Arbitration Hearing Looming, page-66

Hi mate - stuck it into the evolving file, and it gave the following (again basis the usual caveats):

Here’s a breakdown based on the original public agreements:

1. Fifield Project Earn-In (Stage 1 Only)

• Target Ownership: Up to 50.1%

• Funding Requirement:AUD 4.5 million over 3 years

• Status at Termination (Oct 2024):

  • GPR had spent ~AUD 1.5–2 million

  • Did not complete Stage 1

Remaining obligation if reinstated:
Approximately AUD 2.5–3 millionto complete Stage 1
(Possibly more if a new timeline or updated budget is imposed)

2. Avondale Project Earn-In

• Target Ownership:

  • Up to 70%via staged spending

  • Can go to 75%via feasibility study

• Stage 1 Spend: AUD 1 million for initial entry

• Full Earn-In Requirement: Estimated $5–6 million (based on typical exploration & development milestones)

• Status at Termination (Oct 2024):

  • GPR had not met initial $1 million spend

  • No equity earned

Remaining obligation if reinstated:
At minimum, GPR would need to spend at least AUD 1 millionto reach Stage 1
Full earn-in would require several million more, subject to a revised agreement.

Additional Considerations in a Reinstatement Scenario

• Revised Terms Likely:
  Rimfire could demand:

  • Accelerated timeline

  • Security for funds

  • Upfront payments or minimum commitments

  • Clear default consequences

• Capital Constraints at GPR:
  GPR would need to show proof of funds or backing from Billis or others, which could be a hurdle.

• Loss of Leverage:
  GPR may be asked to accept reduced ownership upside, tighter controls, or a non-controlling JV structureas a condition of reinstatement.

Summary: Estimated Remaining Spend by GPR if Reinstated

	Project	Target Interest	Remaining Funding Needed
1	Fifield	50.1%	AUD 2.5–3 million
2	Avondale	70–75%	AUD 5+ million (total) ~$1 million just to reach Stage 1