AVL news, page-688

There was a cost estimate of 75 cents per litre of diesel for Transport use. The assumption is this would be revised higher for todays pricing. Based on any rebated price of AVLs TMT's best estimate was $1.66 so any AVL estimate looked under cooked under the BFS.

Even TMT's estimate of $1.66 now would be under cooked from an inflation perspective.

Based on the EPA application where they are highly emissions conscious it makes no sense trucking 900,000 tonnes of ore, which was penalized iron grade at the time all the way to Geraldton. When final product tonnes which are 90% less by weight and therefore emissions can be shipped from the mine site to the port.

To top off that estimate AVLs BFS stated a V205 processing opex of $6.83 before credits and then a $2.40 iron ore credit to achieve the comparable final opex of TMT's all without binding offtake, floor and ceiling price contracts and in my opinion based on a lot of assumptions.

I am not saying TMTs costs were any better purely based on reducing carbon emissions the Geraldton strategy doesn't work without future technologies which are not on the market yet. i.e electric trucks or hydrogen trucks with satisfactory mileage range.

My point is that on a V205 basis AVL couldn't get close to TMT regardless of the processing employed.

Now that we are AVL+ The thing that will bring the opex down is the combined resource ore grades at Yarrabubba period.

I dont want my investment upside wasted by increased trucking and opex costs when there is a pending EPA application for the mine site. Everyone should be asking the company what the hold up is on this.

If there is a material cost opex reduction benefit to processing at Geraldton then so be it but to date management have not demonstrated anything and the lack of detail is not up to scratch for this type of decision.