Ann: 291129 SAEMC Growth Pipeline Presentation, page-14

I guess the truth is that its not possible to get all you want out of an agreement if you have a price point that needs to be achieved.

It seems that the decision was made to walk away from the UG opportunity under the pit if we could get $31m. Hence the announcement that the PHES deal sterilised the UG under the pit.

I think that we should have accepted that and moved on with exploring Nugent etc. so that we had a sure path to producing ore once the stockpiles ran out.

If we have proceeded with the exploration ,mine development plans, feesibility studies, approvals for mining etc under the pit without agreement with AGL that we can mine until the first fill then , as I have said management will present as incompetent.

Nothing wrong with the decision to take $31m and walk away. There seems to be potential for resources galore further afield.

I even think that the thought that the ore under the pit is sterilised could be based on the assumption that flooding the pit will deny access to that ore via the pit haul road.

Once we are underground Via Nugent, Emily Star etc. and have followed those loads down then linking across to the ore under the pit may not be a problem. Does a freehold owner have the right to prohibit us from doing that.

Maybe management is smarter than I think and getting a mining approval to recover that ore could auger well for us even after the pit is filled.

A nice stage two reserve to add mine life.