Ramelius Resources Limited

Thank you, Mel. Good morning, everyone.

Thank you for taking the time to dial in this morning. In addition to the full quarterly report, we have also released a presentation that we will speak to during this call.

Both documents have been uploaded on the ASX platform and will also be available on our website shortly. I'm joined today for the first time by our COO, Tim Hewitt; and as always, our CFO, Darren Melman.

Tim and Darren will provide some more detail on the operations and financials after I've run through the highlights. While the presentation as a whole will focus on the highlights, I do note that there is a lot more detail that can be found within the quarterly report itself.

As usual, there will be an opportunity for listeners to ask questions at the end. And before I start on the presentation in the quarter, I'd like to highlight a couple of important points.

First, one thing that will be noted from our releases today is the absence of full year production and cost guidance for FY '26, which we would normally release around this time. Given the timing of the Spartan transaction, we have deferred providing guidance to the market until we've completed the Ramelius Spartan integration work.

We have several options available to us for the processing of Dalgaranga ore and are diligently considering these to ensure the best return for our shareholders. The integrated study outcome will include 5-year production cost and capital guidance at the Mt Magnet Hub covering FY '26 to FY '30, demonstrating our preferred pathway to 500,000 ounces per annum by FY '30.

This new extended guidance is due to be released in the December 2025 quarter, if not earlier, if we are able to. Secondly, we are very excited to be introducing the exploration DNA of Spartan to our business.

With baseload feed secured for the foreseeable future from existing stockpiles, particularly at Mt Magnet and the planned Eridanus cutback, we are aggressively targeting high-grade opportunities at the new enlarged Mt Magnet hub. We are very encouraged by what we have seen over the second half of FY '25 from our own exploration drilling and have therefore, guided for $80 million to $100 million of expenditure in exploration in FY '26, which is effectively double that of FY '25.

For those who have downloaded the presentation deck, I'll be initially speaking to Slide 3. Both operationally and financially, Q4 was exceptionally strong, which further built on an incredible year for Ramelius.

Our strategy of focusing on high-grade ore sources such as Penny, Cue and soon Dalgaranga is proving its worth and what has differentiated us from our peers as is evidenced by our low cost base and record cash flows. The fourth quarter saw 73,454 ounces at a very low all-in sustaining cost of $1,339 an ounce, generating $229 million in operating cash flow.

Production exceeded our upgraded guidance for the quarter, with the continued outperformance of the Cue resource, mainly positive reconciliation noted at Break of day, continued over at the White Heat pit. Whilst this is encouraging, at some point, we still expect the Heat pits to perform more in line with the resource models going forward as mining progresses into the fresh rock.

The closing cash and gold balance for the quarter was $809.7 million, which was after paying a maiden fully franked interim dividend for FY '25 of $0.03 per share and prepayments by way of tax installments on the FY '25 income tax. The Board will consider the final dividend for FY '25 at the time of finalizing the FY '25 financial reports later next month.

Our exploration for the quarter focused on following up the promising results seen in the March quarter. At Penny, drilling was focused on extending the mine life beyond FY '26, whilst drilling at Perseverance South, formerly known as Saturn East and Hesperus continued to further target and define the banded iron mineralization.

Tim will talk in a little more detail on this shortly. Work on the Rebecca-Roe DFS continued throughout the quarter as planned, with completion scheduled later this quarter, followed by an FID consideration by the Board.

Our transformational combination with Spartan Resources has progressed seamlessly, and I wanted to express my thanks to the team at Spartan for working with Ramelius to progress studies and integration alongside the shareholder and court approval process. While the transaction is to be implemented later this week, we are already well advanced on studies and integration of the 2 companies, and this would not have been possible without the cooperation of Spartan.

Our aim was to hit the ground running both operationally and from an exploration perspective, and I feel we've set ourselves up well to do that. Upon implementation, based on current share price, the combined Ramelius and Spartan Company will have a market capitalization well in excess of the original pro forma we quoted back in March when the deal was first announced, which could well see Ramelius enter the ASX 100 Index in the coming months, all things being equal.

In addition to this, despite recent speculation about being withdrawn from the VanEck GDX Index, the combined Ramelius and Spartan Company could well actually be included in this newly known MarketVectors Global Gold Index as our understanding is the previous assessment was completed on a Ramelius as a stand-alone basis as opposed to the merge cut. At the time -- also at the time of announcing the Spartan transaction, we noted a pro forma cash position of just over $500 million.

Now given the cash generation of Ramelius over the last 2 quarters, this is now expected to be well north of this figure even after accounting for the $270 million payment to be made to Spartan shareholders later this week. This leaves Ramelius in a position of financial strength ahead of ongoing mine development of Never Never and Pepper, the Mt Magnet mill upgrades, which are pending the completion of integration studies and the development of Rebecca-Roe.

All of these growth projects can and will be funded entirely from existing cash reserves. Referring to Slide 4.

Get on the right slide. And before handing over to Tim to discuss the operations in more detail, I wanted to take a moment to reflect on the year for Ramelius and what has been delivered and achieved.

Record gold production of just over 301,000 ounces at a peer-leading, all-in sustaining cost of AUD 1,551 per ounce. This is the fifth year in a row where we have achieved both production and cost guidance.

Our company values delivering on our promises, and this is embedded in every part of our business, and this track record shows just that. Record operating cash flow of $771 million and underlying free cash flow of just under $700 million.

And as mentioned, cash and gold of over $800 million. During the year, we released a 17-year mine plan at Mt Magnet, putting to bed the myth that Ramelius does not have mine life.

This mine plan will be superseded by the upcoming studies into the integration of Dalgaranga. Completion of the PFS at Rebecca-Roe was completed last December, demonstrating strong economic returns with a DFS to be completed later this quarter.

And lastly, a total of $0.08 per share return to shareholders by way of the $0.05 FY '24 final dividend and the $0.03 maiden interim dividend for FY '25, both fully franked. On Slide 5, lastly for me, I'd like to draw your attention to the chart on the left, which breaks down the quarterly production for the year.

What is evident here is Mt Magnet filling the gap left by Edna May as that operation progressed to care and maintenance and is in care and maintenance as we speak. Mt Magnet alone had its best quarter of the year on the back of improved grades at Penny, which saw a record of 72,575 ounces of production.

And this resulted in a full year production from Mt Magnet of 248,108 ounces, which also not surprisingly, is a record for the hub. With that, I'll now hand over to Tim to discuss the operations in more detail.

Thanks, Mark. Pleasure to join for the first time and always good to join in such an impressive quarter for Ramelius.

I'll take over from Slide 6 of the presentation and take you through the mining production in more detail. The June quarter saw us mine 347,000 tonnes of ore, an increase of 20% on the prior quarter at a grade of 6.87 grams per tonne, a 12% increase.

Both increases were driven by improvements at Cue open pits and Penny underground. As a result, we mined 76,707 of contained gold ounces, up 34% on the March quarter.

Total tonnes processed were down for the quarter, with the completion of processing at Edna May in the previous quarter. However, the combination of higher mine grades and throughput at Mt Magnet filled part of this gap, with a total of 73,454 ounces of gold being produced.

Moving on to Slide 7. This has the same layer as the previous slide, but represents the full year and for comparison, the last 3 years of information.

On the mining side, all mining took place at the Mt Magnet hub with a focus on accessing high-grade ore. Tonnes mined were down in the prior year given mining ceased at Edna May and Eridanus, but noting that the mine grades more than doubled.

Processing, a very similar story to the quarter with the transition to magnet only, with the higher grades available from the mine inventory in the year resulted in a record gold production for the group, which totaled a fantastic result of 301,664 ounces. Moving on to Slide 8, some more details here on Mt Magnet for the quarter.

Firstly, on safety, we did have a disappointing quarter, saw 1 LTI and 4 RWIs. Statistically, this is a reversal of our previous TRIFR trend recorded in the first half of the year.

During the quarter, we did place some significant actions in place to focus on our safety leadership, both with our own employees and through our business partners, and we continue this safety focus into FY '26. The higher mine grade in the quarter when compared to the prior quarter was attributable to higher grades at Penny as multiple stoping areas came into production within the high-grade areas of Penny North.

At Cue, the White Heat pit saw a repeat of the overperformance that was noted at Break of Day in the prior quarter. The positive reconciliation resulted in an additional 13,000 ounces across Cue for the quarter and 28,000 ounces for the year.

There are some reconciliation tables in the quarterly for those who want some more detail on this. It's important to note that these positive reconciliations have been seen in the weathered upper sections of the ore body above the fresh rock.

With these mines now progressing into the fresh rock, we believe that both White Heat and Break of Day will still perform in line with the model predictions. What I will add though, is given the high grade of these open pits, the ore body is treated with the utmost respect, a very diligent modeling of the mineralization and some very strict ore control practices in the pit resulting very little ore loss and dilution.

These techniques are also applied to our underground mines, too. Processing at Mt Magnet recorded the highest throughput quarter for the year.

This is a combination of excellent mill utilization, a balanced blend program and the change to a more aggressive mill liner to improve our tonnes per operating hour with the harder Eridanus ore. This, coupled with a higher mine grade resulted in gold production of 72,575 ounces at an all-in sustaining cost of $1,310 per ounce, arguably one of the lowest cost production centers in Australia.

Before we move on, I just want to highlight the continuous improvement mindset from the Mt Magnet processing team. The real benefit of these technical modifications, whilst minimal in this quarter, will have some real long-term benefits when Eridanus becomes a prominent ore source of ore feed to the Checkers mill.

Moving on to Slide 9, a reflection of the year at Mt Magnet, which was the engine room for Ramelius for FY '25. The start of the year saw completion of mining at the current Eridanus pit before the open pit fleet transitioned to Cue.

Again, another highlight was the open pit mining team pivoting from one style of mining to setting up and establishing the Cue pits in a safe and timely manner. Underground mining continued to focus on Galaxy at Mt Magnet.

Across the year, a total of 1.8 million tonnes were processed at 4.48 grams per tonne for record gold production of 248,108 ounces at all-in sustaining costs of $1,340 per ounce with the costs being largely comparable to the prior year. The production and low cost profile generated an operating cash flow of $661 million for the year.

Slide 10, now talking about Penny. A very solid quarter for Penny.

Mine grade just under 18 grams a tonne, which resulted in a production of 26,241 ounces of gold, all-in sustaining cost of $809 per ounce and generated $93 million in free cash flow. For the year, Penny processed 169,000 tonnes at a grade of 14.4 grams per tonne for 76,418 ounces.

Production was achieved all-in sustaining costs of $1,003 per ounce and generated $221 million in cash flow for the year. Slide 11 is discussing exploration at Penny.

Obviously, our focus at Penny is to continue to find the next ore body there, and we're defining a target down plunge of the Penny North load with the aim to extend the mine life beyond FY '26. We've seen some significant results.

As can be seen on the slide, 0.6 of a meter at 33.1, 1.24 meters at 7.8 and 0.6 at 8.34. We are seeing promising potential to extend the mine life here very similar to what we saw at Vivien.

Given the time horizon for Penny, this is a priority one from an exploration perspective for this coming year. Up to $12 million has been allowed for exploration activities across year at Penny.

The underground platform development is well underway as is the follow-up surface drilling. Moving on to Slide 12, Cue.

So a total of 204,000 tonnes was mined across Cue in the quarter at a grade of 6.55. All tonnes were 22% up on the prior quarter as the strip ratio decreased, and we saw some improvements in our productivity, again, with a continuous improvement mindset at the site.

Selective stockpiling allowed us to mill 149,000 tonnes at a grade of 8.19, which whilst down the prior quarter, is still a remarkable grade for any gold mine, let alone a shallow open pit. Gold production totaled 36,490 ounces, all-in sustaining costs of $942, producing a cash flow of $125 million.

For FY '25, Cue processed 295,000 tonnes at a grade of 10.66 for 96,720 ounces. All-in sustaining costs, $794 per ounce, generating cash flow of an impressive $288 million.

Slides 13 and 14 show some of our exploration highlights for Mt Magnet, which includes Perseverance South, as Mark touched on, and Hesperus. At Perseverance South, we're following up some encouraging results in the March quarter, again, focusing on the BIF, which is immediately east of the Galaxy underground mine.

Significant results include 13.2 meters at 6.95, 4.2 meters at 4.36, 8.9 meters at 13.45 and 8 meters at 7.62. On Slide 14, we have the Hesperus pit, which sits a few hundred meters from Saturn and was historically mined solely on the granodiorite geology.

We continue to test the granodiorite. We're also targeting a BIF located below that.

Results include 18 meters at 5.35, 18 meters at 2.86 and 1.4 meters at 8.4. And we continue to see significant potential below the existing pit.

As many people on the call know, Mt Magnet still has untapped potential, and our commitment to this is reflected in our increased exploration guidance for FY '26 of $80 million to $100 million. Last but not least, I'll now talk to Edna May on Slide 15.

So for the quarter, Edna May produced just under 1,000 ounces at an all-in sustaining cost of $2,892. This production was sourced solely from stripping the remaining gold in the circuit and the processing of the final carbon from the site.

For the year, gold production at Edna May totaled 53,556 ounces at a respectable all-in sustaining cost of $2,608 per ounce. It was a highly cash generative with a total operating cash flow of $109 million for the year.

Gold production was above guidance, while all-in sustaining cost was at the lower end of guidance. Edna May has now transitioned into care and maintenance with a small team on site maintaining the asset.

With that, I'll now hand over to Darren.

Thanks, Tim, and good morning, all. I will be initially speaking to Slide 16 of the deck.

These slides are regular in our presentation deck and is an important tool for us to assess our M&A track record. The figures in the square brackets represent the cash and gold generated by our operations over the quarter, with the standouts being Penny and Cue.

Cue is a remarkable investment for Ramelius with the acquisition having been fully recouped within 9 months of commencement of mining. At the end of this week, we'll add Dalgaranga onto the scorecard with the same philosophy applied.

We must ensure that what we spend on the acquisition in cash and script, we must get returns and create the black diamonds above the line. It might take a little longer to recoup our investment on Dalgaranga than that of Cue, but our 5-year guidance is to be released in the December quarter and will demonstrate this plan.

On Slide 17, we show financial highlights for the quarter. From a financial point of view, it was another exceptional strong quarter for Ramelius on the back of strong gold production with $208 million of free cash flow being generated, only marginally down on our second consecutive record on the metric noted last quarter.

What needs to be highlighted here is the fact we pre-delivered 7,000 ounces, this reducing our Q4 cash generation and closing position to the tune of $13.4 million. This demonstrates the increasing margins of our business, not only due to the gold price, but also lower operating costs across the Mt Magnet Hub.

During the quarter, we sold 76,000 ounces of gold at an average realized price of $4,442 per ounce. This includes a mix of spot, predelivered and committed forward sales that resulted in total sales revenue for the quarter of $336 million.

The AU gold price was fairly flat over the quarter with the strengthening U.S. price being offset by a weakening U.S.

dollar. The all-in sustaining cost for the quarter was $1,339 per ounce, which was 10% down on the prior quarter with only negligible production from the higher cost Edna May in the quarter.

The resulting all-in sustaining cost margin, which is the average realized price less the all-in sustaining cost was $3,103 per ounce, representing an all-in sustaining cost margin of 70%. Looking at Mt Magnet in isolation, the all-in sustaining cost was AUD 1,310 per ounce, which was 7% up on the prior quarter with the operation now bearing almost all of the corporate costs.

On Slide 18, we show a breakdown of free cash flow metrics for the quarter. The gold sales of 76,000 ounces generated cash flow of $228.9 million with $224.8 million coming from Mt Magnet and $4.1 million from Edna May.

A total of $16.8 million was reinvested in mine development, resource definition and exploration in the quarter, which focused on Mt Magnet, Cue and Penny. During the quarter, we also paid $4.1 million for the care and maintenance of Edna May.

This cost includes the employee redundancy costs and other relating to the transition into care and maintenance is not considered to be reflective of the ongoing care and maintenance cost for the site. Details of expected care and maintenance costs will be detailed in our 5-year guidance to be released in the December quarter.

The resulted free cash flow for the quarter was $207.8 million. During the quarter, we prepaid income tax by way of installments for FY '25 totaling $28.3 million.

We expect to be able to materially reduce this rate at which we pay income tax in FY '26 with the introduction of Spartan tax losses to the group and also higher depreciable asset value. These expected tax synergies will be detailed in the integration study to be released in the December quarter.

We also paid our maiden fully franked interim dividend of $0.03 per share to shareholders in the quarter, which net of dividend reinvestments resulted in a $26.9 million cash outflow. The resulting cash and gold position was $809.7 million.

Just now speaking to Slide 19. As others have done on this call, I want to take a moment to reflect on the year from Ramelius.

We have detailed the key metrics for FY '25 with further results to be released with the full year financial report in August. The business on the back of record gold production, generating just under $700 million of free cash flow, which is more than double that of the prior year.

We sold 303,000 ounces at an average realized price of $3,963 per ounce, which includes a mix of spot, predelivery and commitment forward sales. This results in total revenue for the year of $1.2 billion.

The Australian gold price improved significantly over the year from $3,488 per ounce in June 2024 to $5,020 per ounce in June 2025, a 44% increase. The all-in sustaining cost for the year was $1,551 per ounce, which was 2% down on the prior year and driven up with production with -- from higher cost, but cash generation from Edna May production.

The resulting all-in sustaining cost margin was $2,404 per ounce and represents an all-in sustaining margin of 61%. Looking at Mt Magnet in isolation, the all-in sustaining cost was $1,314 per ounce, which was in line with the prior year and represents one of the lowest cost gold projects in Australia, if not the lowest.

On Slide 20, we show a breakdown of free cash flow metrics for the year. The gold sales of 303,000 ounces generated cash flow of $771 million with $661 million coming from Mt Magnet and $109 million from Edna May.

A total of $73.2 million was reinvested into mine development, resource definition and exploration in the year, which focused on Mt Magnet and Cue and Penny, which is in line with our market guidance of $60 million to $80 million. The resulting free cash flow for the year was $695 million.

During the year, we paid $166 million to increase our holding in Spartan. We also paid income tax on FY '24 and FY '25 earnings of $96 million, which was again within our updated market guidance of $90 million to $100 million.

We also paid a total of $0.08 per share to our shareholders, including maiden interim dividend of $0.03 per share and a final FY '24 dividend of $0.05 per share in the year. Net of dividend reinvestments, the cash payments totaled $70.3 million.

Lastly for me, I just want to touch on our hedge book on Slide 22. Over the year, we have maintained our disciplined approach to managing the hedge book, including predelivery into committed contracts where appropriate.

We unwound the hedge book from 155,000 ounces at an average of $3,081 per ounce at 30 June 2024 to 56,000 ounces at an average price of $3,283 per ounce at 30 June 2025. The majority of the hedge book relates to FY '26, which covers approximately 24% of our FY '26 production based on our 17-year Mt Magnet mine plan with only 8,000 ounces at an average of 3,664 per ounce relating to the first half of FY '25.

In addition to this, we also have 0 premium collars for FY '27 totaling 22,500 ounces with a floor price of $4,200 per ounce and a ceiling price of $5,906 per ounce. What I will say overall on our price protection approach is that we are generating peer-leading margins per ounce even without the 100% exposure to gold price that this has highlighted.

With that, I'll now hand it back to Mark.

Thanks, Darren and Tim. Slide 23, we have summarized our key focus areas for the remainder of calendar year '25.

We will continue to work on our safety performance. We have added additional resources and look to lead from the top on that aspect.

Completion of the Rebecca-Roe DFS to be delivered in the September quarter, followed by an FID by the Board. Significantly increased exploration activities leveraging off the Spartan exploration DNA, which is evidenced by our increased exploration guidance of $80 million to $100 million, as you've already heard.

And our priorities, not surprisingly, will be almost in order of grade, Penny, Dalgaranga, the Galaxy area, Cue, not forgetting Rebecca and also the Eridanus mine area. We'll look to issue updated resources and reserves for Ramelius on a stand-alone basis and then shortly thereafter, put out initial reserves for Never Never and Pepper.

The other deposits to the south at Dalgaranga, such as Applewood and West Winds will likely come later once we've completed quite a large drilling program planned in FY '26 at Dalgaranga. As mentioned, we'll close the Spartan transaction, which is scheduled for this Thursday, the 31st and finally, complete the integration studies with Spartan, which are expected in the December '25 quarter.

And this study will include our selected milling option at Mt Magnet and Dalgaranga, a 5-year mine plan for Mt Magnet, which includes Dalgaranga and importantly, the full detailed guidance for FY '26. Finally, a reminder to those on the call that Ramelius will be attending the upcoming Diggers and Dealers Conference in Kalgoorlie, where I'm happy to say those who have looked at the program where I'll be co-presenting with Simon Lawson for those who are wondering about what was going to happen with the combined group.

So with that, let's open the line up if we can, Mel, for questions.

Just wanting to get a bit more on the integration studies for Dalgaranga and particularly the network that's been ongoing. Kind of wanted to get a sense of how that's framing the option that you're looking to progress the PFS?

And is this predominantly about blending and throughput impacts or something else? And maybe just give us a bit of a refresher on the bookends of scenarios that are under review.

I'll go with that one. Thanks, Al.

There is 8 options on processing. I suppose just to take a step back, the mining and the scheduling and the mine plan is largely finalized and largely agreed.

It is really now what is the best processing solution. Met test work has largely been around the combination of, let's call it, Mt Magnet, which is largely Eridanus ore with Dalgaranga ore, recognizing that currently, the Mt Magnet plant runs at a grind size of 150 micron where based on all the test work that Spartan have performed up until now, the Dalgaranga ore will get higher recoveries when you're at a grind size at least at 75 micron preferably even lower.

So the combination of those 2 ore bodies and how that performs, whether there's any preferential grinding, where there's the opportunity to do a tail grind are part of those scenarios. One scenario is everything goes through Magnet as it is.

Next scenario, everything goes through Mt Magnet expanded. And then the options sort of expand from there, okay, do you look to refurb Dalgaranga and restart Dalgaranga?

When do you do that? Do you potentially expand Mt Magnet if you can beyond the 3 million that we've talked about.

So you can see a way to get to sort of 8 options here, and that's what we're working through. We won't be emotional or sentimental about it.

We'll go with the option that provides the best value for shareholders. But it requires obviously a lot of work on capital at both plants, operating costs at both plants, road requirements in terms of capital and running costs on those.

But you do need to recognize that a finer grind does require more power and more steel in the mill, which will increase your operating costs and reduce your throughput. So there are trade-offs there.

You don't just go for the highest recovery. There is a balancing act that we're working through and the guys, as always, are doing it super diligently.

We've got really good consultants working with us who are very familiar with both the Dalgaranga and the Mt Magnet plant, and we're confident we'll come up with the right solution when we come to market with it.

Just a second one, maybe for Darren, just the presales into the hedge book. I think they mainly got stripped off March quarter 2026.

Just interested in why that period was targeted. And I suppose just more broadly, noting your comments about funding growth with the balance sheet, any views on further early deliveries into the hedge book?

Yes. We saw a drop in gold price briefly in the June month.

We took the advantage of delivering some of those predelivered ones and also just looking out into FY '26, just when we had some production coming in, even though we haven't provided it. We don't materially think it's materially different from FY '26, so it's still subject to the review.

So we just thought we'll get less production at the back end of FY '26. So we just took the time to have that full exposure to gold price.

So that was the basis of timing. On a go-forward basis, when we put in place the zero cost collars was basically a footstop or, call it, $100 million coverage on the Mt Magnet mill expansion from the 2 to 3.

So that was the underlying basis of those hedges, the 22,500 for FY '27. One thing you might have saw in the guidance or the FY '26 sort of some cash flow guidance pieces is that we are looking to potentially bring forward some of that into FY '26 versus FY '27.

We've got to consider obviously a larger CapEx continue on the development of Dalgaranga and obviously, that final option we'll have with the mill. So I think once we get the broader capital program expected in the December quarter, we may add some additional potentially zero cost collars or puts depending on how we -- if we're comfortable to do that.

But obviously, we want to ensure our shareholders have got upside available in that gold price. So it won't be at a lower level.

So that's sort of how we're kind of looking at it. But that all being said, as we mentioned on the call, our starting position is over $800 million, a little bit less than that when we do the integration, but we don't have to hedge, but it's just sort of we have been pretty disciplined in that approach and obviously still thinking about returns.

So long-winded answer, but there are several factors that we'll consider before putting something new in place.

Just wanted to push you a little bit on one of the scenarios that you mentioned earlier, Mark, just in terms of potentially expanding Mt Magnet beyond the 3 million tonne throughput rate. Just wondering what the logic of that would be considering you do have obviously the Dalgaranga plant sort of sitting there as well.

Thanks, Richard. I think you need to, I suppose, bear in mind that Mt Magnet is even compared to WA gold plants, a very low-cost plant, and it benefits from low-cost power.

We have the gas pipeline, and we've now -- and are in the process of supplementing that with renewables. So on a cost per tonne basis, it's a very low-cost plant.

So putting as many tonnes through that plant makes a lot of sense to us and maximizing -- if you're going to do an expansion going to the maximum on that, you do reach a point, as we've talked about before, it's not as simple as, okay, let's turn a 2 million tonne plant into a 5 million tonne plant, which intuitively, if you have 50 million tonnes, that's over 17 to 20 years, you probably want to actually have a 5 million tonne plant to make that more like a 10-year mine production profile. So -- by doing that, you will reach a limit on things like pumps, conveyors and sort of all of the more ancillary infrastructure, you can add ball mills and SAG mills and tanks, but you do reach a limit on that expansion capacity.

But we think it's very much worthwhile really testing that and making sure that if we're going to expand it, we're going to the maximum given the long life at Mt Magnet and the low cost of that mill. It's a combination of power and the fact that we've been running it for, what, 15 years now and really got it dialed in.

And even to the point where Tim didn't really expand on it, but we've changed the liners in the SAG mill at Magnet to be able to deal with the harder Eridanus ore and things look really positive on that. It's relatively early days, but the guys, as Tim mentioned, have a continuous improvement mindset.

And some of those tweaks, obviously, on a throughput I'm assuming that you still only do 2 shuts per year. But if you can increase your throughput by 5 tonnes per hour over a long period of time, it makes a massive difference.

So that's why we're looking at expanding it. If we're going to expand it, we expand it as one of the options as far as we can.

Hopefully, I've answered your question.

Just trying to ascertain the thinking behind the reason not to provide FY '26 guidance. I mean, obviously, you gave us the Mt Magnet mine plan fairly recently.

Is it more that development at Dalgaranga might bring ounces into the plan that's above that Mt Magnet plan that you gave us? Or is it something like a scenario where a mill expansion might see tie-ins and lower throughput than that Mt Magnet plan?

I'm just trying to sort of get an idea of why you're not so sure about the next year, particularly because I assume the assumption is that very small ounces would be coming out of Dalgaranga development over the next year.

Thanks, Andrew. I suppose there's a couple of aspects to it.

Typically, when there's a combination that's just on the verge of happening, we're reluctant to provide guidance right now as we would have every year for the last umpteen years and then come back and then revise it a month or 2 months later. And our feedback is the market says, well, just when you're ready, give us the guidance on a combined basis.

So whilst the production, it's not much point putting out Ramelius only and then saying, well, here's another number with Dalgaranga in there. But I think probably just as importantly, there's capital associated with Dalgaranga that's obviously over and above what we had previously put in our Mt Magnet mine plan, which was minimal for FY '26.

And then we want to, as we talked about, potentially bring forward any mill expansions into FY '26. So we just didn't want to give you half the story essentially.

And I think it's not uncommon for -- I think Westgold did it last year. They completed at Diggers and I think it was 6 weeks later came out with guidance.

And I think we're probably following the same playbook on that, making sure that we do it once and do it properly.

I was just curious if you've had any interest in potentially selling Edna May, given it's been on care and maintenance since April.

Thanks for that, Jarrod. We're just about to close the call, but I appreciate the question.

There's been no shortage of incoming. It's fair to say.

But that's not surprising given the gold price and everyone wants a gold project, especially a permitted one with the mill being looked after by ourselves. So yes, at the moment, we're happy to have it on care and maintenance for now.

We have other priorities at Mt Magnet and Rebecca-Roe. We think it's great option value.

We'll turn our mind to what happens with that. We could even refresh the numbers.

I think when we actually made the decision, we used a AUD 3,500 an ounce gold price. So we'll look at that probably more likely later in the year, early in the new year, but it's not stopping people coming forward and asking the question, and we're basically saying we'll add you to the list if and when we consider what we're doing with that asset.

Nothing more to add. I think that's the longest call we've had for some time.

A fair bit of detail in there, but thanks for your time this morning.