Former post outlines - Prophecy will own approximately 90% of PCNC. 90% - Prophecy Coal, that is.
With PCNC owning - 10% stake.
Let's roll the ticker to previous year - 2010 - Whereas, Prophecy Coal and Nothern merge.
Resulting in, Northern's shares absorbed by Prophecy represented 49%.
https://www.prophecycoal.com/news_2010_jul16/
OR https://www.prophecycoal.com/news_2010/
SUM - Prophecy Coal absorbs Northern - Northern has 49% stake
- Prophecy Coal is bought by PCNC but... Prophecy Coal owns 90% and PCNC 10%
Simply ask, whose PCNC ? ( Pacific Coast Nickel Corp ) But really, who are they ?
Around this same timeframe, Mr Lee also sold the Manitoba Lynn Lake claims to, PCNC.
Who once owned, Wellgreen and Lynn Lake Nickel properties ?
Hudbay
Hudbay.... sounds awefully like,
Hudson Bay.
Historically speaking = England. ( mining and fur trade )
Reads as, Lee was into consolodations....lol
Let's play suppose, suppose PCNC + Northern teamed together, what would result ?
= 10% + 49% = would give controlling interest. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moving forward, 2011 year, launches the Wellgreen revamp. - New Drills
- Historical reassaying
- Exotics
No issues with junior working on,
- UG mine
- Historical updating
- Exotics
And pitched Wellgreen,
100% owned. 2013 rolls around, - zone changes
- upper / lower hole come into play
2014 - new resource calc - no tech report
2015 - new resource with tech report
- 329 million ( mm+ i ) and 846 million ( inferred )
- partial mining the UG mine ( 25, 37, to 56 yr mining life
- process silicates after 25 yrs
No issues with resource calculation nor, inferred.
Inferred was compliant.
https://data.geology.gov.yk.ca/Occurrence/14129#ReserveTab During the above spanse of time,
capital company invests.
Things changed in latter part of, 2015. Earlier 2015 crew - Johnson, Lee move on.
New crew, replaces old crew.
As the years pass, - more zone changes
- upper / lower hole more apparent
- 86% resource loss
- defer pfs
- cut offs
- test Gabbs and Sulphides at later date.
- recharacterize ore geology****
Why would the controlling junior decide to recharacterize the feology ?
who was leading the project ?
new 2015 crew.
What's the highest grade ore minerals are found in ? Sulphides and next inline, Gabbs.
Ironically, these two ores classes are quite apparent -
with in - UG Mine. We can read former MET studies along with 2017 press, Sulphides comprise 5% of resource
Gabbs approx 15%
Peridotites - 80%
2015 pea - resource calc also outlines, higher grade subsection with in global resource Witn in the 329 mil t + 846 mil tonnes inferred
https://www.nickelcreekplatinum.com/investors/news-releases/press-release-details/2015/Wellgreen-Platinum-Announces-Positive-Preliminary-Economic-Assessment-Update-on-its-Wellgreen-PGM-Nickel-Project/default.aspx
Could this be higher grade subsection be,
UG Mine and partial inferred below ?
Is there a tag team of 3 ?
PCNC + Northern + New Stakeholder funding project ?
I know one is still apparent, but what about the other 2 ?
Do they still own % stake / control ?
Supposing this aforementioned hypothesis is somewhat correct,
would shareholders interests be realevsnt ?
Again,
Former 1st crew of 2015 spoke of
UG mine, exotics, pulling plats from magnetite,
mining the UG mine.
many more mine life yrs
processing sulphides and silicates later on
= it's what investors invested in
2016 crew,
spoke of, pulling plats from magnetite and permitting ( production language )
videos - time to get the project mined - teenager out of the house.
2015 - 2017
everything changed.
rug pull ?
like.... why recharacterize the ore geology ?
Sulphide and Gabbs, highest grade ore - test at later date ?
were they not already measured / tested 2015 ?
Yup.
sulphide and gabbs - highest grades - yet....
Clinopyroxine and Peridotite comprise the geestest ore mass.
Clinopyroxine = Orange ( high grade too.
Peridotite / Dunite - mass ore volume
2015 to 2017 - 80% peridotite blened ores ( MET )
2017 - separate Sulphide and Gabbs test at later date.
2015 new funder installed own crew.
was this new crew looking out for, investor interest ?
would should investment firms be allowed to insall own crews ?
yes... that is if they still have the sm investors best interest.
otherwise it beomes - bias vantage.
Of recent - i accessed Wellgreen's file on, Gov't Yukon.
Here is where i was once able to review ( Lee's 2013 / 2014 )
work on reassaying and relogging.
Yes... i was once able to open these reassaying / relogging of hidtorical, drills.
Yukon link to to this 2013 file is no longer highlighted, active.
And page says it's not be revised since 2018 ?
Then why... can't i access these important files ? lol
What is different ?
Rory Claims shows itself.... hmmm
https://data.geology.gov.yk.ca/Occurrence/14129#AssessmentReportsTab
These 2013/2014 reassaying relogging files are important.
Proves it was performed. Proves junior at time place incredible focus
monies, time on the UG mine.
It's what investors invested in.
Furthermore,
Wellgreen has always been pitched as, Wellgreen deposit.
Newer language uses, Shaw Project.
Hmmmm.
Since mid 2015 - Wellgreen has sported,
329 million t ( m + i )
846 mi t inferred
The new 2023 pfs is a cluster ( f )
2015 had access to UG mine - measuring tonnage
versus
2023 main pitshell skirts and rides overtop
not to mention, very shallow pitshells considering deep drills like, johnson's.
756m or other reports state, 762m
2017 - 86% inferred resource loss,
was performed in a press release.
was not during a pea, or pfs.
how was this allowed ?
and, aren't reports suppose to improve upon the former, why was 2023 pfs
pushed out knowing it came nowhere near, 2015's success ?
Could the UG mine be used as a control card ?
Former owner ( 49% ) along with new larger interests weild the UG mine
to their vantage ?
Let's reverse this,
Clino + Peridotites comprise 80% or more of the resource.
Clino contains high grade too.
Can't mine the UG mine without touching the, clino - lol
Clino + Peridotite = more ore by volume than the Sulphides and gabbs.
Infact... could the 5% sulphide be didputed ?
Thin red line ( 5% Sulphide ores ) do not account for 5% of whole resources.
Appears far, less.
2017 ( resource reduction test sulphides and fabbs / later date
why continue the xps extraction which could not handle silicates ?
why not find a new extraction which cateres to sulphides in silicates along
with solution nickel ?
Also, why has wellgreen seen partial digest assaying over the years,
versus peers, full digest ?
Hypothesis Post
Speculation, allowed when speaking of stocks.
Sharing intel with other ( sm ) investors, have to, conidering the events.
SUM ?
- former ( 49% + 10% ) imbedded
- 2015 radical changes.
Yet... no issues when 2015 crew and prior built out UG mine
and reported 2015 resources.
Someone wanting their UG mine back ?
lol
,
Cheers...