Thank you, Darcy. Good morning, everyone.

Thank you for taking the time to dial in this morning. In addition to the normal quarterly report, we have released a presentation that we'll speak to during this call, noting that it also includes information from our exploration update that we released last week.

Both documents have been uploaded to the ASX platform and will be available on our website shortly. This morning, I am joined by members of the exec team, our COO, Tim Hewitt, CFO, Darren Millman, and also our EGM Exploration, Peter Ruzicka.

Initially, I'll speak to the highlights for the quarter and for FY '26 before handing over to the team to go through their specific areas before I close with some comments on our shareholder returns program. Whilst the presentation is relatively high-level, there is a lot more detail that can be found both in the quarterly activities report released today and that exploration update that was released last week.

As usual, there'll be an opportunity for questions at the end through both the teleconference and the webinar, depending on how you have joined the call. For those that do have the presentation deck handy, I'll be initially speaking to slide three.

Gold production for the quarter: 53,500 ounces at an all-in sustaining cost of 1,973 Aussie. After a couple of leaner quarters, which were in line with our mine sequencing and expectations, we are now at a normalized run rate at our Mount Magnet hub, considering that current throughput capacity of around 2 million tons per annum.

The positive impact of the Never Never ore feed is now coming through, and we look forward to a higher contribution from that mine in the year ahead. Work on our three key projects: one, being the ramp-up of the Dalgaranga mine; two, the Mount Magnet plant upgrade; and three, environmental approvals for the Rebecca-Roe project have progressed well across the quarter.

The operational project focus has been at Dalgaranga, with the paste plant construction and ancillary site infrastructure, including underground pump station, which has been commissioned and is fully operational, which Tim will talk to further shortly. At the Mount Magnet plant, engineering and execution success are the priority, with the owner's team now largely in place.

The refurbishment of the existing circuit, we call Circuit 1, progressed with a third-party contractor appointed early in the quarter. Circuit 2, the front-end engineering design or FEED, is nearing completion, and we expect to award an EPC contract in this September quarter.

Also, during the quarter, we received EPA authorization for the Roe mine area of the Rebecca-Roe project to proceed through the established Part V works approval and licensing process. This approval process is the last major hurdle for the project, with the same approval already in place for the Rebecca part of that project.

On the corporate front, we continued our share buyback program and have now completed $141.7 million of our $250 million program, or 57%, noting that this does include an additional $1 million over the numbers you'll see in the deck, as the last trade actually settled in early July. It would be difficult to find any of our peers as active on buyback execution.

In addition to that, we paid a 3 cents per share fully franked interim dividend in the quarter. Towards the end of the presentation, I'll touch on our shareholder returns in more detail, with a final dividend obviously to be considered by the board upon release of the full financial results in late August.

Lastly, we've entered into a sale agreement for the Edna May hub, which we expect to complete in September. The sale proceeds of $300 million further compliment the exceptional cash flow from that investment over the past 8 years, and Darren will talk to this value generation in more detail shortly.

FY '26 on slide four: It's been a very busy year, which is nothing unusual in my experience here at Ramelius, but we want to highlight the results of some of the work that's been undertaken. Annual gold production was just above 192,000 ounces at an all-in sustaining cost of $1,983 an ounce, with production guidance being met for the sixth consecutive year.

Early in the financial year, we completed the acquisition of Spartan Resources and then went on to finalize the Never Never Underground Mine PFS, and also complete the Mount Magnet Integration Study with a maiden ore reserve of 1.6 million ounces. At Rebecca-Roe, a DFS was completed with FID approval from the board, subject to environmental permitting for Roe, which is advancing as I just talked about.

We also executed a native title mining agreement with the traditional owners in December. In terms of exploration, we invested just over $100 million in FY '26, with excellent results being returned across the portfolio, focusing on displacing lower-grade ore in our 5-year mine plan that we released last October.

On the back of these promising results received to date, we are doubling down on exploration with a similar budget already approved for FY '27. We released a lot of great results in FY '26, but we are confident there are plenty more to come.

On shareholder returns for the year, we returned $294 million by way of both buybacks and dividends, with $255 million of that in cash and $39 million in dividend reinvestments. Slide five shows a breakdown of ore sources during the quarter and the full year.

What's quite obvious here, you can see the impact of the introduction of Never Never ore in green in Q4, making up about 40% of the gold production. We're currently in the process of updating our mine plan in conjunction with updated mineral resources and ore reserve statements.

We will provide these details along with FY '27 guidance later in the quarter. With that, I'll now pass over to Tim.

Thanks, Mark. Good morning to you all.

Firstly, I would just like to acknowledge the fantastic effort by the teams at Magnet, Dalgaranga, and Penny for the quarter's results. I'll start on slide six looking at the production metrics for the quarter, all of which showed an improvement over the previous quarter.

We mined 636,000 tons of ore at a grade of 3.3 grams per ton, representing a 16% increase in tonnage and a 35 35% increase in mined grade. This was driven by two factors: firstly, the increasing contribution of the Never Never underground mine; and secondly, a notable increase in tonnages from Galaxy mine, with 213,000 tons being mined at a grade of 2.22 grams per ton.

As highlighted in previous releases, Galaxy is delivering on both volume and mine life and is an important part of the FY '30 plan. At Cue, open-pit mining continued in the quarter with comparable material movement to the prior quarter.

Operations at Cue focused on stage two of Break of Day, Leviticus, Lena, and Big Sky pits. Penny mine performed well again with a total of 66,000 tons being mined at a grade of 8.52 grams per ton, a combination of Penny West and north stopes in those tonnages.

Whilst tonnages were slightly down, the all-important grade increased 35% quarter-on-quarter. Operationally, the Penny mine is planned to extend production into the December '26 quarter.

At the processing plant at Mount Magnet, tons processed were up compared to the prior quarter, which was impacted by the plant's 6-day mill shutdown. A total of 515,000 tons were milled at a grade of 3.59 grams per ton, a 38% increase on the prior quarter.

This was the result of the increased tonnages we saw from Never Never underground and Galaxy and the improved grades at Penny. Overall, plant recovery dropped marginally, as expected, with the introduction of the higher ore contribution from Never Never.

However, it is pleasing to note that recoveries on a daily basis on the Never Never ore have been as good, if not better, than the model recovery. Further analysis is to be completed over the coming months of mill throughput to confirm an updated recovery percentage to be used until the completion of the Mount Magnet plant upgrade.

The resulting gold production for the quarter was 53,466 ounces, a 40% increase on the March quarter, taking annual gold production to 192,182 ounces. Moving on to slide seven, looking at some of the site progress at Dalgaranga, the key projects and operational progress for the quarter, I guess the key point here is that we have transitioned quickly to commercial production.

That was 3 months earlier based on better than initially modeled mine grades and the improved gold price environment, and reflective of the quality of geological work we've done on the ore body at Never Never. Site infrastructure work continues, with eight key packages being worked on at the moment.

The key one is the paste plant and paste establishment, including the paste boreholes, which are now in place. The surface workshop and mine offices are progressing well, and the underground pump station has been commissioned and is in use.

Lateral development of just under 6,000 meters under the period of Ramelius's ownership from the 1st of August, with 1,800 meters completed in Q4, with the metric improving quarter-on-quarter. Focus is on the decline for vertical advance and the ventilation drives to support the mine volume as it increases.

The underground mine generated a total of 115,000 tons of ore mined at a grade of 5.95 grams per ton, taking FY '26 to 181,000 tons at 5.3 grams per ton. This was a combination of stope and development ore, with four stopes mined for the year.

Stope recovery and dilution has been excellent. We continue to progress the Never Never open pit, which has been mined ahead of schedule to reduce impact on adjacent infrastructure.

A total of 69,000 tons of ore was mined in the quarter at a grade of 2.15 grams per ton. The ore was not processed; we preferentially treated the high-grade underground ore, and the pit will continue into the December '26 quarter.

Of this, 146,000 tons of Never Never ore was processed at a grade of 5.37 grams per ton. I'll now pass over to Darren to discuss the financials and cash flows for the quarter.

Thanks, Tim, and good morning, all. I will now be speaking to slide eight.

For the June quarter, we sold 52,000 ounces of gold at an average gold price of $6,230 per ounce. The higher gold sales reflected the increase in gold production from operations and the realized gold price, which is 8% up on the March quarter, with the June quarter hedge book commitments pre-delivered in March.

The all-in sustaining cost for the quarter was $1,973 per ounce, a strong improvement, with the all-in sustaining benefiting from the higher mill grade. Even with the recent change in gold price, it is really a great time to be a gold miner, with the highest margins ever recorded at the company at 68%.

The margin has led to underlying free cash flows of $138.3 million and a closing cash and gold balance at just shy of $650 million. The reported all-in sustaining cost for FY '26 is $1,933 per ounce and warrants some further discussion on slide nine, where we reconcile the original guidance and actual all-in sustaining for the year.

By far the largest driver in our higher all-in sustaining cost for the year has been the earlier-than-expected transition of the Never Never underground mine from development to commercial production, resulting in mining costs which were assumed to be growth development, not forming part of the all-in sustaining, are now considered sustaining operational cost. This is attributable to both the better grades that were modeled early in development of Never Never and the higher gold price environment.

There are two important points to make on this. The total mining costs for the Never Never underground for FY '26 is in line with guidance.

It is just the classification that has changed. When preparing our 5-year plan in October last year, it was assumed that the mine would transition to commercial production on 1 July 2026, and we don't expect this reclassification to impact our all-in sustaining cost in FY '27 and beyond.

Still on the all-in sustaining cost, as with other peers, our cost base has been impacted by high diesel prices across the second half of the year. This increased our all-in sustaining cost by $24 an ounce, with the impact of some of which we were able to manage with our proactive diesel hedging program, which saved Ramelius approximately $5 per ounce.

Our initial guidance for the year was based on assumed gold price of $4,750 per ounce Aussie, with the actual average spot price for the year being $6,129 per ounce. This increased our cost base by $6 million or $33 an ounce.

Moving on to slide 10 and the cash flow for the business for the quarter: Operational cash flow was $191.2 million, an increase on the prior quarter, with the improved production and gold price. This operational cash flow funded growth capital for the quarter of $42.1 million, which is primarily related to the Dalgaranga infrastructure and the development of stage two cutback and Break of Day and the Big Sky pit, both at Cue.

Our investment in exploration and resource definition for the quarter totaled $33.9 million and was focused on Dalgaranga, Mount Magnet, and Cue. Peter will shortly highlight the exciting results we're seeing from this investment.

The underlying free cash flow for the quarter was $138.3 million. This underpinned our ability to return cash to shareholders, which comprised the payment of the FY '26 fully franked interim dividend and share buybacks, of which totaled $84.6 million or 60% of our underlying free cash flow for the quarter.

This resulted in a closing cash position which has improved $45 million across the quarter to $649.6 million. Whilst we provide a full-year whilst we will provide a full report of our Q4 '26 results in August with our annual reporting, I'd like to take this opportunity to provide an overview of the cash flow for the year.

The operations produced 190,000 ounces of gold, generating $764.2 million in cash flow and $624.6 after factoring in the hedge book. We invested $163 million in the development of of Dalgaranga and Mount Magnet across the year and over $100 million in exploration, focusing on displacing the low-grade ore within our 5-year plan.

Total cash returned to shareholders was $255 million or 60% 65% of the underlying free cash flow by way of fully franked dividend and share buybacks. In addition to this, $39 million was returned via our share our our dividend reinvestment program.

We paid $74 million in to Spartan to Spartan shareholders for the acquisition of Dalgaranga, net of the $199 million of cash acquired from Spartan. I also note that we have now, in July, paid the outstanding stamp duty on the acquisition of Spartan being $131 million.

We paid $180 million in income taxes, including $130 million for FY '25 earnings and a prepayment of $50 million in of FY '26 earnings. Closing out the FY '27 hedge book, with 90% of FY '27 production being available to sell at spot, with the remaining 10% relating relating to 22,500 ounces of zero-cost collars with a ceiling price of $5,906 per ounce.

Before handing over to Peter to discuss the exploration activities and results, I want to touch on the sale of Edna May on slide 12. Edna May was initially acquired in 2018, with the project further enhanced across its life with our hub-and-spoke additions of Tampia and Symes.

Up until the end of 2025, Ramelius produced just over 600,000 ounces from these mines, generating $430 million in pretax cash flow. The total sales proceeds, which we expect to receive in September upon completion, is $300 million, with $210 million in cash and $90 million in FireFly shares, allowing Ramelius to retain upside in the future development of Edna May hub.

Edna May has been an exceptional investment for Ramelius, with total value delivered pretax of $590 million for a $140 million investment. With that, I will now hand over to Peter to provide an update on exploration activities.

Thanks, Darren, and good morning, all. I'll be initially speaking to slide 13.

Many of you will have seen this slide in the past. A reminder that our exploration strategy differs from our peers in that we're not looking to extend the back end of mine lives.

We're focused on displacing low-grade ore material from our 5-year outlook, with the primary focus at Mount Magnet. The real impact of successful exploration will be evident in FY '29 as we look to displace the 1.9 million tons at 0.8 of low-grade ore, and in FY '30, displacing the 1.8 million tons at 0.6 grams per ton.

On today's call, I'll be speaking to some exploration success at Cue, Galaxy, Eridanus, and Gilbey's Underground. You'll see that most of those are actually listed as opportunities on the right-hand side of that slide.

Moving on to slide 14: This is a long section of the Lena and Break of Day mineralized system within the broader Cue complex. For information purposes, the Break of Day underground mine has only 50,000 ounces in the current 4-year mine plan and no contribution from Lena.

Our initial FY '26 exploration plan was to focus on Break of Day underground potential. Following up significant assay results shown there, including 6.2 meters at 60.3, 7.5 meters at 35.8, and 4.6 meters at 15.2 grams per ton gold, all shown in the figure there.

However, as a result of operational constraints, we weren't able to position the drill rigs at optimal locations for Break of Day. We've taken the opportunity to do some work at Lena.

Assay results have come back extremely positive from Lena, including 19.7 meters at 5.73 grams per ton and 9 meters at 12.9 grams per ton in the same drill hole, indicating two lode positions. Those results are situated 50 to 100 meters below the current resource model and highlight the depth potential of the 400-meter-long system.

Scoping studies are suggesting a significant expansion to our underground plans at Lena, as represented there by the conceptual design shown in the image. On to slide 15: Noting there the existing underground resources at Cue before drilling updates: at Break of Day, 250,000 tons at 8.9 grams per ton for 72,000 ounces, and at Lena, 910,000 tons at 3.6 grams per ton gold for 110,000 ounces.

In FY '27, we plan to aggressively drill out both Lena and Break of Day. We'll continue surface drilling for conversion of Lena underground inferred mineral resources, progress scoping study, while exploring down-dip extensions of Break of Day mineralization.

The dashed lines there on the figure represent planned drilling. Just highlighting that link again back to slide 13, we're looking to displace low-grade material in the long, grading from 0.6 to 0.8 grams per ton gold.

Slide 16 is a long section of the Galaxy mining area. As Saturn and Mars are operational and due to finish up at the end of FY '28 in the current 5-year production profile.

About 6 months ago, we set an exploration target of 6 to 7 million tons at a grade range of 2.1 to 2.6 grams per ton for 400 to 600,000 ounces. We're quietly confident that there's further upside to this system.

You might ask why. If you look at the image, it shows the exploration target area.

The Galaxy mineralized system is open at depth, with the same BIF host and structural continuation. It's constrained only by drill density.

Comparison with the Hill 50 system on the right, developed to 1.5 kilometers depth and still open. That shows the excellent depth continuity of these BIF-hosted systems.

Infill and lateral extension results from drilling during the reporting period include 20.2 meters at 40.7 grams per ton, 10.5 meters at 3.16 grams per ton, and 8 meters at 4.42 grams per ton. Two dedicated purpose-built drill platforms for depth extension drilling are being established, and we're increasing from two to three underground drill rigs to expedite.

Moving on to slide 17, Franks Tower: This is a long section of the Eridanus corridor. Both Eridanus and Franks Tower lie along the same granodiorite intrusive dike.

The exploration focus at Franks Tower is focused around replicating the high-grade success at Eridanus for another conceptual high-grade open pit. Whilst early days, we have some positive results proving up the concept.

Assay results include 14.8 meters at 54.6 grams per ton and 3.6 meters at 113 grams per ton. The long section highlights the shallow depth of drilling along the granodiorite away from Eridanus and the scope for high-grade at Franks Tower.

On to slide 18, Gilbey's Underground: In April, we provided the market with a Dalgaranga exploration update, setting an exploration target of 2.1 to 4.7 million tons at a grade range of 1.5 to 2.0 grams per ton for 100 to 300,000 ounces of gold. Conceptually, we're looking to turn this exploration target into production as early as FY '29.

Assay results continue to bode well for that target to be achieved. It's still early days, and we don't want to get in the road of Never Never's underground development.

We're looking forward to sharing the resource and reserve update on Gilbey's Underground, with our exploration teams viewing the FY '26 drilling programs as a success and more exploration upside to come. With that, I'll hand back to Mark.

Thanks, Peter. Final slide, slide 19, shows our shareholder returns for FY '26 and also an indication of what this could look like going forward.

We are indeed living up to our vision to deliver superior returns for stakeholders, with our 3 cents per share fully franked interim dividend along with over $140 million in share buybacks. We'll note that we're now in a blackout period and have been from the start of July through August until we release our FY '26 results.

We will use this time to further assess our preferred mix of dividends and buybacks, accounting for internal valuations and the like, but also recent changes to capital gains tax laws and their possible impacts. As it says at the top of the slide, we want to maintain returns in FY '26 and '27 at levels that we established in FY '25 whilst we go through our expansion projects, but then grow returns in FY '28 and onwards as these projects complete and cash flows increase.

That completes this morning's presentation. We'll now open the line up for questions if we can, please, Darcy.

Morning, Mark and team. Thanks for taking my question.

Just on costs, all-in sustaining costs on a unit basis look quite good, just with the extra ounces there. You've given some good detail just before on cost increases with diesel on an absolute basis, costs have gone up.

It sounds like you've given some numbers there for diesel. Are there any other cost concerns?

We're seeing costs sort of go up across the sector in your peers. Are you seeing cost inflation with labor or anything else?

Some detail on that would be great.

Thanks, Jonathan. It's Darren here.

As you've seen, a few of our peers have sort of reported out. You've seen I think sort of ranging from the 8% to 12% largely seems like the inflation.

We're seeing probably salary labor rates within that of ranging from the 5% to 7%. Then you've got some piping that's sort of significantly higher than that level.

Yes, we are seeing those cost inflation increases. I guess the great thing or the benefit for us is one, we are increasing our capacity at Mount Magnet.

We are getting higher grades as we introduce more Never Never ore. Obviously, as Peter said, with lots of potential offsets with looking to identify higher-grade materials.

We have got that pressure that the peers are getting. We will put out that update sort of the end of the September quarter with our 4-year mine plan and our cost profile capital then, you'll see that full picture as we go forward.

Great. Without giving sort of formal guidance, can you just outline FY '27, maybe just some detail on operating assumptions with progression, how should we think of it building sequentially with Never Never ramping up in terms of volumes?

Is it second-half weighted? Then also just on costs, are we expecting to see a cost kind of flatline now on an absolute basis, or should we still expect some inflationary pressure?

Jonathan, it's Mark. Unfortunately, you're going to have to wait for all that detail.

We'd rather give you the whole cake rather than just a slice. We've already indicated that Penny's going to go until later this calendar year.

The ramp-up will continue at Never Never. I would use the PFS ramp-up schedule as a baseline until you're told otherwise.

A lot of the other stuff, we're working through that, pulling that together. Obviously, some of these cost things: on-again, off-again Iran wars, fuel price going up and down, it's a little bit hard to pin a number down while we're pulling it all together ourselves.

You're just going to have to be a little bit patient on that, I'm sorry.

No, that's fine. That's some good detail there and appreciate that it's difficult.

Thanks. I'll pass it on.

Hey, Mark and team. I was just wondering just around how much detail you can give on the recoveries at Dalgaranga.

Obviously, you've got indications, 82% to 84%. Is there anything special that you're seeing there, is it just a conservative kind of nature with the study work there on that?

Then maybe just a follow-up, just around the grades coming in slightly higher than what you previously guided at 5 grams as opposed to what you're guiding at 3.7 grams. Is that higher-grade reconciliation, or is that just stopes coming online a little bit earlier than expected?

Thanks, guys.

Hi, Michael. It's Tim Hewitt here.

I'll just answer that question around the recovery. Our model recovery is 81%.

What we've seen in this last quarter is, sort of on a monthly basis, that's sort of ranged from 82% to 84%. Given we've got 7 million tons of this material to put through the mill, we do need to run for a little bit longer so we can sort of pin that number down, given we've got a couple of nuggety ore sources that also go through that mill with Penny and also some of the Cue oxide.

It's definitely a positive. It's not below the test work, which is a good thing.

We do need a few more tons through the mill before we can sort of lock that number in. Obviously, prior to the Magnet mill upgrade, which does obviously compensate for that finer grind.

Grades?

Grades. Largely, obviously, as we've got closer to the ore body, we've done more grade control drilling.

That has seen, again, probably as good if maybe not better grades than what we originally thought. The sequencing of the stoping is what the grade is.

The actual reconciliation of the grade is what we expected. No surprises from that perspective, it's just where we are in the ore body.

Awesome. No, that makes perfect sense.

May just quick follow-up, I know Mark touched on it right at the end there, just around the payout ratios. Is there any kind of plans for an increase given the cash coming in from Edna May just around increasing the buyback in the short term?

That's assuming that Edna May obviously completes in September. We also have noted in the stats that the net number will be more like $150 after we have to pay the tax man yet again on that sale.

We'll consider what we use that for. Obviously, we're very confident that our 5- or 4-year plan is fully funded.

That mix between buybacks and dividends is worthy of a larger discussion. We'll have that over the next couple of months as we pull our plans together.

No, we don't have anything definitive in our mind with the cash from Edna May, but we'll work through that over the next little while.

Awesome. Thanks for that, guys.

I'll pass it on.

Thank you.

hi, gents. Look, just a follow-up on the previous question regarding grades at Dalgaranga.

You mentioned that it's reflecting where you are in the ore body rather than it being a reconciliation issue. Not really an issue given it's reconciling better.

If we roll forward for the next sort of 6 to 12 months, is it fair to say that therefore you think you can access higher-grade parts of the ore body earlier, or should we be thinking that the grade should sort of fall back and reconcile more closely with what was in the previous mine plan? Hey,

Richard. I think we're not chasing grade; we will stick to the mine plan.

We're at the top of the Never Never ore body, the ability for us to manipulate that is fairly and fairly narrow to do that. We'll stick to what the mine plan is.

As I said, the overall grade will be reflective of what the stope grades are. No, we're not sort of trying to high-grade the mine at all.

We just need to work through the next 12 months. It's a part of setting up the mine for that higher tonnage.

Very important we get that infrastructure in there.

Maybe I can add something hopefully that's helpful, Richard. The 3.7 grams per ton that you see in that first FY '26 is really the first quarter.

Perhaps the assumption is that we would be mining largely development ore. We got into stoping a bit earlier, and the first stope, for example, is right in the middle of the ore body.

I think it's just the 3.7 is probably a little bit of a red herring; it's the 5-plus grams from thereon, and we seem to be hitting that a bit earlier. There might be a little bit of upside, but I wouldn't be factoring in too much, again, until we get more data and we can be confident, because we know this is going to be a long-term mine, and we don't want to have expectations that are above where we're actually going to land.

Thanks for the question, anyway.

Brilliant. Thanks, gents.

Hi, Mark and team. Just wondering if you could give us a bit of a status update for Rebecca-Roe.

I guess, what does it mean now that Environmental Protection Authority is authorized for the Roe area? Are we fully permitted there now?

I'll take that one. It's not fully permitted, but it provides a clearer pathway that we go through the same process for the main environmental approval that we went through with Rebecca, which has already been through, rather than going through a Part IV process, which, as you've seen with a couple of others of our peers, can be quite lengthy.

We're on a much more defined timeframe, and that will give us some added flexibility, we believe, in the mining sequence. It's good news.

We don't have the final approval, but we're on a shorter pathway than we otherwise would have been. That's what we've been trying to indicate along the way.

Did that answer your question, Adam?

It does. Yeah.

Yeah. I guess just noting there's a pre-existing mill nearby with a depleting ore source, noting it's a different company, just wondering, could there be a change of approach when it comes to the FID?

For example, could tolling be something that you could look at, or would you potentially be open to looking at a data room if I guess this peer decides to carve off some non-core assets?

From my experience, and I've been on both sides of it, tolling is not ideal and it's not something you do if you can otherwise avoid it. You tend to want to be all purchase, but that's a whole another discussion.

Tolling is not much fun for any party. We're moving forward with our projects team.

We've set a projects team up now to build Mount Magnet and then go straight into build Rebecca-Roe. We've got some Rebecca-Roe personnel already in the office here working on that project, working on early works.

We've moved on, if I want to put it that way, and we're building Rebecca-Roe straight after building Mount Magnet. Have I answered your question there?

Crystal clear. Thanks, Mark.

Hey, guys. Thanks for the update today.

Look, firstly, FY '27, appreciate you'll give us guidance later in the quarter, but you've reiterated the 5-year outlook numbers today. Should we interpret that '27 production number then as in line or skewed to the upside next year on some of the exploration piece, and it's maybe just the costs that are getting worked through?

In line is probably the best place to start, with perhaps a smaller amount of upside. Look, I'm trying not to give you numbers here when we're still pulling it all together.

Really, what we need to incorporate is these pieces of exploration upside and mine extensions into quite a complicated mine schedule to obviously optimize not only ounces, but costs, cash flows, et cetera. It's something that we're working on.

As I said to Jonathan at the outset from JPs, that we're just going to have to be a little bit patient until we get those numbers through.

Great. Just good to clarify.

Risk is not to the downside, it's excellent. Then maybe, Darren, one for you.

You've noted the classification impact to '26 all-in costs from Never Never being early. I think that sort of implies about $27 million in the second half that you therefore expensed for Dalgaranga, which then sort of in turn implies it's about $165 a ton in the second half.

Is that the right way to think about it? Going forward from here, should we expect that dollar-a-ton cost to continue to come down as you ramp up the volumes there?

Yes.

In short, yes.

Yes, obviously as you'd expect, as the ramping up infrastructure has been the real focus for the last 6 months getting it ready and so that's been what Tim and the team have been focused on. We've seen some really positive upticks in level of volume.

We've seen in the June quarter, we expect that to continue on to hit these numbers. Obviously, the name of the game or the prize is the million ton per annum coming out of Never Never.

You should to see them decline quarter-on-quarter. Excitingly, yeah, I think we've got that extension on Penny as well for December.

As per the norm, we'll always be prioritizing the high-grade. We might have been in a great situation where we've got a stockpile of some of this ore.

So.

Great. Helpful.

Just lastly, sustaining capital, pretty modest spend for FY '26. Any catch-up there in terms of plant works or anything like that we should think about going forward?

Yes. Some of the expenditures, especially on the Mount Magnet mill, will be moving from the FY '26 into FY '27.

Then also some consideration, given the recent great news on Roe, whether we bring forward some expenditures or some capital connected with the Rebecca-Roe project. That's all that sequencing work we're doing.

The other one probably to highlight, as Peter flagged, we've got Galaxy's looking very positive in mine life extensions, we need to evaluate what does that look like in the spend needed for the next sort of 24 months to be extending beyond the existing FY '28 sort of planned operational finish. That's sort of why it's taking a little bit longer, Hugo, on some of these pieces.

They're all positive, but it's just taking a little bit longer. You will see an elevated level of capital than what we initially planned in the October 5-year plan.

I might just add that we expect to get the results of our competitive FEED process end of this week. Obviously, that's a key part of the Mount Magnet upgrade in terms of not only cost, but also schedule.

Pretty hard to put a reliable mine plan out when you're largely relying on PFS numbers from late last year. That's a key part of it, as well as all the other bits.

Hopefully, that gives a good explanation as to why we're taking as long as we need to to have all the bits to be able to put together a reliable mine plan. No,

absolutely. That's clear, guys.

Good things take time. Appreciate the update.

Thanks, Hugo. Cheers.

Okay. Webcast question here from Monty Graham: "Could you please shed some light on the Never Never ore recoveries of 82% to 84% through the mill?

Does this plan increase with upgrades at the Mount Magnet Checkers Mill?" Tim?

Yeah.

The answer is yes.

I think, yeah, we touched on this one, but yeah, to the Mount Magnet, yes, definitely that's part of the engineering to improve through the recovery.

To be clear, the 82% to 84%, as compared to the 81% that we expected, was on the assumption it goes through the Mount Magnet mill as currently configured and has been configured for some time, which is a much coarser grind than we'll ultimately achieve for the Dalgaranga ore body, or the Never Never ore body specifically. Once we have the finer grind, we are looking more like 93% to be really clear on that answer.

That's a short-term lower recovery. Question from Chris, can't pronounce your surname, apologies: "With a focus on core operations ramping up for production and improving grades, would $1,500 all-in sustaining cost be an achievable target?"

I'll let the finance guys answer that, but I think that would be world-beating. I'm not sure if that's in Aussie dollars, but I think the days of $1,500 unfortunately are behind us.

I think $2,000 and being below $2,000, we didn't trumpet that as much as we perhaps could have, but not many are doing that. $1,500 seems to be unachievable in my mind.

Nothing to add there, Mark.

Yeah. What else have we got?

"Are we looking to incorporate electric trucks in any of your mines?" I suppose we have contractor-based operations, both underground and open pit, and also surface haulage.

We are a little bit dependent on those guys. We would happily look at electric options or support them in their adoption of electric.

I think that will start on the surface haulage. I did see an article from a haulage contractor where they are looking at those.

We know for sure underground you can actually potentially get more production and require less ventilation as a result of less diesel equipment. There's a positive in it, but we're not at the pointy end of developing that, it's something that we're dependent on through our contractors and OEMs.

Anything to add to that, Tim?

No, I think you're spot on there, Mark. We do keep an eye on what's going on in the market, but yeah, we're definitely keep those conversations with our main mining contractors.

Nearly 50 minutes in. No more questions.

Few comments, but no more questions online. We'll wrap the call up there.

Thanks, everybody, for your attention this morning. Have a great day.

Thank you.