Ann: Retraction of Announcement, page-91

Some comparison to the NPV released earlier in the year (19 April, 2022)

1. Both done on Resource size of 9.7Mt, 1% Li2O1
2. Both used a NPV6
3. Mining rate was 770ktpa vs 780ktpa now
4. Lithium Hydroxide was 10.5ktpa vs 8.8ktpa now
5. Capex was USD508M vs USD866M now
6. Same debt/equity ratio used for Capex (60/40)
7. Lithium Hydroxide Price of US26K used vs ??? (We don’t know)
8. Previous NPV was AUD862M, vs approx AUD2.15B (USD1.5B) now

So, same resource size, both used interest rate of 6%, mining rate pretty much the same, Lithium Hydroxide product reduced by about 15% and capex increased by about 70%……and NPV increased by 250%!!!

As others have mentioned as far as I can see it really does looks like EUR cherry picked the best case scenario for Lithium Hydroxide price here.

DRA without doubt, would have run and reported various scenarios for varying Lithium Hydroxide prices, so EUR announcing this "best case" doesn’t necessarily reflect badly on DRA.

To be clear… I am only comparing numbers across the two EUR NPV announcements and noting the difference….

Feel free to correct me if I have missed something!!

So....with this in mind..... my expectations are that we will see a decreased (relative to one just announced) NPV at the end of the Qtr....which is perfectly fine.....still nothing wrong with an NPV 20-25% less of 1.1-1.2B USD..,...all this speculation of course on my part...

It is good to keep expectations real.....