Ann: Investor Presentation - Paydirt Battery Metals Conference, page-75

(For you @mirri11. Reply feature acting up again.)

Hello mirri11,

Yep, that would be right up there, imo, but not the only consideration.

There are some rather vocal voices on these threads that keep rinse/repeating the same old language to the effect "we know the mineralisation is there, just get on with it!". You've nailed the nub of it. Proof is required... to a JORC standard. That means not idly speculating what's there, but actual testing and confirming it via drilling and assay work. We're due an update to the SS Resource (from recent drilling) sometime this month. Once a mining plan can be put around the GS and SS Resources a Maiden Reserve (GS) and Reserve update (SS) will also be forthcoming (i.e. a couple/few months later). This all ties-in with initial LOM (life of mine) expectations, BFS, funding, yadda, yadda, which needs to be based on best practice rather than just winging it, loosey-goosey style.

The above comments only relate to the act of finding and proving-up the in-ground ore, but that's not the end of it by any means. Consideration also needs to be given to how it can be effectively processed into Ni concentrate. This is where the metallurgical ('met') testing work comings in. Since we're very unlikely to have enough of juicy high-grade u/g ore to justify a min., say, 5-yr initial LOM, the decision has been made to blend it with the much lower-grade, but more plentiful low-grade ore from the BS open pit at the same site. Blending different ore types isn't nearly as simple as mixing a G&T or a shandy. It's complicated and requires much testing. That too is ongoing.

There are some voices on these threads that seem to think that we can simplistically pick-up where Norilsk (previous owner) left off. That thinking is simplistic in the extreme. For starters, it ignores the fact that Norilsk, a vertically integrated (i.e. raw ore to final Ni metal) owner was producing a Ni concentrate to its own spec to feed its own smelters in the northern hemisphere. We don't have that luxury and we must tailor our Ni concentrate to meet the needs of others -- hence the need for the crazy amount of met testing work. There's a host of other ops issues at the BS complex that mean management cannot simply pick-up where Norilsk left off without properly informing itself in that regard and making the project their own.

Having the topside processing infrastructure already in place is very advantageous, but it's not a matter of just 'doing what they did'. Perhaps the best way to think about having the existing processing infrastructure is something along the lines of, "Not as good as if we were an existing owner (who previously operated) who is now considering restarting ops, but much, much better (quicker/cheaper) than developing a virgin greenfield project from the ground up".

Hope that very basic primer helps.


[Edit] +1 to AJ's comments, which I only just noticed after posting this.