Tuesday Shareholder Update, page-4

Hi Stock, too much cognitive load to go back over Sydney comments to compare ...but the points I noted at the Bris meeting are following.

Accuracy not guaranteed. Can guarantee there is no intent to misconstrue or deceive.

Please feel free to ask me if you'd like a clarification on anything.

With all of these things there is an element of reading between the lines, gut feel and vibe and I'm getting a good vibe.

Discussions after the session have enhanced my suspicions that:

1. Our good relationship with SIG was enhanced by the process of the CoA and we are/will be the preferred developer

2. In 12 months time the CoA decision will be considered advantageous for Axiom (as I have posted before) because it removes any possible platform for any to complain of unfairness, as neither of the two major litigants actually won..

It's important (to me) that the High Court findings regarding Sumitomo's conduct still stand.

-I haven't sold any shares and I will wait it out because we don't know when news will be announced and I believe this news it will have a significant positive effect on our SP (no guarantees). DYOR

Cheers,

SJB

• The Court of Appeal did not rule as to Sumitomo’s conduct which was spoken and written a lot in High Court judgement – they did not overturn those findings – they didn’t need to deal with it because of the fact that Sumitomo had already breached the land act provisions.

During the trading halt axiom:

• Confirmed that agreements with customers will remain in effect
• the funds that were raised during suspension were at a lower price than action would have liked but it was unavoidable in the situation
• reduce debt position by 90%
• introduced in core as a shareholder
• customer stand behind us – had an opportunity to change their position
• vote of confidence because they were happy to have their name used in announcements
• application for Kolosori tenement re-lodged with the Ministry of mines the same day the judgement was received

• were all frustrated by the judgement initially and also because we haven’t heard about the process as yet
• jurisdiction were dealing with doesn’t have the same capacity that we might have elsewhere and we need to remember that it’s an 80 page judgement and five-year court case
• court ruling was not flattering to the SIG both to the Ministry of mines and the Ministry of lands
• some people have lost the jobs over this
• 3 judges are only in the Solomon Islands twice a year so they’re not around to discuss with the attorney general technicalities of the ruling
• they want to make sure get the process right -where happy about this is encouraging that taking the time
• seeking independent advice to make sure that the process is sustainable and will be upheld and they have other stakeholders including World Bank officials working with the Ministry of mines working on a number of aspects including the Isabel project and that does give us confidence
• the announcement from the government that there is interest in the project from various parties and that they are addressing the project is essentially letting people know that they are getting on with the job
• Ministry of mines does lack some capacity -particularly compared with Australia
• it’s a big project for us; it’s a big project for the country and for other companies and no doubt be getting a lot of interruptions are phone calls emails people turning up in regards to the project and this slows the process down so the SIG public notice was to settle that and allow them to work through the process and to formulated in a manner so that it will be up held.
• We have a healthy dialogue with the Ministry of mines and it is clear that this project is a focus for them at the moment, but at different times other issues can take a priority.
• Solomons has a horrid history regarding mining, there are no current mines, however the region is geologically gifted.
• Were aware of this history in the Solomons and this has led us to taking a strategic approach and over the last 5 years we built up very good relations with key stakeholders including the people of Isabel, the business community and the SIG and the Ministry of mines.
• These relationships are the single most important attribute for any commercial development in the Solomon Islands
• We’re here for the shareholders of the company and while we have built up considerable goodwill with these key stakeholders – they also don’t like to be pushed and so we need to be very careful.
• It’s frustrating to management and the board and who are in personally that we haven’t got a formal announcement already however, I believe that the announcement will be announced shortly, I have confidence that it will adhere to the law and that it will conform to the judgement.
• We are confident about our position with the government, were confident about our position in the country and we believe that we will be the ones mining Isabel
• When? Can’t say for sure however best guesstimate is that we will be mining this year – of course sooner than later
• It won’t be a surprise if the process does take a few more months
• We do have a legal asset in the St Jorge tenement (part of the Isabel province)
• 40 to 50% of all the historical work was done on St Jorge
• We are very confident that St Jorge will be very similar to Isabel in both tonnage and grade will take 10 or 20%
• Historical drilling by Inco was only to find the upper limonite zone where is where more focused on the higher grade saporalite zone
• Inco were drilling the upper zone because they were testing the HPAL (high-pressure acid leaching) technology which is only applicable to the limonite zone.
• There is a historic resource however were not able to discuss that because of the listing rules as this resource was prior to the current JORC code.
• Despite this there are thousands of drillhole results drilled by the world’s number one nickel company and so we do have considerable confidence in those results - and the results on the drilling we did on Kolosori did largely validate those historical results.

Questions

1. is Sumitomo still a threat?
2. A. Sumitomo haven’t been known for backing down. No doubt they will try to make an application but legally we don’t know how they will be able to do it because they have more than 3 prospecting licences as it stands at the moment. However putting that legal aspect aside our number one asset is our goodwill and our position in the community.

The goodwill with the community also has a legal aspect in that: initially application is made to a government, which if successful will result in a letter of intent and this gives you the right to negotiate a surface access agreement with the landholders specifies the area of the land and the duration. Sumitomo have obtained letters of intent before, however they have never been able to execute prospecting license. The landowners have their own company called Axiom KB and these are 2 reasons of many why we are embedded in the community. The main issue with the Solomon Islands is that they value their way of life. They hold that in high regard and providing that’s respected there is the potential for commercial development.

1. Could they relinquish one of the tenements and then apply for Isabel.
2. Don’t think there is anything to stop them from doing that.
3. While we have this lull can we go to San Jorge and drill 2 to 4 holes to prove that we have the resource there? To give the shareholders more confidence.

A issues are -the program has to be completed to Australian standards and in so there is an amount of money involved – however it’s a question that the board considers every few weeks, do we wait to see if we get the Koslori tenement back or do we go to San Jorge drill and hopefully can encouraging results and a lift in our share price? If we continue to drill do we need to raise money? And if the SIG process takes a bit longer do we need to raise money because we’re drilling on San Jorge?

1. Can’t we drill just 4 to 5 holes to prove that that saporalite zone is there?
2. Yes it is possible –however we still have the community engagement process and there are costs with developing the infrastructure as there are no phones no roads no Internet and on an island so that all the equipment must be barged across and this needs to be timed carefully because of tides and weather et cetera. We are considering this and it may lead to an increase in share price.

Comment made regarding stressful situation for holders but also stressful situation for RM.

1. How confident are we in the grades at San Jorge -some rumours that the grade may be less.
2. The exploration was conducted by Inco who are the largest nickel company at the time this gives us confidence however it doesn’t conform with the JORC code -for example we don’t know where the testing is carried out.
3. Because of the large size of San Jorge mineralisation does this lend itself to areas of higher mineralisation that could help axiom get mining underway?
4. Short answer: yes
5. What are our current hold-ups going forward
6. Good question: we are currently in a difficult situation because we have everyone on hold, we’re trying to minimise our spend, yet retain key people in the Solomons to ensure rapid development.

Can be a communication disconnect between SIG and Isabel; most people don’t speak English; will be visiting the islands on Friday and Saturday to try to explain a court ruling that I have trouble explaining to shareholders; with decisions that are difficult to understand

1. If we have to bite the bullet and raise money can we do that in a way that includes shareholders.
2. Private placements were an efficient way to raise money in the past particularly when situations occurred or thinks didn’t go our way however now we’re starting to get a more even keel -with the Court of Appeal decision finalised; I understand sentiment and the answer is yes.
3. Possible for compulsory land acquisition by SIG?
4. It’s possible …hasn’t happened in the last 40 years
5. how long will cash last us?
6. So we have San Jorge which we could drill and attract capital; we have a goal project which is becoming of interest -especially with gold at the moment; will prefer raise cash after we reach a milestone and have share price appreciation. We feel comfortable with our position at the moment, however we also have to keep in mind that one of the criteria for licenses is financial capability and we don’t leave any stone unturned or give anyone an excuse to question us. Expect current funds to last considerable period of time. 5B notice will also provide details.
7. Is it possible to list the bonus options -might create more interest.
8. We are aware that listed options is a potential method for a backdoor takeover, however we did say would listed shares when they are cash flow positive or something similar.

Should point out were actually not opposed to a takeover at the right price; not opposed to the joint venture; were not opposed to selling and were not opposed to mining. We are here solely to create value for shareholders.

1. Steps taken to guard against a takeover?
2. We believe this asset will create a lot of value for shareholders so we have taken steps to protect against takeovers.
3. if there was a takeover attempt how with the indigenous people take to it?
4. This is definitely a risk for a potential predator, hostile takeovers in this region have not been very successful general.
5. Would a joint venture with SM MB at a question?
6. Not out of the question, we’re here to create value for shareholders -perhaps it’s possible that we could be the front end of an organisation and they could support the rear end.

during litigation parties talk and this is not about personalities it’s about business.
Q re-nickel future price research?

1. Nickel recently reached a 13 year low, as the world stockpile is eaten into will see a rapid uptake in the nickel price particularly with an increase in activity in China. Nickel is the most volatile of the metals with the exception of tin. Perhaps it’s been a good thing that the litigation / delays have been during this period of low nickel price. As the nickel price increases we are susceptible to shipping costs however this may be reduced by negotiating longer term contracts early.
2. Is there any lithium over there? (Laughter)
3. A few lithium batteries on site but we haven’t found any yet
4. Will we have a better idea of the timeframe once this process comes out?
5. I would have thought that the next step will be defining the process whether it’s an expression of interest or a tender
6. are you prepared to take a pay cut while we wait?
7. Job is 7 days a week many our job. (But isn’t this all of us?) Sure, we are looking at ways of reducing the burden of salary costs and we don’t know if I’ll eventuate but we are considering these.
8. If it goes to tender what is a timeframe?
9. In 2010 a tender was awarded a week or 2 after the deadline.
10. could we have gone into San Jorge a couple of years ago?

A explanation of the history of the awarding of tenements and litigation and why that led to our history and approach.

1. Do you watch hotCopper?
2. I don’t need to get sent screenshots etc.
3. Question re-taking part income in shares or delaying the cost in some way because of concern for cash flow position of the company -after good news and we’re at $.45 nobody will be too worried.
4. Significant tax issue in SI; the difficulties in living in the area (dengue fever and zika virus ). Executives don’t wish to live in the region. Shareholder concern is understood - being considered.