Ann: Company Presentation - ADU Singapore , page-2

Back on subject of upgrading:

2 strange things in this presentation

Maybe a typo but noticed the feed head grade is given as 46% in this presentation which is higher than previously stated (to date has been 42%), which is very significant and would warrant more than a cursory one liner.

Also product grade is not indicated on this presentation which is a little strange if you are trying to sell the project but don't indicate what the product will be.....

Extract from the quarterly report issued recently:

"It is contemplated that mined ore, at a grade of around 42% Fe, will be hauled to a crushing plant and crushed to around <10mm by a simple, low power intensity two stage crushing system. The crushed ore will be further milled, fed to a beneficiation plant and through a simple magnetic separation process, a final upgraded iron ore concentrate of 55-56% Fe is expected to be produced"

From this recent presentation page 18 it reads "feed head grade of 46%"

Note that:

The JORC is set at 42.7% average grade
Exploration target is in range 32-48%

The implication if that if 46% is required as the feed head grade then a large chunk of material in the ground is not going to be suitable based on the JORC value of 42.7% and the exploration target range values 32-48%.

Remember that no pre processing is being completed now so there is no upgrading prior to mag process so what comes out the pit is head grade

As previously indicated the adopted mag upgrading process does not work for the upper zone laterite, so perhaps this is a short hand way of saying only higher grade lower zone material will be processed.

We are slowly slowly getting closer to the point we get some clarity in a presentation what tonnage of material is suitable as feed ore...

Noting that another potential reason for higher feed grade is that a higher grade product is required for marketing for sale, more like 58% product rather than 55%. To achieve this the only way is by upping the feed grade which would result in higher product grade. So less tonnes of product but higher grade.

A note that may indicate a higher grade is being looked at is given by IB, in the quarterly there is this quote:

“The Phase 2 metallurgical results are very
encouraging and indicate that we can produce a 55-58% Fe
iron ore concentrate from the lower CID-Oolite mineralisation defined at our Agbaja Project.”

The 55% product comes from head grade of 43%, so to get the upper end 58% then a higher head grade of closer to 46% would be required. So maybe this is the reason for 46% now being stated as feed grade??

Interesting also to note that this neither this presentation or the quarterly has any mention of recovery rates/yield on the process diagram as was given previously (where they were given and were around 50%), these numbers have now been studiously removed from all published process diagrams now and no mention is given to this....

Still hard to decide if these reports and presentations are just very poor on technical side or information is being hidden/not disclosed