IMO. DYOR.1. Resource andReserve AssessmentGrade of...

IMO. DYOR.

1. Resource andReserve Assessment

Grade of Resource:

• Average Grade of Mineral:
  • Main Zone:
    • Rutile product content: Averages 25.3%, with a TiO2 grade of 93.0% (approaching pure rutile quality).
    • Pseudorutile: Accounts for 69.5% of HM content, with an average TiO2 content of 75.4%; 43 grains analysed exceed 80% TiO2.
  • South Pseudorutile Zone:
    • Predominantly pseudorutile, constituting 83.6–97.7% of HM assemblages, with an average TiO2 content of 65.1%.
  • North Zircon Zone:
    • High zircon content: 14.5–20.9%, alongside rutile products with TiO2 content as high as 93.9%.
• Comparison to Industry Benchmarks:
  • Global benchmarks for economic HMS deposits report TiO2 grades between 50% and 60% in high-grade zones. Rosewood's grades significantly exceed these standards, categorizing it among high-value projects.
• High-Grade Zones:
  • Main Zone: VHM content averages 97.9% to 98.9%, with exceptional concentrations in rutile and pseudorutile.

Resource Size and Classification:

• Total Resources:
  • 12 samples analysed: results from 45 additional drill holes pending across a broader 8 km × 2 km area.
• Breakdown by Deposit:
  • Main Zone: 1.6 km strike length, open to the north, averaging 9.1% HM content over 10–17 m intervals.
  • South Pseudorutile Zone: Drill hole 24RW020 reported 22m @ 19.1% HM.
  • North Zircon Zone: Zircon values exceed 20%, with promising TiO2 content.
• Confidence Categories:
  • No JORC-compliant resources; early exploration phase.

Reserves and Mine Life:

• Proven and Probable Reserves:
  • Not established.
• Expected Mine Life:
  • Potentially significant given the scale and grade of mineralization.
• Exploration Upside:
  • Northern extensions of the Main Zone remain open; further drilling imminent.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Reliance on early-stage exploration data and inferred geological interpretations.
• Reserve estimation not yet initiated.

2. Feasibility and Costs

Feasibility Study:

• Completion Status:
  • No formal feasibility studies completed, current focus on initial metallurgical test work.
• Key Findings:
  • Titanium oxides in Rosewood samples show exceptional purity, with no deleterious minerals detected, greatly enhancing economic viability.

Capital Expenditure(CapEx):

• Not disclosed, exploration phase ongoing.

Operating Costs(OpEx):

• No operational cost estimates provided.

Breakeven Price:

• Not determined, but exceptionally high-grade titanium content indicates competitive production potential.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Cost and feasibility metrics absent; further financial modelling required.

3. Revenue and Profitability

Financial Metrics:

• Financial projections such as NPV, IRR, or payback period not included.

Assumptions:

• No commodity pricing or inflation assumptions discussed.

Hedging Strategies:

• No mention of strategies to manage commodity price risks.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Profitability cannot be assessed without additional data on costs and market conditions.

4. Timeline and Milestones

Development Schedule:

• Milestones:
  • Heavy mineral (HM) assays from 45 drill holes expected within 3 weeks.
  • Metallurgical studies: Magnetic and electrostatic separation tests planned.

Past Performance:

• Early exploration milestones (e.g., drilling, initial analysis) met on schedule.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Unclear timelines for advanced exploration, permitting, or production.

5. Geological and Technical Risks

Geological Models:

• Deposits are fluvio-deltaic marine sediments, well-suited to open-pit mining.

Mining Method:

• Likely open pit mining due to shallow depths and lateral continuity.

Metallurgical Challenges:

• No deleterious minerals identified; initial results indicate high recovery potential for titanium oxides.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Further metallurgical and bulk sampling required for comprehensive recovery analysis.

6. Infrastructure and Logistics

Proximity to Infrastructure:

• Located near Coober Pedy, South Australia; accessible within the Woomera Prohibited Area.

DevelopmentRequirements:

• Infrastructure needs not explicitly outlined; logistical challenges for remote operations may arise.

Limitations andInconsistencies:

• Detailed infrastructure planning and logistics not discussed.

7. Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Factors

Permitting and Compliance:

• All tenements are in good standing, with no reported obstacles to exploration.

Community Engagement:

• Located within Native Title land under the Antakirinja Matu-Yankunytjatjara claim.

Environmental Impact:

• No discussion of mitigation strategies for environmental impact.

Limitations andInconsistencies:

• Lack of ESG-specific planning poses long-term risks.

8. Management and Team

Experience:

• Team has demonstrated competence in executing exploration programs efficiently.

Track Record:

• No reported delays or project mismanagement.

Limitations andInconsistencies:

• Expertise in advanced project stages and commercialization unaddressed.

9. Financing and Ownership

Funding Status:

• Current exploration funding appears sufficient, no details on production financing.

Ownership andPartnerships:

• Joint Ventures:
  • G4 Metals Pty Ltd.
  • Narryer Metals Ltd. (EL6715 and EL6873).

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Long-term financing strategies and ownership implications not clarified.

10. Market and Economic Context

Commodity Market:

• Titanium is a critical mineral in renewable energy, EVs, and aerospace, ensuring robust demand.

Supply-Demand Dynamics:

• Favourable market conditions expected due to global push for green technologies.

Geopolitical Risks:

• South Australia’s stable mining jurisdiction minimises geopolitical risks.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Lack of explicit market analysis or demand forecasts.

11. Competitive Position

Benchmarking:

• High VHM content (up to 98.9%) positions Rosewood favourably against competitors.

Competitive Strategy:

• Current focus on exploration and metallurgical advancements.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Long-term competitive positioning remains underexplored.

12. Exit Strategy

Path to Monetization:

• No explicit exit strategy or commercialization plan detailed.

Long-Term Vision:

• Exploration results suggest potential for long-term development and production.

Limitations and Inconsistencies:

• Lack of clear plans for monetization or scaling.

Conclusion

The Rosewood Prospect shows exceptional geological potential and strong market prospects. However, uncertainties in cost projections, ESG commitments, and monetization planning necessitate cautious but optimistic investment.