Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Nickel Creek Platinum Corp T.NCP

Alternate Symbol(s):  NCPCF

Nickel Creek Platinum Corp. is a Canada-based mining exploration and development company. The Company’s principal business activity is the exploration and evaluation of nickel and platinum group metals (PGM) mineral properties in North America. Its flagship asset is its 100%-owned nickel-copper PGM project, located in the Yukon Territory, Canada (Nickel Shaw Project). The project is in the southwest of Canada's Yukon Territory, approximately 317 kilometers (km) northwest (NW) of the capital, Whitehorse. The Nickel Shaw Project is a large undeveloped nickel sulphide project, with a unique mix of metals including copper, cobalt and platinum group metals. The Nickel Shaw Project has access to infrastructure, located three hours west of Whitehorse via the paved Alaska Highway, which further offers year-round access to deep-sea shipping ports in southern Alaska. The Company also maintains environmental baseline activities, considers optimization alternatives and seeks other opportunities.


TSX:NCP - Post by User

Post by Wangotango67on Apr 12, 2024 9:51am
90 Views
Post# 35985348

2011 - 2017

2011 - 2017 Consistent them of keep ug mine intact while promote open pit.
= makes no sense but it would make sense if another wants ug mine separate.

   2011 PROPHECY
- focal point majority ug mine at surface above ug mine
- good handle on contained estimated resources

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53648991753_65173c0a1f_b.jpg


   2014 - 2015
- much of the ug mine inferred is moved to = ( m + i )  ( 1st chart )
- additional inferred tonnage ( 846 mil tonnes ) is tacked on ( 1st chart )
  https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53294034400_a645049e8f_c.jpg

- all with in ( yellow ) pea constraint ( not the phase 5 larger pitshell )
  https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53320845588_6e26abc7b6_c.jpg

329 mil tonnes ( m + i )
846 mil tonnes ( inf )

   All the above
= 516 ug mine holes / 80 above ug mine with small western portions
= it's all about ug mine ( sulphide / gabbs / clino

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Infamous Highgrade Zone
Notice the ug mine is whitwashed ( kept intact
Yet...all original resource sizes were spawned from this ug mine zonation

Sulphide + Gabbs are far easier to extract metals from
Versus Silicates ( silicates require ulteafine grinding )
2018 - met tests increased grind size
meaning - courser grind size - to save on power consumption


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53296587984_d7753e1316_c.jpg


Johnson's drill hole reveals what below ug mine
And... what small investors recieve with 34% pea pit shell
vs mass tonnage below pea pitshell - where forward junior team said they'd go
back to deep east zones yet... never followed through.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53520608537_e27368a5f4_c.jpg


2017 - rolls round
test sulphide and gabbs later ( separate from silicates )

Yet... were these sulphide ores not the primaries for the 2011 to 2015 resource sizes ?
Sure were.

And.... since 2015 extraction studies only factored
10% peridotite
then, this supports majority sulphides and gabbs

The 2017 recharacterizing the ores = (    )  the entire deposit.
Along with tweaking cutoffs / zone name and boundary changes + 10% more resource
deduction from 74 holes ( 2015 - 2016 ) due to spot prices - lol

If .....
sulphides / gabbs / clino ore were grouped  +  silicated mined later
the extraction percentage recoveries would considerably increase.


Supposing 2017 ( test sulphides + gabbs later ) were partitioned
then... what would the deposit be comprised of ...?
Silicate ores.

If new met tests in, 2017 / 2018
and with courser grind = poor recoveries 


Questions...
Where's the sulphides and gabbs ( core high grade tonnage ) 250 mil tonnes ?
Why was the ug mine always kept intact while pushing open pit ?
Who has the 2013 reassaying files ?
Why assay and measure exotics but never include in, resource calcs ?
Why promise to pull plats out = more shareholder value but never follow through ?


Which is why i've always maintained
separate small shareholders from larger holders
payout small shareholders
why suffer us with drag, delay, numerous revisions, cheap dilution, poor pfs
that kind of formula is anything but.... shareholder friendly

Those original high grade sulphides and gabbs ( 2011 )
create a significant amount of metal pounds per cubic vs silicate cubic tonne.



Cheers....



<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>