Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining us. This is the MinRes FY26 full year results.

I'm Chris Ellison, I'm the founder and managing director. I'm joined today by our chair, Mal Bundy, chief operating officer Darren Colleen, and our chief financial officer Mark Wilson.

Darren will share his reflections on what makes this company special, and Mark will speak to the financials shortly. I encourage you to read the annual report we've released today.

It looks back on many of our achievements in the past 20 years since we listed on the ASX. When we listed back in 2006, we were a $100 million crushing contractor with a small manganese export operation.

We had a couple of hundred employees and a lot of ambition to grow into something much bigger. 20 years on, that $100 million business has just delivered record revenue of $6.5 billion and record underlying EBITDA of $2.6 billion.

We're now one of Australia's largest diversified resource companies and one of the best mining services businesses in the world. We employ more than 7,200 people, and alongside Tier 1 partners, we run iron ore and lithium operations, and an energy exploration program.

We have our own airline and a child care center, which is something I would never have imagined 20 years ago. One thing that never changes, the mining services remains the heartbeat of MinRes.

Over two decades, it's built a reputation of outstanding performance both for clients and our own projects. Onslow Iron is the proof of that.

We took it from an investment decision to full production in three years. The project could not support heavy haul rail or a deep-water port, it was designed and built on MinRes innovation.

The next-gen crushers, the mine to port haulage system, the transhippers, all unique to MinRes. It's that in-house expertise that's made us a partner of choice for some of the world's great mining companies.

Of course, no business achieves what MinRes has without an exceptional workforce. Many of our people have worked side-by-side for over a decade, moving from one project to the next.

That continuity is a genuine competitive advantage and it's very hard for others to replicate. On our 20th anniversary as a public company, and 34 years since inception, I want to thank the thousands of people who have worn the MinRes logo and helped build this company.

Now, to this year's results. The past 12 months were among the most significant in MinRes's history.

We achieved record financial and operational results, every division met or exceeded guidance with some operations beating multiple upgrades. Revenue was a record $6.5 billion, up 44%.

Underlying EBITDA was a record $2.6 billion, up 183%. Mining services delivered record volumes of 341 million tonnes and record EBITDA of $976 million.

Onslow Iron reached its full capacity 35 million tonne run rate back in August last year, and then it finished off the financial year at a 38 million tonne run rate. The project sustained no major damage from the two cyclones that passed through earlier this year.

Lithium bounced back on higher prices and improved operational performance. At Wodgina, our investment in mine development has repositioned the operation on the cost curve and extended its production outlook significantly.

The work was done when conditions were difficult, and the benefit is now flowing through with more to come. Importantly, strong cash flow has now returned our balance sheet to a healthy position following a period of significant investment.

Net debt come down by $1.1 billion to $4.3 billion, and our liquidity is more than doubled to $2.4 billion. Today, the board has declared a fully franked dividend of 83 cents per share, representing a 20% payout on underlying profit.

This decision reflects the board's confidence in the balance sheet and that MinRes is in great shape. It also reflects a simple principle: when the company generates surplus cash, our shareholders should share in it.

Looking ahead, we enter FY27 with strong operational momentum after a record-breaking finish to FY26. We're guiding FY27 mining services production volumes to 370 to 390 million tonnes, which is 9 to 14% increase on last year's record.

This growth will be driven by running Onslow Iron beyond nameplate, the restart of Bald Hill, increased mining at Mt Marion, and a growing external order book. I want to be clear about the quality of these earnings, because I don't think the market fully appreciates it.

Around 70% of our mining services order book runs on more than 15 years. These are long-term build-own-operate contracts with rates indexed every year and very low sustaining capital.

It's an infrastructure earnings stream that sits inside a resource company and it doesn't move with the commodity cycle. Onslow Iron is transformed our iron ore portfolio, adding a low-cost, long-life asset that unlocks the West Pilbara.

The arrival of transhippers 6 and 7 lifts installed capacity towards 40 million tonnes run rate and gives us redundancy to rotate the fleet through maintenance. At the Pilbara hub, the transition from Wonmunna to the nearby Lamb Creek deposit's almost complete, and that extends our mine life out by about another 5 years.

Following years of investment to improve plant recoveries and reduce costs, our three lithium mines are well-placed to capitalize on improved prices. At Wodgina, after several years of increased stripping, we expect clean ore to feed all three process trains from around December this year.

Wodgina's FY27 sales volume guidance is 360 to 390 million tonnes of SC6, and that's an increase of 14 to 23%. FOB cost guidance is around $640 to $710 a tonne, and it's a decrease of 4 to 13%.

In short, more tonnes and lower cost. It will be a transitional year at Mt Marion as we construct a float plant and develop underground mining.

Taken together, these investments will add about 100,000 tonnes of product, and it'll allow us to produce a single SC5 product for the whole of the mine. We restarted Bald Hill back in May, and it remains on track to reach nameplate capacity of 140,000 tonnes SC6 equivalent in the December quarter.

Alongside additional drilling to define a maiden reserve for Bald Hill, we have commenced a pre-feasibility study for a plant expansion. The transaction with POSCO is expected to complete later this year, and that'll deliver us about $765 million in US in gross proceeds that'll further go towards reducing our debt and providing options for disciplined growth.

In energy, we'll continue advancing the gas exploration program across the highly prospective onshore Perth and Carnarvon basins. We anticipate two gas exploration wells in the Perth Basin, where we are 100% owner, and two exploration wells in the Carnarvon Basin, where we're in 50-50 partnership with Hancock.

In addition, a well-flow testing program will appraise the elevated gas readings encountered at Abyss 1 at the end of FY26. In terms of CapEx spend in FY27, the focus is on low-risk, high-return brownfield opportunities.

The CapEx includes the Mt Marion developments, completion of Lamb Creek, and construction of the 270-room accommodation camp at Onslow. That accommodation project is an example of how we invest in the well-being of our people and improve productivity and retention.

If you step back, our priorities for FY27 are clear. First, safely deliver guidance across every division.

Second, keep investing in low-risk, high-return expansion around the assets we already know well. This includes studying expansion opportunities at Bald Hill, Wodgina, and Onslow Iron.

Third, keep strengthening the balance sheet so that we have the flexibility to grow and return capital to shareholders through the cycle. Earlier this year, the board and management completed a strategy review, which is reflected in some of the near-term priorities I just mentioned.

The first is to optimize our existing operations through brownfield growth; the second is disciplined domestic growth where our integrated model can unlock values others cannot; and the third is to carefully assess international opportunities in the right commodities, the right jurisdictions, and with the right partners. I want to acknowledge the work of our chair, Mal Bundy, and the board.

MinRes is a stronger, better governed company because of the board's work over the past 12 months. Governance improvements are now embedded across the business.

Just as importantly, they've strengthened the company without taking away the entrepreneurial speed that has always made MinRes different. The appointment of Darren Colleen as chief operating officer reflects the quality of our leadership team.

Darren's appointment gives me, the board, and our shareholders confidence in the succession process that's underway. When I think back over the past 20 years, what I'm most proud of is not just what we've achieved, it's that we've developed the people, the innovation, and the culture to drive even more success in the decades to come.

Thanks everyone, and I'll hand over to Darren.

Thank you, Chris, and good morning, everyone. This is my first time speaking to you as chief operating officer at MinRes.

I want to start by briefly introducing myself. I spent nearly four decades delivering major resource projects in Australia and the Middle East, including the past 17 years at MinRes.

Most recently, as chief executive of engineering and construction, I led the design, construction, and commissioning of Onslow Iron. That project is a perfect demonstration of what makes MinRes different.

We have long-tenured teams, deep in-house capability, and one line of accountability from design through to construction and operations. We do not just plan projects.

We build them, we operate them, and then we improve them. That allows us to move faster, control costs more tightly, and deliver at lower capital intensity than others in the sector.

I have a high level of confidence in the people we have across mining services and our operations. As COO, my job is to help the teams apply that model consistently across the business.

That means safe performance, reliable delivery, strong operational discipline, and careful use of capital. Chris has already covered the strength of the FY26 result and the momentum across our operations.

What I would add is those outcomes did not happen by accident. They came from experienced teams working together over long periods of time with a clear operating model and a strong focus on problem solving and execution.

That is especially important for a business like MinRes where the same capabilities that build projects are also responsible for operating and improving them over time. It creates continuity, accountability, and speed, and it helps us keep lifting performance as assets mature.

I also want to address safety directly, because strong operational results mean nothing if people are not going home healthy. Transparent and verified safety reporting is fundamental to how MinRes operates and to maintain the trust of our workforce, regulators, and investors.

During FY26, we completed a comprehensive review of our injury and illness classification procedure, aligning it with ICMM standards. The adoption reflects broader classification of recordable injuries.

It is a deliberate decision to hold ourselves to a high reporting standard as our business grows. For me, that's the right approach.

Safety systems, reporting discipline, and operational standards all need to keep strengthening as the company grows larger. As we enter our third decade as a listed company, my commitment as COO is to deliver growth projects safely, on time, and at a lower capital intensity.

That is what MinRes does best, and it's what we will keep doing. We have a rare combination of people, capability, and culture at MinRes, and I'm confident in what the team can achieve from here.

I'll now hand over to Mark.

Thank you, Darren, and good morning, everyone. I'm pleased to present MinRes's financial performance for FY26.

This was the strongest financial year in MinRes's history. As Chris has outlined, what makes this result significant is not simply the headline numbers, it's the quality of the earnings.

We delivered record revenue of $6.5 billion and underlying EBITDA of $2.6 billion. Underlying NPAT was $822 million, compared with a loss in FY25.

This was driven by record operating performance resulting in volume growth across the business. We can now see the benefits of prior years investment coming through in earnings and cash flow.

Iron ore was the largest contributor with EBITDA of $1 billion. We used long-dated debt to invest in Onslow Iron to strengthen the earnings and life of our asset portfolio.

This result is the first return on that investment. Mining services delivered record underlying EBITDA of $976 million, up 32% on FY25.

This is a high-quality earning stream that is less exposed to commodity prices than many investors appreciate. It is underpinned by long-term contracted revenue, including life-of-mine contracts and toll road earnings from Onslow Iron.

It also generates high free cash flow with sustaining capital low relative to depreciation, given that a large proportion of its assets are infrastructure-like and designed to support a specific mine life. Lithium added EBITDA of $771 million, reflecting improved operating performance, record volumes, and stronger lithium prices in the second half.

The strength of these results has translated directly into balance sheet improvement. The deleveraging we committed to is now evident.

FY26 operating cash flow, excluding the Onslow Iron carry loan and iron ore prepayment, was $2.6 billion, representing 102% cash conversion on underlying EBITDA. Free cash flow was $849 million after capital expenditure of $1.1 billion and Morgan Stanley Infrastructure Partners' distribution for the Onslow Iron road trust.

This is a business converting earnings into cash reliably and at scale. Net debt reduced by around $1.1 billion to $4.3 billion with net debt to underlying EBITDA falling sharply from 5.9 times to 1.7 times at year-end.

That deleveraging has been driven by organic cash flow generation, not asset sales. Our liquidity position more than doubled to $2.4 billion, comprising $1.6 billion in cash and a fully undrawn $800 million revolving credit facility.

This is well above the $1 billion minimum we maintain at all times, and provides genuine resilience across the cycle. On completion, the planned sale of a 30% interest of our share in Wodgina and Mt Marion to POSCO will deliver US$765 million, bolstering an already healthy position.

The POSCO proceeds would take net debt to approximately $3.2 billion and leverage to around 1.2 times on a pro forma basis. Completion of that transaction remains subject to conditions precedent, including regulatory approvals, and we expect those to be satisfied in this half.

On debt capital markets, I want to take a moment to acknowledge what has been a very active 12 months. In October, we refinanced our nearest-term US$700 million bond to April 2031.

That was done at 7%, which was our lowest-ever coupon at issuance. In April, we issued US$1.3 billion of new senior unsecured notes: US$650 million at 6%, due May 2032; and US$650 million at 6.25%, due May 2034.

We used those proceeds to repay our iron ore prepayment facility and redeem US$975 million of higher-coupon bonds. Together, these transactions lowered our weighted average cost of debt from 8.6% to 7.4% and will reduce annual finance cost by more than $60 million and extend our weighted average debt maturity to nearly 5 years.

That is a materially better debt profile with lower cost, longer tenor, and no near-term refinancing pressure. Reflects the strong support we've had from the debt market for our investment strategy.

On capital allocation, the refreshed framework we outlined at the AGM is clear. First, we protect the balance sheet.

That means maintaining at least $1 billion of liquidity and keeping leverage below two times through the cycle. Second, we invest in growth, but only where it meets our return hurdles and sits within areas we know well operationally.

That is why FY27 CapEx remains focused on brownfield opportunities. Guidance is $1.425 billion pre-financing, or $1.27 billion on a net-financing basis.

Please note Mt Marion and Wodgina CapEx are shown on a 50% basis in line with our current ownership interests. Our growth investment program includes the Mt Marion development, the Onslow camp, and autonomy spend on jumbo road trains.

Sustaining CapEx of $815 million for FY27 reflects the increased scale of our business and a few one-offs, like elevated stripping at Mt Marion and the final Lamb Creek development. It also reflects a full year of operations at Bald Hill since restarting and mobile fleet replacements across the portfolio, some of which had been deferred.

We anticipate sustaining CapEx going forward to range between $700 and $750 million, depending on mine plans and fleet replacements. Third, when those balance sheet and investment requirements are met, surplus cash can be returned to shareholders.

That is the context for today's dividend. As Chris mentioned, the board has declared a fully franked final dividend of 83 cents per share, representing a 20% payout of underlying NPAT for the whole of FY26.

The message is straightforward: balance sheet first, disciplined growth second, and shareholder returns from excess cash once those conditions are met. This marks our return to dividends and reflects the board's confidence that the balance sheet is healthy, the business is generating the cash to sustain it, and the company's outlook is positive.

Thank you. We're now happy to take your questions.

Thanks. Morning, Mal, Chris, Mark and Darren.

First questions are on mining services and just the outlook there, which is pretty upbeat, just on volumes and you actually beat your guidance for FY 26 volume. Just want to step into the volume uplift and how much baked into that just roughly is the external volumes in that opportunity?

Morning, Paul, it's Mark. Nice to talk to you.

I think we've been saying for a while that we see a significant opportunity for mining services going forward. I think the results in FY26 are just the start of what we can expect to see going forward.

We see a good pipeline of opportunity. A lot of that's external.

Some of that's going to be driven by higher strip at Marion through FY27, but also the other third-party contracts remain very real as opportunities.

Thanks, Mark. Then just secondly, further to that, just on opportunities.

Now you went through three different buckets there, one being a existing opportunity, second, new opportunities in Australia, and third, overseas. Just on the second one, which is really being the story of MinRes over the past decade or so, is finding the opportunities, owning an equity stake in the mining operation and banking the mining services volumes, which has been very successful.

How many opportunities do you see on the horizon there, because the balance sheet's now in a position where, to your point, you're returning capital to shareholders now, it's very strong and now you can actually pursue more external new opportunities for probably the first time in a couple of years now, particularly that Onslow's bedded down and still improving, actually. Just curious around that second bucket and, is anything you can share as far as how aggressive you're chasing those opportunities?

Thanks, Paul. It's Chris.

We're always on the lookout. Those opportunities are always around.

We've obviously, the last couple of years, we've had to pause with Onslow Iron. It was a bigger undertake than what we would normally do, but it's sort of a company changer for us for the next 40 or 50 years, but we're looking offshore and we're looking around Australia and we have got some opportunities sitting in front of us.

At the same time, we've got mining services opportunities sitting in front of us. We've always grown them at about 10 or 15% a year.

We've got some of them in front of us now. They always get priority.

Look, we hope over the next period of time, we'll be able to announce a few new things coming to fruition.

Oh, hi, everyone. Thanks for the call, appreciate your time.

Look, the first one perhaps for Mark. I just wanted to touch upon the dividend.

Obviously, congratulations, everyone, for the strong result and obviously the dividend is a big tick in the box to solidify that result. Mark, just looking forward, yeah, in terms of the policy and obviously you guys have paid a dividend after a while, just to remind us, how should we think about sort of excess cash, to speak, being available to pay out?

Obviously, up to 50% of underlying NPAT is what you're going for. From memory, I remember that there used to be a second caveat that a third of the dividend used to be paid for the first half and then the rest in the second half.

Can you just remind us of some of the levers you're going to look at in terms of your payments, first half, second half timing, and then also, how do you view the balance sheet? Just is it net debt to underlying EBITDA below two times or are there other things you're looking at as well?

Then I'll come back with a second. Thanks.

Hi, Rahul. Thanks for the question.

Basically, the dividend policy is grounded in the capital allocation framework, which basically points to balance sheet strength first. Then once we get through sustaining CapEx and, obviously, servicing of interest, we then look at growth opportunities and the opportunity to return surplus cash to shareholders.

The dividend that we've declared in respect of last financial year is a dividend in respect to the full year, not just the half. Just to point out, in the financials, you'll see today that we're reporting a franking credit balance of $913 million.

We think the dividend that's been sized this time around, which is about 20% of underlying NPAT, is an appropriate balance for where the company is today. I think it's a prudent distribution as we weigh up the growth opportunities for the future.

In terms of the split between the third, the two-thirds, you're going back a little while, that's how we used to think about it. I think the way going forward will be, every period, the board will have regard to the opportunities in front of it and the position of the balance sheet.

Final point is that the dividend policy basically says that we'll contemplate dividends when we have line of sight to the balance sheet metrics being in line with our financial policies, effectively less than two times leverage within a 12- to 18-month window. So.

Got it. That's clear, thanks.

Look, the second one's just on Pilbara iron ore. Perhaps a question then for Darryl and Chris, both of who are on the call.

Look, the Pilbara iron ore production obviously has been performing much better given Lamb Creek, and working on the costs, moving them lower. It still remains fairly marginal in terms of its cash generation, given the iron ore price has been coming off.

What I'm trying to understand is what are some of the levers you can pull in terms of perhaps sustaining CapEx or otherwise to make sure that if the iron ore price were to move lower, or get to a level where the cash generation becomes fairly breakeven, that you can squeeze a bit more out of this asset? I guess the follow-on from that would be when would you consider shutting it given the contribution to mining services?

Look, thanks for the question. Look, mining services has always been part of the Central Pilbara, so, yeah, the contribution mining services makes to the overall Central Pilbara tonne story is not at the headline number in terms of our FOB costs.

We've looked at it year on year. It's always high on our priorities to say, "Well, is this part of our forward plan?"

We get a line of sight for the next 5 years at Lambs Creek, and that sort of remains our focus. Look, it's line of sight, it's front of mind, hope that answers your question.

Good morning, Chris, Mal, Mark, Darren, and team. Thanks for the opportunity.

Just two questions today from me. Just to start on, yeah, I guess mining services, obviously, nice handy uplift implied in guidance for next year and some good additional color in the contracts in the deck, thank you.

I just wanted to go to the order book and, I suppose, outside of iron ore and lithium, I'm just interested to understand what you're seeing coming forward, potentially, in terms of gold and copper, given there's a lot of activity obviously in gold and there's a couple of projects starting to emerge in copper here in Australia. I'll come back with my second.

Copper is high on the agenda for everyone and it's something that we're paying attention to. We're more interested in partnering with an owner that's got, say, a copper project somewhere in the world, and it would be probably near shovel-ready, and they would probably be looking for the sort of skill set that we have along with our design, engineering, build capability.

That's the lens we're sort of looking at copper. Mining services, we've sort of got that covered.

We're sort of all over that in Western Australia. The one thing we are looking at trying to do is seeing if we can replicate our model in another geographical part of the world.

That's something we've been looking at for the last sort of 12 or 18 months and we think we're going to make some progress over that over the next 12 to 18 months. Then around lithium, I think we're fairly settled where we are.

We just, basically, focused on brownfields projects. That's the low-hanging fruit, low CapEx, and we're going to get a lot more product to market fairly quick.

All

right. Thank you.

Then my second question is just, just on the FY27 CapEx guidance, hopefully just a couple of quick clarifications here. Firstly, just to remind what have you assumed in the guidance in terms of Wodgina and Mt Marion ownership, and what would the implied guidance for FY25 do pro forma for the POSCO sell-down?

Then a second follow-up, just on pre-strip at lithium, can you just indicate how much of that will be capitalized versus put through the P&L? Thanks very much.

Hi, Lachlan, Mark. In terms of the CapEx, what we're trying to do is transition from showing, historically, a net number to a gross number.

With this year, we're showing both, trying to make sure that the market understands how we're thinking about the numbers. Net is 1,270, gross is 1,425.

Those numbers are underpinned by an assumption of lithium at 50%. I understand that some in the market might be thinking of the 40% number post-POSCO, and so on.

The effect of that is within those numbers, Marion and Wodgina are set at 475. If you adjust from 50 to 40%, that's a $95 million delta, the 1,270 would come down by $95 million to under 1,200.

Hopefully that answers the first question. In terms of the second question in terms of the strip, the strip at Marion this year is going to be possibly as much as 50% higher than life of mine average.

There's a fair bit of strip that's being capitalized at Marion this year. The numbers are sitting there in the guidance.

I'm not really sure what else I could add to those.

Hi, good morning. If I think about the POSCO transaction, there's been quite a lag between agreeing that and the cash coming through the door.

In that time, we've had positive news of both assets and consensus has moved up materially on those valuations, which has been great to have that news come through. Now, in retrospect, the deal is a discount to street NAVs.

What levers do you think you have to unlock some of that delta for Min shareholders there?

Look, we're pretty happy with the deal that we've done with POSCO. They're a great partner.

We hope to settle that out later this year and bank the cash. The cash will predominantly be used for paying down debt.

We've got a bond due in '28 for 750 US. We think that puts us in a pretty good position and it gives us a lot of flexibility for opportunities we're looking at going forward.

I think the important thing, too, with the sell-down is that if you have a look at the brownfield projects we're doing around Marion and Wodgina, and then later around Bald Hill, we're not really backing off tonnes. Within about 12 to 18 months, the MinRes share of tonnes coming out of those mines will be pretty much what it is today.

We think that gives us a very good balance between mining services, commodities. It gives us the horsepower to go and look at, obviously, copper is high in our preference and, as I said earlier, being able to replicate the MinRes business in another continent of the world where we use our engineering and design build skills to be able to earn into a commodity project and, at the same time, be able to get mining services.

It's sort of a really great opportunity we're sort of looking at now over the next 1 to 2 years, where we can sort of do what we've done somewhere else.

Okay. Thanks, Chris.

Just on '27 guidance at Onslow, you've given us the diesel price assumptions assumed. You gave us some sensitivities last quarter.

Everyone stopped asking about diesel now, but can you just remind us of those sensitivities and what you're seeing now?

Just to remind you going back, last calendar year, we were probably running at about net 80 cents a liter on diesel. The last quarter of last financial year, we probably got up around $1.70, $1.80.

It peaked at about $2.20 for a month. What we've allowed this whole of financial year is about $1.25 a liter.

We feel we might be a little bit over-conservative on that. It might be a little on the high side.

Oh, good morning, everyone. First question I had was just on the Bald Hill outlook, decent amount of money being spent on deferred strip there, just wondering how to think about that over the next, say, 3 years, and what the current sort of mine life is given what you're spending?

Thanks.

Thanks for the question there. Look, we've got visibility on the current 140-kilotonne run rate at the moment at SC6.

To answer your question, what we've got to do is further drilling. We need further drilling to improve the resource confidence, prove up the reserve.

That's a work in progress. Before we can give any guidance, we need to get that work done.

In front of us, 140-kilotonne at SC6.

Thanks. Then maybe one for Mark, not the most exciting question, but just in terms of the accounting treatment post the lithium sell-down, are we still going to be consolidating the same amount of EBITDA from the assets, and then backing out a minority or will it be some sort of other arrangement?

To some people, that's a very exciting question. The answer is yes, we will still consolidate because we'll continue to control our interests in those assets.

What we will be going to do is make the split and effectively our attributable earnings at MinRes level front and center of the way that we think about underlying going forward. That's something we'll be transitioning to this half.

Of course, that would also take into account the Morgan Stanley Road Trust earnings as well. All of those whilst technically non-controlled interests will be shown in our management reporting to the market as underlying, on a net basis.

Good morning, everybody, Chris and team. Just two questions, please.

The first one, I might be jumping the gun a bit, but just wanted to ask if you could please make some comments about the potential train 4 expansion at Wodgina, just in terms of your thoughts around that and if there is a potential target FID for the train 4 expansion. Thank you.

Thanks for the question. Look, it's early stage at Wodgina.

We're progressing the design through FY27. Obviously, once done, we've got JV approval, market conditions, and all those sort of things, we're about 18 months to production once we finish the study and made FID.

We spoke about two paths. We've got a comminution upgrade for about 230 to 260 million and then we've got train 4, sorry, 180 to 220 million for the first upgrade, train 4, 230 to 260.

Then we've got some MPI that we do need to upgrade in that same process.

Great. Thank you.

The second question was just in relation to the slightly higher FOB costs at Onslow, they're increasing to $56 a tonne in FY27 from 52 last year. Is that mainly diesel cost that Chris talked about before, or are there some other factors that we should know about?

Thanks.

What we're seeing there is the impact of escalation year on year. We're seeing that, yeah, we've guided 54, 58, we're seeing escalation, most of that cost comes through mining services, which has the, obviously, the life of mine contract.

That's just part of the course for us.

Morning, Chris, and well done on the div, drinks on you. Two questions from me.

Firstly, just on Onslow, how are you thinking about that? I know you said transhippers almost in place now and gives you the flexibility to run at 40.

Do you think about going beyond that now or does the iron ore market, etc, just make you pause and just try and optimize what you've got? That's the first one, thanks.

Good morning, good to talk to you. Look, based around Onslow, we're really focused there on just sweating the assets, really.

We've got plenty capacity inland, plenty of capacity on the haul road. We kind of start pulling up when we get around the port, around the load-out.

Seven transhippers are good to have, it allows us to be running six at any time and doing maintenance, and then later when the windows come, but if we want to go beyond sort of 40, 41, looking at the capital we have to spend, we've really got to let that compete with the other opportunities, mining services out there always get high priority. We are fairly keen on moving down the path of doing a copper project next.

If something really attractive come along, we'd look at it, but we are really focused on copper as our next commodity, and we really don't want to grow too much more in the lithium and the iron ore.

All right, that's great. Then Chris, just looking at mining services, obviously been a great business and as you say, the engine room, if we look at the last 12 months, though, and before that it's been your margins been going up progressively, but it was $2.10 in the first half, $2 for the year, which suggests the second-half margin was less than $2 a tonne.

Can you just help me understand what's caused it to sort of drop 10% year on year? Thanks.

It really hasn't done that. If you go back 5 or 6 years ago and have a look at what we were doing then, and traditionally, I don't know anyone else that's been able to grow the volume and grow the margin at the same time.

It normally happens the other way around. I've got to say, it's getting tougher to be able to keep holding that sort of margin.

We're out there, remember, competing in the industry. We've got some fairly rare offerings we have in MinRes that others don't have with the innovation that we have and the way that we're able to build and get really good value for our clients on the ground, but it's tough to keep maintaining that margin.

We've done it for the last 4 or 5 years. It's bounced up a little bit.

I think if you have a look when we're commissioning Onslow Iron, we had some fairly generous rates in there, when we're on small tonnes, we're obviously on much higher rates, but that's sort of all sort of washed out, so that's a little part of that. That was just an abnormality last year.

I'd love to be able to keep those rates going, but I can't.

Morning, all. Thanks for taking my question.

I just wanted to clarify one of your answers before, Mark, when you were answering Locky's question, talking around the CapEx spend at Wodgina and Marion, which you've given at a 50% basis. You said that some of the Street may have that at 40%.

However, my understanding is the POSCO deal is that you would take it to 35%. Was that just a miscommunication, or is there something else that I'm missing here?

It's a timing thing. Because it's not a full year, people are assuming, yeah, we obviously, we end up in 35%, but consensus is at 40, yeah.

Because of the mix of the time. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you for clarifying.

Appreciate it. That's it for me.

Oh, thanks, team, for taking my follow-up. Just on capital management, just to revisit, great to see the dividend back, but I just want to unpack a little further.

Very healthy mining services outlook, order book, recovering capacity to fund growth with balance sheet de-gearing, versus franked dividends and that large franking balance. Can you give us any more color on how the board approaches or how they might be inclined on accretive growth opportunities versus returns?

Thank you.

Do you want me to take that? So.

Go for it, Mal.

Thanks, Lachlan, it's Mal. Look, I think what we've said all along is, first up, getting the balance sheet in good shape, getting Onslow up and running, we're confident now where the balance sheet sits, we've re-upped the bonds, we've got a much cheaper cost of debt, and the business has been historically nimble to be able to take advantage of opportunities, and we think we've got ourselves in a strong financial position now to be able to do that and to this year reward our shareholders.

It's hard to predict because the opportunities come along. They're relatively medium- to long-tail, the spend doesn't happen all in one hit.

It might happen over 12, 18, 24 months, and we'll just monitor that as we go on an opportunistic basis. As Chris touched on before, we've got opportunities out there across the business in mining services and to vend in our services potentially into equity positions.

That's a different cash position again, we weigh that all up, we've done modeling, and we do like to reward our shareholders.

Great. Thank you.

Thanks, Indy. Good question.

We've been on this journey with the autonomy for a couple of years now, progressing pretty well. We're reasonably happy on where it's at.

Can't give a timeline on exactly when they'll be completely driverless. The part we're up to at the moment, we've got a number of trucks that can get from the mine site to the port.

They've all got drivers in them as caretakers, and they just sit there and monitor them. We've got a new set of software that's going into them shortly that gives us sort of a fairly major upgrade.

Look, we're kind of hoping that by the time we get into sort of the first quarter of next year, that we've got the trucks in a condition where they've still got caretaker drivers, but we'll probably have them all sort of running from one end to the other. Getting them to the loading stations and unloading is going to take a little more time.

The cost savings on taking the drivers out of the truck, we're looking at around about $60 to $70 million a year. The big achievement that we're after is to be able to get people off that haul road, we want to have just machinery on the haul road, no humans, and that means that we've got zero risk of anyone getting hurt in the future.

Look, it's fairly hard. This is kind of a first in the world, it's the first time we've had more than one semi-trailer.

These are three-trailer configurations, and it's the first time in the world that anyone's tried to do that. Slow and careful is the measure to make sure that the place is safe.

Yeah. Hi, gents.

Thanks for the follow-up question. Question on mining services margins, and I know you just said, Chris, that it's hard to hold a $2 a tonne, 25 was probably a high point, but just looking at the Onslow unit costs which are increasing 10% year-on-year, and Mark, you point out rightly so that that's mostly because of mining services margins or cost push coming through.

Just want to dig into one of the footnotes on slide 26, which that the assumption of $2 a tonne for next year assumes $8.50 a tonne on the haul road stays for calendar year '26, but obviously that resets on 1st of January. That 10% increase in Onslow unit costs, should we assume that the tolling charge might actually increase by that as well on 1st of January?

No, Paul, it's Mark. You shouldn't assume that the tolling charge is going to increase by 10%.

It's effectively an index-based increase. What we're trying to do with the guidance is at 54 to 58, we're acknowledging that some of the costs are going up as we're just stretching a little bit further in terms of the source of the feed, some of the activity that we've got happening there with haulage, and so on.

I come back to the core of your question, though, that $2 a tonne, we've generally been able to hold that for a while, and that's our long-term target. That's what we expect to see going forward.

We don't expect that to bleed away. Chris did mention that we had some higher ramp-up rates in the first half last year through the transition of mining services contract with ramp-up, but $2 is what we would expect to deliver,

and yeah, I think that

mining services margin's solid.

That's very clear. Then, just I want to explore this offshore copper opportunity a little bit, and Mal, you mentioned that a few of the options you're looking at might involve an equity stake.

Can you maybe just talk through this copper opportunity? Could it involve an equity stake?

Go on, Mal. We've got a couple of them on the horizon that we're looking at, and it's early days, but the way that we like to be able to do the partnership thing has worked out extremely well for us.

I can't tell you too much more about them at the moment. I want to kind of keep that confidential because there's a fair bit of competition out there in the market.

The skill set we have that's really, really unique, that very few others, in fact, no one else that I know has, is that we can design, and we can construct, and we can operate, and we can do the design-construct at a fixed price and we can do it with a guaranteed certainty of a timeframe. That's a fairly attractive piece of currency that we bring to the table.

Look, there's a number of other clients out there that we've worked with in the past that are very keen to be able to work with us on that basis. They don't want to take the risk on the build and the construct.

We're very good at that because we've got a team of people, well, we've been building for over 30 years, and we can control our costs fairly accurately, as you've seen over the last 15 or 20 years. Very seldom we run over on a project, and I'm trying to remember if there's one we have, but that's sort of the currency we bring, but I just don't really want to talk about the opportunities, but once we've sort of nailed one down, we'll be out to the market and let you know fairly quickly.