Thanks, Darcy. Shaun Day here from Greatland Resources. I'm joined on the call by Simon Tyrrell, Chief Operating Officer, Monique Connolly, Chief Financial Officer, and Rowan Krasnoff, Chief Development Officer. Look, let me just say up front that we recognize our guidance is different and lower than the outlook previously provided. The reason for the change is that as part of the FY 2026 budget process, we undertook a risk assessment and we felt it was appropriate and prudent to apply a risk factor to the expected grade of the ROM stockpiles which we acquired through the acquisition and to some open pit material planned to be mined this year. The risk rating of the ROM stockpile has been an outcome of our budgeting process. After we saw the full June quarter numbers and that gave us multiple data points, we decided to take the decision to ensure that we were taking a conservative approach to delivering FY 2026 year guidance. The previous approach at the Telfer site was for indicated resource to be defined around a 50x50 m drilling spacing. Greatland since acquisition has moved to a high density of 25x25 m drill spacing, which we think is the structural fix for this in the medium to long term. What this means for FY 2026 guidance is although the answers are still potentially there, we wanted to provide a more conservative and high confidence range. Hence, we risk rated the ore grade on those pre-acquisition ROM stockpile and all that was still drilled out to that 50x50 drill spacing. With that ROM stockpile, the majority of that is going to be processed in this FY 2026 year. In terms of FY 2027, the ROM stockpile is anticipated to be a small component of mill feed and with the increased density of drilling, ultimately I think we are well placed to overcome the legacy variances in grade. With that, we'll do a page turn and we'll try to get through the presentation in the next 10 or so minutes and then move into the Q&A format. Moving to slide four, which is the performance against the FY 2025 guidance, this is really the FY 2025 year where we've achieved guidance across gold production. We've achieved a really good all-in sustaining cost outcome and our growth capital is sitting there within the guidance range. Moving to slide five, which really just does the highlights for the quarter. For the quarter just passed, we did just over 78,000 oz of gold plus just under 4,000 tons of copper at an all-in sustaining cost of AUD 1,736 with the average realized price of just over AUD 5,000, AUD 5,014 an ounce. We delivered revenue of AUD 487 million. That delivered the operating cash flow at Telfer of AUD 310 million, slightly shading the March quarter at AUD 298 million. With that slightly elevated gold price, that left us with a cash balance. You can see that cash flow coming to the cash balance of AUD 575 million. To remind you, we're debt free and with no fixed forward hedges, but some put options where we can elect but there's no obligation to deliver. We have some protection on the gold price while still fully participating. A lot of this quarter is also around growth. We've got the west open pit, stage seven and in that underground we go, we're driving out to the putting a second drive out into the west dome underground and the ESC, that eastern stockwork we think is going to be a really strong development area for us, which comes into our FY 2026 mine plan. Of course, during the quarter we completed the ASX listing and we retain strong stockpiles and we think that gives us ongoing flexibility in terms of mining across future years with still having around 7 million tons ROM stockpile but just over 20 million tons of that lower grade material. Turning to slide 6. Yeah, we're really pleased with the safety performance. We've just continued to improve through that integration period. Integrations are hard. We completed the integration and we've done that safely as well. From a sustainability point of view, we have good relationships with the local Martu people and JYAC, their statutory organization, and they actually assisted us or at least sent a letter of support into the Government of Western Australia around our second mining lease renewal. That was the 21st year anniversary, which is now the 42nd year anniversary of our mining leases. The second mining lease review now takes it out to 2045. I think we are the first mining company to successfully renew second mining leases. That's a really good outcome for us. With that, I'll pass to Simon Tyrrell to talk through the results. Thank you, Shaun. As noted, quarter four production was within guidance at 78,283 oz, and with a laser focus on costs, a substantially lower than guided all-in sustaining cost of AUD 1,736 per oz was achieved. Starting at slide eight, open pit ore was predominantly mined from Stage 2, with the main change being a deferral of 0.9 million tons of ore into FY 2026 while additional dewatering infrastructure was installed in-pit. Total material mined was in line with forecast, with 3 million tons of Stage 7 pre-stripping undertaken. Underground productivity was sustained whilst drill rigs were increased from two to four during the quarter. We have developed into the Eastern Stockwork Corridor during the quarter with minor development tons mined. Development of the second drive towards West Dome underground progressed with approximately 50% of development m etres went into growth areas, evenly split between ESC and West Dome underground. Moving to slide nine, our processing productivity improvements continue to highlight Telfer's capability, with FY 2025 being the highest gold recovery year since 2010. This is an outstanding achievement given the lower grades currently processed. Of note is the higher copper recovery that has been sustained, and it is approximately 10% above historical levels due to good plant performance. Gold recovery returned to life of mine recovery model levels. Moving to slide 10, growth expenditure ramped up in the fourth quarter to AUD 76 million. This marked Greatland 's commencement of reinvestment into Telfer. Growth expenditure was across open pit pre-stripping, underground development, tailings storage facility expansion, Havieron development, and resource development. Open pit drill rigs increased from one to two by the end of the quarter, with 16,700 m drilled. West Dome drilling focused on Stage 7 extension and Stage 2 extension, with the majority of this ore to be mined post-FY 2027 pending successful results. Moving to slides 11, 12, and 13, underground drill rigs increased from two to four by the end of the quarter for 11,200 m drilled, targeting near-mine extensions including the Eastern Stockwork Corridor, the Eastern Stockwork Corridor Extension, ARIFS, and Rae. New areas such as the ESC Repeat were identified, whilst targeting the ESC near-mine extensions provides opportunity to add easily accessible oz. AUD 7 million was spent in the fourth quarter on resource development drilling, whilst the FY 2026 budget has AUD 37 million allocated. Moving to slide 14, the Havieron feasibility study has progressed on schedule and includes the previously annozd ramp up to 4- 4.5 million tons per annum and remains on target for December quarter. Permitting and approvals have progressed well with the EPA and DQ, and early works including design and tender of the reinforced concrete portal tunnel and completion of the ventilation shaft. Design and procurement of the specialized blind bore cut aheads have progressed. I'll now pass on to Monique to present the corporate and finance. Thanks Simon, and just to recap on what Shaun has previously touched on, the June quarter delivered strong operating cash flows of AUD 310 million and over AUD 600 million in the seven months of operation. We went from AUD 398 million in the bank at the end of March to AUD 575 million at the end of the June quarter, and importantly we remained debt free. The June quarter included strong capital cash spend of AUD 96 million across growth and sustaining in order to progress stage seven, the underground development, our resource development, and Havieron. The June quarter also we added more protection to the commodity price by taking out 150,000 oz of gold put options on an upfront basis at a cost of around AUD 10 million, and that has a strike price of AUD 4,200 for the calendar year 2026. This continued to protect Greatland Resources from downside risk to the gold price while ensuring we participate in any upside. Overall, both a positive quarter and year of cash build to facilitate the support for key growth investments in FY 2026, targeting that further multi-year Telfer life extension. The June quarter also saw the successful completion of integration of Telfer and Havieron operations, which was a huge milestone and effort for the team in standing up all of the systems and operational process across a range of functions, and this also included the stand up of our ERP system SAP S/4HANA to allow for streamlining our business processes, improving visibility in cost and productivity. This now concludes the transitional services arrangements with Newmont within six months post acquisition and allows us the independent running of operations going forward. I now pass back to Shaun to chat through the FY 2026 guidance. Thanks Monique. That integration outcome that Monique led together with Simon and a number of the team here, I think is a tremendous example or a tremendous outcome to complete that integration in that time, on time, on budget. Great outcome. Just moving to FY 2026, which I think is a lot of the focus of today's call, the gold production 260,000 oz- 310,000 oz. As I acknowledged up front, that is 11% different to the previous outlook, albeit this is the guidance that we said we'd update. Now all-in sustaining cost is somewhat a mathematical calculation around that gold production range. Whilst gold production is off 11%, all-in sustaining cost is off 4%, which talks to that cost control and increased productivity that Simon mentioned. In terms of CapEx, I think the CapEx story is a very positive story. Really what we're seeing here is moving away from a two-year Telfer mine plan to actually feeling we've got a multi-year plan of a longer life Telfer asset. Moving to slide 18, you're seeing that in the investment we're doing, an extra lift that takes us out to FY 2028, which shows you some confidence and indeed I think you'll see ongoing lifts. We're doing the pre-stripping on stage seven, which gives us the mainstay feed for 2027, 2028, but into 2029 we're buying new fleet and refurbishing some, which again reflects our confidence. In the underground, I think that's a tremendous story for those that can cast their mind back to the acquisition. We felt that was a really challenging area. As we bring on ESC, the eastern stockwork, we feel that brings the mine planning flexibility and the resilience we want into that mine plan in the second half of this year. We're still really excited about the West Dome underground, but increasingly we're confident around that Telfer underground. Moving to Havieron, this is pre-FID. There's really no change to Havieron in terms of expecting to come out with that feasibility study in the December quarter of this year, kind of end of November, December kind of period. What we're doing this year is some of the pre-works. For those that went to the site too, you might remember that the box cut there didn't have a sump initially. Although Greatland has installed a small sump, it still gets overcome with moderate to heavy rainfalls. We just want to protect that decline into the future and its production decline. We're effectively taking that box cut or the portal to surface by putting in the concrete archways and covering that or refilling that with fill. That's to protect the decline. We're also going to restart work with Byrnecut on the ventilation system. VR1, just taking that down to the bottom of the mine. We're well placed to get down to the bottom of the ore body. For VR2, VR3, which is more ventilation work, we've contracted the blind bore, but we've now commissioned and indeed paying for those cutter heads to be delivered ahead of time. They're a key lead time item. Finally, the exploration and resource development 240,000 m. That is the most ever drilled at Telfer. This goes to us just seeing a huge number of opportunities here, both in the open pit and the underground. Some of Simon's slides showed the size of the prize there, but we think it's really significant. Plus, we talked earlier about that increased density of drilling. We do both. Where the site's probably been underinvested in some of those drilling, we catch up and overtake that and really set us up for a multi-year and successful Telfer into the long life. You can see that a little bit on slide 21, which shows those pit shell opportunities around the West Dome. I'm not going to spend too much time on slide 22 and 23, but you can see in that underground on 22, that eastern stockwork area, but also continuation of some of those existing mining areas and the West Dome underground is really exciting. We've just got one rig on there. We'll have a second rig there shortly and we think that underwrites the future of the underground. Although we want to do another dual campaign in that West Dome underground before we can really talk with confidence about what that looks like. Certainly, the drilling to date is hugely encouraging and the ESC similarly, the intercepts we released I think looked great in this quarter. With that, I'll pause and Darcy, I'll invite you to open it up for questions. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be annozd. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Daniel Morgan with Barren joey. Please go ahead. Hi Shaun and Tim. Just the first question is can you just make it a little bit clearer on the variance to the prospectus versus this guidance today? You know, how much is the stockpiles and how much is any mining material? Can you just make that split a bit? Expand on that a little bit? Yeah. Thanks, Daniel. Look, I think when you look at this, it's really us trying to take what was the 50 m space drilling from Newcrest and just trying to consider the risk factors on this. That manifests in that ROM, that high grade ROM stockpile, but also in some of the open pit material that we planned to mine during this FY 2026 year. Probably when I look at that, it's probably one third in the stockpiles and 2/3 in that open pit material. This is basically where we've gone through and risk adjusted all of that. All of that is calibrated in how we've described that guidance. That's just explaining how we got to that risk adjustment. This is basically the last two months and the next four quarters are effectively this transition period where we go from the historical approach of drilling by Newcrest and in turn by Newmont, to Greatland Resources which has that high density of drill feed. In terms of the mineralogy that's driving this, is it, I mean, what can you say about how sustainable an issue that is? Does that contain to certain portions of the ore body and therefore the stockpile? I'm just trying to get a sense of how much this is. Yeah, let me answer that in two parts, Daniel. Firstly, in terms of the drilling we've done and the classification that we've done of indicators, even going back to that first one we did kind of 12 weeks after acquisition, we have applied that tighter framework to drilling density. This is what we will continue to do. Effectively, the work we do now lets us overcome these legacy variances in grade. I think just as a portfolio asset, I think Newcrest as owner probably just had bigger tolerance for variance. If we look at kind of what we're looking at now and where does it apply, where it applies is more to the higher grade areas. That's where we feel, where you have those cross cutting reefs, that to understand the kind of the domain of those or the size of those cross cutting reefs, you need that higher intensity of drilling, and that's kind of where it's a target for our drilling, although we have that 25x25 spacing everywhere. That's a real focus for our drilling, and in terms of us revisiting, that's kind of where we've looked to revisit a little bit or at least apply those risk factors. Thank you. Just with regards to the prospectus on the CapEx, can you remind us, I think that the CapEx was under the assumption that Telfer has got a two-year mine life. The CapEx today is designed to extend the life. Can you talk to, I think you've got in the release an objective to maintain a sustainable production rate from Telfer leading up to Havieron development. Does that imply that the CapEx being spent, the aim is to hold production in 2027- 2030 around the same levels as is in guidance today? Yeah, look, like that directionally that's what we're trying to achieve here in terms of we think we want to create, you know, consistent production profile out of Telfer and we think the open pit and the underground with these meaningful drilling gives us the opportunity to do that. I can talk to the specific reasons in specific areas in the underground and in the open pit, but you're seeing the CapEx on the stage seven cutback and the bigger stage seven cutback. I think in due course you could see a stage six cutback and investment in new fleet. Pushing the tail stands up higher are all, I think, you should take as confidence in the life extension opportunities at Telfer. The best possible outcome for us is not just Telfer running until Havieron comes online, which I think we're highly confident around, but is actually Telfer and Havieron running in parallel. Thank you Shaun. I'll pass it on. Thank you. Your next question comes from Andrew Bowler from Macquarie. Please go ahead. I guess just following on from Dan's question. I mean obviously you know the commentary is that CapEx is higher this year because you're extending mine life or that's. The sort of plan. How sticky is CapEx beyond FY 2026 if you do see further mine life extensions beyond, say, 2029? Another way of asking is, is FY 2026 expected to be somewhat of a peak year in capital, and then we start to see a bit of a reduction given you largely catch up drilling, catch up developing, etc. I'll just give Simon Tyrrell an opportunity to jump in. Thanks Shaun. Look, there's a number of areas where additional growth capital in FY 2026 is going to give us a running start. I'll pick a few examples for you, Andrew. Resource development, drilling around that AUD 37 million for FY 2026. You know we wouldn't expect a need for that amount of drilling moving forward post FY 2026. I'm not saying we won't do it, but to develop a multi-year life of mine plan, there is sufficient drilling this year to deliver that plan. When we work through our mineral resource estimate in the first quarter and the third quarter of this financial year, our reserve in the fourth quarter, the following mine plan from that, there's sufficient drilling this year to give us that multi-year outlook. That's an example of where capital cost or growth capital would reduce in following years. Another example is, you know, we're doing two TSF lifts this year, so essentially we're doubling the CapEx on TSFs than what we would normally require. Why we're doing that, there was very little float between filling up a stage in the TSF to when the next stage was ready. We don't want to be in a position where there's an incident or there is an increase in production that puts additional strain on that float, on that scheduled float in the TSF construction. Hence, we brought forward the TSF Stage 4 construction and there's also some cost synergies there in not demobilizing and remobilizing equipment later on. There's a couple of examples why we believe this is going to be the peak capital costs here for Telfer moving forward. No worries. Can you just remind us of the permitting timeline that you're hoping for Havieron, particularly what I think was to get permitting around a surface evaporation pond to recommence development? If I'm not wrong. Can you just give us an update of how that's tracking compared to the plan that you've given us most recently? Yeah. Hey Andrew, it's Shaun again. I think it's all pretty consistent. Just to be clear, Greatland is basically just doing a single updated permit, that we're not staging it. I know Newcrest at one stage did go down that they were going to do ponds and then the full, the full permitting. We've, under advice both from the EPA and from our professional consultant, just combined it into a single approval with both the state EPA and the federal EPBC. I think we remain on track as previously advised. I guess when we update the feasibility study we'll give you a full update on that. Right now we think everything's kind of on track there and has advanced a lot, and we're building really successfully on a lot of good work that Newcrest did as owners as well. Understood. Thanks guys. That's all from me. Cheers. Thank you. Your next question comes from Alex Bedwany from Canaccord Genuity. Please go ahead. Thanks guys for taking my question. Just to clarify, Simon, on what you said on the resource definition drilling. Am I to understand that what you're going to spend this year is sufficient to look at a multi-year mine plan, and anything beyond that would therefore be linked to a further extension in the mine life, is that right? The plan that the 240,000 m of drilling plan for FY 2026 is sufficient to deliver a multi-year mine life for Telfer, notwithstanding, you know, we may choose to do further drilling in FY 2027 depending on what size of mine life we're targeting. Whilst I'm saying this, there is sufficient work to deliver a life of mine plan towards the middle of next year that would contain a multi-year outlook subject to the success of the drilling. If I can maybe just add to that, Alex, I think Simon's absolutely right that the 240,000 m is a lot of drilling that will give us multi-year life and we're excited about the prospect of that. I also think that although this might be the peak year for drilling, I think I'd share conviction that we will continue to be doing resource development drilling because we think we're going to get good value for continuing to expand that Telfer mine life. You look at something like stage six, if it hangs together, it's up to eight, ten year kind of expansion. You look at the West Dome underground, understanding the size of that prize, even the size of that ESC or so in the underground, I think there's a—yep, we can consolidate a lot of information from 240,000 m from eight rigs. I think there'll be ongoing value driver by continuing to have a focus on exploration, although recognizing what Simon says, we'll just be able to kind of take it down a notch and so a little less expenditure but still a real focus for us. Okay, yeah, that's what I was getting at. At the time that you updated the reserve, you guys sounded pretty confident. On Stage 7 extension. When do you think you'll be in a position to give us a bit more information around what the quantum of the grade will be there, and how long it's ultimately going to last? I think that the commentary in the quarterly is that it will go into FY 2029. Yeah, thanks Alex. I'll take that one, Simon. We'll have completed the drilling for that in Q1. By the time we get the assays back, do the modeling, and I complete that bulk model, we probably have that completed in the second quarter. Based on that time frame, we'd probably be talking to you about this after our 2Q results. Okay, great. Just the last thing for me, just on the recoveries, is 82% or roughly thereabouts a good figure to expect for the rest of the life of mine, or do you expect that it should rise a little bit as it was in the March quarter? Yeah, thanks Alex. I'll take that one as well. As Shaun mentioned earlier, we've taken a conservative approach to our guidance. Whilst we've shown that we can achieve those high 80% recoveries through the process plant, what we need to prove to ourselves is that's sustainable over a whole financial year. What we've used is the life of mine, so 20 years of history to develop these recovery models. That's where the 82% comes from. We need to do further work this year to make sure that the high recoveries are sustainable and we work towards that. I'd also highlight that in FY 2026 we've got 15% of our plant feed is from stage seven, which is an area of the open pit that we haven't processed. We'd like to get that operational data in hand before committing to higher recoveries in a sustainable method. Okay, thanks, Simon. I'll hand it off. Thank you. Your next question comes from Kate McCutcheon from Citi. Please go ahead. Hi, good afternoon Shaun. I don't mean to continue this FY 2026 guidance for Matic, but you mentioned calibration and historically West has always been prickly on reconciliation. The decision to risk the stockpile, were you seeing undercall on tons and grade and what was that under quarter? That undercall for June quarter for some context in terms of expected grade or delivery and same for the open cut. Has the tighter spacing that you've drilled shown that that grade or those tons are coming in lower and that there's a reconciliation issue? I'm trying to understand if the delta in reconciliation on both the stockpiles and pit has supported putting this conservatism into the numbers. Yeah, so look, we've come in to Telfer and we can't reassay stockpiles and we can't get them. The drilling data on those mining benches that we're putting to stockpiles are historic and they are what they are. That drilling density under Newcrest was basically done around 50 m spacing. We've adopted this tighter approach which we think is right for the ore body and we think, I think Telfer did have some historic under call, sorry, over call issues and we believe this is the, we are highly confident in fact that that's the remedy to this. As I said before, we're a bit in a transition year where although we've applied that, obviously the ROM stockpiles already in situ are under a separate regime and indeed some of the current mining areas, you know, were already in the mine plan and you know, we just haven't had enough days since acquisition to get rigs on them and you know, get assays, remodel them, etc. Hence my response to Daniel before where I kind of said look, probably two thirds from that is in new mining areas that we're going to mine. What we think though is this is the transition year and as you go into 2027 and beyond, we'll have that high density and will be a lot more that will give us the confidence that we'd like to see as Greatland because we want to have just a tighter understanding of the range of oz production. The risk rating isn't necessarily that those oz have disappeared. It's just us putting, we think, a conservative risk rating to make sure the guidance we're giving the market we think will hit. Just to clarify, in the June quarter there were not reconciliation issues, as in what the mine plan said would be there for both tons and grade is what has been there for both the stockpile and the pit, is that correct? I'll have another go at attempting to answer that with a different perspective. So. Whilst the source of the underperformance in Q4 is still under investigation, it's clear that it's in the grade. As Shaun mentioned, it's in the high grade areas which is a function of where the reefs run through. We believe most of the issue is in the high grade ROM stockpiles. As Shaun mentioned, we've processed the majority of those or a significant portion of those in FY 2025. When we look at FY 2026, there's around that 4 million tons of those stockpiles in FY 2026 which we've risk weighted appropriately. Okay, the bulk of the issue. I think we stockpile. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, correct. Bulk of the issue is in stockpiles. You know that we have weighted the lower classified material in FY 2026 open pit. We put a high risk weighting against that. When we get the updated models through that second quarter, as I said, we'll have a higher confidence with that material that is planned for the second half of FY 2026. We would be able to update appropriately on that in our 2Q results call. Okay, I think that is clear. There have been some reconciliation issues. The bulk of it is the stockpile. Correct, Kate. That's observing that, then calibrating it through the budget process is where we said we ultimately made a call. Let's risk weight this so that we are confident that we're putting out a conservative FY 2026, conservative guidance. Okay, got it. I think in the previous two-year outlook you told us an expected grade of 0.55 for the ex pit ore. Is there any sort of color you can give around the FY 2026 mill feed expectations in terms of pushing that plant on tons to go through in some sort of head grade given we've had a. Yes, look for the ex pit grade. There's minimal change on that. It's in line, substantially in line with the production target we gave. There's no change to the open pit grade. The stockpile grade has reduced, one because we've consumed the high grade stockpiles, and two, because we've risk adjusted them. You will see that grade drop from FY 2025 through FY 2026. Yeah, I think you see kind of a 5% change in grade. That's more just a combination of a change in the mining sequence and driven by that, the stockpiles being estimated to have a lower grade moving forward. There's not a lot of change in that open pit grade, but you obviously do have some natural variation. Okay, super helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Oh, hi Shaun and team. Thanks for the update this afternoon. First one from me, just looking at the cost guidance into next year, can you just firstly confirm how much higher that AISC guidance would be if you were expensing that 4 million tons of inventory drawdown? Presuming you don't, given that you've acquired that stockpile. Yeah, Hugo, so effectively, as people are aware, inventory or stockpiles that you acquire as part of an acquisition don't go through all-in sustaining costs. That's partly why you saw such a super low all-in sustaining cost for the past year, because we've had the benefit of that. Less so in the year ahead. We've still got around 4 million tons of stockpiles going through. If you added that into the equation, you're probably adding AUD 100- AUD 150 to your all-in sustaining cost. If you were to put a cost on that stockpile, bearing in mind we bought it at a still super attractive price, even if the grade is a fraction lower. We bought it at AUD 10 a tons. Yeah, no, it makes sense. Thanks a lot, Shaun. Just good to clarify. In terms of the sustaining spend into FY 2026, can you maybe just give us a bit more detail in terms of what's going into sustaining versus growth? Appreciate the tailings work there. I think at the site visit part of that was going to be in sustaining. Looking at the numbers, maybe it's not. Can you maybe just talk through how much you expect to spend as sustaining capital in 2026 and what those pieces are? Yeah, in the sustaining there's AUD 110 million, AUD 120 million which flow through into those all-in sustaining costs. There's a lot of underground advancement, that's probably your biggest single element. It's about creating the flexibility and the resilience in that underground, creating multiple mining faces. That's been a huge narrative to us and we're really pleased to be investing in that underground because we think we set it up for success in the past year. What we did is we expensed the stage two lift, which was basically run-of-mine, where the next lift we're actually capitalizing because that basically gets us ahead of time. Then there's some relatively kind of minor lifts after that. We're improving the cyanide flow onto the dump leach. We're actually doing some new rooms in the village. Those probably three items are your three largest items as part of sustaining and there's just a little bit of CapEx catch up. CapEx where we just think the site needs a little bit of a birthday and we're pleased to do that, particularly given it's generated, you know, plus AUD 600 million over the last seven months for us. No, that's helpful, thank you, Shaun. Lastly, in terms of the grade impact on the stockpile, should we assume the copper grade impact is proportional to the gold grade impact, and how much copper production have you factored into that FY 2026 guidance to give us a steer? Yes, you should. The two are correlated and I'm going to say about 9,000 tons- 13,000 tons of copper in FY 2026. That would be kind of sitting with that kind of profile we've given. Yep, excellent. Thanks, Sean. I'll pass on. Thank you once again. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one. Your next question comes from Ben Lyons from Jarden. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. Shaun, maybe just closing the loop on some of Kate's questions about the grade profile, perhaps you could provide some indication about the expectations for the underground grade. Given there's been a fair bit of variability there over the journey as well. Thanks. I'll just pass that to Simon Tyrrell who's about to jump in. Thank you very much, Shaun. We see a minor decrease in grade from underground in FY 2026, about 6% lower than FY 2025. Once we get into the ESC, we've seen better grades in those areas, so we're expecting some sustaining the grade through those areas. We also like the Ray extension, which also has a good copper by-product out of it, which is quite profitable. Underground grades more or less holding consistent. As I said, 6% drop off FY 2026. Of course, West Dome underground hasn't been in the two-year outlook, but that obviously has upside once that comes into the mine plan. Cool. Thanks, Simon. Maybe sticking with you, you've given some breakdown of that Telfer growth CapEx number when you referred to some of the underground works, et cetera. I've had a crack at using first principles to work out maybe what the TSF would be and the underground development. Can we break it f urther into its component parts? Like is it about AUD 120 million on the TSFS, about AUD 80 million on stage seven, maybe AUD 20 million on the underground, and say AUD 30 million -AUD 40 million for the fleet. Is that order of magnitude the breakdown? Yeah, look, we can give you some further clarity on it, but yes, it's AUD 120 million on TSF. We have AUD 65 million in stage seven stripping, we had that AUD 37 million in res dev, just over AUD 30 million in underground development. The one you're probably missing there is the open pit mining fleet renewal and refurbishment, that's in at AUD 36 million. There's some other Havieron pre-production, Havieron FID is called out at AUD 70 million. That's other smaller bits and pieces, but that gives you a flavor for it. Okay, awesome. Thank you. Yep, yep. Sorry Sean. Go ahead, Ben. No, you go ahead, Ben. Yeah, final one was just on Havieron. I think there was a comment in the release about some early works on the underground development. Just wondering if you could sort of clarify. Is that a reference to a restart of that primary decline or maybe a commencement of the second decline from an underground position? Thanks. Hi Ben, it's Shaun again. We won't restart until we've come out with the feasibility study. Although we are remobilizing Byrnecut in there where they'll do some work on the raised board just to bring in that VR1 system, that ventilation system one down to the bottom of the current decline, which will set us up to get into the top of the ore body. There is some remobilization, but really it kicks off in earnest post feasibility study and for good order, post fit. In addition to that, just what I said about, we're also got Byrnecut working with us on taking the portal to surface, so getting away from the box cut that wasn't fit for purpose, and then you're getting the taste for that. The blind boards that will ultimately deliver all the cutting bits for VR2 and VR3. Yep. Copy that. Thank you very much, Shaun. Okay, Darcy, I think that might be the end of questions, and we've probably run a little bit over time, but we wanted to make sure we addressed everything. With that, I just want to thank everyone for taking the time to dial in. Hopefully, that was helpful, and we appreciate the engagement. Thank you.