Morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Champion's third quarter results of financial year 2024 conference call. At this time, all lines on a listen-only mode. Following the presentation, we will conduct a question and answer session. If at any time during this call you require immediate assistance, please press star zero for the operator. This call is being recorded on Wednesday, January 31, 2024. I will now like to turn the conference over to Michael Marcotte, VP, Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Thank you, operator, and thank you everybody for joining us today to discuss our Q3 results of the financial year 2024. Before we get going, I just want to point everybody to our website, where you can find the presentation that will be used for this session under the Investor tabs and Events and Presentation. We'll also be making forward-looking statements throughout this call. And for more information on forward-looking statements, you can also look at our MD&A, also available on our website. Joining me here today is our CEO, David Cataford, our COO, Alexandre Belleau, our CFO, Donald Tremblay. Our CEO, David, will make the formal portion of this call, and then we'll follow up with Q&A as well towards the end. With that, I'll turn it over to David. Hi, everyone. Thanks for being here today. Bonjour tout le monde, merci d'être présent ici aujourd'hui. So if we look at the third quarter highlights, I think the biggest highlight for us is the fact that we've managed to surpass our nameplate capacity and deliver roughly about 4 million tons during the quarter. So a very big achievement that we've managed to do, and we'll be able to run through what that means for us. A little bit underwhelming has been the delivery on the rail operator of allowing us only to sell about 3.2 million tons. We'll be able to address that portion a little bit further into the call as well. As we've always said, when those plants are running smoothly, it also allows us to tweak the recovery circuit and increase our iron recovery. So another highlight during the quarter is the fact that we've managed to achieve 81.4% iron recovery, just shy of our 82% target. But again, we feel confident we'll be able to achieve that once we continue operating in a stable manner and able to tweak that recovery circuit. But we now know that the plant can deliver over the nameplate capacity. What that means in terms of our cash costs, our cash costs were trending in the right direction, going from roughly about $74 to $73. So we've improved slightly the cost, but we'll be able to go through the different elements that are entailed in this. So very happy of the highlights that we managed to achieve during the quarter. What's important as well when we deliver record production is to not only have record tons, but also produce clean record tons. And if we look at the quarter, we exceeded over 500,000 hours worked without a recordable injury, and also managed to deliver those tons without any significant environmental issues. So very proud that we've managed to produce 4 million clean tons during the quarter. In terms of the work that we've done with the community, I think it's been also a very big quarter. We've managed to continue strengthening our partnership with the First Nations, delivering on different projects that we're doing within the community. So very proud of what we've managed to achieve with our partners from Uashat First Nation. We also had a visit from the Minister of Natural Resources and Forests at Bloom Lake, where we were able to discuss what we do and how important our material is to decarbonize the steel industry and decarbonize the world. So turning back to operations, you probably saw during the quarter that the P62 and the P65 increased slightly, so about 12.5% and 11%, respectively. And we managed to fully benefit from that increase of pricing during the quarter. We see that the margin for the P65 is still fairly depressed compared to historical numbers. Again, pointing towards weak steel output in Europe and the lack of environmental controls in the steel industry in China. But we still see that the iron ore price right now has been fairly healthy during the quarter. That's been a little bit offset by the higher shipping costs, so one reason being the events happening in the Red Sea and also an increase in the C3 Index. But we've seen that since being reduced a little bit. If we turn to the underwhelming portion of the quarter, being the rail operator, so this has been a little bit more complex during the quarter. We are working very closely with the rail operator so we can get the contractual tons that we have agreed on. But, it has been a, a challenge and has pushed back a little bit our view on when we believe we'll be able to bring down our stockpile. So during the quarter, we increased by 800,000 tons, our, stockpile at site, bringing our current stockpile to about 2.4 million tons. The, the element that is positive is, is we've had significant space at Bloom Lake to be able to stockpile material, but that has increased, our costs at site and has made things a lot more complicated for us. So continuing to work very closely with the rail operator so we can get the agreed, tonnage down on the, rail. In terms of our operations, when we look at the highlights of the quarter, so not only do we produce 4 million tons, but we also increased the material mined and moved at site. We increased our strip ratio, and even if we produced that high level, we've managed to keep the mine healthy by moving all the tons of waste that we needed. We still have a slight backlog from the beginning of the ramp-up that we'll be able to work on in the coming quarters, but the mine is in a very healthy position right now. And another element that's very important is, even if we've produced a record production during the quarter, every ton that we've produced has been of high-grade quality. Again, showing the fact that the Bloom Lake material is extremely good to be able to help our clients produce more, decarbonize, and we'll be able to go through the next steps of our decarbonization portion. What does that mean in terms of financial highlights? An EPS of about CAD 0.24 per share, EBITDA of close to CAD 250 million. So very good quarter, allowing us to generate cash, to be able to position ourselves very well for our growth initiatives. In terms of our costs, so, well, we saw them trend slightly lower, a little bit higher than where we would like them to be. The main highlights for the quarter is the higher sales volume, but because we had to move quite a lot of tons that we had to rely on certain contractors at the mine to be able to do this, which increased a little bit our costs, and also got into the winter period, where the snow removal started and other elements consuming a little bit more energy at site. But we still feel confident we'll be able to produce and ship the same amount of tons and improve the operations at Bloom Lake, we'll be able to bring our costs below the $70 mark. In terms of provisional price adjustment, as you know, always a little bit of noise during the quarter. This quarter was positive. We had about 1.3 million tons on the water at the end of last quarter, where we had forecasted a price of about $126 per ton. We managed to achieve roughly about 135, giving us $12.3 million of positive provisional price adjustment. If we look for the next quarter, so we have about 1.8 million tons that is subject to a provisional price, and the expected price that we had at the end of the quarter was roughly about $150 per ton. If we look at our average realized selling price, so a little bit higher than the P65 index, due to timing elements during the quarter. But we did see our freight and demurrage increase due to logistics issues, mainly on the rail, and also the higher C3 impact, as we mentioned a little bit earlier, due to the impacts in the Red Sea. All in all, as we've mentioned, we've seen this come down slightly in the month of January, and if we go back to last quarter, allowed us to have a net realized price of about CAD 157. What does that mean in terms of our cash position? Well, it allowed us not only to pay our dividend, but to invest in the mine, also invest in our CapEx projects for the growth initiatives, and allowed us to increase the cash by just over CAD 70 million during the quarter. In terms of balance sheet, very well positioned for the next steps of growth. We have roughly about CAD 400 million of cash in the bank. And if you account for the inventory that we have at site, minus the logistics and freight costs, we have a value of about CAD 200 million post logistics and taxes at site, making our cash balance roughly about CAD 600 million. Again, very well positioned to be able to continue our growth initiatives to create more value for our shareholders. You probably saw in the past quarter that we've continued working with our great partners at the various banks that are in our loan facility syndicate. We managed to secure a new term loan of about $230 million, allowing us to repay the revolving facility and have a full $400 million revolving credit facility available, again, positioning us very well to be able to work on our growth initiatives. We turn to the past quarter in terms of why we would want to produce higher grade iron ore, and why we would potentially take an FID on producing 69% iron at Bloom Lake. One of the main highlights during the quarter is the fact that at COP28, we saw a lot of governments recognize the fact that if you want to decarbonize, you can't only work on electric vehicles, you have to also work on various elements, one being steel. We have several countries, including Canada, Germany, U.K., and U.S., all pledged to procure green steel for public infrastructure construction. The big advantage is. This is a little more price-agnostic. Once the government's pledged to be able to use green steel, they'll need this green steel to be able to build their their infrastructure. So if you put this on top of all the contracts that we've seen last year between steel purchasers to be able to use the whether it's in car manufacturing or in various other businesses that require green steel, on top of these governments also pledging to procure green steel for public infrastructure, we see that it's all pointing in the right direction to have a healthy premium for a green steel, and also for the the ingredients that come into green steel. We also have the United States and Latin America, that announced measures to introduce a similar mechanism to Europe in terms of, the CBAM, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. So again, pointing in the same direction, that it's important to produce low CO2 intensity material, like what we do at Bloom Lake, and be able to participate in a lower CO2 steel environment. So again, pointing in the right direction to be able to create, significant premiums for the higher grade type material that decarbonizes the world. What we saw also in the last quarter, very impressed by, and proud to have worked, alongside different governments, to be able to show how important high-grade iron ore is to decarbonizing the, the world and also, our country here in Canada. And this has made not only Quebec, but also Newfoundland, leaders in terms of recognizing the high-grade iron ore as critical and strategic. So we're now part of the list of critical minerals here in Quebec and also in Newfoundland, allowing us to view the importance that we have for various governments to deliver projects in terms of high-grade iron ore. This had allowed us also with Hydro-Québec or with the Quebec government, to be one of the only companies that had access to hydroelectric power blocks, to be able to do our modification of Phase 2, to increase the grade to 69%. So if we turn to this project, we had hinted in the past quarters that there was certain elements that needed to be achieved for us to have final investment decision on the Plant 2 modification, to bring it up to 69%. So when we look at this project, it was roughly about CAD 470 million to be invested, for us to take half of our tons and upgrade them to 69%, to then be able to enter the electric arc furnace market and also the green steel, the green steel market. So by having the power and also increasing our credit facility, making sure that our balance sheet is robust, allowing us to do the project, we got the final investment decision yesterday from our board, and are now on track to be able to deliver our project by the second half of calendar 2025. So, this will then position Bloom Lake as producing one of the highest-grade materials in the world, on half of our tons, and being able to enter the DR market. Other initiatives that we're working on, so we're continuing to work on our feasibility study for a pelletizing facility in Pointe-Noire and also continuing to work with our partners that we've invested in Binding Solutions, to be able to produce a coal-bonded pellet. We're now at the pilot plant phase, where we're producing material that we'll be able to ship to our various clients, so they can test it in their steelmaking process. But we're very optimistic on the next steps of this coal-bonded pelletizing. And once we have more data from our clients on how it reacted in their steel plants or more their steel capacity, well, we'll be able to come back to the market in terms of next steps with this project. If we turn to last quarter, another highlight as well has been the delivery of a feasibility study for the Kami Project. So, this is a significant resource, just a few kilometers away from Bloom Lake, situated in Labrador, so in Newfoundland, in a very mining-friendly jurisdiction, and that has a long history of supporting our iron ore operations. If we look at the highlights of the study, it's roughly about a 9 million ton per year DR grade pellet feed, that would be over above 67.5% Fe, with currently a 25-year mine life. It includes equipment similar to what we have at Bloom Lake, so proven technology to be able to produce this. And one of the other advantages as well is we've managed to have a project that would have an even lower CO2 intensity than what we have at Bloom Lake, making this a leader in terms of CO2 intensity per DR grade-type material. If we turn to the economics, so the initial CapEx for the project is just shy of about $3 billion. And a C1 cash cost to produce DR grade material would be sub $60, delivered in the vessel, in Pointe-Noire. So, very robust, operating cost. And when you look at the, CapEx required to build a project, it gives a good view on what it costs to build a project in a top-tier, jurisdiction. Again, showing the big advantages that we have at Bloom Lake, and also, allowing us to have a good, potential project in the pipeline, to be able to, bring more DR grade in the market. The next steps in terms of this project is to be able to continue working with groups that would potentially need this material and that would like to partner up to be able to evaluate the next steps. So now that we have our feasibility study in place, we'll be able to continue the discussions with the various groups that are interested in being able to partner in this project. And once we have a potential partnership, come back to the market and be able to explain the next steps. If we look at where this project positions itself in terms of high-grade iron ore or DR quality iron ore. So we see that the capital intensity is roughly about $331 per ton. I mean, we've just delivered a feasibility study at the peak of inflation, but I think it was important to have conservative numbers that reflect what it would cost to build a project today, and be able to eventually look at the different ways that we can potentially improve the economics of the project. So all in all, I think a fantastic quarter, where we've managed to hit a record production of clean tons here at Bloom Lake, allowing us to view the next steps of our growth initiatives. I think it's positioning us very well in everything that we control, and being able to work on the next steps mainly on the logistics side, to make sure that we can match everything here at Bloom Lake with what we do, to make sure that we can bring all these great tons to our clients in the future. So thanks, everyone, for being on the call. We'll now turn it over to the Q&A portion. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, should you have a question, please press the star followed by the one on your touchtone phone. If you'd like to withdraw your question, please press the star followed by the two. If you're using a speakerphone, please lift your handset before pressing any keys. One moment, please, for your first question. Your first question comes from Alexander Pearce from BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Thanks. Good morning, David. So, just thinking about Kami, maybe you can just give us an idea of the premium you've assumed for that project over the 65% final price quoted, and how that product maybe differs from the DRPF project at Bloom Lake, to begin with? Yeah, thanks for the question, Alexander. So when we look at the premium that we've used for that, when we look at the all-in price, the premium that we use is about $34 per ton. So it was lower than what we had in different reports from independent groups on where that premium would be, because you have to imagine that the premium was taken a few years down the road and with a 25-year sort of view, and taking into account all of the new electric arc furnaces that will be coming into the market with the potential supply gap that will be there. So that's the number that was used. There's also a slight freight advantage that is used as well compared to where we're at today, because when you look at the potential market for this, we're targeting much more Europe, Middle East, US, and Canada in terms of the use, and also continuing potentially to send tons to our great partners in Japan. So, that's the way that we've built the premium and the freight portion. Great, thanks. And then, obviously, you mentioned that you're looking at potentially looking for some more kind of optimization opportunities there. But obviously, the IRR is actually relatively low and the CapEx number is quite high. So maybe based on those, the numbers that we can see in the study at the minute, is the right way to look at this as a longer-term option to dovetailing with Bloom Lake, you know, down the line, let's say, if final prices do remain elevated? And then maybe the second part of this, how confident are you that the rail capacity can eventually get to a point which can actually support those additional tons? Yeah. So if you look at the study, I think the main thing to take in is how undervalued we are at Bloom Lake. So when you look at how much it costs to build a new project of this DR grade type material in a top-tier jurisdiction, it's fairly expensive. So it really puts the spotlight on what we have here at Bloom Lake, and it really shows the importance of us not only delivering this DRPF project for phase one, but eventually looking at making 100% of Bloom Lake at DR grade material. It also highlights the importance of working on the debottlenecking projects at Bloom Lake, because we do feel that that's the portion that's the most accretive for our shareholders. Now, that being said, when you look at the future, if the market requires DR grade material, well, where are you going to get it from? So now, the important thing for us to get the study that came out, is to be able to, one, position a very conservative price of CapEx to be able to build a project. And then the economics, well, obviously, if you use the three-year trailing average for the iron ore price, well, you get an NPV over $2 billion. So I mean, the economics are good if you look at the trailing price. But as you know, everybody usually sees iron ore price going down in the future because everybody believes it's so easy to build new projects, and new projects don't cost anything to build. So in that situation, well, obviously, the economics of a Kami project are not that great. So in that scenario, it puts Kami as a good option for the future. If the market goes to requiring quite a lot of this DR grade type material in the future, well, then we might see, and governments now pledging to use green steel. Once that starts getting built into the price of the premium, we'll see where that lands, and that might position the economics of a project like Kami in a better space. When you have, elements like CBAM, and then if the U.S. and Latin America also go the, down the same route, well, then you have carbon border adjustment mechanisms that also favor the, the introduction of low CO2 intensity DR grade material. So where is this going to land? That we'll be able to evaluate in the next years. But I think the important thing for us was to come out with a conservative number that shows how, how important Bloom Lake is in the current scope of our company and puts a good, good option for the future. If we turn to the rail operation, as you know, it's got a theoretical capacity of about 80 million tons per year. So the rail is not the issue, it's really the operation, and we need to make sure that we continue working with the rail operator to ramp up those tons, so we can move every ton that we produce at Bloom Lake, plus the stockpile down to our port and eventually to our clients. Great. Thanks, David. Your next question comes from Orest Wowkodaw, from Scotiabank. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning, and congrats on completing the ramp up at phase two. I had a question around the expected cadence of inventory destocking. We clearly saw the inventory number go up now to 2.4 million tons. Can you give us some guidance on how much—assuming you're now operating at the full nameplate moving forward, how much capacity or ability on the rail is there to destock that inventory? And I feel like with that higher number, it's likely going to take more than a couple of quarters now. Can you give us some guidance on what to expect there? ... Yeah, thanks for the question, Orest. Maybe just to position the, the run rate at Bloom Lake. So we hit a record of 4 million tons during the quarter, and that brought up different elements that we need to modify at the site to make sure that we could eventually hit that in a sustainable way. So please don't expect that every quarter we'll, we'll be making this number, because just to give you an example, the way that we've designed all of our shutdowns, it was to pass a certain amount of tons within our mills. But by hitting those sorts of numbers as we did in the past quarter, while that has shown that some equipment is wearing out a little bit sooner than the major shutdown. So we need to work on the maintenance schedule and on the various equipment that we have, to make sure that we can hit those sort of numbers in a sustainable way. That was our view on the debottlenecking project, as we've been mentioning for a while. We've pushed the machine, and then we come back a little bit, fix what needs to be fixed, and then take another potential step change in the future. So by saying that, in the next quarter, we should not view that we'll necessarily be producing 4 million tons. And as we work with the rail operator to be able to pass down the contractual tons that we have, we do feel that we'll be able to destock the inventory in the coming quarters. But to your point, obviously, the results that we've had in this quarter, adding 800,000 tons on our stockpiles, has pushed out the timeframe that we view we'll be able to bring down those tons. This is causing significant issues for us, so increased cost at site, more complications also for us. The advantage is we do have the space to be able to do it, but at the same time, our, our main focus is really to get that rail in line so that we can pass down our tons. Can you be a little more specific? Like, should we anticipate any inventory destocking in this March quarter, given it's winter, or is that likely gonna start more in the June quarter, and then, then, I don't know, take, I assume, several quarters? I mean, we, we've now increased 800,000 tons of material this quarter. I don't expect us destocking this quarter. We would need to destock this quarter, but I unfortunately don't expect it when I see what the challenges that there during the winter period and the fact are that in the previous quarter, we only managed to bring down 3.2 million tons. So I do expect that it's gonna be closer towards the summer, where we start destocking the stockpile. Okay. And just maybe another way to approach it is, what do you think a realistic sales number is as we get into later part of the year in terms of volume, in terms of what the rail can handle of your total volume? Is it 4 million tons? Is it slightly more? I'm just trying to understand the near-term limitations on volume on sales. So are we. So we're working with the rail operator to be able to to get that, because that's the only sort of bottleneck that we have right now, to be able to get those tons to market. We know the market wants them, we know we can produce them, so that's the only missing link there. I'd love to give you more info, Orest, but honestly, this is the biggest risk of our company, and we're working and, we're doing everything we can to get that rail to the level it should be. Okay, thank you. Your next question comes from Dalton Baretto from Canaccord. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks, and good morning, guys. I wanna stay on that same line of questioning. It's really just such a shame that you guys are facing these logistics issues in this pricing environment and with your operations doing so well. Just one follow-up question on that front: You've got 2.4 million tons of finished goods inventory now. How much more space do you have? I mean, if you have another hiccup on the rail, is there a scenario where we could see you having to dial back production rates? I mean, you have probably one of the most creative teams in operations, and we typically find ways to make things work, so we'll continue to have that same approach. It's tough to give you a number on what's available. Honestly, our view is that we should never have more than 100-200,000 tons of inventory at site. So this is an abnormal situation, but as you've seen us in the past 10 years, we sort of always try to find a way, but it's costing us, obviously, and it's been very, very complicated. But I do expect that if we continue producing, we'll be able to work with the rail operator to get those tons down and hence not have to use more stockpiling capacity at Bloom Lake. There is space, but the last thing we want to do is to continue increasing that stockpile on site. Got it. Okay, and then just maybe switching gears to Kami and a couple of questions there. I'm just wondering, you've got the numbers out there now. How does this compare to a potential Bloom Lake Phase 3 scenario? That's a tough one to answer because we're not as advanced on the Phase 3 at Bloom Lake. So we are working on that. I think the main focus for us at Bloom Lake is really the debottlenecking project. So when you look at the economics of debottlenecking Bloom Lake, obviously better than what we have in a greenfield project like Kami. So that's gonna be the main focus for us. Now that we have the CapEx numbers for the Kami project, we'll definitely continue working on a potential Phase 3 at Bloom Lake. But I think that the best way to approach Bloom Lake in the near term is really to get it to its full potential with the plants that we have now. Okay, great. And then it just, you know, based on your, your comments so far, it, it sounds like given these numbers, you're, you're not really rushing to move Kami forward. When you think about the, structuring of the financing and a potential JV scenario, how fast are you moving on that, and what kind of a partner are you looking for? What are you looking for them to bring to the table? Thank you. Yeah, thanks for the question. So, we're looking for a great partner. Our view is that to find a great partner, it needs to be someone that needs those tons. So realistically, we don't need—Well, it's not that we don't need a financial partner, but there's no big advantage for us in partnering up with a strictly financial partner. The main importance for us is really to find someone that needs the tons. So it's going to be a large steel manufacturing company that wants to produce green steel, that sees importance in producing steel with low CO₂ intensity, that comes from a low CO₂ intensity and in a top-tier jurisdiction, to be able to supply either governments or the automotive sector to be able to use this material. So that's the type of partner that we're looking for, and that's the type of groups that have approached us in the past to be able to see if they can partner up on Kami. So those are the discussions that we'll be able to continue. How quickly will that happen? Well, we have been in discussions for a while already with various groups on this, and there are some interested parties. So we'll see how much time it can potentially take to firm up something with one of these partners. But the partner portion is definitely a priority for us, because even if we're not necessarily pressing go on the project, I think where we can create the most value for our shareholders is by de-risking these projects as much as we can. So that way, when we do potentially take a decision, we're much closer to the end, to the end goal when we actually, pull the trigger. So for us, we want to continue monitoring where the DR premium is going, where, all this sort of steel, portion and steel premiums for green steel is going. And if we can advance permitting, if we can de-risk certain, aspects of the project, definitely something that we'll be looking into, because we do feel that we should advance it to a certain level without spending too much shareholder money, but making sure that we can de-risk the project and, be closer to that decision timeline. Got it. Thanks very much, guys. That's all, thank you. Thanks, Dalton. Your next question comes from Lucas Pipes from B. Riley. Please go ahead. Thank you very much, operator. Good morning, everyone. David, I first want to follow up on the rail side and would appreciate additional color around what exactly is holding up the destocking at this point? I feel like there have been a few moving pieces over the past 9, 12 months that have led to this inventory buildup, but would really appreciate kind of what's been the bottleneck, what is the rail operator telling you today? I'll start there. Thank you. It's a bit tough to give more color on this one, Lucas. So they're not delivering the contract. So it's basically that simple. And we want to make sure that they're able to do that. We gave them significant money ahead of time to be able to get ready, and it's not delivering. So we need to make sure that we can get that in line. So right now, that's pretty much all the color that I can give. Are locomotives missing? Are people missing? Is the track not maintained? What is contributing? Well, that's their business. Realistically, we put everything in place so that they should be delivering right now, and it's not delivering. So, we're- Mm-hmm. Are they making investments? Are they getting... I mean, in order for you to destock, they have to make these decisions today. Do you see any movement on their part? I mean, it's a bit tough to be able to answer all your questions, Lucas. I mean, the one thing you have to take into account is that we'll, this is the biggest risk of our business, and we'll do everything to make sure that we can get those tons down. But to start getting more in detail in the way that they operate, the number of locals they have, and this and that, a bit tough to get into that portion. I think the main highlight is, again, long term, the capacity of that rail is 80 million tons, and it's the first time that it has to operate to those levels, and they're now ramping up, and we want to make sure that we can get what we signed for in terms of logistics. Thank you. What's the legal recourse? So this is costing you a lot in higher inventory costs, capital is tied up, you're missing on a big market opportunity. What are the legal mechanisms you have to force them to live up to their terms of the contract? We have a contract in place, and we're now working with the rail operator to get this up and running. That's pretty much all the color I can give you, Lucas. Okay, that's, that's, that's helpful. I'll, I'll, I'll do one more along those lines, and I'll switch topics. I understand you have storage to stockpile, but this is tying up a lot of capital, and is there a point of inventories where you say, like: Look, enough is enough, we don't need to bunker iron ore for the next 18 months, or something like that? What, what-- When do you reach that point where you say, We, we have to cut production? Thank you. Every ton we don't produce, we'll never be able to produce again. So right now, when we look at our cost to be able to stockpile it versus the available liquidity that we have, it still makes sense to be able to stockpile. Our view is that we'll be able to bring down all the tons that we're producing in a short period of time versus the actual capacity on the rail. Now, how much, how much more tons could we stockpile before we would sort of pull the plug in terms of pushing the machine? A bit tough to answer, because, again, every time we don't produce a ton, we'll never be able to produce that ton again. So for the moment being, it still makes sense for us to push Bloom Lake and to make sure that we can produce everything that we can. We are hopeful that we'll be able to get that logistics portion resolved shortly so that we can get all the tons down. Yeah. I guess you could produce the tons later, right, if they're sitting in the ground or sitting on a stockpile. That's. I don't quite understand that trade-off. No, what I'm saying is that the plants, if you reduce the cadence, well, then it's not as if you'll be able to increase it higher than its nameplate capacity in the future. So every ton that you don't produce and that you slow down, you won't be able to make up for it. So, for us, it still makes sense when we look at our view on our iron price, when we look at our costs, the margins that we can make, still makes sense to produce those tons today, yeah. Okay. So, in other words, you would also expect this rail bottleneck to be resolved soon? I would have expected it to be resolved already. So, it's definitely something that I expect to be resolved soon, yes. Okay. Well, thank you on that, and, and good luck. David, I wanna go a little bit higher level on kind of supply, demand for high-grade iron ore. And if you look out over the next three years, what would be the incremental demand you're seeing kind of by region? And what incremental supply do you see coming online, be it Eastern Canada, Brazil? I understand, you know, supply regions are limited of this great material, but would appreciate your thoughts on that. Thank you. Yeah, what's important for us, and I think we, we've been mentioning this for the past, for the past several years, is we don't necessarily want to service long-term blast furnaces. We want to be that niche product that services the electric arc furnace market, and that's where we see there's a pretty big gap in terms of supply and demand. You're seeing in various countries, be it U.S., Canada, Europe, especially Germany and France, we're seeing a whole lot of investment to build electric arc furnaces. When we speak to various clients, they don't necessarily have a clear solution on where all of those tons are going to come from to be able to supply that. We just came back from the Middle East as well, in the conference in Saudi. We're seeing all the investments that are being made in the Middle East, all in the, the investments and the money that's available to be able to build green steel capacity. And again, what we're seeing is that they need to secure tons in this DR market. So for us, it's very important to move away from what I'd call traditional high grade, because you have projects like Simandou, that, that, that will potentially come on, in a short timeframe. You have other projects that could come on, that could supply that higher end of blast furnaces, but that don't quite make it for the DR grade. I mean, maybe a few tons, but, that don't quite make it in the, DR grade, portion. So we want to make sure that we're in that market, so we differentiate ourselves and we have a higher margin. And when you see countries like Canada, U.S., when you see potentially Europe also partnering up to use green steel in the infrastructure build, well, that creates a big demand that is more price-agnostic in terms of what premium has to be paid, because they just need that material. Not as if they're doing a trade-off to see, well, can I sell my car X amount more versus the premium that I'm paying for green steel? If they're saying, "We need green steel to build our infrastructure," well, that's what's going to be required. So we do feel that there's quite a gap in terms of supply of DR grade type material, and that's really the market that we want to be in. David, I appreciate the call. I wish you best of luck. Thank you. Thanks, Lucas. Your next question comes from Craig Hutchison from TD Securities. Please go ahead. Hi, guys. My question is just on costs. You mentioned in your release that it was negatively impacted by utilization of contractors to fill vacant positions. Can you just, you know, let us know which positions were filled by contractors, and have you started to change that here in the first calendar quarter? Are you starting to fill those positions internally? Yeah, it's a lot maintenance related, Craig, so mostly the garage, mostly, working to make sure we can have the uptime on all of our equipment. So we had to push the availability of our equipment to be able to hit those sorts of numbers. So that's where we've got a lot of sort of firepower. I mean, it accounts for roughly about just over 60-some-odd cents per ton. So it's not... That portion of the cost was not the main area, but it's still one that if we would have hit, we would have been closer to $72 per ton. So that's where we had the most cost impact at the mine side. Okay. Your target to sort of hit the mid-60s on cost, is that really contingent on everything working on the rail side? Correct. Maybe just one last question for me. Just on the capital for the quarter, there was, I think, $18 million you guys spent for third-party facilities in Pointe-Noire to handle the additional productions from phase two. Is that going to be a recurring cost? And just kind of curious why that was capitalized versus, say, expensed. ...Yeah, that we're finalizing the work and the payments related to the SFPPN, so the part, the port portion. So when you look at that sort of investment, if you remember, we had to build that new stacker reclaimer, build some new sidings, and do all that work at the port. So that's where that portion has been invested. But we don't view it as a recurring. We're pretty much finalized right now, the work that needs to be done at the port. Perfect. Thanks, guys. Thanks, C raig. Your next question comes from Stefan Ioannou from Cormark. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks. I think you kind of answered my question, but maybe just to rehash just on Kami, you kind of mentioned, you know, still looking to further de-risk the project going forward. Just wondering, are there any significant sort of boots-on-the-ground costs required to do that, either, you know, before you really engage in partnership discussions or, or after? Like, is basically the, the key sort of tool you're going to have to move the project forward, or do you have to do a little bit more still in terms of spending? Yeah, right now, when we look at the next steps, we really want to work more on securing a partner before we start investing more dollars or more significant dollars in the Kami project. So, I think we brought it to the level now where we can potentially attract a partner. Once that is done, while there is some more drilling that needs to be done to define the geotechnical portion, there's some investment that needs to be done on the environment side to make sure that our plan for the tailings and so what is correct, but it would really position us differently in the region by being one of the most robust tailings facilities in Labrador. So, it's a, it's a higher CapEx number eventually in the future, but we want to make sure that we hit every key point, being the environment, to make sure that we can enter that green steel and those sorts of ESG-friendly purity premiums. But when we look at the investment that we would be making, short term, it's really smaller investments until we potentially bring in a partner. Got it. Got it. Thanks very much. That's helpful. Thank you, Stefan. Your next question comes from Brian MacArthur from Raymond James. Please go ahead. Good morning. One of the things you highlighted in the quarter was getting power from the Quebec government, because even there, I guess it is limited. With the power you have now, you can do the DRPF 8 million tons, I assume. But would you have enough power to do the debottlenecking at Bloom Lake Phase 3? Where does the power constraint come in, in this whole process now, as you move through all your options? Yeah, the good thing, when you look at the debottlenecking projects, they don't necessarily use up that much fixed power. So there, there's more power required at the mine, but that would mostly come from the trucks. When we look at the capacity we have right now, will we be able to operate an extra shovel? There's no, no problem there. We do have some certain buffers at the site, and the big ticket items in the plants that use up the power is really the, the mills, and we would not be adding more milling capacity to be able to achieve that. So for the debottlenecking projects, we don't feel that we would need more power to be able to get there. The only more power that we would need to secure is if we were going to put 100% of the Bloom Lake tons into a DR grade. So by modifying the first plant and adding a flotation plant there, that would potentially require more power. But apart from that, we feel that we've got the power required to be able to debottleneck Bloom Lake. Great, thanks very much. Thank you, Brian. Ladies and gentlemen, as a reminder, should you have a question, please press the star followed by the one. Your next question comes from Lucas Pipes from B. Riley. Please go ahead. Thank you very much, operator. Thank you very much for taking my follow-up question. I want to circle back on the rail side one more time. Are the incentives fully aligned in, put differently, does the rail operator have an issue on economics, or in your opinion, are they properly incentivized to live up to their contractual obligation? Just want to make sure nobody's upside down on this contract. I don't see any issue. I mean, you see all of our costs to be able to deliver a ton at the port. You can imagine what operating costs are. The only issue they might have is counting the profits they're making from those tons. So, there's no, no, issues in terms of profitability on that rail that would hinder them from investing what is required to deliver the contractual tons. I appreciate that. Very helpful. Again, best of luck. Thanks, Lucas. There are no further questions at this time. I will turn the call back over to David Cataford, the CEO, for closing remarks. Thanks, everyone, again for being on the call. Thanks for supporting us through the various stages. I think we can be extremely proud of what we managed to achieve during the quarter. A bit of noise that, as you've seen on the logistics side, but we are working to be able to solve this. But again, I think the main highlights for us is the fact that we've managed to produce over our nameplate capacity in such a short time frame is an incredible achievement that the teams have managed to do. We've positioned ourselves very well to be able to benefit from higher premiums in the green steel space by the FID for the flotation plant to allow us to produce one of the highest grades, lowest CO2 intensity DR material in the world. We're very well positioned with other growth initiatives that we now have as options that we can continue to evaluate over the future and be able to create significant value for our shareholders. Again, thanks everyone for being here, and looking forward to seeing you at the next quarter. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes your conference call for today. We thank you for joining, and you may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.