2003-2009

30

Molybdenum Outlook• Short-term: Recovery underway, after

demand/price affected by downturn in steel sector

• Medium term: Market tightness and price strength likely as world economy recovers

• Demand supported by new uses and continued energy/infrastructure investment

• Supply constrained: Development of major new mines delayed by financial crisis

31

Moly World Demand

32

2019

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1960

1963

1966

1969

1972

1975

1978

1981

1984

1987

1990

1993

1996

1999

2002

2005

2008

2011

2014

2017

2020

ActualDemand

ProjectedDemand

Year

Mo,

mill

ions

lbs

4% Growth(per annum)

World demand projections assuming historical 4% average growth rate

World Molybdenum Production

460 million+ lbs in 2008

By-product 50%

Primary 50%

33

34

Molybdenum Mining Cash Costs*

Range Type Percentage of World Output**

<$5/lb Most copper-molybdenum by-product mines

44%

$5/lb - $9/lb Large primary mines*** 28%

$9/lb - $15/lb Smaller surface and underground primary mines in China

28%

* Approximate US$ cash costs for mining, milling and roasting.** Production capacity based on CRU data for 2008*** Includes: Henderson Mine (Freeport), China Molybdenum, Jinduicheng, Thompson Creek Mine, and Endako Mine

China

35

• Large reserves, significant potential supply

• Government regulation aimed at limiting exports – Export taxes (current):

20% tax on ferromolybdenum 15% tax on molybdenum oxide

– Export quotas introduced in June 2007

• Quotas effective in reducing exports in 2007-08

• Moly price decline in Fall 2008 caused Chinese production to be curtailed. China shifted from net exporter to net importer of molybdenum.

36

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

Mar

ch

June

Sept

Dec

Mar

ch

June

Sept

Dec

Mar

ch

June

Sept

Mill

ions

lbs

Mo

2007

2008

2009

Net Exports/Imports from China

Source: International Molybdenum Association (IMOA). Net exports = exports minus imports.

China export quotas imposed

Net Exports

Net Imports

Why Own Thompson Creek Metals?• Established world-class operations in North America with

significant mineral resources and reserves

• Strong cash position; low debt*

• Flexibility to increase production in 2010

• Expansion/development projects to contribute to production in the future

• Proven operations/management team committed to enhancing shareholder value

• Long-term moly prices supported by rising demand/new uses

*$14.3 million in debt, mainly equipment loans, as of September 30, 2009.

37

Thompson CreekIdaho

Metallurgical FacilityLangeloth,Pennsylvania

Davidson DepositBritish Columbia

EndakoBritish Columbia

One of the World’s Largest Publicly TradedPure Moly Producers(NYSE:TC, TSX:TCM)

One of the World’s Largest Publicly TradedPure Moly Producers(NYSE:TC, TSX:TCM)

Appendix

39

• Kevin Loughrey, Thompson Creek Metals Company Chairman & CEO:approximately 26 years industry experience, former VP, General Counsel, Secretary Cyprus Amax

• Ian J. McDonald, Thompson Creek Metals Company Vice-Chairman:former Chairman & CEO Wheaton River; 19 years experience managing mineral resource companies

• Pamela L. Saxton, Thompson Creek Metals Company CFO: former VP Finance, U.S. Operations, Franco-Nevada; more than 30 years financial and accounting experience in mineral resource industry

• Scott Shellhaas, Thompson Creek Metals Company COO: Over 25 years of operations experience including as former President and COO of Amax Gold Inc. and President of Cyprus Australia Coal Co.

• Mark A. Wilson, Thompson Creek VP Marketing: formerly with Climax Molybdenum Co., Goldbelt Resources (President, CEO, CFO);Cyprus Minerals Co.

Management Team

40

Molybdenum (Products and Uses)

41

Mine

Ore

Milling

Concentrate(Molybdenum

Disulfide)

High-PurityMolybdenum

Disulfide

Roasting

Technical Grade

Molybdenum Trioxide

Lubricating Oils and Greases

Additives

Waste Tailings

Thompson Creek Operations

Molybdenum (Products and Uses)

42

Sublimation

Technical Grade

Molybdenum Trioxide

Pure Oxide

Ferromolybdenum Reduction

Ferromolybdenum

Reduction

CatalystsPetro-Chemical

Mo Metal

SuperalloysLighting Products

ElectronicsMolybdenum Metal Products

High-Temperature Applications

Foundries & Steel Mills

Stainless SteelAlloy Steels

Tool, Hi-Speed SteelCast Irons

Thompson Creek Operations

PowderBriquettes

Molybdenum (Products and Uses)

43

Technical Grade

Molybdenum Trioxide

ChemicalManufacturing

Corrosion InhibitorsAgriculture

MicronutrientsPigments, Surface

CoatingsHealth Micronutrients

Ammonium Molybdates

CeramicsNanomaterials

SodiumMolybdates

Other, Carbides, Silicides

Smoke SuppressantsPigments

CatalystsPetro-Chemical

Calcining

Pure Oxide

Thompson Creek Operations

Mo is harder than• Chromium• Niobium• Tantalum• Vanadium

Mo has betterresistance to

compression than• Chromium

• Graphite (via Carbon)

• Niobium• Tantalum• Vanadium

Limited Substitutability

44

Molybdenum’s Physical Properties

WeightTremendous strength but still light in weight

Mo is lighter than• Tantalum• Tungsten

Measured By:Standard Atomic Weight g/mol and Density kg/mˆ3

TemperatureResistance

Highly resistant to extreme temperatures

Mo has a higher melting point than

• Boron• Chromium• Niobium

• Vanadium

Measured By:High Melting Point

(°C)

Expansion Response to Heating and CoolingLow expansion to

heating and cooling: superior bondability

Mo reacts less to temperature changes

than• Boron

• Chromium• Graphite (via

Carbon)• Niobium• Tantalum• Tungsten• Vanadium

Measured By:Coefficient of Thermal Expansion [/K-1* 10ˆ6]

(at 0°C)

Resistance to Uniform CompressionExceptional

incompressibility

Measured By:Bulk Modulus/Gpa

HardnessGreat Strength

Measured By:Vickers Hardness/Mpa

Source: CPM Group

Top 10 Producers of Molybdenum

45

Top 10 Producers* Output (millions lbs Mo*)

2007 2008Freeport** 69.5 73.1

Codelco 61.4 44.5

Grupo Mexico**** 35.8 36.0

China Molybdenum 30.5 34.1

Jinduicheng 28.7 30.0

Thompson Creek*** 18.0 29.1

Rio Tinto/Kennecott 33.1 23.2

Antofagasta 22.3 17.3

Antamina 14.1 12.2

Collahuasi 8.9 5.4*Source: CRU, contained molybdenum, by operator, estimates for 2007 and 2008; ** Includes all of Cerro Verde output (Freeport owns 53%) ***Includes all of Endako (Thompson Creek owns 75%) ****Includes Southern Copper and Asarco operations

Structural Changes in Moly Demand

A. Moly is a metal for developed economies • Rapid industrialization of China, India, Brazil, and Russia

B. Demand follows growth in wealth • Desalination plants/power generation/oil refineries

C. Industrial requirements demand better steels• Higher operating temperatures • Need for fuel economy drives improved strength-to-

weight ratios (ex. autos)

46

Structural Changes in Moly Demand

D. Growing catalyst use in oil refineries • Higher sulfur content in refinery feedstock • Tougher sulfur emission standards for refinery outputs -

gasoline and diesel

E. Limited substitution away from moly• Steel alloy formulas proven over time • Moly cost is less than the value of the benefits

47

• New cars: Desire for fuel savings and improved crash-test results causing use of stronger, lighter steel alloys(0.9 lb Mo/new car)

• Refinery catalysts: Government regulations forcing reduction of sulfur in gasoline and diesel fuels – hence greater use of moly catalysts at petroleum refineries

• Project Economics: Strength-weight concerns and cost savings driving new use of Mo-bearing high-strength steels in industrial applications*

• Nuclear: Each new reactor needs 400,000 - 500,000 lbs of MoMoly-bearing pipe mandated for retrofits at existing reactors

* Example: Newer pipeline steel allows thinner walls for same throughput pressure; if it contains 0.25% Mo and is 30-inch diameter with 5/8-inch wall thickness, a 1,000-mile pipeline requires 2.5 million lbs Mo

Growing Uses for Molybdenum

48

Molybdenum Demand

49

Category ApplicationsSteel

Full Alloy Construction/automotive industries, shipbuilding, heavy machinery, offshore pipelines

Stainless Biofuel tanks, flue gas, desulphurization in oil and coal units,desalination plants

Carbon Construction and transportation, tunnels, food storage, communication

Tool Manufacture of tools and the cutting or shaping of power machinery

HSLA Oil and gas pipelines, construction and automotive industries, bridges

Other Metallurgical

Superalloys Superchargers, aircraft turbine engines, gas turbines, chemical and petroleum plants

Cast Iron Diesel engine motor blocks and cylinder heads, mining, milling, and crushing

Mo Metal & Alloys Auto parts, lamp filaments, glass manufacturing, heat shields, optical coatings

Source: CPM Group

Molybdenum Demand

50

Category ApplicationsNon-Metallurgical

Catalysts Petroleum hydroprocessing and hydrodesulfurization

Lubricants High performance base oils, greases, synthetic fluids, bond coatings, friction products

Pigments Paints, inks, plastic and rubber products, and ceramics

Other Chemical Smoke suppressants, PVC cabling, metal-based smoke suppressants

Source: CPM Group

Comparables: Pure Moly Producers

51

Thompson Creek* China Molybdenum** Jinduicheng***

2008 Revenues US$648 million* US$475 million US$870 million

Market capitalization US$1.7 billion US$3.8 billion US$8.3 billion

2008 Profit US$183.2 million US$198 million US$402 million

2008 Profit/share US$1.53 US$0.036 US$0.161

* Thompson Creek Metals Company reported 2008 results in U.S. dollars on March 19, 2009. Reported revenues of $1.01 billion included sales of third-party molybdenum whereby concentrate was purchased, roasted and sold by the company. However, excluding such third-party sales, the company’s sales of its own mined molybdenum were about $648 million. Market capitalization is based on 139.2 million common shares outstanding and share price of US$12. On a fully diluted basis, assuming exercise of warrants and employee stock options outstanding, the number of shares outstanding would be 168.8 million and market capitalization on this basis would be US$2.0 billion.

** China Molybdenum on March 22, 2009 reported sales of RMB5.6 billon, net profit of RMB1.64 billon and net profit per share of RMB0.34 for 2008. Exchange rate used for conversion is RMB6.85 per U.S. dollar. Market capitalization is based on 4.9 billion shares outstanding, share price of HK$6.00, and exchange rate of HK$7.8 per U.S. dollar. The company’s shares are traded on the Hong Kong Exchange under symbol 3993.

*** Jinduicheng (JDC) on February 17, 2009 reported sales of RMB5.96 billion, net profit of RMB2.75 billion and net profit per share of RMB1.10 for 2008. Market capitalization is based on 2.7 billion shares outstanding and share price of RMB21.00. Exchange rate used for the conversion is RMB6.85 per U.S. dollar. JDC’s shares are traded on the Shanghai Stock Exchange under the symbol 601958.Updated December 4, 2009

Molybdenum Production Comparison

Thompson Creek* 24.7 16.3 26.0 22 - 26China Molybdenum** 22.6 27.6 34.1 30.0

Jinduicheng** 27.9 28.2 30.0 28.7

(million lbs contained Mo)

2006 2007 2008 2009

*Thompson Creek estimates include only 75% of Endako.** 2008 and 2009 estimates provided in company reports.

52

53

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

ExportsImportsNet Exports

Mill

ions

lbs.

Mo

China’s Net Exports of Molybdenum

Ten Months2009

Annualized