newsonline24

The Company has not completed adequate work to develop a resource estimate in compliance with National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”) at the SCZ project. In addition, the Company wishes to clarify that its Chrome Puddy project is in the exploration stage, and that, contrary to National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”), the mineral resource estimate previously disclosed by the Company in respect of the project is not supported by a NI 43-101 compliant technical report and should not be relied upon unless and until it is supported by a NI 43-101 compliant technical report.

Furthermore, the Company clarifies the following disclosures in its investor presentation, news releases and website:

a. disclosures relating to historical estimates in respect of its Chrome Puddy project do not contain the supporting disclosures required by section 2.4 of NI 43-101; accordingly, the Company restates this information as follows:

“A historical mineral resource based on limited drilling south of Puddy Lake was presented in 1966 by Commerce Nickel Mines Ltd. (CNML). CNML reported a nickeliferous magnetite mineral resource estimate of 30 million tons grading 0.27% Ni, 0.017% C o and 7.2% recoverable Fe to a depth of 400 ft (122 m) (Annual Report 1966). This historical mineral resource estimate was calculated prior to the implementation of the standards for disclosure set forth in NI 43-101 and current CIM standards for mineral resource estimation. The historical drill and assay results were reported in a manner that was consistent with the exploration practices at that time. Diamond drill holes by CNML, that are the basis of the historical mineral resource, are presented on maps that can be reasonably accurately located on the basis of lakeshore and topographic features and the logs for such diamond drill holes are available in public files, as are the 1965 assay certificates by Technical Laboratory Services, which was a reputable assay lab. A longitudinal section evaluation of relatively widely spaced drill intersections shows continuity of mineralization and that the reported tonnage and grade estimates are reasonable.     However there have been no independent validations of the historical assay drill core results and the assumptions, parameters and methods used to prepare the historical estimate are not all known. Resource definitions, terminology, and reporting standards have changed significantly since these series of reports. The estimate is considered historical in nature and a QP has not done sufficient work to independently validate the assay drill core results and evaluate these resources as current resources. Therefore, the Company is treating the estimate as historical in nature.

b. disclosures regarding certain exploration information were not supported by data verifications required by sections 3.2 and 3.3 of NI 43-101; accordingly, the Company restates this information to include the following:

“All sample results are considered historical and are from samples that were not collected by the Company. The QP has not done sufficient work to validate the assay drill core results, nor to verify sample collection methods, analyses, or QA/QC information for these samples.”

c. concerning disclosures relating to the Crawford deposit nearby to the Chrome Puddy project, the Company notes that such disclosures relate solely to the Crawford deposit, in which the Company does not hold an interest, and that there can be no assurance that the Company will obtain similar information or results from the Chrome Puddy project nor is the Company implying that it will obtain similar results on the Chrome Puddy project;

i. concerning drilling target information, the Company notes that such information did not contain the supporting disclosures required by Section 2.3(2) of NI 43-101, accordingly, the Company re-states this information as follows:

“Based on historically reported mineralized drill holes over a 1.9 km strike length the Company has an exploration target estimated at 25 to 50 Mt at a grade of 0.25% to 0.30% Ni which it will endeavour to validate and refine by upcoming surface exploration and airborne geophysical surveys.  However, the Company notes that the potential quantity and grade of the exploration target is conceptual in nature, and that there has been insufficient exploration to define a mineral resource and that it is uncertain if further exploration will result in the target being delineated as a mineral resource.”;

ii. concerning the “Sample Results” disclosed, the Company provides verifications pursuant to Sections 3.2 and 3.3 of NI-43-101 as follows:

“All sample results are considered historical and were not collected by the Company. The QP has not done sufficient work to independently validate the assay drill core results, nor to verify the sample data.”

iii. With respect to the Company’s disclosures contained in its presentations, website and news releases relating to adjacent and regional projects, the Company clarifies that such disclosures relate solely to adjacent and regional projects in which the Company does not hold an interest, and that there can be no assurance that the Company will obtain similar information or results from its own projects regardless of proximity, nor is the Company implying that it will obtain similar results on its own projects.

The Company has removed the above-mentioned investor presentations and technical disclosures from its website, and notes that investors should not rely upon the information which the Company is retracting by way of this news release.

In addition, the Company notes disclosures contained in the Chrome Puddy Report are not compliant with NI 43-101 and should not be relied upon unless and until such disclosures are supported in compliance with NI 43-101 by an updated report. The Company intends to file a new technical report relating to its Chrome Puddy project by August 8, 2024.

Michael Dufresne, M.Sc., P. Geol, P. Geo, is an independent qualified person as defined under NI 43-101 who supervised the preparation of and approves the scientific and technical content of this news release.

About Green Bridge Metals

Green Bridge Metals Corporation (formerly Mich Resources Ltd.) is a Canadian based exploration company focused on acquiring ‘battery metal’ rich mineral assets and the development of the South Contact Zone (the “Property”) along the basal contact of the Duluth Intrusion, north of Duluth, Minnesota.

ON BEHALF OF GREEN BRIDGE METALS

“David Suda”
President and Chief Executive Officer

For more information, please contact:

David Suda
President and Chief Executive Officer
Tel: 604.928-3101
investors@greenbridgemetals.com

In Europe:
Swiss Resource Capital AG
Jochen Staiger & Marc Ollinger
info@resource-capital.ch
www.resource-capital.ch

Forward Looking Information

Certain statements and information herein, including all statements that are not historical facts, may contain forward-looking statements and forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Such forward-statements include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to future exploration work on the properties of the Company and upcoming surface exploration and airborne geophysical surveys and potential results therefrom.  Although management of the Company believe that the assumptions made and the expectations represented by such statements or information are reasonable, there can be no assurance that forward-looking statements or information herein will prove to be accurate. Forward-looking statements and information by their nature are based on assumptions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause actual results, performance or achievements, or industry results, to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements or information. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except in accordance with applicable securities laws.

Neither the Canadian Securities Exchange (the “CSE”) nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the CSE) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.