Good morning, everybody. Thank you for joining us for the Northam results presentation for the year ended June 2026.

I'm supposed to put my glasses on, otherwise I'm going to struggle. Excuse me.

Welcome to our board members, Emily and André. Welcome to those of you on the lines, and a special welcome in particular to those of you who managed to join us in person.

Much appreciated. This presentation together with our full reporting suite are all available online this morning.

Thank you once again to the team, particularly Aletta, Damian, Arno and Cé, who have prepared this comprehensive set of documents. It's a remarkable effort in a very short space of time.

As always we'd like to describe the pictures on the slide. This is slag that has been tapped from one of the furnaces.

Slag is the waste product of smelting, but still carries some PGM content. Once the slag has cooled, we reprocess it through our slag concentrator, and in this way maximise metal recovery.

Here is the usual disclaimer regarding forward-looking statements that we might make today. I'd appreciate it if you do read it when you have a little bit of time.

Aletta and I would like to cover the annual results in full before moving on to recent strategic developments, so that we don't distract from what has been a really standout year in terms of performance. I will review some of the key features of a year in which we have yet again set new production records, as well as record sales volumes.

We've also made significant progress in respect of our project pipeline, including the development of Eland Mine, the commissioning of 3 Shaft and 3A Shaft at Zondereinde, the expansion of the South Tailings Dam at Booysendal, upgrades to our metallurgical facilities, and, in addition, we've committed to further expansion embodied in our Vision 2031 strategic plan. Aletta will then take us through the financials, and, finally, I'll provide guidance for 2027 and then take you through our future growth ambitions.

This image is from last month's official opening of Zondereinde's No. 3 Shaft.

Four happy chappies there. Both 3 Shaft and 3A Shaft are operational.

3A Shaft is the ventilation shaft. And 27 mining crews have moved over to date.

Damian and I visited the stope on 5 Level earlier this month, and our travel time was 25 minutes from bank to stope face. A dramatic reduction on what previously took up to 2 hours.

The working places are markedly cooler, and the impact on crew morale is tangible. We've also just commenced the reaming of our No.

4 Shaft, which will enable a significant step change in production from 2031 onwards. The logistical benefits of 3 Shaft, together with the additional hoisting capacity of 4 Shaft, will allow us to realise the full value of this exceptional orebody for many, many years to come.

A strong operational performance allowed us to, once again, post record production and record sales. Despite the pressure on metal prices in the second half, full-year revenue totalled R54 billion.

Our operating profit exceeded R14 billion. This illustrates our leverage to metal price appreciation.

Recent geopolitical tensions have impacted the prices of all the metals in our basket, and we will maintain our internal focus, and continue to place high emphasis on safe production and efficient mining at the right cost. The board has declared a record final dividend of R10 per share, bringing the total dividend for the year to R17, and demonstrating confidence and our commitment to returning value to shareholders.

This is the 3 Shaft site, with the smelter stack visible in the very far background. The site is compact and well laid out.

You can see the shaft headgear, winder house, backfill plant, and refrigeration plant, and the change houses and offices in the foreground. The shaft conveys 126 people per trip, and takes just 2 minutes to travel the 1,400 meters from surface to underground.

If we can move on to the mining operations, and firstly, safety. This remains a key focus area for Northam, as it is for the broader industry.

Operationally, working safely is non-negotiable. Despite Booysendal and Eland surpassing 13 million and 1 million fatality-free shifts, respectively, the passing of three of our colleagues at Zondereinde Mine during the year is unacceptable to us.

Our thoughts and those of the board are with their loved ones, and we are redoubling our efforts in this critical area. The nature of the accidents involved a combination of technical and behavioural issues, and visible leadership is key in this regard.

To this end, the Minerals Council has initiated a CEO safety drive across the industry in which all CEOs have undertaken to provide visible leadership at their respective operations. I, together with our executives, visited each of our three operational teams during this last month to re-emphasise and support mine leadership in these efforts.

Looking at some of the operational metrics, firstly, at group level. This is a wonderful set of numbers, by the way.

Stoping improvements at all operations led to a 3.3% increase in tonnes mined. This, allied with higher feed grades and higher concentrator recoveries, resulted in record mine metal production of 939,000 oz and record metal sold of just almost 1.1 million oz.

Strict cost control limited cost inflation to 6.4%, including for the ongoing ramp-up at Eland. Our cash margin more than doubled to 45%, reflecting the improved metal prices.

Chrome production improved once again to 1.7 million tonnes with higher UG2 tonnes treated, as well as improving chrome yields across the operations. If we can move on to discuss the individual mines, and firstly, Zondereinde, where we posted a stellar production and cost performance despite high energy cost inflation.

We are on track for our production target, the short-term target of 350,000 oz. Of course, the commissioning of No.

3 and 3A vent shaft is a major milestone and bodes well for further productivity improvements. I would just like to take a few moments to flick through some more pictures of the infrastructure at 3 Shaft.

This picture shows the refrigeration plant, which is the largest single installation in the world, currently delivering 52 MW of cooling power. To put this into context, that's the equivalent of around 100,000 household fridges, and it helps to create a more comfortable working environment underground.

Here is the backfill preparation plant. Backfill is an integral part of the Zondereinde mining cycle, providing hanging wall support and reducing heat while significantly reducing the size of our tailings dam.

Prior to No. 3 Shaft, placing backfill underground took between 5 and 6 hours in the Western Extension.

This was a major limitation on productivity. Backfill will now take place between 2 and 3 hours.

The change house accommodates 3,200 people, together with the offices, are designed to allow quick and efficient movement to the place of work. Here is a picture of 3A ventilation shaft in the foreground.

This is an upcast ventilation shaft that increases air flow throughout the whole mine at Zondereinde by over 40%. You can just imagine the improvement in conditions.

Moving on to No. 4 Shaft.

This is a picture looking up the barrel of the shaft, as we've just began to ream, with the reamer head still visible in the hole. If I can demonstrate, this picture, be looking up now from 1,500 meters looking up the shaft, right at the beginning of the reaming of the shaft.

The head you see is of course in the middle of the picture. The teeth you cannot see, because that's cutting on the rock face side.

This shaft is 5.5 meters in diameter, will be just over 1.5 km in length, another world record for a raise-bore shaft, breaking the previous record set by No. 3 Shaft.

Raise boring is quicker, it's cheaper and, most importantly, safer than conventional shaft development. 4 Shaft is designed for rock hoisting, with a capacity of 150,000 tonnes per month, which will complement Zondereinde's current hoisting capacity of 235,000 tonnes per month.

And 4 Shaft is scheduled to be commissioned in 2031, and this will free up the mine for a significant change in production, a step change. As of this morning, reaming has reached 120 meters, so far, good.

Moving on to Booysendal, where we, once again, exceeded our nameplate capacity of 500,000 oz with a very strong cost performance, retaining our position at the bottom of the sector cost curve. Key to further growth at Booysendal is the expansion of the South Tailings Dam, which is moving now at pace.

This will allow the treatment of the stockpile from financial year 2028. In addition, Booysendal remains fatality-free since inception, over 16 years ago, and recently surpassed 13 million fatality-free shifts.

This is a remarkable performance and demonstrates both the inherent safety benefit of the mechanized mining method, as well as the ongoing dedication of the Booysendal team, under Wonderboy Khumalo's leadership. At Eland, we are pleased with how the mining ramp-up is progressing.

We are now 60% of the way to steady state, which is scheduled for 2029. I'm very happy to announce that Eland has, for the first time, recorded an annual operating profit, just 6 years since inception.

Since the mine build program was initiated, Eland has shown steady progress, building up mineable reserves and stoping crews. There's still much to be done, but Eland will continue to grow and deliver a premium metal basket replete with significant loadings of platinum, rhodium, ruthenium, iridium and chrome, into a market that is likely to need it sooner rather than later.

This operation will do very well for Northam. We produced over 300,000 tonnes of chrome at Eland this year, at a yield of 25%, double that of the previous year.

Again, an outstanding achievement, but we will continue to upgrade the chrome circuit using learnings from both Zondereinde and Booysendal, and ultimately, expect yields of 40%. All this chrome requires storage capacity, and thus, you can see the expansion of the chrome stacker pads as shown in this particular picture.

We will continue to roll out our renewable energy program, and the commissioning of the first 80 MW solar farm at Zondereinde is also a major milestone. Each year, this facility will produce 220,000 MWh of secure, behind-the-meter electrical energy, reducing annual carbon emissions by 240,000 tonnes and reducing Zondereinde's energy costs by 15%.

In addition, progress has been made on five other projects under construction: the Kareebosch Wind Farm, the Tsakane Solar Farm, and the solar farm at Eland. We will soon start to install 360 MWh of industrial batteries across the operations.

All of these will be fully operational in financial year 2028. By then, we will deliver over 1,000 GWh of energy, and we will have reduced the group's carbon intensity by 70% and shaved around R1 billion per annum off our current electricity bill.

The economic benefit of these initiatives ensures their true sustainability. Batteries will allow us to extend the solar benefit into the peak tariff periods, thereby maximizing savings.

We plan to install 250 MW at Zondereinde, and these will both improve energy security and enable peak tariff arbitrage. It is worth noting that peak tariff energy represents only 14% of energy use, but 44% of energy cost.

Hence, the arbitrage opportunity. The build program at Kareebosch has now 22 of the 25 towers erected, and we remain on track for commissioning next year.

This particular facility will deliver around 460,000 MWh into the Eskom grid, and we will elect on a monthly basis where to apportion this power between the operations. This will reduce carbon emissions by over 0.5 million tonnes per annum, and group energy costs by a further 10%.

A few quick photographs of the other sites. Here's the Tsakane solar facility close to Klerksdorp, commissioning scheduled for mid-2027.

Again, energy delivered to the grid, where we, again, elect to apportion the energy through a wheeling agreement with Eskom on a monthly basis, as we choose across the operations. This is the Eland solar and battery site.

We've just started clearing for construction here, and this will be initially 20 MW, growing to 40 MW, producing initially 55 MWh of energy, and displacing 60,000 tonnes of carbon per annum. At Eland, we have a truly unique opportunity to create the first PGM mine in South Africa operating solely on renewable energy.

In addition, Eland is water positive, and we will phase out external water sources before the end of the decade, truly becoming a green mine. I'll now hand you over to Aletta to take us through the financials.

Thanks, Aletta.

Thank you, Paul. Good morning, everybody.

This is the expanded footprint of the Booysendal South Tailings Dam. We are tripling the size of the dam to provide a full life of mine solution, and work is progressing well.

The expanded dam will be operational in around 10 months time, and this will enable increased throughput at the south concentrator and thereby the increase in mining production required for Vision 2031. To contextualize the regulatory challenges of projects in this country, permitting for this dam took more than 3 years, and CapEx will amount to almost R1 billion.

Looking at the key financial features for the year under review. This has been yet another record year for Northam.

The uptick in metal prices, applied to our record sales volumes, resulted in record revenue of R54 billion. This allowed us to post a gross profit of R14.2 billion and a record EBITDA of R16.7 billion.

This, whilst continuing to invest in organic growth, ensuring our long-term sustainability, the primary responsibility of any serious mining company. We also delivered record basic earnings per share and a record headline earnings per share of R35 and R30, respectively.

In addition, we closed the year in a net cash position. Looking now at revenue.

Revenue improved by 64% to R54 billion. This increase is primarily driven by a 57.4% improvement in the rand 4E basket price together with an 8% increase in sales volumes.

Whilst prices softened somewhat during the second half, they have since rebounded and remain well above recent historical levels, and PGM market signalling remains positive. Accordingly, we are forging ahead with Vision 2031.

This will not only expand our business to 1.5 million oz, but will also provide bulletproofing against potential future market shocks. The focus of our mining growth is UG2, and this provides an outsized benefit from the not-so-minor metals, ruthenium, iridium and chrome.

These combined, contributed almost 20% or R10.6 billion to our revenue this past year, and our share of these markets continues to grow. Looking now at cost of sales.

Sales revenue increased by 64%, whilst cost of sales increased by 36%. This led to a gross profit of R14.2 billion at a gross profit margin of 26.2%, reflecting the improved pricing and production volumes.

Movements in the individual elements making up cost of sales include a 6.5% increase in square meters mined, together with an average wage increase of approximately 6.5%, led to mining costs increasing by 11.1%. Concentrating costs increased by 11.6% due to additional costs incurred on various recovery enhancement projects.

Smelter and base metal removal plant costs increased by 14.7% due to increased tonnes smelted. Royalty charges increased in line with revenue and the profitability of the group.

Share-based payment expenses increased in line with the Northam share price. The group's increased profitability led to an increase in the contributions to the Toro Employee Empowerment Trust and the matching profit-share schemes across the group.

Increased third-party purchase volumes at higher metal prices led to a 90.7% increase in the cost of concentrates. Refining costs increased on the back of higher UG2 volumes processed.

The complexity of refining rhodium, iridium and ruthenium leads to higher relative costs for these metals. Lastly, the change in metal inventory was impacted by the offset in revenue from by-products.

Moving on to the income statement. The group generated profit before tax of R17.2 billion and accounted for a tax charge of R3.4 billion, with the bulk paid in cash.

Northam contributes significantly to the South African economy as a whole. This is done through direct taxes paid to the fiscus, employment opportunities created, as well as various community upliftment initiatives focusing on health care, education, and infrastructure development.

To demonstrate the scale of our contributions, Northam has, once again, published the Tax Transparency and Economic Contributions Report. Copies are available here and on our website.

Moving on to working capital management. By the end of June, inventory had increased to almost 505,000 oz with a carrying value of R7.4 billion.

After applying the basket price and exchange rate at the end of June, a sales value of around R18.7 billion, a significant asset on our balance sheet, which remains unencumbered. Noncurrent inventory will decrease over the coming few years as slag is processed at the metallurgical complex, and the stockpile is treated at Booysendal South, following the commissioning of the expanded South TSF.

It is important to note that around 110,000 oz can be readily liquidated, if required, as this sits in our refining pipeline. Looking at the group's cash flow.

Over the year, our cash balance increased significantly, to the tune of R6.8 billion. Items impacting our cash balance include cash generated from our operating activities amounting to R18.5 billion, as well as investing activities, which included R5.9 billion spent on CapEx, mainly in the execution of the group's growth strategy, and financing activities that included the settling of DMTNs to the value of R1.1 billion and associated interest of R1.3 billion, and paying dividends to the value of R3.5 billion.

These movements culminated in a very healthy cash balance of R13.7 billion. By year-end, Northam had moved into a net cash position to the value of R2.7 billion.

Subsequent to year-end, we increased our RCF to R15 billion, with banking facilities now totalling R16 billion, all of which remains undrawn. This provides Northam with the necessary funding flexibility to pursue our Vision 2031.

Our expanded scale, combined with current metal prices and our considered view of the future of the market, is allowing us to both pursue our new accelerated growth program, whilst, at the same time, returning meaningful sustainable value to our shareholders. This is evident from not only the quantum of our dividend distribution this year, but importantly, from our increased dividend payment policy.

As a mining company, it is incumbent upon us to invest in sustainability and future growth, and we have consistently demonstrated our commitment to this very important principle. This provides meaningful employment for tens of thousands of people, contributes significantly to the fiscus, and ensures real returns for our shareholders, both for now and for well into the future.

I will now hand you back to Paul to take us through the operational guidance.

Thank you, Aletta. This picture reminds us all where true value lies.

This is the UG2 reef at Zondereinde Mine. It's a world-class orebody, as averaging 150 cm in width, and containing 1 oz of PGMs and over 1.5 tonnes of chrome in each square meter mined.

Importantly, platinum, rhodium, iridium, and ruthenium make up 75% of the metal split. The production teams at Zondereinde achieve an extraction of over 90% under Nelson Nhlapho's leadership.

The mining people in the audience will understand the significance of that number. It's also important to understand that Zondereinde's resource contains twice as much UG2 as Merensky.

Yet, we currently mine those two orebodies at a ratio of close to 1:1, due to the mine's hoisting constraints. The shafts are full.

4 Shaft provides additional hoisting capacity, which, together with our planned upgrade of the UG2 concentrator, are key elements of Vision 2031, allowing us to fully benefit from Zondereinde's UG2 endowment. In line with our growth profile, the current-year guidance is as follows: PGM production from own operations expected to be between 960,000 oz and 970,000 oz 4E, platinum, palladium, rhodium, gold.

Group unit costs to be between R29,500 and R30,500 on a 4E basis. Sales will exceed 1.1 million oz for the first time.

We expect chrome sales to exceed 1.8 million tonnes. Our forecast CapEx for the year is expected to be between R7 billion and R7.5 billion as we forge ahead with Vision 2031.

We present the guidance, as always, as our considered view, and wish to highlight, given the current state of the world, we remain in a heightened business risk environment on a number of fronts. If we have a quick look at price performance on this chart, the average basket price we received for the year was R49,600 per 4E oz.

Recent events saw prices fall to around R45,000 per oz by year-end. Since then, however, prices have recovered to the current spot of around R51,000 per 4E oz.

Gives you an idea of where we are this morning. The PGM market remains in deficit, and this is despite being well supplied by miners, recyclers, and investors during the first 6 months of the year.

Auto demand is steady, with softer car markets offset by forward purchases from OEMs. Industrial demand is very strong, helped by new applications in AI.

The outlook for the US dollar, bond yields, and the direction of interest rates dominate market sentiment for the moment. However, declining primary production, continued use of PGMs in autocatalysis, and new industrial applications will direct prices in the medium to long term.

As a final comment on the markets, minor metals, as Aletta pointed out, have outperformed the balance of our basket over the last 5 years. These are very special metals, and new applications continue to evolve.

Iridium crucibles are now being used to grow crystals essential for many high-tech and AI applications, and ruthenium is absolutely critical for data storage. The world is witnessing an AI and information revolution.

In addition, our UG2 fine chrome has become the preferred feedstock for large, efficient, new furnaces in China that supply the growing stainless steel market. On this basis, our view is positive for platinum, for rhodium, iridium, ruthenium, and chrome.

Northam has come a long way, and we have differentiated ourselves from our peers by setting ambitious growth targets and, in the main, delivering. Our view on the long-term fundamentals of the market remains unchanged.

As we approach the conclusion of our current strategic journey, and given the quality of our resource base, we have determined that is now time to set new, stretched goals. This includes growing PGM sales to over 1.5 million oz 4E, which is equivalent to 1.8 million oz 6E, in other words, including the minor metals, and chrome to over 2 million tonnes.

We will invest the necessary elective capital in order to achieve this. You can expect annual capital over the next 5 years to be in line with 2027 guidance.

This new strategic goal, which we term Vision 2031, will include growth from each of the operations as well as further upgrades to the downstream processing capacity. Zondereinde is slated to produce at least 430,000 oz, Booysendal, at least 600,000 oz, and Eland, at 180,000 oz.

At Zondereinde Mine, 4 Shaft, which is currently being reamed and will be equipped, and the UG2 concentrator expanded, and we will also add a dedicated mud concentrator, which frees up additional Merensky capacity. Currently, the mud is treated in the Merensky concentrator.

At Booysendal, along with the commissioning of the South TSF, we plan to construct a dedicated 200,000 tonne per month Merensky concentrator, allowing the restart of the South Merensky module. We will also build a fifth UG2 mining module together with a third Merensky mining module.

At Eland, we will expand our mining efforts to include Nyala Shaft, alongside Kukama and Marula Belt. Capacity of the metallurgical complex will be expanded to cater for the increased feed, including the upgrade of No.

1 furnace from 20 to 30 MW, the addition of a third matte converter, a second autoclave in the base metal refinery, together with expanded copper winning circuitry. In addition, we intend to scale up our third-party business to 300,000 oz/annum.

In conclusion, these initiatives will secure the future of the company for decades to come, preserving jobs and delivering sustainable value to shareholders and all stakeholders. That concludes the formal presentation on the annual results.

I will now move on to cover the recent developments. Whilst Northam is the smaller of the five fully integrated primary PGM producers of the world, we believe we hold an outsized, raw, strategic value.

I often use my hand as a description of the world's PGM production. Northam is the thumb.

This belief is based on five qualities. Firstly, the mineral resource base, absolute fundamental for any mining company, which in our case is dominated by UG2 with a combined 200 million oz in the ground and located in the sweet spots of the Bushveld.

Our mine boasts the best PGM yields and the best loadings of platinum, rhodium, iridium, ruthenium, and chrome in the sector. Secondly, over the past decade, our capital build program has essentially created a fleet of new, high-quality, well-capitalised, low-cost, long-life mines, together with the necessary processing facilities.

We operate with the efficiencies and reduced risk profile that ensure sustainable operations throughout the commodity cycle. Our countercyclical investment strategy has led to a threefold growth in PGM volumes, a fivefold growth in chrome, and has ideally positioned us to take advantage of the current improved metal prices.

Thirdly, Northam stands alone amongst the majors as a growth asset with technological and financial innovation from a dynamic and progressive management team. Time is absolutely critical in mining.

The most valuable thing is time. We have a proven track record of rapidly growing our production base to create the company we are today.

The same approach, allied to our resource base, is what will allow us to pursue further growth as we deliver Vision 2031. Finally, there remain few untapped resources of scale and quality in the Bushveld, and we are very well placed to bring these to account.

We have initiated a strategic competitive process in terms of which we will consider proposals from preselected third parties and other creditable, interested parties regarding potential transactions. The main objective of this process is to ensure that Northam's long-term value and industry position are appropriately recognized and crystallized for the benefit of the company, its shareholders and other stakeholders.

We believe that through this process, the true strategic value of Northam will become very evident. Ladies and gentlemen, I'll leave you with this slide.

The Buttonshope Conservancy Trust, close to our Booysendal Mine. This is a first-of-its-kind public-private collaboration to preserve the catchment headwaters of the Dwarsrivier.

The De Berg Nature Reserve pictured here is part of the trust area and has recently been declared South Africa's 30th Ramsar site. This is something we are very proud of, and it exemplifies the commitment Northam has made to minimising our environmental impact.

A commitment that has typified the Northam approach to positive societal contributions throughout its history. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the formal part of the presentation for today.

Hope you found it informative, and we can now move on to the Q&A. We can start in the room perhaps, followed by the phone lines at the back, and then Damian at the front will help us with the webcast.

If I could please request that you introduce yourself when you receive the microphone, and let us know which organization you represent before you ask the question.

Thank you, Paul. Gerard Engelbrecht from Absa CIB.

Got two questions. Maybe two themes.

Just looking, you have increased your long-term metal price assumptions by more than 50% in the last year. It is significantly higher than your peer group.

When you're looking at these transactions that you're talking about, are you not pricing yourself out of the market in terms of value? I guess that's the first question, the first part.

The second part is if you use, shall we call it, consensus prices, do your 2031 Vision returns still clear the necessary hurdles? Do you need much higher prices to continue with that?

Then the second question is just around processing. Vision 2031, you're increasing processing capacity, but if I look at your production profile for the South African industry, by 2030, we'll be producing 3 million oz if I look at that chart.

There's a lot of debottlenecking of downstream processing. Do we need more processing capacity in the country?

Thanks, Gerard. I'll do the last one first, if I may.

The country is not awash with smelting and BMR capacity. In fact, it's very tight.

The reason for that is not ounce related. It's because the nature of the orebodies has changed over the decades quite dramatically from a light base metal content to a heavy base metal content.

Not all orebodies are the same, and as a good example, the Northern Limb concentrates are quite heavy in nickel, copper, and sulfur, whereas the Rustenburg concentrates much much less so. An ounce is not an ounce when you compare that type of capacity that's required.

I've got no doubt the industry can use additional smelter capacity. We are going with a extra 10 MW.

It's not that dramatic, to be honest. Nevertheless, we certainly need it.

On the base metal side, we will double up with two autoclaves compared to one. Again, in the industry context, not dramatic, but for us, very, very important.

In terms of our price models, we use a cost-of-production price model. It's a very, very fundamental, classic commodity analysis.

In essence, we model, if I can say it like this, and you can do the same, take a very important, well-disclosed asset in the industry that you know well, and that asset must be an asset that is required, let's say, 5 years forward by the world. In other words, the metal from that asset is required.

It's required. It's not on the high end of the cost curve.

It's in the meat of the cost curve. Model the unit cost of production from that asset.

That's exactly what we do. Effectively, if you don't meet that rand basket price in terms of the overall metal pricing scenario combined with the rand-dollar, that metal is out of business.

It's very, very classic commodity theory. We do not forecast price a la perhaps you might think against demand or using consensus prices.

We just don't do that. We do a cost-of-production analysis.

The basket must make the South African cost of production, otherwise, unfortunately, the world does not get metal. To illustrate that point extremely clearly, South African platinum production peaked at 5.4 million oz annualized.

Last year, we produced about 3.9 million oz annualized. By 2035, that number, the way we are heading, will be below three.

Why is that happening? It's because the incentive price is not there for greenfields replacement production.

Your point is well made, and I accept the point. Just as the safety valve, let's assume that our thinking is wrong, and the metal prices do, for a protracted period, fall below the incentive price or cost of production, of course, all this expansion is modular, and we can push and pull with the exception of the shaft, of course.

That's not so easy. The rest of it is very much modular in nature and can be trimmed back if necessary for a better day.

That's essentially how we think about it.

Sorry, just to follow up then. Do you expect your peers to significantly increase their long-term price assumption?

That would be of course for their own book, Gerard. I've just explained we use a cost-of-production model.

Hi, Paul. It's Arnold from Nedbank.

Three questions from my side, if I can? Yes.

Three from me. The first one is on your growth projects.

It should be quite capital efficient. You're essentially adding 500,000 oz, which is two mines.

Trying to get a sense of what the total capital spend would be over that period and how that would compare to, let's say, a Eland, which you recently completed. Because I think it's very capital efficient, but I just want to get some color on the numbers.

Then a quick one for Aletta. How many ounces of sales were from longer-term inventories or the inventory stockpiles, just trying to see whether that started to come out?

Then, Paul, on the announcement earlier and your presentation here on the value that you see, can you give us a sense of how much value you do see, because if I look at the valuation metrics, you're basically trading in line with one of the biggest peers, and you're on par, and that to me is a step-down. You've got two other companies that probably at 40%, 50% discount.

On my numbers, you're already sort of top of the valuation metric. How much upside or how much more do you think there is in it that the market's not seeing?

I'll use a benchmark. I think it's sort of nine times EV/EBITDA, the level that you're trading at.

What do you think is a reasonable level given what you've demonstrated here? Thank you.

Yeah. Thanks, Arnold.

I think let's do the CapEx one first. We've effectively just guided FY '27 at between R7 billion and R7.5 billion, and in my commentary, you can expect that type of capital profile within that range for the next 5 years to deliver 2031.

Within the 7.5, about 3.5 is what I would determine essential CapEx or stay-in-business CapEx, and the 4 is then, therefore, elective. 4 x 5 is 20.

That's a good reference number for you. They're real.

Please don't forget to escalate if you want the absolute number over 5 years. On the valuation question, the market will value the stock.

It's not for me to determine what the right value is or what the wrong value is. What I can assure you is what is not obviously visible just yet is the full capacity for growth and delivery.

Of course, we've promised it. We haven't yet delivered it.

Then secondly, the strategic value of these assets in terms of where they're positioned is very powerful.

Then in terms of the noncurrent inventory, if you look at the breakdown for noncurrent inventory currently, it relates to furnace slag, as well as the stockpile at Booysendal. Obviously, the stockpile at Booysendal will only be able to be treated once the South TSF is up and running, and that's around in 10 months time.

In terms of the furnace slag, we are treating that, and it should take around 3 to 4 years to go through that stockpile.

Here's another point on valuation, which is not the way you would necessarily think about it as a market participant, but the way we think about it as a miner. In the early '30s, Northam will represent 15% of world platinum primary production, and a much higher number for the minor metals.

What is 15% of the world's platinum production worth? It's going to be quite interesting to find out.

This transaction, I would say, we mustn't just think about in South African terms.

Okay. Paul, thank you very much.

That helps a lot. Sorry, quick one.

On the growth phase, this 500,000 oz, from a risk and execution perspective, how do you think it compares to the last decade? Is this much easier, or it's still going to be a hard slog?

Or is there a fundamental difference in this is, and I'm not underestimating this, more easily achievable than what you've done over the last decade?

Yeah. I would agree, with the exception of 4 Shaft, I would say the rest of it is relatively straightforward.

Yeah. 4 4 Shaft remains a technical challenge.

I did point out, if that shaft is completed, it would effectively be a technical world record.

Thanks. Sorry.

Thanks, Paul. It's Brian Morgan.

Sorry, frog in my throat. Brian Morgan from RMB Morgan Stanley.

Great presentation. I really enjoyed the breakout to 2031.

It's quite exciting stuff, and to Arnold's point, it's quite capital efficient. The organic growth side I totally get.

You've also spoken on Tuesday about potential asset-level transactions and corporate-level transactions. The one thing that I haven't heard, which I'd be interested to hear your points on, well, two things actually, is potential for acquisitions in the industry.

You're obviously very constructive on the basket in the long run. Transactions might make sense.

Then the other is buybacks. Does that not make sense for Northam to do a really large buyback if you're that excited about your stock?

I'll let Aletta answer the buyback one.

In terms of buybacks, we have spoken to most of our shareholders around dividends or buybacks, and most of our shareholders at this point in time would prefer dividends, cuz most of them are pension funds, etcetera. We, as the board, we continue to evaluate it, and we will continue with our engagement with shareholders with regards to their preference.

At the first instance, at this point in time, we'll be declaring dividends.

I think on the answer to the first one, Brian, to be honest, given what has happened, I think we would, in the immediate period, be precluded from acquisition. It would be just too much.

Aletta, can I just ask on costs? I think the guidance for next year is 10 10% increase in unit costs.

Guidance is also about a 3% increase in volumes. These are fixed-cost businesses, I would have thought that there'd be a bit of benefit coming through on the unit cost.

The same applies for last year, actually. We saw a 4% increase in volumes and a 6% increase in costs.

Just flesh that out for us, if you don't mind.

If you look at the various operations, Booysendal and Zondereinde will be increasing between 3% and 4% year-on-year. However, the cost penalty comes from Zondereinde.

We've just commissioned 3 Shaft. Only 27 teams are at 3 Shaft at the moment.

We'll build that up to 45 teams. We are taking that fixed-cost penalty.

In addition, one must remember that half of our electricity cost relates to refrigeration, and we've just commissioned the largest refrigeration plant in the world, and that has an impact on the unit cash cost. As those teams ramp up, it will ease off.

We are also very conservative, and we haven't included the potential savings from our solar facility, as we'll see what that entails in the coming year.

Good morning, Katlego Mathoni, Investec Bank. Paul, thank you so much for the presentation, especially on Vision 2031, and what it will take to actually get there.

I just want to know if, in terms of the key infrastructure, if it's fully exhaustive, what you have given us? My question is around acid abatement.

As you take more of the Northern Limb third-party metal that comes in with higher sulfurs, at what point do you now need to start considering something like acid abatement, which is capital-intensive? Then my second question, also on inventory in hand, the 500,000 oz, exactly how much is excess inventory?

As your production profile grows to this 1.5 million oz, I would assume that the work-in-progress inventory actually will be increasing to a degree where we might not see much liquidation of the 500,000 oz if it becomes the normalized process inventory. If you can give us a little bit of guidance there as to what is actually excess considering the Vision 20 2031?

Then my last question is on the process that you've just you've just launched. You said it can be at an asset level or a corporate level.

I want to get a little bit of guidance in terms of how you read that. I looked at your announcement on the website, and the way the question was answered was the wording was used by the company that approached you.

Essentially, you're saying you kind of do not know what it means at an asset or a corporate level. How are you reading this approach that has been stated at both asset or corporate level?

Thanks, Katlego. I think on the feed, the 300,000 oz, we have limited our 300,000 oz to only 100 from the Northern Limb because of exactly the point you make.

You can expect us only to take 100,000 oz at this stage from the Northern Limb. The balance of the growth is coming from UGs, LGs, and MG feed, which of course is virtually zero sulfur.

That answers that question. Aletta, do you want to tackle the working capital bit?

In terms of our noncurrent inventory, at the moment, it sits around 90,000 oz, that will be worked down in the next 3 to 4 years. Vision 2031 will only be up and running by that point in time.

There will be a period in which we will run down on some of the inventory. I do agree with your point, when we're at 1.2, 1.5 million oz, the increase in our fixed inventory will probably go to around 600,000 oz.

You can expect 3 to 4 months of run rate in the working capital. At 1 1 at 1.5 million oz, divide by 12 * 3.5 is a good number for what it will be at that point in time.

The last question, I really can't answer, if you don't mind. I think what we can say is we have cast the net, and we will listen to what potential third parties have to say about structure as well as value.

Hi. It's Steve Friedman from UBS.

Also got two, maybe three questions. The first one maybe just for Aletta.

If you could just quantify the inventory or the working capital inflow that you had during this period, and just bridge approximately what I calculate roughly R2 billion benefit and split that between sort of the physical inventory reductions, valuation effects, byproduct credits, whatever else that could have driven that. Be keen to get a bit more color on that, if possible.

Then just on Paul, for the Vision 2031, curious to sort of see, the numbers you spoke to there you said R20 billion additional CapEx, $1.2 billion, $1.3 billion for 200,000 oz incremental mine production growth and 100,000 on the third-party. To me, that seems pretty capital intensive, to your previous sort of growth I'm just curious to sort of see how you view that and what are the sort of hurdle rates that you're measuring that growth on?

If you look just on that one, it's not four increment. It's two incremental, because the previous profile was five, now it's seven.

If you're just looking at the increment, it's two per year additional to what we've previously announced in terms of our CapEx profile. As Steven, these are quite brownfields, incremental.

No, they're very, very capital efficient, I must say. Just intuitively, you should be able to see that.

Right.

Like $6,000 per annual production ounce?

Very, very cost-effective ounces, Steven.

Okay.

Aletta? Then

in terms of the working capital movements, it mainly related to inventory movement. The byproducts that sets off is about R3 billion in excess, which has flowed through to the valuation of inventory.

Okay. Then maybe just the final question.

You mentioned cost support is your sort of key thesis. We've all sort of followed this industry for a while.

I'd say probably the last 2 decades. The majority of the period, PGM prices have traded below cost support.

What makes you so confident that we're going to sort of see that situation prevail going forward?

Not below cost of the middle of the cost curve. That's the point we make.

We model our cost forward at the heart of the cost curve, not at the top end of the cost curve. In other words, the must-have production.

You can, of course, choose yourself where you want to pitch that, but the way we do it is those very chunky, middle of the cost curve, absolutely must-have ounces for the world. Price it forward, and you will see that the rand basket price must appreciate.

It must.

Thanks.

I'm going to allow about 5 minutes more Q&A. This is the last one for the room from Bruce, if you don't mind.

I'm sorry to do this to everybody, but we do have a call at the back and a call at the front, which we will cover, Bruce.

Paul, hi. Good day.

Bruce Williamson, Integral Asset Management. You mentioned that in the AI space, you're starting to see increase in a range of PGMs.

Is that in any one region, any one country? Can you just elaborate a bit more, and then maybe quantities that you're seeing?

They are world metals in the sense that they are priced in world terms, and the applications are coming from across the world, the US and the East. I think some oddities, like fiberglass and glass is a China-driven effect.

I think the data storage is really from the big three providers of discs, and they are world companies, although they may be based in the East. They're very big companies in their own right in world terms, and they are pulling iridium and ruthenium quite hard.

The reason that we've seen some price movement, but not necessarily a full, expected price movement yet, is because, to date, the deficit has been made up by vaulted stocks, historical stocks. Just to illustrate the point, historically, as an industry, we have not been able to sell all the ruthenium, if I go all the way back to the '90s now, there was some stock.

Of course, the big question is what's left. I can't answer that for you, unfortunately, but it is certainly being eaten up at a rapid pace.

Thanks, Bruce. If we can move to the lines at the back, please, and then I'll come, Damian.

Questions on the line?

Thanks, operator. Hi, Paul and Aletta.

Thanks for a good delivery of results. Particularly, your cost performance, just to note, you've delivered 18% increase in costs over 3 years versus inflation of 45%.

Done on that. I'd like to ask you a bit more about ruthenium and iridium as you allude to in your commentary in the report.

You've made quite a discussion about it. I would argue the sell-side don't really take a view on minor metals to a granular degree or have a view.

You've certainly pointed out the revenue contribution is meaningful. Could you perhaps, for the purposes of investors to just remind us what your prorated exposure is as a group relative to the industry average?

Do you have a view on the outlook for demand for ruthenium, iridium, in respect for the next few years in terms of annual growth?

Yeah. Adrian, I'm not going to answer all those questions, because off the cuff, I can't.

What we can say to you is that the growth projections in demand for ruthenium and iridium continue to be extremely strong and keep surprising us. We don't know all the applications, as you may accept, but it looks pretty good.

The deficits in those metals are very, very significant. We're not talking about a couple of percent deficit here.

We're talking tens of percent deficit. On an industrial level, those metals are in what we would describe a severe deficit.

They're only being held at the moment by selling of historical stocks. Again, I would have to defer on that one and say what I will say is when those stocks become depleted, the true industrial balance will show itself in price.

In terms of our splits, the best way of thinking about it is in terms of how much UG2 we mine versus how much Merensky we mine, and that will give you the necessary feeling for ratios, because, for those who don't know, those metals that Adrian is talking about, predominantly the ruthenium, iridium, and rhodium, actually come almost entirely from only one reef, which is the UG2 currently in South Africa, of course. Booysendal is 90% UG2, 10% Merensky.

Eland is 100% UG2. Zondereinde is 50-50.

They give you a good feel that We're actually on a weighted basis, quite heavy on the minor metals, which is, of course, then ultimately reflects in the prills split, which I believe you will get in the detail in the book. Thanks, Adrian.

Thanks, Paul.

Hi, Paul and team. Thanks for taking my question.

Done on your results, especially the dividend. 3 and 4 Shaft, can that access Tumela reserves quite easily, and BMM 2, can that access De Brochen quite easily?

Yeah. 3 and 4 Shaft

3 and 4 Shaft if you remember, historically, we purchased a very large block of ground effectively from Tumela, if I can say it that way. The commercial transaction, of course, happened with Anglo Platinum historically, but what we refer to colloquially as the Tumela block.

So 3 and 4 Shaft are placed down-dip of Tumela as it stands today. Accessing up-dip is a lot easier than accessing down-dip, so that probably answers that question.

We are absolutely contiguous with De Brochen. That's also true.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Done again.

Thank you. I think we've done on the lines.

Maybe Damian, anything that we haven't answered?

Only things that you've not answered, Paul, is one one for Aletta, what do you expect tax rate going forward, that's from Yandroy Pieterse at Tembawell?

For the current year, the effective tax rate for the group was 19.5% with an 8% relating to the reversal of Eland. If you add that back, one can look at roughly 25% to 28% going forward.

From Thoko Mokwena, Oyster Catcher, he was just asking furnace upgrade at Zondereinde timing?

It will be May to July 2028, which is the next campaign life end and the rebuild.

Then the concentrators at Zondereinde and Eland? Any

The concentrators will take about 2 to 3 years, and it will be staggered a little bit.

Mark Versterklif from Stone Capital, you've answered essentially his question from Arnold. Sorry, just give me 1 second.

You've answered Shashi Shekar from Citi's question about CapEx. Then there was one question from Bulelwa Bandara from Ntambo.

That was, are we still on track to meet our 2030 carbon reduction targets? Will renewable energy build to displace the additional energy requirements for the cooling at 3 Shaft?

The answer is yes.

Yes. Yeah.

I do want to point out we are looking for more renewable opportunity. As you saw, at this stage, we're only 70% abated on carbon.

There is more we can do, but for the moment, that's the project work we do have. Anything else, Damian?

That's everything, Paul. Okay.

Ladies and gentlemen, I hope you've enjoyed the presentation, and appreciate everybody coming, and everybody on the lines, thanks very much.