Thank you for standing by and welcome to Iluka Resources 2023 Results Teleconference. At this time, all participants are on a listen-only mode. After the speakers' presentations, there'll be a question-and-answer session. To ask a question at that time, please press star one, one on your telephone. Please be advised that today's call is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to your host, Mr. Tom O'Leary, Managing Director. Please go ahead. Hello and welcome. With me this morning are Adele Stratton, Matt Blackwell, and Luke Woodgate. I'll begin by acknowledging Iluka's safety performance, which in 2023 saw a material reduction in total recordable injury frequency rate and a continuing decline in serious potential incidents. I'd like to acknowledge our people for their diligence in delivering these reductions and for their ongoing focus around safety leadership in the field. To the result more broadly, the approach we've taken over the past year reflects the macro challenges Iluka, like many, has encountered, but it also reflects the deliberate steps we've taken over a more extended period to enable the company to adapt to the economic and industry conditions we're confronted with. As demand slowed over the course of 2023, Iluka acted with discipline, prioritizing the value of our products and calibrating production settings and inventory levels accordingly. Prices remain relatively strong and stable, mitigating to some extent the influence of higher costs on our margins. In addition, the company benefited from the take-or-pay contracts we have in place to underpin production from our principal synthetic rutile asset, SR2. These contracts were renewed at the start of 2023 for a period of four years, providing important revenue certainty. Throughout a lengthy phase of destocking on the part of Western pigment manufacturers, Iluka's titanium feedstock customers have also demonstrated discipline. More recently, most of those companies have reported on the last quarter and have all reported improving sales volumes along with pigment inventories at minimal levels. They are also closely following anti-dumping proceedings being undertaken by the European Commission, which are a potential catalyst to reset the European pigment industry. While our smaller swing asset, SR1, is expected to remain offline in 2024, Iluka has retained the workforce to operate this kiln and can restart it quickly in the event of demand recovery, industry supply constraints, or both. SR1 operated for less than 12 months of its original 18-month campaign, following more than a decade offline, but it's already demonstrated its ability to recover its low capital investment and provide the company with significant production flexibility. In zircon, cautious buying behavior in the second half of 2023 was driven by uncertainty and subdued demand in key markets, especially China. Iluka coupled its focus on pricing outcomes for the company's premium sand with increased sales of Zircon in Concentrate, a capability that provides us the further flexibility to sell a lower-quality, high-margin product to select customers. We provided some guidance in our recent quarterly regarding first-quarter sales for Zircon. By way of update, contracted sand volumes for the quarter stand at approximately 45,000 tons. As activity returns post-Chinese New Year, we'll have a better line of sight as to demand there, but it's a pleasing start to the year nonetheless. I'll now hand over to Adele. Thanks, Tom, and good morning, everyone. Iluka delivered a net profit of AUD 343 million in 2023. An outcome of the disciplined approach Tom's just outlined was margins achieved at 47%. We experienced pressure on our cost base with higher labor costs and consumables, combined with lower grades, resulting in increased unit costs. In prioritizing the value of our products, we increased our zircon, rutile and synthetic rutile finished goods inventory by 145,000 tons across the year, or AUD 224 million. This is working capital that will be liberated in future periods, bearing in mind that just represents the cost of the product and not the value we will realize from its sales. Despite this, Iluka generated an operating cash flow of AUD 347 million. We continue to invest in major projects that are critical to our future, including Eneabba refinery and Balranald, both of which are in execution, and Wimmera, which is the subject of a definitive feasibility study. Total capital expenditure was AUD 281 million in the year. Turning to the balance sheet, the mineral sands business closed the year in a net cash position of AUD 308 million and the rare earth business in a net debt position of AUD 83 million. You'll see in our results materials that we've started to report these units separately. That's done in the interest of providing a true view of good gearing levels, given the non-recourse status of debt associated with our rare earth business. Full-year dividends of AUD 0.07 per share included a final dividend of AUD 0.04. This reflects a pass-through of funds received from our 20% holding of Deterra Royalties, which remains a valuable source of additional financial strength. With that summary, back to you, Tom. Thanks, Adele. Before taking questions, I'll take a few moments to comment about our project pipeline, starting with our progress at Eneabba. We're now very close to finalizing feed, and I expect this to be completed in the next few weeks. Since December, we've been working to refine that AUD 1.5 billion-AUD 1.8 billion capital estimate range, and you'll see that we've now narrowed guidance to AUD 1.7 billion-AUD 1.8 billion. We'd intended to provide a rare earth update at the end of March and that this would cover feed outcomes as well as marketing approach, operational readiness, and funding. As we stand here today, I expect funding outcomes will likely dictate the timing of this update. The Australian government is our strategic partner in this development and has been kept up-to-date with the feed process, as you'd expect. I'm not going to comment further on those discussions other than to say we're working with the government to come to a pathway to deliver the refinery. I think it's fair to say that Eneabba's strategic importance in providing a secure Western supply chain for rare earth has only increased in recent times. Following China's ban on the export of heavy rare earths technology in December, we've also seen several further offtake and toll-treating arrangements announced for projects which involve downstream processing of Australian-sourced rare earth minerals in China. Elsewhere, work continues at Balranald, where we'll be deploying our underground mining technology for the first time. We noted in the quarterly our flexibility with regard to Balranald's commissioning date. That's essentially an extension of the approach we take to all of our operations. We'll bring our projects into production when it makes sense to do so in terms of market conditions, and I'd note global supplies of rutile continue to deplete. At Wimmera, our DFS is progressing, and you'll have seen that we've updated Wimmera's Ore Reserve today to reflect our increased geological confidence in the WIM 100 deposit. So to conclude, I think we've delivered a solid financial result given the economic backdrop. We're focused on progressing our growth options, and we'll continue to operate and to make decisions with the prudence and discipline you should expect from us as we strive to deliver sustainable value. Over to you for questions. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd like to ask a question, please press star one, one on your touch tone telephone. Again, to ask a question, please press star one, one. One moment for our first question. Our first question comes from the line of Rahul Anand of Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Tom, Adele, good morning, and team. Good morning. Thanks for the call. Look, I just wanted to touch a bit upon the production setting changes at JA, which obviously makes sense given market conditions and inventory positioning for yourselves. So, obviously, calendar year 2024-2026 were previously at JA going to be higher than reserve grade, in order to prioritize production, and now it seems like you've switched back to the reserve grade of around 2.5%. I guess my question's around, is high grading still going to be part of the strategy for this asset as and when demand returns, or are we looking for a more stable profile from here in terms of your reserve grade and the production grade that you're gonna utilize at the asset? So I'll stop there for the first question. I'll come back with the second. Thanks. Oh, hi Rahul and good morning. Just in terms of the production guidance, as you've noted, you know, our outlook for 2024 is to produce 160,000 tons of zircon sand from both, obviously, our Jacinth-Ambrosia and Cataby mine. If we think about managing our market and our inventory, as you rightly noted, you know, you can clearly see that we've built 100,000 tons of zircon inventory across 2023, and that enables us to satisfy our customer demands going forward. Coming back to your comment with regards to high grading Jacinth-Ambrosia, you'd be very aware of the remaining life at JA. So, you know, through to 2028, 2029 is when that mine will come off, and therefore, you know, we have already, if you like, reflected our mine plan between high and low grade when we move back and forth to Ambrosia. So we're now in the final aspects of that mine depletion. So, you know, I don't think we've ever guided that we'd be anything different to the mine reserve grade. So, you know, rightly noting last year closer to 4%, this year closer to 3%. Got it. Okay. So I guess in terms of production and cost setting, this seems like this is the new base for the asset till end of life in 2028. Is that a fair way to summarize that? Oh, look, I, you know, we don't guide production out of JA for the next five years. Yeah. So, you know, certainly in terms of looking at that disciplined approach to market, this is the production settings. There's a little bit of flex in 2024 if we so chose to use that, but, you know, yeah, grade will determine the output from Jacinth. Got it. Okay. Look, my second question's around the inventory position. Obviously, Mm-hmm. We'll lag by yourselves, but starting to reach, you know, peak levels that were previously established in the 2012 cycle. I guess given the spend profile ramping up in calendar year 2024, you've got Balranald, and then also you've got Eneabba, you know, obviously noting that you've got the government facility there. At what point, does it become critical to start reassessing whether putting JA in care and maintenance, is the path that the company needs to go down? Well, so yeah, Rahul, just in terms of inventory, I think it would be an incorrect conclusion to reach to think that we're at the heading heights of where we were in inventory holdings back at the start of the decade. You know, a couple of points to note. We built inventory in 2023, and as you rightly have called out, as I mentioned, you know, 92,000 tons of zircon, 50,000 tons of synthetic rutile, but bearing in mind that was from extremely low levels of inventory at the start of the year. You know, we made that very clear last year when we reported. So, you know, there has been some inventory build, but when you're looking at the value of inventory on the balance sheet, you know, that is impacted by your unit costs. So as unit costs go up, even if your volumes don't change, your value on the balance sheet will increase. So, you know, what I'd say is, our inventory levels certainly aren't excessive at this point in time. Any sort of critical points, Adele, that you can point out to, or, you know, at what point should we think about sort of project bills taking priority over continuing the asset, and continuing to stockpile? Yeah. So, Rahul, just in terms of continuing to stockpile, we're not building any heavy mineral concentrate just at Jacinth-Ambrosia costs 2024. Mm-mmm. So again, we're not. Yeah, that's not a contemplation point for us. Got it. Okay. Look, I've asked my two. I'll cue back again. Thank you. Thank you. One moment, please. Our next question comes from the line of Paul Young of Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Pardon me. Paul Young of Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Oh, thanks. Morning, Tom, Adele, Matt, and Luke. Hope you're all well. A question on the zircon market. Tom, I know you've indicated that your contracted sales volumes are increasing in Q1, yet the commentary, I guess, you provided on China and Europe, who are your two major customers, is a little subdued. We know the market backdrop is still relatively subdued, but just calling out, you know, Tronox's commentary last week, on their results call about customers buying again and seeing some actually restocking occurring across the non-ceramic applications, particularly ZOC in China, and destocking having run its course. I'm curious around, you know, your commentary from Europe and China. It seems a little bit on the soft side. So just curious about what, you know, maybe Tronox is saying that maybe you're not. Yeah. Look, I'll hand over to Matt. Thanks, Paul. But I'll hand over to Matt to talk about that. But, you know, we have called out our first quarter sales of zircon year to date, which is a pretty good start to the year. But, you know, it's early in the year, so, you know, I'd caution getting too carried away with that. But Matt, do you wanna talk about the outlook a little more? Yeah. Sure. Good morning, Paul. So yeah, I did note Tronox made a number of comments there regarding the ZOC market. It's not a market that we sell a significant amount to because it's not a premium zircon market. It tends to be where the lower-grade product goes in China, lower margins. What we have seen is a little bit of demand for the premium-grade product in China and in Europe. And we're well-positioned to service that market. As Adele pointed out, we didn't follow the market down last year. Despite others perhaps scrambling towards the last quarter, we chose to stand back a little bit, prioritize value over volume, and that's enabled us to end of this year better positioned than most, I think, to take advantage of any uptick in consumption and then any restocking event, any start to restocking through the markets, whether that's in Europe or in China. Okay. Thanks, Matt. Then, Tom, maybe a few questions on the rare earth refinery. I see you've tightened up the CapEx range, which is great. I mean, I'd be interested in your views around, you know, the confidence within that. I know you guys do things properly when you estimate, maybe better than others. So I'm just curious around that AUD1.7-AUD1.8, you know, what gives you confidence on that tight range, you know, comments on contingency sort of escalation you're factored in? Because there's no guarantees in the industry at the moment just based on the CapEx inflation we're seeing, locally but offshore as well. And then comments around the gap in the funding. I know that you said that you wanna leave it there, as far as where discussions with government are, but, I mean, that tells me that, you know, discussions are underway as far as topping up that facility potentially with maybe other sources of government debt. So I think it'd be certainly helpful to get some sort of further thoughts on that. Thanks. Sure. Look, I'll pass to Adele to talk a little bit about the confidence around the estimates. You know, inevitably, there's some uncertainty there, but you know, what we have done is spend an awful lot of time on feed to date, and we have spent time tightening up that broader range to give the updated guide today. But just talking more generally about Eneabba, you talk about the funding gap. You know, we think about that in the context of value, obviously, overall. So look, if I just talk more generally about value and funding, what we're building at Eneabba is an infrastructure asset. And what generates appropriate, not greedy, but appropriate risk-adjusted returns are the usual factors: longevity, pricing, operating costs, and having the right capital structure, to your point, around funding. As we look ahead and contemplate value and funding, there are obviously risks associated with all of these. On longevity, though, since FID we've greenlink Balranald, we've secured offtake for Northern and its heavies-rich deposit in the Kimberley. We've declared a reserve on the heavies-rich Wimmera deposit in Western Victoria. So the economics we showed back in 2022 contemplated using only any that are increasingly conservative from a longevity perspective. Pricing is obviously a key driver of returns, and much is made of current low spot prices. Longer term, though, widely held views, as you know, Paul, are that supply is gonna be materially less than demand, and prices need to be higher to incent supply, particularly if the West wants any sort of longer-term assurance about availability. You know, and on price, we're all aware of Chinese dominance in the market and its influence on the Asian Metals Index. And again, that's a factor we take into account in assessing risk-adjusted returns, around making a disciplined capital allocation to the refinery. So, you know, as we contemplate funding, both we and government are really cognizant of the risks of the project and also its strategic importance, not only from a geopolitical and defense perspective but also from the perspective of its contribution to facilitating global decarbonization. Ultimately, Iluka is a commercial enterprise focused on returns to shareholders rather than an instrument of government policy. So while government and Iluka objectives are aligned around the development of the refinery, discipline around our capital allocation decisions has got to be maintained. You know, we're currently discussing this broadly with government, and I really won't be commenting further on that given the ongoing nature of our discussions. So, Adele. Okay. Thanks, Tom. Back to you, Adele, on the updated guide on the capital estimate. Yeah. Thanks, Tom. And, Paul, just in terms of, you know, as you've articulated, we've spent quite a bit of time focusing and trying to finalize the FEED range. And, you know, certainly, as you've noted, we're refining that to a much smaller amount. I think coming to your comment around escalation and contingency, as you'd expect, you know, we're confident with regards to the ranges that we're including within that revised capital guide. I think, you know, as part of the FEED process, as you'd expect, that includes the combination of going out for formal tender bids, budget quotes, etc. So, you know, there's a good degree of support underpinning the number, and we have certainly factored in the ongoing escalation that we've seen across the past couple of years and reflected it, you know, alongside EPCM contractor Fluo r, what their expectations are around escalation over the next couple of years as we develop that asset. So I wouldn't really wanna get drawn too much in terms of, you know, what, what are the quantums within the range, but thinking of a couple of hundred million dollars in terms of, you know, some of those aspects, Paul. It's not factoring in today's prices as they stand. Okay. That's all for discussed further. That's it from me for now. Thank you. One moment, please. Our next question comes from the line of Al Harvey of JP Morgan. Your line is open. Yeah. Morning, team. Just following up on the funding. I guess given Eneabba is contingent on that funding outcome, should attract the focus. I guess just wanna understand if, you know, your negotiations with the government, you know, don't go quite as planned, would there be potential for you to monetize your Deterra stake? Maybe just take us through how core that is to the portfolio and how you think about diversification across mineral sands, rare earths, and, I guess that iron ore exposure. Look, Al, we've, we've spoken about the Deterra stake, you know, many times over the last few years. You know, it's a, a source of long-term financial strength for Iluka. And, you know, when it's suggested by a range of investment banks, frequently that that be monetized, you know, we do have to remind folks that, that would be very expensive capital, to deploy. W e would pay, capital gains tax on the, on divestment proceeds. So you can see, it would be, extraordinarily expensive capital. So it's not something that is, is contemplated seriously, in that in that context. Sure. Maybe one for Adele. Just on the AUD 173 million positive cash inventory movement, can you just help me work that out? What drove that? I guess inventories have been rising, but yeah, you got a positive cash inventory movement. Was there some high-cost production that drove that movement? Yeah. Sure. But, Al, I'm assuming you're talking more so than P&L? Correct. Yeah. So yeah. So if you think about the way the profit and loss works, you obviously charge all of your costs to make your production, so they come through as expenses. But if you don't sell what you've made, you need to put that onto your balance sheet. So hence, you reduce those costs through that inventory movement and put that onto your balance sheet, and then you liberate that cash when you actually sell the product. So it's more just an accounting treatment of reflecting the costs of making the inventory and putting that on your balance sheet, if that makes sense. Sure. Thank you. One moment, please. Our next question comes from the line of Richard Hatch of Berenberg. Your line is open. Yeah. Thanks very much. Thanks for taking my questions. I've just got two. The first one's just on growth and strategy. Over here in Europe, there's been a few activists calling for certain mineral sands companies to consider putting themselves up for sale. You've had a look at Africa in the past with Sierra Rutile and obviously had a bid for Kenmare there back in some sort of about 5-10 years ago. Is that a consideration just in terms of, you know, African M&A, or are you quite comfortable with the pretty, you know, extensive growth options you've got in Australia and North America? That's the first one. Thank you. Yes, we are. Understood. Thanks. The second one is just—I'm curious to hear your thoughts on rare earths and the market pricing environment. Obviously, China, you pointed to, it sort of can have a pretty swingy impacts on the price. Do you think there's a scope for a bifurcated rare earths pricing market, where perhaps there's an annual contract, a bit like thermal coal, something like that, that sort of plays out for certain Western producers just to perhaps give them, you know, a bit of a stable footing for the rare earths price in the West to, you know, enable some of these projects that are struggling to get funded to go, not yours in particular, but, you know, just interested to hear your thoughts on how that pricing environment might work. Thank you. Yeah. I certainly do think there's scope for that over time. I think in the nearer term, it's more likely to be contracts, you know, bilateral contracts, by private treaty rather than sort of an exchange, a bifurcated market where Western product is sold by under some sort of exchange, but that may certainly evolve over time. We're planning on giving a little bit of an update on our marketing strategy, later in the quarter, potentially. So, we'd look to elaborate on that somewhat at that point. Understood. Thanks for your time. Pleasure. Thank you. Thank you. One moment, please. Our next question comes from the line of Dim Ariyasinghe. Your line is open. Thanks. Hi, guys. Thanks for the call. Just touching on what Al said before in terms of monetizing Deterra, maybe not Deterra, but, you mentioned offtakes for concentrate. Can we talk about that? Like, is there a potential for you guys to go back and monetize the monazite? Noticed, Hastings recut their deal last week. MP's now out of the market. Do you have ability and is it to do that, and is it maybe relatively more attractive right now? I'll come back with the next one. Yeah. I mean, that would certainly be an alternative if we were not to pursue the refinery, but that's not one that we're contemplating seriously at this point. Thanks, Al. Have Dim a bit. Yeah. And then, no, you're right. And then, but I guess, like, maybe just following on, like, so Balranald line ball, it might look like it's up and running for Eneabba, and you'll get rare earths concentrate out of that. Is the idea just then to stockpile, or continue stockpiling concentrate until Eneabba's up and running? Yeah. That, that's right. That's what we're contemplating. Yep. Yep. Awesome. Okay. Cool. And then the next question just on the markets. You touched on the well anti-dumping investigations in the EU pigment. Can you just maybe help me understand how that has ramifications for feedstocks and the markets you directly sell into? Sure. I'll pass that over to Dim, but they're a oh, sorry. I'll pass that over to Matt. Sorry, Dim. They're a key customers who'll be the beneficiary of those measures, but Matt. Go ahead. Thank you. Thanks, Tom. So Dim, the way we think about this is what we've seen over the last year and a half is, and what and what is being alleged by pigment producers in Europe is that there's been a flood of or a sort of an increase of below-cost or dumped product into Europe, which has taken their market share away. They haven't necessarily followed the price down, and there's actually a gap of almost $1,000 a ton between the Chinese product and the European-produced product. They're alleging that they're suffering harm and that that dumping margin is somewhere between 45%-65%. That's what's articulated in their filing to the EU Commission. So an outcome could be that duties are imposed of between 45%-60% or the injury margin. There's all sorts of theories that go into that and calculations, which would then reduce the amount, which would make it less attractive for consumers of pigment in the EU to buy that product coming from China, revert back to domestic production, which would then increase the operating rates of those assets in Europe. Some of those assets, there's both sulfate and chloride that is affected, but we are suppliers to at least four assets, sometimes five assets in Europe, major assets. And so we would expect to see them increase their operating rates, which we think is good for the long-term state of that of the pigment industry in Europe and also good for our feedstocks, our high-grade feedstock offtakes, which become more in demand when people are running at higher rates. Yep. Okay. Cool. No, thanks. That helps, provides. Okay. Cheers. Thank you. One moment, please. Our next question comes from the line of Glyn Lawcock of Barrenjoey. Yo ur line is open. Hey, Tom. It's Glen. Look, firstly, just wanted to talk a little bit about the capitalization in the inventory movement. I'm just sort of looking at it. You had a lot a smaller inventory build in the second half relative to the first, but you had the capitalization was almost double. Can you just help me unpack that a little bit? Thanks. Yeah, Glysn. So again, that depends in terms of what inventory you're putting into, on the balance sheet, really. So, you know, as you'd expect, so different operations have different cost settings, and therefore, your capitalization is impacted by that inventory that goes onto the balance sheet. So, you know, you'd imagine in the second half, as we have, idled both the kilns, you'd be building heavy mineral concentrate coming out of Cataby. You know, that, that mine is still operating at full tilt, and therefore, that would be a component of what goes on the balance sheet. Okay. I mean, I guess there was a bit more zircon on inventory. I guess, as the highest cost component, is the HMC at Cataby that's your highest unit cost when you're putting it to inventory? Is that what you're saying? You know, well, let's reflect when we initially undertook the Cataby investment back in 2017. You know, the reason that Matt and the team put in underpinning contracts was because, you know, that was a higher-cost operation. So it's like, yeah, you know, that would be fair. Obviously, as grades decline at Jacinth, you know, you need to move more material in order to get the same, volume, if you like. So, you know, that, that impacts unit cost going forward for Jacinth, but, you know, historically, it's been blessed with very high grades. Okay. So there's nothing funny about the large inventory capitalization in the back half, essentially? No. There's nothing funny. Okay. Okay. And then just on, you've given us Q1 contracted sales for zircon sand for Q1. You know, obviously, Q1 is seasonally. It's usually the weak one in the year. Is that how you feel? And I mean, we're only six weeks out from Q2. Do you have a feel for what Q2 contracted volumes look like? Are they lifting sequentially, do you think? All right, Glen. I'll answer that. Look, we're positively, as we noted, volumes are up in Q1. We're gonna have a better understanding of how the rest of the year plays out in the month ahead. We wouldn't normally most people wouldn't be normally talking about Q2 volumes at this stage. We're still in February. And we're gonna have a better understanding of the outlook for the year post-Chinese New Year. You know, as, as you'll know, that just finished last week. And so as operations ramp up in China, and the European market starts to warm up, we'll get a better outlook. But you're right. Q1's normally the weaker quarter. All right. And, Tom, can I just squeeze in a quick last one just to clarify some of the earlier discussions we've been having? Just on Eneabba, are we now committed to moving forward, or is there something that could occur to see you delay the project, or is it full steam ahead as far as you're concerned? Thanks. Yeah, Glen. You know, we've identified our latest view on the capital estimate, and we've also been very clear about the funding arrangements on announcement in 2022. So, you know, we are in discussions with government around funding, and, you know, I'll update further on those in due course, as I've said. But is there a chance you could delay? Is that what you're saying if you don't get the funding? Glen, I'm not gonna be drawn further on that. Okay. So you're gonna keep us in suspense. Thanks, Tom. No trouble. Thank you. Again, ladies and gentlemen, if you'd like to ask a question, please press star one, one on your telephone. Again, to ask a question, please press star one, one. One moment. Our next question comes from the line of Anthony Barich of S&P Global. Your line is open. Oh, yes. Hello. I was gonna ask you a question about that European demand that you flagged earlier, but you answered that question, I think. Perhaps, I don't know whether there's anything. I mean, what you mentioned before about the weakness in supply chains and the efforts to diversify there for rare earths, you kinda reflected on that a bit before, but is there anything new there that you've noticed in the market since, besides the usual of what people are aware of? No. Pardon me. Still connected. Sorry. Did you hear? Yeah, I heard. The answer was no. Okay. Not a problem. Sorry. Thanks. I think we're moving on to the last question, are we? Thank you. Thank you. One moment, please. Our next question comes from the line of Chen Jiang of Bank of America. Your line is open. Hi. Good morning, Tom and Adele. Thank you for taking my questions. I'll follow up, please. So, for FY2024, zircon production, from your comment, it seems like it's due to weak market condition for Iluka to support zircon prices as well as depleting reserve from JA. I'm wondering, so this year, zircon production guidance is not a good reference for future zircon production when the market turns into positive outlook than your forecast. Is that a fair assumption? Thank you. I have a few more after this. Yeah. So, you know, if you think of our production outlook, obviously, we've got production out of Cataby and just since the 2024 guidance. You know, as we've noted, we're not running on mineral separation plant at full capacity in 2024, but also reflecting 2025, we'll be introducing the Balranald deposit into our production stack. So, you know, that it's probably not a true reflection of future outlook, but we're not gonna be drawn too much either in terms of what that looks like 2025 and beyond. Sure. Sure. Thanks, Adele. Understood. And then, I'll follow up on Eneabba refineries, please. I understand you cannot comment further, you know, for your discussion with the government, especially the funding gap. I'm just wondering, you are discussing with, with the government, and the discussion has been ongoing. Does that mean government funding is the only funding option for Iluka? Thank you. Yeah. Look, we'll be updating further on these matters, as I say, later in the quarter. Sure. Understood, Tom. And then maybe let's move to the market. Tom or Adele, not sure if you can comment on the CapEx intensity of rare earths projects outside of China, like especially for, you know, for Eneabba for projects at like Eneabba outside of China. Do you think CapEx intensity in the rest of the world is higher than China for building integrated refineries? Thank you. Yeah. I think that's a likely expectation. But again, we'll elaborate further on that, in time. Okay. All right. Okay. Thanks, Tom and Adele or Pascal. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. That does conclude our conference. I'll just turn the call back over to Tom O'Leary for any closing remarks. Look, thank you for your attention today. As I said earlier, I think it's a good start to the year in mineral sands. Don't wanna get carried away about that. I look forward to addressing you further on the funding and value of our key project in Eneabba, later in the quarter with any luck. Thank you. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today's conference. Thank you all for participating. You may now disconnect. Have a great day.