If you wish to ask a question via webcast, please enter it into the Ask a Question box and click Submit. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Ivan Vella, Managing Director and CEO. Please go ahead. Thanks, Darcy. Hi, everyone. Good morning. Thanks for joining the call. As usual, Kath Bozanic is with me, our CFO. I would also like to introduce—I know you can't see her; she's in the room, though—Shaan Beccarelli, Heads of Corporate Affairs and IR, as you know. Richard Glass is taking a really exciting trip around Australia with his family for the next 12 months or so. He is probably sitting in Coral Bay, hopefully not listening to this call. We will miss him. Shaan stepped in and came up to speak very quickly. You will get to meet her in due course. We will cover a few highlights and then get into some questions. I mean, look, overall, I think it was a solid quarter. Some big change with exploration, which I will come to. The foundations of the business are just starting to find some rhythm, which is good. First, on safety, look, the actual lagging results are still sort of flat and similar. There was a period of 60 days that we went without any recordable injury through February to early April, which we are really pleased about. There has been a lot of focus on this, as you know, from the team over the last 12 months. We are starting to see some strong progress there. We have launched a behavioral safety program called Taking Control of My Safety. It is getting fantastic feedback and pull from the team at site. That will be rolled out right across IGO. That, among a number of other areas of focus in safety, I think we are having a real impact. We had a new Head of Health, Safety, Environment, Heritage, and Land Access join us in February. Very strong pedigree in this space. And he's having a huge impact, which is great to see. I guess more broadly, in terms of results, look, Greenbushes has had a really solid quarter as well. I guess production was lower than the prior quarter. That's just grade and mine planning, effectively. There's nothing to see there in terms of actual underlying performance. In fact, and I'll talk more to it, the performance continues to improve. Rob's settled in, and he's making tremendous progress there. As you see and you know already, this is a very, very strong ore body that offers up fantastic margins, 68% EBITDA for the FY2025 year to date. There's a range of operational improvements that are continuing. Recoveries I'll mention, but that's all happening. I guess that broader strategic asset review and life of mine optimisation work that's underway. As everyone's asked about dividends, and there was a dividend paid from Winfield into the joint venture partners, $110 million in the quarter. I was surprised. This business generates a lot of cash. It converts cash. That is going to flow out, as we said. Even at the bottom of the cycle, even at the most difficult period for lithium businesses out there, this is a business that's still generating dividends. Kwinana, look, it was a tough quarter. The team were challenged with more equipment issues and shutdown related to some of that work. The highlight, I guess, was the announcement of the Train II decision. Of course, I think one of you on the call actually said, "When bad news is good news." It was mixed. Growth and, of course, development and more downstream processing of minerals and metals in Australia is attractive. Clearly, we have that view, but it's got to be economic. It's got to be sustainable. It's got to be something that can deliver through the cycle. We didn't see that pathway for Train II. The joint venture partners took that decision, which we've talked at length about at the half. Nova, look, as we know, had a very tough start to the financial year. Had a good quarter, and the team's found their feet. We'll come back to more about forward-looking guidance on production. Overall, we're starting to get a better handle on the ore body and the way it behaves in its extremities, how we deal with the lower recoveries when we're in high areas of MGO, and generally speaking, more stable performance there, which is very good to see. The team's working hard to continue to improve that. On the financials, look, it's nice not having to share impairments and other challenges. Simple quarter generated some cash and getting back to basics. Overall, sound quarter. It's good to see some rhythm from the key operations in our portfolio. If I just dive into Greenbushes in a bit more depth, I can't stress enough what an impressive mine this is. As an ore body, it's very privileged. We know that. It's world-class. The ability to generate margin in this commodity through the cycle and the cash conversion, I think, puts it in a very unique space. 68% margin through this period is extraordinary and shows you just how capable this asset is. That's all knowing that there's still a lot of upside. Rob is building out his team and building that momentum with the organization. He's making change at a steady and very sensible and very thoughtful pace. There is a lot of challenges to manage as you make those changes. Some of you may have picked up the engagement with the local residents in the community around dust that was played out in some of the media in the last couple of months. That is the kind of thing that Rob's front-facing. We know that he is taking this very seriously. He's thinking about the non-technical risks. He's thinking about the impacts in a very practical way. He lives down in the region. With his team, he's, I think, the perfect leader to help steer through the growth and the development to pursue the opportunity, but to do that in a way that the impacts are managed very thoughtfully. The engagement with the communities and other stakeholders is done, leaving them feeling like this is a significant contributor, which I believe it is to the region and to the local communities, but that their voice is really heard and understood, and the team's working through those challenges. All credit to Rob and the Greenbushes or Talison team there and how they're doing that work. Mill recoveries, look, I think I've mentioned before that this obviously is a privileged ore body, and that offers up opportunity. Equally, the team's doing a great job at continuing to drive recoveries up. CGP1 is well above 80%. It's very impressive what the team's doing there. They're, of course, applying those learnings back into CGP2. Naturally, they'll want to carry that into CGP3 when it comes online. I mean, this is the benchmark in the world for recoveries. Some really strong focus on that. That includes plant throughput and just asset stability as well, which we all know is a key driver of recoveries and ultimate performance. I mentioned the dividend, which I think is good to see, AUD 110 million on a 100% basis. The broader optimisation work is underway. I have got a bit more on that in a minute. Capital expenditure, probably a key point to note is we have revised down our guidance for FY2025. We previously said AUD 850-950 million. We brought that back into AUD 700-800 million. That is really a focus of, again, the work that Rob has done as he has got in and worked through this with his team and the board's influence, of course. Strong focus on capital, being really careful to prioritize capital, spending money on the right things, making sure we get more value for every dollar that is spent, and being very frugal, ultimately. We do not want to see the team hurt asset health or not invest in sustaining capital. Of course, that is critical. We want to continue to see this business perform at its very best. Equally, we need to be very thoughtful with how we commit more capital in that space. Great to see that progress. I am very, very positive about that shift down. I think you will see that continued pressure and focus maintained. Obviously, it is what you would expect at the bottom of the cycle. What we need to do is carry it right through the cycle when the market turns and make sure that discipline stays in place. CGP3, probably last key point on this slide, is tracking well on budget as we've signposted first production expected in the back end of this year. Moving on, put in a quick slide. Look, there's nothing new on this for anyone who's been through these kind of processes. It's not necessarily entirely unique, but it is significant for Greenbushes. Rob's progressing this. It'll take some time to work through all of the elements. The slide, and I won't go through every dot point, sets out the first part, which is looking largely top-down at what the upside is. What is the potential? What's the upside? What is it that we need to go and pursue? How do we prioritise that? Then breaking that down into the bottom up, which is when we say phase two, it's running in parallel. It's not to say that it's all staggered, but getting back into the block model and building up that picture of the mine from the ground up, understanding the ore characterisation, understanding the assets, understanding the product demand, and understanding how we get the very best value out of this business for the long term. I think the last blue box is absolutely critical. I have talked about engagement with community stakeholders and the impacts. A lot of the non-process infrastructure and other non-technical aspects are fundamental. How we think about growth and the requirements around that non-process infrastructure is absolutely fundamental to get right. Having that done strategically in the long term and being able to look out decades, not just a short period, is really important for us to get the best value from this asset. What does all that deliver? Look, this slide's nothing new either. I mean, you can all put this together from the information you've got. It just visualizes the leverage on this asset. Yes, we're generating great amounts of cash at this point in the cycle. As that lithium price, spodumene price moves, the leverage is extraordinary. This is a picture of as is before CGP3 and before the improvements. That's really the message I want to leave you with: contemplate, and we will do our best to unpack that as we go. We work through that with the joint venture partners. What is that potential? What is it that we're pursuing? How can the asset deliver more productivity, more throughput, lower cost? How can we optimize that amazing ore body? How can we grow the resource reserve in a way that drives material value for the business? That work is underway. I guess the leverage where you're sitting so far down on the cost curve is very significant. Kwinana, look, a couple of key points. I mean, covered LHP2 or Train II. I won't go into that further at this point. There may be some questions. The quarter was challenged with some equipment failure and a shutdown, also dealing with some of the residual work from the October shutdown. Conversion costs trended down and naturally tied, obviously, to volumes as well. There's still some work to do there. Capital guidance is probably the major takeaway here. We've revised that down for FY2025. I think that's important to note that we've got, obviously, a strong focus on CapEx here. It's not a case of just being an open book by any stretch. We need to be very and are very thoughtful about where we allocate cash in this business. Both joint venture partners are equally attentive to this detail, making sure the team are very careful, very well planned, and execute each of their projects with a great degree of care to make sure we get the value for money that we expect. You can obviously see in the guidance that that's a fairly material step down from what was anticipated. Onto Nova. Look, it's nice to see the team find their feet and have a good quarter. They had some good recoveries. They got some better grade. They got some good rhythm. The team are working really well with Barminco. All of that with much better safety as well. It made me smile. I looked back on the quarter, and it was just nice to see the team finding their rhythm and delivering. That has continued into April, which is good. I think we will continue to focus hard and drive, obviously, that performance. We have got a high ambition right through the organisation to do that, to show the quality of mining capability that IGO has. They did have a very tough first half. This was great to see. I think it gives credit and recognition of the very hard work they have done through this financial year in a very difficult period with the ore body. It has not been kind to us. In a sense, it is good that we are getting our hands around it. The big takeaway, I think, on this page is we've put in there some guidance out to the end of life for the asset, for the mine, 15,000-18,000 nickel tons through to the end of life, which is pretty much the end of next year. We've been through the long life of mine now many different ways. We've looked at it through different angles. There is still work going on in our budget cycle at the moment to fine-tune that. We don't see any scenario where that changes. We think it's got good economics through the cycle unless there's some major shock to the nickel market, which we can't see. We've got some real clarity and certainty and confidence around how it can perform. We're just finishing the detailed budget work around that so we can look at the costs and manage that in that ramp down as we go. Overall, a nice quarter for Nova and well done to the team. On exploration, look, it's been a tough year. IGO has got a long pedigree and a long history of exploration. It's where the company started. It has deep, deep capability in the team. Some of the most capable individuals, scientists, GOs that you could find. We had a strategy which focused on these belt-scale tenements, focused on very broad standing across Australia. We've tested that, as you know, over the last 12 months. We've looked at where we stand, how we want to proceed, what we think will drive economic outcomes. We have made a major change to the operating model, to the structure of the team, to the size of the team. We have rationalized that portfolio of tenements heavily or are in the process of doing that. That has been a very challenging process to go through. I mean, the team has done exactly what they are asked to do and done it extremely well. They were responding and delivering against the strategy of the business. We have changed that. That has created impact for individuals, which is why I have not wanted to talk about it in depth up until this point. I think it is just not ideal or respectful to do that until we have been through the work. That is now complete. March, well, this quarter was a tough period for the team. Very sad to see very long-term team members leave who've contributed a huge amount to the business. I want to thank all of them who've been part of the team. Those that stay equally feel that challenge probably more than most. It's still a difficult time as we get through that. We finish the rationalisation. I have deep conviction here. Brett has leant into this personally. We've also had a change for the Head of Exploration. John Kilroe has been appointed. He's got a very long pedigree in this space and worked right across Australasia and beyond. A very, very capable individual to lead the team. Brett's been personally involved. I think, look, it'll take us a bit of time to find our rhythm again. We've got conviction. We've got a focus. We've got a very good plan. We've looked at this really hard. We have also, as part of this, got some guidance for you going forward on what we think our expenditure will be in this space. We have indicated the next financial year and onwards effectively is in that sort of good guidance range of AUD 30 million-AUD 40 million. We have put that out there to sort of say, "Look, this is where we think the right sort of investment fits based on our understanding of other tenements that we hold, where we think we can make a difference, and what is appropriate for the scale of our business." That, as I said, has been a tough process. It is good that is behind us. We are now in a place to look forward with a lot of confidence for exploration. On the financial results, not a lot to cover there. I mean, obviously, last quarter was heavily overweighted by the impairments on Train II and Train I. This is a cleaner quarter where you can kind of see the underlying numbers and some cash starting to flow through. I note that some of that's tax return, which is just a function of cash timing from last year. Ultimately, through the cycle, we are generating cash and covering our corporate exploration and other costs. You'll be aware, of course, that we're still carrying real cost for the care and maintenance activities at Forrestania and Cosmos. All of that taken in, we're still in a very strong position. Our balance sheet continues to stand well behind us as we look forward and pursue a lot of really exciting opportunities with Greenbushes, Nova, and beyond. Look, just to wrap up, I mean, I think I was reflecting this is sort of effectively 12 months of full cycle since I did this April 2024 as my first full quarterly. It's been a tough 12 months. There's been a lot of change. There's been a lot of hard decisions that we've had to take as a team. That's really difficult when you come in and you work through so much so quickly. That definitely leaves people feeling challenged and uncertain and anxious and knowing what's the future of the business. I think what we're starting to see now is a much cleaner view of what is IGO and the capability of IGO and the potential with Greenbushes. We have a fantastic leadership team and fantastic organization, world-class asset in Greenbushes with huge upside. Nova is in a stable place to deliver cash right through to the end of next year and a reset exploration organization to go and pursue and help us find some exciting growth. I will leave it there and open up for some Q&A. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question via the phone, you will need to press the star key followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. If you wish to ask a question via the webcast, please type your question into the ask a question box. Your first question comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Morning, Ivan and team. Thanks for the update this morning and the extra detail in the release and particularly just around that Windfield dividend to the partners. It's great. First question just on the CapEx reductions at Greenbushes and Kwinana. Now that you've completed those initial spending reviews, can you just elaborate on where those CapEx reductions have come from at Greenbushes and how we should think about that, whether that's more a deferral or reduced spend? At Kwinana as well, what you think the ongoing spend at Train I now looks like beyond FY2025? Okay. Thanks, Hugo. Look, I can't give you it's a list of things for Greenbushes. Rob and the team have basically stepped back, looked at the portfolio, and gone through it with a fine-tooth comb and challenged all of the projects. Now, some of it will be timing. Where does it fit in the pipeline? And some of it will be, "We don't need to do this." Now, I don't want to get into specifics. I'll give you an anecdote as an example. There were some plans to pave certain car parks, and they decided that wasn't required. There'll be certain facilities that they might have wanted that they've said, "Look, we don't require." It is both deferral, but on and it's not a case of, as I said, pushing things that impact asset health. I mean, I'm one of the biggest proponents, and I've lived with many assets where that has happened, and it is painful. I won't. That's not who I am as a leader. As a board director, I'm a strong advocate for us maintaining and putting the right investment into our assets to make sure they're healthy. Rob is that kind of leader as well because he's also lived through those issues. The other directors are as well. I have complete confidence that we're not cutting corners here. This is about us just being really disciplined and frugal and thoughtful with our CapEx. The other lever that he's pulling is he's challenging value for money. He's saying, "Well, what is the right amount to spend on that? What is the right standard? How far should we go on that particular requirement? We are both looking at CapEx intensity and allocation. I think this will only continue to improve. There is a committee that goes through this very closely with the business. It is all the things that you would expect from strong capital governance, strong discipline in the way that they allocate that cash. With regard to Kwinana, I cannot give you guidance yet. We will next quarter once we update there. I think it is fair to say that we have got a very, very strong focus on any additional capital there. We want to make sure it is extremely clear what difference it will make, why it is being spent, and the engineering and science and thinking behind that. I cannot give you numbers at this point. I will as soon as possible. I appreciate you want more certainty there, and we'll give you that to you as soon as we can. I guess, be confident that we have got a huge focus on every dollar that's spent on the refinery. Great. Thanks for that, Ivan. Just segueing across to another one on Kwinana then. If I look at the overall production piece, I appreciate you've still got some repair work to get through in May. If we look at sort of the discount for non-battery-grade hydroxide at the moment, it looks relatively small. Is there an opportunity to ramp up more unqualified material there to try and improve sort of the unit economic piece? Just as a tack on, can you maybe clarify how much government assistance you got in the quarter there as well? Yeah. Look, the team are not trying to move as much because we have got inventory, as you know. They are absolutely trying to monetize that and drive our working capital down. That is happening. We are looking at a range of channels to do that. I think with TLC's connections and support and guidance in the market, that is really going well. On the second part of your question. I'll jump in there. We got a back pay during the quarter, so that impacted EBITDA. It was in the order of about AUD 8 million. We'll see that continuing to come through, but at much lower levels as it just is for the quarter-over-quarter. Yeah. Thanks, Kath. I was going to say, that's the number that I didn't have at hand. There is sort of a new program, which maybe everyone's not familiar with, the West Australian government's launched late last year. We've applied and received that support. It's quite material. I don't have the exact quantum because it's effectively an offset on a number of things like utilities and other costs that we would incur. It is quite material and very well received. We're really pleased with that support from the West Australian government. Maybe we'll look into that and see if we can give you more clarity on that for the next quarterly. From a forward-looking point of view, you have a sense of what's coming. Got it. Thanks for that, Ivan and Kath. I'll pass it on. Thank you. Your next question comes from Kate McCutcheon from Citi. Please go ahead. Hi. Morning, Ivan. Kwinana Train I, this is the first time that you've said in writing about discussions for an acceptable Train I pathway have been pulled forward. Sorry. Discussions for an acceptable Train I pathway have been talked about. CapEx has been pulled back. There is another AUD 80 million gone into TLEA this quarter that will not make its way to IGO shareholders this half. How do we think about the bookend of options here? Is it care and maintenance, continuation, one-party consolidating ownership, or all of those on the table and possible timing, if you can say? Yeah. Okay. Kate, unfortunately, let me deal with the last point first. I do not have any time frames. I know you would love that. I am sorry. I I cannot be more specific there. Look, I think we are working through—I signposted this at the half—but we are talking with TLC about Train I. We have concerns about its capacity to perform. That is both technically its history and also the market it is in. We are talking about a full range of options of what might be a solution. I think the important thing to note, though, is as we stand today, it is operating. We have a team there. They are working hard to make it perform. We are all behind that. Both shareholders are supporting the team in that way. Of course, we know we have to look at and think about what is next. Where there are differences of view between the two shareholders, we need to work through that in a respectful and thoughtful manner. That is underway. I would say there is no one option or one answer to this for us or from my point of view. Naturally, every extra dollar of cash that gets consumed by Kwinana that does not drive value is undesirable. We are extremely impatient and driven to see that change. This business has had enormous investment since we became a joint venture partner. I think we have been extremely patient and supportive. We remain supportive of the team and the work they are doing. We cannot continue to just spend money without a clear path of where that takes us economically. I know that has not been too specific. It is fair to say we are working through this, as I said, in a very thoughtful way with our partner. As soon as we've got some more news or more clarity, we'll give you that. The important takeaway being that we are operating, teams doing a great job, trying hard to improve that performance. We're right behind them until we take any other decision. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. I know I ask you this every quarter. The Windfield balance sheet, thanks for the additional disclosures for March quarter. Albemarle said they didn't expect to pay a dividend this calendar year, but we have one. It looks like net debt's increased AUD 70 million quarter- on- quarter. I can see that after the dividend, there was cash generated in that asset. Just the strategy around drawing down debt by another $260 million quarter- on- quarter, if my math is correct, how do we think about gearing of that asset as the CapEx then rolls off into next year? Also, your JV partners have very differing balance sheet positions to IGO, I guess. Anything you can say around that would be helpful. Yeah. Let me comment broadly, and then maybe Kath can get into some more of the specifics. I mean, there's a debt bundle there, and the team will draw on that where they think is appropriate funding CapEx and growth, which, and you can see, if you pull all the numbers apart, the business was net cash, put the debt aside. I think that's the first takeaway that this business is generating cash. The application of debt for that growth CapEx and the timing of it, when you think about Australian dollar, US dollar terms, we're making really thoughtful decisions here. While the debt's US dollar denominated, it's not drawn, of course, that does create some opportunity for us. Luke and Rob are very conscious of that. There's no sense here that we want to overgear this asset. The partners are all very aligned and very cautious on that. We look at these things with a great deal of care. All of our ratios and covenants are well, well under. We are in very good shape. I would say that this is just being very prudent and thoughtful. Actually, it's quite value accretive when you think about how we're applying that debt in the business and the timing of the drawdown. Kath, do you want to build on that? I think you've covered most of it. The one thing I'd say, Kate, or reiterate, is the debt's there to fund the capital. As CGP3 comes to an end, then the capital profile is going to look different. We've got very strict, or the joint venture has got very strict capital management there and manages gearing ratios, leverage ratios, liquidity levels very thoughtfully and looks out 18 months. The balance sheet is strong, and I don't believe overleveraged at all. Our intention is not to be there. This is a very important asset for us, but it also is you've got to look at the best cost of capital on the way to fund these things. That's no different to any other miner. I wouldn't set expectations that that debt is going to grow significantly. It's going to be utilised, as Ivan said, in a thoughtful way during that process, also keeping a very close eye on those various swim lanes that we work in in order to do that. Surplus cash gets distributed, once you look at that, to the joint venture parties, as you have seen in this quarter. If you pull up the 2024 accounts which have been posted by Talison Windfield recently, and you just do the like for like, I mean, actual net debt, if you look at the cash balances, the debt, it changed $75 million in the quarter. It is pretty material in real terms when you pull it apart. Your comment on the dividend, look, I'm not sure I can't comment on Albemarle's remarks there. Look, this business generates cash. It's a great asset right through the cycle. If the electric price moves, it just gets even more exciting and even better. I don't see any reason why we should expect otherwise. As you know, late this year, we have another huge chunk of production starting to come online. could not be a better time, to be honest, when you think about the run into 2026, where we probably all expect to see the market more in balance and some improvements or a better set of drivers for the spodumene and lithium price. Kate, just to add there off the back of that, if you look at Albemarle's most recent earnings calls and both the conference materials, they actually earmarked that they would be, it's a more normal kind of dividend return is what they're earmarked. Even though they said late last year, no dividends, they've actually earmarked in their announcements and public information a softer tone to that. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you, Ivan and Kath. Thank you. Your next question comes from Levi Spry from UBS. Please go ahead. Yeah. Good morning. Thanks for your time, Ivan and team. A couple of questions about Greenbushes, key value driver for the business. Just on this CapEx, sort of reduced CapEx, just confirming that there's no deferral of any of the growth plans when it relates to CGP3. I saw a headline in your paper over there about some sort of submission for some permitting. Can you confirm that was for Train IV or anything to do with CIP? Just talk through the growth plans there. I guess that's the piece that's missing from slide five. Okay. Sure, Levi. Yeah. Look, yeah, no changes. As I said in my opening remarks, CGP3 is tracking well, first production expected back into this year. That is fine. I think that is well in train. There was obviously a bunch of money spent on it through the quarter and construction is getting to the end there. They will be into their pre-commissioning and so on soon. That is fine. There is no backoff on planned growth or the things that are already in focus there. I talked about the efforts on Train II and, well, CGP2 and CGP1, proving throughput, proving asset health, all of those kind of things continue to get focused, same in the mine. The approvals and some of the media you've seen around the EPA submission speaks to some of those, not that non-process and process infrastructure that you'd expect as you grow any business. That includes, obviously, our waste store or waste dumps for waste rock. We've got to think about that in the near term and the long term. How we do that. There's also work going on around water. I mentioned that in the last call. We obviously draw no groundwater. It's all surface and runoff. Lifting dams and creating more water catchment is all work that they're thinking about. Of course, the third big area is tailings and tailing storage facilities. We're in good shape now, but we do need to think about the long term as well. Those are examples or areas where the team are going to continue to need to build out their strategy and then have those plans and the specific assets and growth of those assets approved stage by stage. That is part of what is being picked up in the media at the moment. No surprises, all to plan, tracking well. Rob Scott, he has got a full book. There is a lot going on for him. Yeah, there is no dial back on growth. That is not the cause for the CapEx. It really is about discipline, focus, timing, and in the sense of if we do not need something now, let us push it out and also value for money. Okay. Thank you. Just on CGP3 then, can you remind me what the expected ramp-up time is for that? Look, we haven't given any specific detail there. Look, you could expect it's about 12 months. That's a normal ramp-up for those types of plants. The team will give us a more detailed schedule in due course, and we'll share that where we can. Naturally, we want to run hard. For those who've covered IGO or Greenbushes for some time now, you'll remember that CGP2 was interrupted in its ramp-up on and off and really didn't have a great start to life, which is very hard for the asset and for the team. We certainly are not anticipating anything like that here. This is about run it up hard, maximize the throughput and production as quickly as possible, get it delivering full value as fast as possible. I think we've got a very clear goal for the team, and they're well-resourced, well-set up. They've got a great plan, and I think they'll deliver extremely well against that. Okay. Yeah. Thanks. On the optimisation, thanks for the extra couple of bits of detail. Will we get some more throughput and some of the other inputs, I guess? Can you confirm that you're still producing technical grade? I noticed you don't reference it into those questions. Yeah. Yes to both questions. Yes, we'll give you more detail in due course as that flows through. Yes, we are producing technical grade. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Jon Bishop from Jarden. Please go ahead. Morning, Kath and Ivan. Thanks for taking the questions. Just to take Kate's question a little bit further, are you able to disclose whether there's any prescribed amortization profile for the debt and/or milestones to trigger principal repayments within Windfield? It's a revolver facility, so it doesn't actually have debt repayments through the course of it. It will have standard covenants that you would expect, but they are so far well within the remits, that there's no risk there. Okay. In terms of what you answered previously then, I guess there's a sort of a high-level agreement amongst the joint ventures as to how you will treat those gearing ratios going forward in terms of any forecast repayments. I guess what I'm getting to is how should we start to manage our forecast for cash retiring that debt position once CGP3 is finished, for example? It's got a four-year term, so I would be thinking about that, and we will manage it within our leverage and gearing ratios. We will consider what that debt refinance potentially may be closer to that four-year term. Cool. Thank you. Thank you. Just regarding some logistics, obviously, you had about 80,000 tons missed, in inverted commas, between your production and sales figures for the December quarter. There was a bit of a catch-up this quarter. How do we sort of think about that production and sales piece going forward? Certainly, as you expand production out of Greenbushes, is there going to be sort of a reasonable amount of volatility, or is the port reasonably well set up to manage that increase? Therefore, we should expect, generally, all things being equal, a normalised production and sales moving in lockstep? It's a fantastic question, Jon. We would love it to be in lockstep, and our customers would love it to be in lockstep as well. The last thing we want is inventory and working capital bills. The challenge is the port, as you've noted, and that is one of Rob's other areas of work. He has been down there and working with our partners in the port. It is difficult. There is congestion, and there is a lot going on. He is working on options to try and just help improve that and smooth out our logistics path, I'll call it, because as we grow the volumes, that just becomes more challenging. Yeah. As I said in the last conversation we had in the half and the quarterly, there was some concern around sales. It is just timing and logistics. It was just shipments. Particularly with Christmas, you get some of that. It's painful, but there is a very clear intent to just clear the product as quickly as we can. The last thing we want to do is have any missed timing or delays there. Great. Thanks very much. I'll pass it on. Thanks, Jon. Thank you. Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan from Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Hi, Ivan and team. Just a quick follow-up on Levi's question regarding how CGP3 would be ramped up, the pace of it. Just wanted to explore that a little bit more on the market piece. Obviously, we're in a very soft market right now. Putting a lot more volume into the market is not going to be necessarily helpful. Just wondering if your views on ramping it up are IGO views, or is there broader alignment within the JV about the ramp-up in light of the market? Thank you. Just brief state, Daniel, what I said to Levi. Ramp it up as fast as we can. I think there's complete alignment. That's what drives value for us. You have the lowest cost producer in the world. Every ton is highly value accretive, and that's what we'll be chasing. Yeah, there's no blinking there. We're not someone who's going to be cautious or careful around timing the market here. This is about getting the asset online and getting it producing because every ton it produces is going to generate cash. Okay. That's clear. Just a second question. It's good to see a life of mine plan, Nova, into end of life. It's obviously not great that it ends its life, but every good thing comes to an end. It has a few more ton in it than I had thought, given that there's been some variable performance in recent times. Just wondering if you could expand on this plan. How robust is it? The risk embedded in it? Should we expect still quite a bit of volatility in the end of life plan? Thank you. Yeah, Daniel, good question. Look, I didn't put that out lightly. I know it was an issue or challenge for you guys, so that's why we wanted to give you some more direction. We'll give you even more next quarter. We've stress-tested this really hard. We've gone over it very carefully. Our tech team, who are very capable, have gone through it thoughtfully, looked at your body, looked at the kind of issues that we've been experiencing and how they'll play out. We have risk-weighted this. Do I sit here and go, "It's absolutely certain, of course. We know in mining that things can happen"? No, we're putting this out with some confidence. That's why we've given it's a reasonably wide range, I would say, given the level of work we've done. That's probably a little bit of me and just caution and Kath. It's just on how we do things. We don't want to disappoint. No, we've done a lot of really good homework, and we're comfortable and confident to put that out as a range. Thank you. Just last question, exploration. I mean, you've guided to what a go-forward kind of looks like in that space for 2026 and beyond, I presume. Just what are the business outcomes that you're trying to achieve? Why is this the right number? What's the return we're going to get on this capital going forward? Thank you. Yeah. All right. I mean, maybe we pick that up in more depth on constant time in our next quarterly or next opportunity to talk more broadly or even get one of the team in to help support that. We have done this work both top-down and bottom-up. In terms of value, clearly, we want to be putting defining resources and putting them in play. Whether they're ones that we develop or not is beside the point. We have got some very prospective ground that we're working on across our portfolio. I think it's a significant change in approach from where we were in terms of how we're prioritizing the sort of commercial focus that's being built in across exploration. For me, I think there's two ways I look at it. One, fundamentally, we need to bring more critical minerals to the market. That isn't about just moving the deck chairs around through asset ownership. It's about actually discovering new ore bodies and getting them out of the ground in a responsible manner as quickly as possible. That's something we're deeply focused on and want to make a difference and demonstrate our capability. I think our team has got absolutely world-class pedigree in this area. We set them up for success. I think give them some runway, and they'll deliver. The second part, of course, is the return on investment. We think about this as capital, as an investment, and we've gone through it with a view of what's appropriate for the scale of our business. We've looked at five years, and we've said, "What does our business look like? What are the sort of scenarios, and what's the right sort of envelope? This is the number that we've come to. Hence the top-down and bottom-up. I feel like this is an appropriate number. It's material. Don't get me wrong. We recognize that if we look across our peer group, which we've done, we're a standout for Greenfield, and we've got capability and focus here that we think will drive real value for our shareholders. Thank you, Ivan, so much. Thanks, Tim. Thank you. Your next question comes from Matthew Frydman from MST. Please go ahead. Sure. Thanks. Morning, Ivan and team. Thanks again for the disclosure and the discussion on the capital management in Windfield and the dividend flow out of that vehicle. I guess if we take that down to the next level and look at TLEA, clearly, as you've called out, the cash burn is still real, but at least perhaps it's a little bit more normalised or stabilised compared to prior quarters. Certainly, as we know, there's no need to build the balance sheet for investing in Train II now going forward. I guess the question is, is there anything in your view that would preclude a resumption of dividends out of TLEA, say, in the first half of FY2026? Is there any major shutdowns or remediation works on the horizon or any other need in your view to be building cash on the TLEA balance sheet? Thanks. The quick answer is no. I mean, there's no standout to build cash. I mean, we need to make sure we've got the liquidity and the cash to support the business and to support the forward work. I think you've got enough information that you can sort of sit back and work out what the cash requirement is. Beyond that, there will be no reason to hold cash. We're not guiding on dividends into the next financial year at this stage. We'll provide more when we can. No, there's nothing I guess what I would leave you with is nothing that's unique or special or that you need to be aware of that you should model in that space that's out of the ordinary. It really is just run the business as it is, do the work we've got indicated, and the rest of the money will flow out to the shareholders. Okay. Thanks for that, Ivan. I guess rather than looking at it from an operational perspective, maybe more from, I guess, a philosophical or from a sort of capital management framework perspective, obviously, you've done some work in the Winfield JV to establish a really kind of more firm capital management framework. Does that exist within TLEA? Is there more work to do there? I guess is that part of the ongoing discussion that you're having with your JV partner there? Is there anything we should think about from that perspective at the TLEA level? Thanks. Yes, absolutely. That is exactly the focus. Yes, that work is underway. Okay. Great. Thanks very much, Ivan. Thanks, Matt. Thank you. Your next question comes from Rob Stein from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Hi, Ivan and Kath. Just pointing, I guess the Greenbushes optimisation slide that you put in the deck was interesting in the sense that where would you be if you had to sort of benchmark yourselves in industry maturity along the, I guess, scheduling and equipment design and operational management parts of the chain there? Obviously, you're looking at strategic options reviews, and you've got the size of the prize that you're looking at, but just interested in how big the next steps are to get that benchmark productivity. Specifically around mine planning, would like to understand that. Rob, look, good question. I'll have to think about how we can give you a more substantive answer. I would say, and I think I've indicated, I think the opportunity is significant. Rob is already with the team making good progress on day-to-day improvements on productivity, both in the mine and the mills. When you stand back and say, "What is that potential and how do you get at it?" It's significant. Some of those changes will take time. The optimisation of that ore body, I don't want to try and even signpost because I think we don't know what we don't know. We need to do the work on ore characterisation. You need to do the mine-to-mill optimisation. You need to understand that much better. I think we've got a fantastic technical team in the mills doing work, pulling recoveries up. I do not even think we've unleashed them yet. I think if you give them more space and more support in terms of influence back into the mine, I think they can drive huge upside. The translation of how that then unfolds and how you might change your schedule and sequence through the mine, there is no point in me commenting because we've just been making it up. We just have to do some more of that work before we can indicate. I guess what I want to leave you with is I think it's significant, the upside. I also think there's going to be quite a bit of hard work to get to. I do not want to sort of indicate that Rob's got a couple of tricks up his sleeve, and it'll suddenly all just change. He is doing the day-to-day work now, and I think building out a very good long-term plan to drive a lot more value. I guess a subsequent point, just looking through then the quarterly result, seeing the production result down Q- on- Q, is that just a refocus of mine plan and sequencing to open up the ore body to get access to more fresh feed as you look then to obviously bring on CGP3 in the coming quarters? The mine plan's actually set up to achieve from the outset. Is that how we should look at that? Given that you're, I think, 78% of your annual guidance has been achieved, or midpoint of annual guidance has been achieved on production. So you're well sort of ahead there. Is that the way to look at it? Yeah. I mean, I think we indicated last quarter and a half as well that we expect to be right at the top of guidance. I think it was a push of, "Well, why aren't we going to re-guide above that?" Because we looked at the forward plan, and we said, "Look, we think we're just going to land based on what the mine plan was." This is just grade variation, which you do get in that ore body, as privileged as it is. You will see that up and down through a year, through a couple of years of grade. One of the things that we might obviously see come out of the optimisation is that we want to blend and stabilise that more, and that might drive a lot of value. At this point, we're still seeing that variability of grade through the mills, and that drives differences in production. Nothing more than that. It's not something you should draw a line up or down off. It really is, at this point, just how the mines run. I think that signals or signposts a very likely opportunity that smoothing that out and having a more consistent feed will drive better outcomes and better value overall. Brilliant. Thank you. Thanks, Rob. Thank you. Your next question comes from Tim Hoff from Canaccord. Please go ahead. Hi, team. Good morning. I was just following up from the question from Levi. The permitting's been submitted for the waste storage expansion at Greenbushes, and it shows that it's going to be impacting Black Cockatoo habitat, which there's been a few issues with your peers at South32 and Alcoa. What's the timeline for the approval? Given the submission points to this being needed in 2026, are there contingencies in place to handle the 70-odd% of material that it points to or waste storage capacity that you need? Yeah. Thanks, Tim. Look, the approval timelines, I mean, I can't really comment because obviously the agencies will determine that. The team are very aware and attentive and focused on that. They've done a lot of work. They're very well prepared. I think they've engaged extremely well here, so they're set up for success. We do have some, I guess, contingencies, as you put it, or we've got a plan if there was to be some critical delay. The focus is to get through these approvals and manage the impacts professionally, and we'll get the outcome. Yep. Excellent. Perhaps one for you, Kath. At Greenbushes, your accounts receivable terms have moved to 180 days, and there is some factoring of sales. Is that just a part of that liquidity management that you mentioned, or is there something else driving that change? Is there any impact on receipt pricing there? The simple answer to that is no. There is nothing unusual in that. What was the second part of that question? I missed it. Sorry. Does it impact the price you receive? Is there a factoring of price? No. No. No, it's just dark working capital. The price is determined on that month-minus-one lag, it is the four PRAs, etc. Very deterministic. That is applied regardless. Okay. Excellent. Excellent. Thank you very much, guys. Thank you. Your next question comes from Jonathan Sharp from CLSA. Please go ahead. Yeah. Morning, Ivan and team. A lot of questions already asked and coming up to the end of the hour. Just one simple question from me. Can you just share your current view on the lithium market, particularly what you're seeing in terms of customer demand, inventory levels, any discussions around spodumene and hydroxide? Just interested to hear what IGO is hearing and seeing out there at the moment. Thanks. Thanks, Jonathan. Look, I don't think I've got much to add that you wouldn't have already. We see strong demand growth, and obviously, China's doing a fantastic job building storage both for EVs and for vehicles and for stationary storage. That growth is continuing to track to expectations. There are some other markets in the world which are contributing as well. For us, it's really more a supply-side issue, and the market is oversupplied, and hence the price pressure we see. In terms of conversion to chemicals, I think the demand is obviously quite strong for carbonate, less so for hydroxide. We see that flow through in the pricing. I really don't think there's much we can add to what you've probably got through the channels. We see a very consistent view and don't expect much relief or much change this year, probably well into next year. Maybe this time next year, we might start to see the market balance come back. I guess the key is that demand continues to grow at rate. It's not been interrupted or disrupted by any of the other things going on in the world. It seems that demand is pulling through and performing extremely well. I guess with low lithium prices, there's probably a strong correlation there that translates to a flow through in the value chain that's very interesting for customers. Yep. Yep. Thanks. Interesting to hear your thoughts. I'll leave it there. Thanks, Jonathan. Thank you. That is all the time we have for questions today. I'll now hand back to Mr. Vella for closing remarks. Great. Thanks, Darcy. Yeah. Look, we're right on time, so I won't say much other than thanks for joining. As I said at the top of the call, look, it was nice to not be wading through major challenges and changes and impairments and so on. It's nice to see a quarter focused on the assets, focused on production, focused on safety. The big news in there, I think, is about exploration and the reset there. I'm really pleased with the way that the team's gone about it and forward-looking. I've got a lot of confidence in what they'll bring. We'll leave it there. Thanks for your time. I look forward to the next update at the end of the financial year. Thank you. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.