TORONTO, ON / August XX, 2019 / Junior Mining Network host Cory Fleck interviews Prophecy Development Corp.(TSX: PCY) (OTCQX: PRPCF) Executive Chairman John Lee to discuss the Company’s 100% owned high-grade Pulacayo Silver-Lead-Zinc Project in Bolivia’s Silver Triangle.

Located between Coeur Mining’s (NYSE: CDE) San Bartolome mine and Pan American Silver’s (NASDAQ: PAAS) San Vicente mine, Prophecy’s Pulacayo project is an advanced stage project hosting two known silver-lead-zinc mineral deposits.

Prophecy’s Pulacayo deposit has access to water, power and toll milling facilities, meaning it can be commissioned on a trial mining basis for minimal lead time and startup costs. The deposit comprises a N.I. 43-101 mineral resource estimate that host 30.4 million ounces of silver in the Indicated category at an average grade of 594 g/t silver equivalent and 6.3 million ounces of silver in the Inferred category (see tables 1 and 2 below). Meanwhile, the nearby Paca deposit contains a N.I. 43-101 Inferred mineral resource estimate totaling 20.9 million ounces of silver at an average grade of 342 g/t silver equivalent (see tables 3 and 4 below). The resource estimates are based on over 98,000 meters of diamond drilling since 2005.

Prophecy is currently working to obtain a mining production contract from the Bolivian government, which will allow it to explore and mine Pulacayo for up to 40 years. The Company also plans to conduct both infill and exploration drilling in 2019.

Listen to the full Interview:

Listen to the full Interview:

About Prophecy Development Corp.

Prophecy is developing the Gibellini project- the only large-scale, open-pit, heap-leach vanadium project of its kind in North America. Located in Nevada, Gibellini is currently undergoing EPCM and permit development. Further information on Prophecy can be found at www.prophecydev.com.

Qualified Person

Danniel Oosterman, VP Exploration for Prophecy has prepared, review and approved the scientific and technical information in this press release. Mr. Oosterman is a non-independent Qualified Person within the meaning of National Instrument 43-101 Standards.

Appendix

Table 1. Pulacayo Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource Statement Details

Pulacayo Mineral Resource Statement – Effective October 20, 2017
Ag Eq. Cut-Off (g/t) Category Tonnes* Ag (g/t) Pb (%) Zn (%) Ag Eq. (g/t)
400 Indicated 2,080,000 455 2.18 3.19 594
Inferred 480,000 406 2.08 3.93 572


Notes:
(1) Mineral resources are estimated in conformance with the CIM Standards referenced in NI 43-101.
(2) Raw silver assays were capped at 1,700 g/t, raw lead assays were capped at 15% and raw zinc assays were capped at 15%.
(3) Silver equivalent Ag Eq. (g/t) = Ag (g/t)*89.2% + (Pb% *(US$0.94/ lb. Pb /14.583 Troy oz./lb./US$16.50 per Troy oz. Ag)*10,000*91.9%) + (Zn% *(US$1.00/lb. Zn/14.583 Troy oz./lb./US$16.50 per Troy oz. Ag)*10,000*82.9%).
(4) Metal prices used in the silver equivalent calculation are US$16.50/Troy oz. Ag, US$0.94/lb Pb and US$1.00/lb. Zn. Metal recoveries used in the silver equivalent equation reflect historic metallurgical results disclosed by Apogee Silver Ltd. (Porter et al., 2013).
(5) Metal grades were interpolated within wire-framed, three-dimensional silver domain solids using Geovia-Surpac Ver. 6.6.1 software and inverse distance squared interpolation methods. Block size is 10m(X) by 10m(Z) by 2m(Y). Historic mine void space was removed from the model prior to reporting of resources.
(6) Block density factors reflect three-dimensional modeling of drill core density determinations.
(7) Mineral resources are considered to have reasonable expectation for economic development using underground mining methods based on the deposit history, resource amount and metal grades, current metal pricing and comparison to broadly comparable deposits elsewhere.
(8) Rounding of figures may result in apparent differences between tonnes, grade and contained ounces.
(9) Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
(10) * Tonnes are rounded to nearest 10,000.


Table 2: Contained Metals Based on October 20, 2017 Pulacayo Deposit** Mineral Resource Estimate

Metal Indicated Resource Inferred Resource
Silver 30.4 million oz. 6.3 million oz.
Lead 100.0 million lbs. 22.0 million lbs.
Zinc 146.3 million lbs. 41.6 million lbs.

**Based on the resource estimate Ag Eq. cut-off value of 400 g/t and 100% recovery; figures are rounded to the nearest 100,000th increment

 Table 3. Paca Inferred Mineral Resource Statement Details

Paca Mineral Resource Statement – Effective October 20, 2017
Ag Eq. Cut-Off (g/t) Category Tonnes* Ag (g/t) Pb (%) Zn (%) Ag Eq. (g/t)
200 Inferred 2,540,000 256 1.03 1.10 342


Notes:
(1) Mineral resources are estimated in conformance with the CIM Standards referenced in NI 43-101.
(2) Raw silver assays were capped at 1,050 g/t, raw lead assays were capped at 5% and raw zinc assays were capped at 5%.
(3) Silver equivalent Ag Eq. (g/t) = Ag (g/t) + (Pb% *(US$0.94/ lb. Pb /14.583 Troy oz./lb./US$16.50 per Troy oz. Ag)*10,000) + (Zn% *(US$1.00/lb. Zn/14.583 Troy oz./lb./US$16.50 per Troy oz. Ag)*10,000). 100 % metal recoveries are assumed based on lack of comprehensive metallurgical results.
(4) Metal prices used in the silver equivalent calculation are US$16.50/Troy oz. Ag, US$0.94/lb Pb and US$1.00/lb Zn and reflect those used for the Pulacayo deposit mineral resource estimate reported above.
(5) Metal grades were interpolated within wire-framed, three-dimensional solids using Geovia-Surpac Ver. 6.7 software and inverse distance squared interpolation methods. Block size is 5m (X) by 5m (Z) by 2.5m (Y). Historic mine void space was removed from the model prior to reporting resources.
(6) A block density factor of 2.26g/cm³ was used and reflects the average of 799 density measurements.
(7) Mineral resources are considered to have reasonable expectation for economic development using combined underground and open pit methods based on the deposit history, resource amount and metal grades, current metal pricing and comparison to broadly comparable deposits elsewhere.
(8) Mineral resources that are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
(9) *Tonnes are rounded to nearest 10,000.

The contained metals estimated by the Company based on the October 20, 2017 resource estimate by Mercator are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Contained Metals Based On October 20, 2017 Paca Deposit** Mineral Resource Estimate

Metal Inferred Resource
Silver 20.9 million oz.
Lead 57.7 million lbs.
Zinc 61.6 million lbs.

**Based on the resource estimate Ag Eq. cut-off value of 200 g/t and 100% recovery; figures are rounded to the nearest 100,000th increment

  •  The Qualified Person for the estimate is Mr. E.J.C. Orbock III, RM SME, a Wood employee. The Mineral Resources have an effective date of 29 May, 2018.
  •  Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.
  •  Mineral Resources are reported at various cut-off grades for oxide, transition, and reduced material.
  • Mineral Resources are reported within a conceptual pit shell that uses the following assumptions: Mineral Resource V2O5 price: $14.64/lb; mining cost: $2.21/ton mined; process cost: $13.62/ton; general and administrative (G&A) cost: $0.99/ton processed; metallurgical recovery assumptions of 60% for oxide material, 70% for transition material and 52% for reduced material; tonnage factors of 16.86 ft3/ton for oxide material, 16.35 ft3/ton for transition material and 14.18 ft3/ton for reduced material; royalty: 2.5% net smelter return (NSR); shipping and conversion costs: $0.37/lb. An overall 40º pit slope angle assumption was used.
  •  Rounding as required by reporting guidelines may result in apparent summation differences between tons, grade and contained metal content. Tonnage and grade measurements are in US units. Grades are reported in percentages.
  •  43-101 Pulacayo Report dated Oct 20, 2017 By Mercator Geological Services Limited on SEDAR.

Cautionary Statements:

Forward-looking statements relate to future events or future performance and reflect current estimates, predictions, expectations or beliefs regarding future events and include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to: (i) the PEA representing a viable development option for the project; (ii) construction of a mine at the project and related actions; (iii) estimates of the capital costs of constructing mine facilities and bringing a mine into production, of sustaining capital and the duration of financing payback periods; (iv) the estimated amount of future production, both produced and metal recovered; and (vi) life of mine estimates and estimates of operating costs and total costs, cash flow, net present value and economic returns including internal rate of return estimates from an operating mine constructed at the project.   

Junior Mining Network (”JMN”) is not a financial advisory or advisor, investment advisor or broker-dealer and does not undertake any activities that would require such registration. The information contained herein is not intended to be used as the basis for investment decisions and should not be considered as investment advice or a recommendation, nor is the information an offer or solicitation to buy, hold or sell any security. JMN does not represent or warrant that the information posted is accurate, unbiased or complete and make no representations as to the completeness or timeless of the material provided. JMN receives fees for producing content on financial news and has been compensated $750 by Prophecy Development Corp. to publish this interview. Investors should consult with an investment advisor, tax and legal consultant before making any investment decisions. All materials are subject to change without notice.