ATCO buys 40% stake in company behind Grays Bay project
West Kitikmeot Resources Corp. president calls deal ‘huge step up’ in credibility for raising money to build $1.2B road and port
ATCO Ltd. announced this week it will pay $10 million for a 40 per cent stake in West Kitikmeot Resources Corp., the company behind the Grays Bay Road and Port project. (Image courtesy of ATCO Ltd.)
A major construction and logistics company is paying $10 million for a 40 per cent control of the main proponent of the Grays Bay Road and Port project.
Calgary-based ATCO Ltd. announced its stake in West Kitikmeot Resources Corp. on Monday.
“We think that this is a really important project,” Jim Landon, president of ATCO Frontec, said in an interview Tuesday.
“It will be the only port in the North that will be connected by road.”
ATCO Frontec is a subsidiary of ATCO Ltd. that specializes in operations and defence support for remote locations.
“We are the part of ATCO that has the largest operations in the North,” Landon said.
The Grays Bay Road and Port project has been in the works for decades. It would connect a proposed deepsea port at Grays Bay in western Nunavut to the rest of Canada through an all-season road. It is expected that the port and road would also be used by the Department of National Defence.
Prime Minister Mark Carney recently announced the project had been referred to the federal government’s Major Project Office for fast-tracking.
“The logic behind it, in terms of supporting the mining industry and also having a defence aspect, is really important,” Landon said.
“We think we can bring something to the party in terms of our experience of operations, logistics and site services in the North.”
Brendan Bell, the chief executive officer of West Kitikmeot Resources Corp., agreed.
Bell said his company sought ATCO out because of the “kinds of skillsets they bring to the table.”
Though the pair are still working out the finer details of the deal, ATCO’s 40 per cent stake in West Kitikmeot Resources will give the firm roughly 40 per cent of the board seats, he said.
“It’s a huge step up in terms of capacity and credibility for us,” Bell said.
ATCO, a global conglomerate with 20,000 employees and $25 billion in assets, has not committed any of its own money to the approximate $1.2-billion Grays Bay build, said Landon.
But ATCO’s involvement will make getting buy-in from the federal government and private investors much easier, Bell said, adding it was an easy decision to make “Given their northern experience, their reputation, their relationships in Inuit communities.”
Not. Bad 10 million. For a part of the 1 billion. Dollar road. Project. Plus all the hauling contracts Inuit sell out again
Many who know me will certainlee know I am not in favour of foolish northirn road bilding projects . They simplee do not work . long or short of distance !
How do i know this you ask . i once unsuccessfullee petitioned frobbie bay mayor bryan pearson to have a road constructed from my back door to the groceree establishmint that we now call ye old northmert . i had already carved my own short cut path through backyards and playground and i simplee wanted the hamlit to aknowlege my path as a ligitimite roadway . the counsil insisted that i was insubordinate with my demands and that i was being a nuisanse to my neighbors and then discarded my petition !
i said your honourible mister pearson ! how else am i to carry my baloni home in a timelee manner to avoid spoilage if not for this bumpy short cut wich has caused me to stumble terriblee on a dailee basis ! he was speechless and i left the chambirs with my head high .
so that is my lesson to you . if you want a road built in the north do not expect administrators to give you a hand . they do not sympithise with you baloni problems .
You just hate it when indigenous peoples finally get something eh? This road will lower the cost of living to the peoples living there. Why are you so against Inuit getting infrastructure?
All of Canada’s highways and infrastructure is made with indigenous peoples money.
I am and have not been a fan of any road projects within in iunit land. These companies and/or KIA and others seem to want to go ahead and build a road. The impact on this will affect the wildlife andthe environment. Our ancestors, grandparents and parents of today rely on caribou, muskox etc for food/clothing. just my thought of our future generation.
Maybe approach this with a more positive view. Using the assumption that the “impacts” on the wildlife and environment will limit access to traditional resources sounds like a broken record. Yet it’s used as a territorial form of denial of proposed projects. Seaways are, or will be, more protected, and farming of land animals could provide additional employment and export of goods.
I support your vision to educate and think of the current and future generations, and so do I. Nunavummiut, need to remember, carry, and practice their culture. However, you can combine tradition and modern reality.
Nunavut must take the next step. It will be a big one, but the positive will outweigh the negative by far. Having a port accessible from the south, the Kivalliq road, community road connections, and additional mining alone will bring a high level of Inuit employment, less expensive goods, and potential prosperity.
Let’s educate our current and coming generations on the importance of traditions and education. It’s time Nunavummiut take part and not the backseat, but it will require dedication.
The impact can also include jobs, increase mining opportunities and job, increase in royalties, additional port and shipping opportunities , a new community could evolve with business providing services to the mine and workers. This is the way a country grows a
Nd becomes productive. First came a trail through wilderness, then a community developed around resources then better roads and rail lines. The northern population will grow and dependence and local food source will become unsustainable. When humans reproduce at a greater rate than the animsals they use for food the result is the herds are over hunted and disappear.
40% stake in billion dollar project for 10 million dollars? Yeah I would want to see the details of the agreement. Inuit getting shafted again in my opinion..
I would challenge that if I was with KIA to Mr. Bell.. This project identified as a National interest project wink wink wink!!!
This isn’t 40% of a $1B project for $10M……..
It’s 40% of a development-stage company tied to a project that currently has no construction funding. Big difference.
Right now, the project is very high-risk and unfunded. That’s why the price is low.
ATCO’s $10M is about bringing in a major partner with the credibility and capacity to bring the hundreds of millions needed to actually build it.
The real issue to watch isn’t the $10M it’s:
– future ownership
– revenue sharing
The life of the project as a main contractor for heavy equipment / maintenance / toll fee definitely measure way more than a Billion dollars over the life of the use of the road and port. 10 million dollars is a small fee to be 40% owner thus it would be great to see the details of the agreement. These are my assumptions without seeing the details.
Easy money for Atco and 10 million is a drop of a bucket for the gain they will get.
Your framing misses a key point. What’s being proposed here effectively commits them to investing significantly more just to make the project viable. Yes, over the life of the project there may be meaningful returns—but that only materializes after substantial additional costs and risk.
Right now, it’s more comparable to buying 40% of the company that is going to buy a home and only putting up their portion of the down payment.
That initial contribution doesn’t get you the benefit of ownership on its own—you’re still responsible for 40% of ongoing mortgage payments, maintenance, and all the associated costs to actually realize later on the value.
In the same way, this isn’t a one-time investment that passively generates returns. It’s an early entry point that obligates continued funding and involvement. That distinction matters when evaluating whether this is truly a good deal.
The proponent expect or perhaps hopes Tax payers will be the biggest investors for this nation building project and for that purpose ATCO investment is a sure win. Perhaps tax payers will be the biggest investor, so the actual investment will be small from West Kitikmeot Resources and ATCO but as the proponents, they will reap the benefits for years to come.
Again without seeing the actual agreement it is hard to see the gauge .
$10M for a 40% stake !!!!
This is peanuts for ATCO
I wonder which independent financial has gone over that deal to suggest to the BOARD OF DIRECTORS to go ahead with this.
KRG and its various denominations (through no action of their own) will be in the driver seat to be the beneficiarcies of extremely large investments that the
US GOVERNMENT AND OTTAWA will be making in the next few years.
$10M is not a bad price to have a prefered seat at the table when the time comes.
You`ll see
Thanks
Atco was waiting for the funding to emerge. It looks clear and now they step to the project. At 40% stake, this company will benefit most, almost 100% pure benefit. They’ll benefit with all accommodation needs sell them to Inuit companies, in addition; This company will sell vehicles to transport what ever need to be cartage. KIA, so dumb, taken to cleaners. It’s not Inuit benefit company, it’s this major Calgary company that will take all advantages from “Inuit Owned Company”…Just look at RB, Atco town.