Good morning, welcome to our annual general meeting of ioneer Limited. I know many of you, but my name is James Calaway, the Executive Chairman of the company. As we have a quorum, I now declare the meeting open. Today's meeting is being held both in person as well as online via the Lumi platform. This allows shareholders, proxies, and guests to attend the meetings virtually. Online attendees can watch a live webcast of the meeting. In addition, shareholders and proxies can ask questions and submit votes. I will ask our company secretary, Ian Bucknell, to provide instructions for our online attendees. Ian? Yes, good morning. So I'll quickly run through a number of slides explaining how our online participants can participate in the meeting. If they'd like to ask a written question, simply select the Messaging tab at the top of the Lumi platform, type your question in the box towards the top of the page, and press the arrow symbol to send. A copy of your submitted questions, along with any written responses from our meeting team, can be viewed by selecting My Messages. To ask their questions verbally, dial the number shown on the main information page. Ensure your webcast is muted before joining the call. Dial the number shown on the screen. Enter in your meeting code. I'll read out that code, but it is on the page, 856-629-69909, followed by the hash symbol. You'll then be asked for a participant PIN. However, simply press hash again, and then press nine to signal the operator, and they'll come online, and you'll be able to ask your question. For voting, shortly, the chairman will declare voting open on all items of business. At that time, if you're eligible to vote, a new Voting tab will appear at the top of the screen. Selecting this tab will bring up a list of resolutions and present you with the voting options. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. Your vote is automatically recorded. There is no need to press a Submit or Enter button. You can, however, change your vote up until the time voting is declared closed. Some instructions for you in the room. It's great to have people here in person. At the registration desk, you will have received either a green voting card, a yellow non-voting card, or a white visitor card. Please raise your hand if you do not have the right card, and we'll have our Boardroom folks look after you. Looks like everyone's happy. Oh, Richard, might just need someone to help you in a moment. Only people holding a green voting card or yellow non-voting card are entitled to ask a question. If you don't have one in your hand, we'll still let you ask the question, Richard. In terms of addressing questions in the meeting, we will take any questions from the floor of the meeting first, then we'll take written online questions, and then the audio questions as they come in. I'll now pass back to James. James. Thank you, Ian. I now declare voting open on all items of business. Your online attendees, the voting tab will soon appear. Please submit your votes at any time. I will give you a warning before I move to closing, to close the meeting. The agenda for today is on the screen. We will have a number of presentations before undertaking the formal business of the meeting. Time will be provided during the meeting for questions. Before the presentation, I would like to introduce your board. Obviously, Bernard Rowe, you all know well, is our Managing Director. Online is Rose McKinney-James, Non-executive Director. Margaret Walker, Non-executive Director. Stephen Gardiner, who is here with us. Stephen? Where is Stephen? Ah, here. Ah, there, Stephen. Sorry, I couldn't find you. Stephen, who's been a fantastic member and Chairman of our Audit Committee, and Alan Davies, online, Non-executive Director. Also at this meeting are our company secretary, Ian Bucknell, and Scott Nichols of EY, the company's auditors. I'd now like to turn to my actual formal address. You know, first of all, I just want to reiterate thank you for coming to our annual meeting. You know, it's an honor for me to finally be physically with you today, and on behalf of ioneer's board of directors and leadership team, thank you for your continued support. 2023 has been another year of macro and micro challenges to overcome, but it's also filled with sometimes hard to appreciate progress, innovation, and strategic growth. At the macro level, the overall economic environment, both inside and outside of China, has made planning and execution most difficult. Rapid inflation demanded aggressive monetary response, with resulting high interest rate, creating strong pressures to reduce consumer spending, particularly for large capital items, such as cars of all makes, including EVs. This pressure will ease in the coming year or couple of years, but for those focused on the near term, sentiment and negative arguments about the promise of EVs are too easily, and I believe, incorrectly made. Not only are the macro pictures challenging, but it's critical to understand that the hydrocarbon sector and its allies are mounting a multi-pronged attack on EVs, as their growing importance represents a hard-to-ignore threat to their future. But in the end, as the price of electric cars fall and their capabilities increase, I am confident that EVs will obtain broad acceptance in the market. In addition, those that argue we should stay with petroleum-powered cars seem to either not believe or conveniently ignore the growing threat of climate change.... At ioneer, we are confident about EVs and the compelling imperative to rapidly bring down emissions across the planet. But in the near term, the rate of growth of EVs will slow. From my perspective, this is actually a relief, as it has been extremely difficult to reconcile the exuberant growth rates of one year ago and the capacity of the lithium and its lithium industry to deliver the required chemicals. Meeting the slightly more modest projections, while still challenging, at least represents a feasible target with full efforts to achieve needed lithium chemical capacity, particularly ex-China. Fo r our shareholders who are also invested in the spodumene sector, their fate is currently almost exclusively tied to China, China. But for the much rarer projects, such as Rhyolite Ridge, that not only produce battery-ready chemicals but that are also higher IRA compliant, the expected decline in material pricing is significantly muted. At ioneer, we recognize the negative sentiment that has harmed all lithium stocks, but we are also very mindful that ioneer's prize, quadrupling America's lithium chemicals and beyond, will be significant and will lay the foundation for years of profitable bottom-of-the-cost curve production with significant organic growth opportunity within the pre-permitted area. Our phase I project has also greatly benefited by the fact that our co-product, boric acid, continues to have higher than anticipated pricing and offers a significant portion of our total revenue with lower volatility. The executive team believes that the market has poorly understood our project despite our efforts to explain. First and foremost, based on the low stock price of late, the market seems to be assigning a very high probability that we will not be able to obtain the permit to build our operations. We strongly disagree with this poorly informed perspective. In fact, we are now highly confident that we will receive our positive Record of Decision and will receive it in the first half of 2024. We also hear from investors that we should be grouped with the clays and the DLE projects. We also reject this idea that we have a risky flow sheet or process. We've invested over $150 million in pilots and detailed modeling and engineering to have high confidence in our processes. We do not use new technology or unproven units of operation. We are, in fact, using existing technology that has a proven record at scale. Our secrets are not new technology, but rather know-how concerning the specific set points throughout our plant. We are not a high-risk DLE project, and we're not taking on, in phase I, the inherent flow sheet challenges of extracting lithium from clay. We are, of course, excited about teaming with EcoPro to address these challenges. We cannot think of a team more capable than them to find a viable path for clay extraction. And finally, our relationship with our strategic partner, Sibanye-Stillwater, has continued to deepen. Over the past year, they have worked with us to do a very detailed review of all aspects of our mine plan and plant. They have made important contributions to our preparation for construction and resultant operations. I can say with confidence that our relations are strong, and we are confident they're making a positive effort FID following ROD. Throughout our years of work on Rhyolite Ridge, ioneer has exemplified the commitment to delivering a responsible mining operation. We have intently listened to all concerns, particularly concerning the protection of endangered plant, and through our planning, we have been able to develop a profitable pathway that has no direct impact and minimal indirect impact on those plants. This work has taken much time and effort to achieve, but we can now say with high confidence that this is precisely what we are delivering in our final EIS plan. Second, we have addressed the other sensitivities, including robust tribal consultation, deep engagement with all related communities, and of course, robust assessment of our impact on the water basin from which we derive our process water. Our company has cut no corners. We've collaborated with relevant stakeholders and agencies, and we believe are delivering a comprehensive plan that is exemplary and protective and that will minimize post-Record of Decision risk from litigation. This time and effort has been costly and time-consuming, but we are now in the final inning, and we will deliver a comprehensive, multifaceted plan that will produce high sustained value for our shareholders. I am also confident that we have the resources needed to complete our work and receive our Record of Decision. The commitment of our resources and ongoing collaboration with our valued partner, Sibanye-Stillwater, will allow us to not only reach Record of Decision, but quickly thereafter, reach FID. In the coming few months, we will drive to conclusion our extensive construction plan. We'll implement acquisitions of long lead items needed to maintain our 2026 first production targets and complete the closing of the DOE loan to complete our key FID conditions precedent. We are now confident that we will soon be permitted. We'll have turned the corner to the endgame, putting our first operation in the ground. As we finalize our plans for phase I, we have over the last year, allowed our team to work on the organic expansion potential within the permitted area.... First, we released a revised resource update that clearly showed that all sediments within the Rhyolite Ridge South Basin are heavily mineral, mineralized with lithium, and together contain well over 3 million tons of LCE. We showed that the lithium clay unit sitting above the borosilicate unit we will process in stage one, has over 1 million tons of LCE contained in the zone. Earlier this week... That's why I'm on this other side of the world and not looking so dreary. Earlier this week, I spent two days with our friends at EcoPro in South Korea, where we announced a strategic partnership to develop pilot scale processes that we hope will lead to commercial scale operations to exploit the lithium contained in our clay. We have great confidence in EcoPro's technological prowess and understanding of lithium processing. They are committed to unlocking our clay's potential. They will undertake the pilot testing, and if they obtain favorable results, we'll build commercial facilities to extract lithium from our stockpiled clay. ioneer and its partner, Sibanye-Stillwater, will receive 50% of the profits from those operations for providing clay at site. In addition, we have undertaken considerable test work on the low boron, high lithium materials in the strata just below phase I zone. We are now increasingly confident that this zone will yield an additional 1 million tons LCE, using a slightly modified version of phase I plant. The synergies from phase I should allow rapid development of expanded production within the existing mine. What is important is that the clay to be mined has overburden, so its processing will create no additional disturbance, and the low boron, high lithium strata below only requires slightly deepening of the existing mine. We anticipate that neither opportunity will require more than an EA amendment, and therefore should allow near-term expansion of our operations. We do not think either of these opportunities are properly factored by the market. And from an engineering perspective, I am confident to say that there are no other American projects at the engineering readiness of Rhyolite Ridge. As we move close to 70% engineering complete, we are now able to confidently commence construction at ROD and proceed straight to completion within approximately 24 months. We will not be like so many others that prematurely declare FID, only to take several years later to commence construction in earnest. I sometimes think of the fable, The Tortoise and the Hare, with ioneer being the tortoise. We all know who wins that race. I am optimistic that fiscal year 2024 will be the pivotal year for ioneer, and you will see that reflected in our company's performance. I want to extend my gratitude to Bernard and the executive team, leadership team for their dedication and exceptional work. These past few years have tested ioneer's resilience, but we are focused and determined and will deliver a bright future for our company and its shareholders. I am privileged to work with this dedicated team. They inspire me to work harder to meet our goals. Our work is our commitment to you, our shareholders. We are ready for the challenges and amazing opportunity that lies ahead. I also want to thank the ioneer Board of Directors. Thank you, Stephen, for being here. Their wisdom and dedication to our work amazes me. I'm so fortunate to chair such a team of leaders. Lastly, I want to express my heartfelt appreciation to you, our shareholders. Your patience, support, and belief in our work at Rhyolite Ridge have been instrumental in this long journey. We look forward to the coming year as we deliver our commitment to you. Thank you for your trust in us. Together, we will build on ioneer's legacy as a responsible and leading American producer of lithium and boron. Thank you very much. I'd now like to turn it over to our managing director for a more specific presentation. Thank you. Bernard? Thank you very much, James, and thank you everyone, ladies and gentlemen, for those who are present in the room and also those who are joining us online. Really appreciate you showing the interest in attending this AGM meeting. I'm going to run through a quick presentation, and we'll, I think, take some call questions rather, a little bit later on. But if I could, please have the next slide. There's a disclaimer there that you should read before making investment decisions. So, I'm going to sort of touch on a few of the things that James, you know, gave an overarching view on and get into a little bit more detail, but in a limited timeframe. So what differentiates ioneer? You know, what, what's so special about this project and this company? So firstly, permitting. We're one of the very few projects in North America that's on the cusp of being fully permitted, and we've been working on that permitting for a number of years, as you all know, and we're very, very confident. I'm intimately involved in that process with the BLM, with the Fish and Wildlife, with the White House, and we're confident around that. Partnerships, we have offtake agreements already in place with Ford, with Prime Planet, which is the joint venture between Toyota and Panasonic, with EcoPro. Those are things that we put in place now several years ago, 1 and 2 years ago, and they really were necessary and underpinned our ability to access the debt funding that we're going to be able to draw on from the U.S. government. So those offtake agreements are binding, they're bankable, and they've been audited and verified through those processes. Our strategic partner in Sibanye-Stillwater, you know, we had Goldman Sachs assistance in running a process that extended over quite a period of time, approximately 12 months during COVID. And at the end of that, we were fortunate enough to have a partner join us in Sibanye-Stillwater and make a commitment of $490 million to the development of this project. And as James mentioned, they've been deeply engaged with us. We have an operating technical committee. We have tech steering committees already operating in preparation for the joint venture, which will trigger at ROD next year. So, you know, we're working around, but making sure we have a warm start to that joint venture, not a cold start next year, and that's really important to maintain timelines. The government debt, I don't know whether many of you realize this, but ioneer is the only, and Rhyolite Ridge, is the only mining project in the United States to receive a commitment from the U.S. government for that debt funding. There isn't another one. So we're the first, and we're the only one, and there are reasons for that. There are reasons for all of these highlights, and I'm mentioning here the state-of-the-art engineering. James mentioned $150 million spent developing that flow sheet from bench scale through to piloting, and fortunately, it didn't require any new technology, nothing unproven, all existing technology that's used widely commercially in the mining industry. And organic growth, you know, this deposit really to date, we've only really focused on a very small part of it, and there's lots more of it. We're working on that now, and you're seeing the results of some of that. But in addition, it's still going to grow further. We have not yet pulled out this deposit, and we have a second deposit to the north, which also is something we will be continuing and ramping up the work around. Now, all of those highlights, I think you could sort of summarize them with two themes. One is, we have an amazing deposit. It's the only large lithium and boron deposit in North America, and in fact, there are only two of these deposits anywhere known anywhere in the world. And so they're, they're very rare deposits, and in, in that, there are opportunities. And what we've been able to do by spending that money is demonstrate those opportunities. So it's a tremendous deposit. There isn't a, another one comparable like it anywhere in the world, and it's one of those few deposits that as the more work we've done on it, the more we've realized the potential that it, that it brings. So the value of it has increased, it's not decreased as we've done that work. And then the other thing is, of course, the team to execute what we've been able to do and achieve today. I would like to acknowledge my management and technical team, my board, led by James, and the rest of the directors. You know, that's why you bring those two things together, this really unusual and an amazing deposit that has no comparison with the technical team that has been able to deliver these things. And what you're seeing summarized is, on this slide, where that's allowed us to get to. Next slide, please. Detailed engineering is ready. We're basically ready to go out tomorrow, if we were given the green light and commence construction. That's how advanced our engineering is. James alluded to this, that often what happens is projects get permitted, but the building doesn't really start for a year or several years later. We're ready to go now, and that's a decision that our board consciously took to continue doing that work post our feasibility study to make sure that we were as advanced as we possibly could be around the engineering design of this project. Next slide, please. I'm not going to go through in detail here, we're happy to answer questions later about this. But I said this is a unique deposit, so this is a unique flow sheet. There is not another lithium deposit anywhere in the world that would have a flow sheet that looks like that, because we can acid leach this mineralization in a way that's sort of similar to what is done in the copper industry, and there is not another lithium deposit in the world where you can do that. There's no high temperatures, there's no high pressures required. It's a simple sulfuric acid leach to liberate the lithium and the boron. The heart of this operation is a sulfuric acid plant. It provides all the, the heat, the steam to heat the solutions, to do the evaporation, to create the electricity, to drive the whole thing. So you can think of this as, like the heart of the operation, and that means that we don't need to be connected to grid power, and we're not. No gas, no grid power. All the energy is supplied from that sulfuric acid plant, something like 50 MW of power goes through the steam process. The back end of this flow sheet is actually just borrowed from either the lithium industry or the boron industry, or a combination of both. So again, it's crystallization and evaporation. Applying it to this unique ore hasn't been done before, which is why we did all the bench scale testing and piloting, but the unit operations have been in use for decades, and in some cases, more than a century. So really, the key in de-risking the process here has been doing all the test work and the piloting to demonstrate that. Next slide, please. Again, that unique deposit then also has some other positive flow on and knock on effects, and some of them are here, summarized here as our under our commitments to sustainability. But we're again, we're allowed to do this because of this unique deposit. So low emissions, no grid power, no gas.... all coming from energy that's generated from the conversion of sulfur into sulfuric acid, with zero CO2 emissions coming from that energy source. Low water usage, you know, we all hear about how important water conservation is, and rightly so, particularly in a desert environment like in Nevada. And the lithium industry does use a lot of water, particularly in the solar evaporation, and yes, that's that water is salty and not used for other purposes, but this project uses way, way less water than any other type of lithium operation. And the reason it does that is that we can do the evaporation to concentrate the lithium and the boron through using the steam from the sulfuric acid plant. We're then able to capture that steam and condense it, and reuse the water. So something like 50% of our water is recycled in that way. Again, that comes back to the unique flow sheet, the unique nature of the ore. Very small footprint, and that's because no solar evaporation ponds, no tailing stands. You know, we're gonna backfill our open pit. Our ore body is flat line, like a bit like a coal seam. It's sort of between 15 and up to 30 meters thick, even thicker in places when you add the other mineralized horizons. But because it's flat, it means that once we've got the hole large enough, we can actually backfill it, and that's what we'll be doing. James mentioned these other types of mineralization that we haven't yet incorporated into the economics and into the mine plan, but they exist, and we've got pathways to process them, both the clay and the non-clay. But they are all stacked one on top of the other. So mining more of them has very, very minimal impact on the overall footprint of the mine. And they all sit within the permitted footprint that we will have fully permitted next year. Efficient equipment, we've got a photo in a minute, we'll show you that we've been working very closely with Caterpillar over the last couple of years, and we'll be using Caterpillar autonomous trucks at this site. And a commitment to sustainability. We've done a lot of work in this area across the board, whether that's around the conservation of the Tiehm's buckwheat, the ongoing programs that we have around protection of the environment, the ongoing programs that we have around community engagement. We're very, very engaged and have been for many years with the community in this area and the tribal nations, and, you know, I think you reap the benefit of all of that early engagement, and we have in this case. Next slide, please. Okay, I'm not gonna run through this slide in detail, but it really nicely and it's deliberately small, and I see Richard squinting his eyes, trying to read it. It's sort of deliberately like that, because there's a lot of detail on this slide. Okay? But this is what you must go through when you permit a mine in the United States. To be honest, it's not vastly different than probably most other parts of the world. It takes time. It's two years of baseline studies. You're always going to be submitting a plan and modifying it before you finalize something. We started these baseline studies in 2019, and I'm pleased to say we're at the far right of this slide, and that's the purpose of it, is to show the level of detail and time that we've worked on this over the last four or five years to get to where we are today. So we are very confident in receiving our Record of Decision, the final permit from the federal government that we're waiting on in the first half of next year. We don't see any hurdles in front of us that we haven't already adequately addressed, and hence, we're very confident around the timing of it. And we're highly engaged with the Fish and Wildlife and the BLM to make sure that as anything that has come up has been adequately addressed. Next slide, please. The growth opportunities. Again, James touched on this, but you can think of this deposit has sort of basically three types of mineralization. It's either got boron or it doesn't. And this shows an example of how, as you get into the detail on deposits like this, they just keep on getting better. Because early on, we thought, well, if it has boron, we can process it. If it doesn't have boron, we're not gonna process it. We're just gonna leave it, stockpile it, or whatever, because we thought it's gonna be difficult to deal with, i.e., clay content. However, once we started to get into that and look at it more closely, we found that, okay, for the material that doesn't have boron, there's two types of that. It's either high in clay or low in clay. So then we went and started processing and leaching the low in clay, low in boron material, and we found that it actually processes just as well as the mineralization that's high in boron. And that's why we've started, now, more than a year ago, working around these, growth opportunities, around these low and high boron mineralization, and also the recent, agreement with EcoPro to look at it, economic, extraction of the, lithium from the clays. We also have our North Basin, which is a deposit further located about 4 km or 5 km to the north, which we also own 100%. It is part of the Sibanye overall agreement, although there is a $50 million payment to be made to bring it into the actual joint venture after we have get to ROD. And the North Basin was actually drilled, discovered, if you like, and drilled by Rio Tinto about 30 years ago. It was regarded as one of the largest borate deposits in North America, and we've drilled a couple of holes in there to confirm the Rio Tinto results. And we've used that material to leach, and what we've been able to see and show is that, that actually leaches just like this low boron, low clay material... So there's a huge potential resource up in that area that we will be working on as we move forward. And then there's some other projects as well that are, that are in the company, which I'm not going to go into today. But of course, we, we look for these rare sedimentary-type deposits because we have an incredible depth of knowledge around them and what makes a good one and what doesn't. Next slide, please. So just to put all of this into scale now. So Type 1 mineralization at Rhyolite Ridge, high boron, there's just under 160 million tons of that material now in the resource, and the feasibility study from 2020 only looked at 60 million tons. So there's 100 million tons that's not currently in the reserve. Most of it, in our view, will go into the reserve. Exact number, but I can't say yet, but most of it will. So at 2022, and so that contains over 1 million tons of LCE, where we're producing 22,000 tons a year. So I often hear people ask about, you know, ioneer is going to be producing with Sibanye and producing 11,000 tons, that's our 50% share. What they neglect to think about is the scale of this deposit and the ability to expand it in the future, which is substantial. So the clay mineralization, another 1 million tons or a little over of LCE, that's actually in the footprint, sitting over the top as overburden on top of the ore body. So we're gonna have to mine and stockpile it anyway, and hence, the importance of having someone like EcoPro partner with us to monetize that. And then the third type, this low boron, low clay, there's 128 million tons of that with another, you know, above 1 million tons of LCE, which now we have got a pathway to process it. It won't be exactly the same as the high boron material, but it'll, it'll be a variation of that sort of processing plant. So it's not gonna. We're not gonna have to spend $150 million working out how the design and the engineering around that plant. It will just be a modification. You put all that together, that's 3.4 million tons LCE, and in our 2020, reserves and our 2020 feasibility study, all those economics were based on mining 60 million tons and producing around about 700,000 tons of LCE. So only a fraction of the total 3.4 million. And remembering, all of this is gonna be permitted next year. When the phase I gets permitted, the rest gets permitted as well, subject to some minor variations that we would have to do. But otherwise, the baseline studies are done, the detailed permitting has all been done. Next slide, please. Just some activities there. We are drilling. We have been drilling the southern end of the deposit because it was an area that hadn't been drilled, and we needed to do it to inform the NEPA, the environmental approval process, needed additional geotechnical information to better define the limits, the southern limits of where the pit would ultimately end up being. So we've been drilling there. We'll put some results out on that in the future. Not right away, but fairly soon. And some various other photos, local activities that we're involved in and some of our technical team. Next slide, please. I do wanna just touch on these two things because, you know, again, you know, some people perhaps saw that, you know, our level of spending has been high in the last quarter. Well, a decent part of that went to Caterpillar, and the reason it went to Caterpillar is those autonomous trucks are now being built, and they're now in trial phase down in Arizona, and we want them to be ready for next year. And so that's why we made the decision. We're confident that we're gonna start next year. We're confident that the equity will be in place. We're confident that the permitting will be in place, and we need trucks. And this is the—these are the trucks and autonomous Caterpillar 785 dump trucks. And James mentioned the partnership with EcoPro. Both of James and I have been and visited their facilities in Pohang, in Korea, and they are incredibly impressive, and they've now committed to build facilities similar to those in Quebec, in partnership with Ford and SK. So not only do we have that partnership for the clay processing, but we also have the offtakes with both EcoPro and Ford. So strengthening of that partnership is an excellent outcome for this project. Thank you. Next slide, please. So right products. I do honestly think that that combination of lithium and boron is a really powerful combination, and again, there are no other lithium projects that have quite that level of co-product. So 170,000 tons of boric acid today, at today's prices, that's worth in excess of $170 million. So something like 35% ±5 of our revenue will come from that boric acid. So it's a tremendous companion to the volatile lithium that we're gonna continue to see, is that our economics are underpinned by something that's very stable and has been for a very long time, and it's got huge demand. And it's actually very strategic material that the United States also wants, because 75% or so of the world's resource and reserves of boron are located in Turkey. So it's important for the U.S. and other parts of the world to have additional supply, and we're one of the very few new supply to come on stream in, you know, for boron. The team, the location, the potential expansions, I've talked about all of that. I want to highlight, though, one other thing here is that we, we've done all this work, we've spent all this money, we're very pleased with how it's all gone and what we've been able to deliver. But don't forget, all of this has been validated independently by our partners. We did two years of due diligence with the Department of Energy before we got that $700 million loan commitment. And there's a reason why we got it, and that is because we'd spent the money, done all the test work, the piloting, the engineering, and we had a team that they saw could deliver this project. That's why we have the $700 million loan commitment. And so putting all those things together, very clear pathway into production. What you're seeing us do now is the preparation so that we are well positioned to start that construction and be in the field next year. Thank you very much. Next slide. Thank you, Bernard, for that thoughtful presentation. I'll remind all shareholders and proxy holders that you have the ability to ask questions via the Lumi platform or from the floor of the meeting. We will hold questions specific to the resolutions to the formal part of the meeting. So we'll first talk about general things and any questions you have, and then we'll get to the formal part. Are there any questions on the chairman's address, my presentation, or more generally, on the management of the company? And yes, please. Sure. Barry Freeman. Mm-hmm. What makes you think you're gonna get approval in the first half of next year? Well, yeah. These things say- Let me let Bernard answer it, and I might jump in afterward. Bernard, why don't you take that? Yeah. I mean it, nicely. Yeah, yeah. You know, what gives you that confidence? So, well, firstly, when the BLM announced that we were entering into the NEPA process, which they did in December of last year, they announced at the same time that they intended to make a Record of Decision in January 2024. So they said it, firstly. Okay, now, has it gone exactly to the timeline? No. Things have slipped a little bit, but we're talking, you know, by a couple of months, not longer. So, our original guidance, based on what the BLM told us, was the first quarter of 2024, and more recently, like in our last quarterly report, we said that based on progress to date, which is very good, but a few months behind, we're saying it's probably gonna be in the second quarter of 2024, not the first. Now, we talk, and I talk very, very regularly with the BLM, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, both of which sit under the Department of the Interior, and I'm hearing nothing to the contrary around that. And finally, I know that the, because this is a lithium project, because the DOE funding, it is receiving special attention as it moves through that process, and so hence, I'm confident that whilst it might have slipped by a couple of months, it's otherwise on track. Okay, sure. Yes? Just on that. Oh, let me get you a microphone. Hello. Can you say your name, please, and then- Bertie Cove. Okay, Bertie. Just on that, the DEI was being delayed, and what's... Can we get some more clarity with regards to what is happening? I know you're in touch with them, but what are they saying? What is the process that gives a little bit more clarity for us to say that everything's not going to be delayed again? Because we've gone from January to first quarter to now second quarter. Right. Then I have a second question, which is related to that, which is, can I get some clarity on the FID, given that, you know, all the time elapsed and all the preparations- Right. are impressive, how long would it be between the ROD and the FID? Right to actually start constructing? And do you need further approvals then from the government to actually start constructing? Let me take the second first, and then let me go back to the permitting. First of all, we have a very detailed catalog of all conditions precedent to close financing. So we have that very heavily detailed, and we're working very hard in a multifaceted way to make sure that by the time we get to the Record of Decision, there'll be a very short interval between then and having CPs necessary to not only draw down the equity, but also to be able to move from conditional commitment to final documents and firm commitment by the DOE. So we take that interval very seriously. It's something that we can work towards. The part about the permit, you know, I mean, look, it is an inherently interesting process when you're dealing with many different agencies of federal government. But I really want to echo Bernard's point, which is that we're not in the early stages of NEPA now, we're in the final innings of NEPA process. And so, you know, we are not having any more inbound requirements, any more inbound requirements for more studies or anything like that. We're, in fact, about to deliver the very final piece of our work to be able to have, in very short timeframe, the draft EIS come out. That's a very important point because that is the government basically saying, "We think this represents the EIS, and we're gonna take this for public comment." We don't see that the work to get that done is in jeopardy. Okay, part of this has to do with sort of this. There's a bureaucratic aspect to this procedural that, you know, we look at it and say, "My God, it's another month or two," and we hate it, and we fight it, you know, fight, fight, fight to accelerate. But for the government, it's just they're doing this as fast as they think they can do. And the other thing I would say is that we're doing this not just to get the ROD, but making sure that our plan is so detailed and backed up with such detailed information that we anticipate any kind of issues that might arise from those trying to stop us through litigation. So it's, it's a combination of getting the ROD and making sure the ROD is so defensible that there couldn't be low chances of any kind of injunction to slow us down. So it's both of those things, and at this point, I think we have very high visibility on this point, very, very definitely. Bernard, you want to add to that? Yeah, so- I'm still unclear. So with regards to the ROD and the FID, when you say what's involved, you're getting ready and everything's fine, but is that a long process or is that a short process? Like, are we talking weeks, months, quarters? Well, do you want to? Well, I would just say that, you know, like I said, we're doing everything possible to get all the CPs completed by the time we get to the ROD, okay? So that there will be, of course, once the ROD takes place, that's we think will be sort of the end of the CP, the key CP. And there obviously have to be taken into account a final review by our partner to make the FID. But look, as I noted and Bernard noted, we actually have moved to a very intimate relationship with our partner, Sibanye. They are deeply engaged in understanding this project from all different facets, and so we do not anticipate a significant decision-making timeline for going from ROD to FID. Now, can I tell you, is it a week? I don't know. Is it 2 weeks? My guess it's more like, you know, a month-ish kind of process to get it, a month and a half. Something along those lines is what I would guess. Yeah, and I'll just reiterate what James just mentioned. The key there is actually doing as much as we can ahead of actually having the ROD. So, you know, a lot of these things can already be worked on now because we've finished. You know, we're not doing any more engineering in respect of requirements under an FID decision. So, you know, so it's about front-running some of that. And now to answer your first questions more specifically. So, what - when the government come out with the NEPA process, and in our case, they said they were intending on doing it in 12 months. Normally, they say two years, okay? That's the sort of standard, and it often takes longer than that. So in our case, they said, "No, we're gonna do this one in one year." And that was because we had done a lot of the work ahead of time. Those several years of baselines, we'd also been working closely to address the concerns around the buckwheat, as an example, and other things, so that we weren't doing that during the NEPA process. We'd already done it. Why has it moved by a few months? Well, because you have to go out and get public comments, and so when you get public comments, then the government have to address those public comments, and they often come back to the company and say, "We have these public comments. We want you to supply more information around these areas." And so that's what you do. Of course, you don't know what they are until you're in the process. Now, in our case, they're related to dust on, not on the mine site, but dust on the roads that access the mine site, and are related to groundwater because they wanted us to do a more expansive groundwater model because scarcity of water in this part of the world is a very important matter. You can understand, and the public comments are available to the public. There was plenty of comments from local community around conservation of water. But we've developed strong strategies around there, and won't go into all of them now, but just to give you an example, we have in excess of 200% of our water needs. So we can actually offset, because we have 200%, we can offset what we use to make sure we actually don't have any net impact. So we haven't had to change any of our strategy. We just needed to supply more information around groundwater models. So again, nothing particularly unusual in it, but it does take time, and that's why it's pushed back a few months. Yes. Let me get you... Let me let you go first, and then go ahead, and then I'll come—I'll write to you. Thank you. Name, please? Hello? No, go ahead. Okay, thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to address the AGM. My name is [Shishu Bajpathy]. I'm here representing the interests of Bogdan Investments, the investment vehicle for [Robert Watt]. And we stand here before you today as concerned shareholders. I'd like to start by emphasizing the importance of shareholder capital. Each one of us has invested our hard-earned money into this company with the expectation that it would be managed responsibly and with the best interests of shareholders at heart. However, over the past year, it has become increasingly evident that our company's management team may not have lived up to these expectations. Our concerns are rooted in the performance of the management and the way they have utilized our capital. Now, cash balance sits at $36.5 million, with $15.8 million spent in the last quarter. At this run rate, the company, in all likelihood, will not have enough cash reserves to get to a Record of Decision. In order to ensure the company doesn't require a diluted capital raise, we believe it is high time that we consider a management and board refresh. While we respect and appreciate the contributions of our current leadership, it is crucial to ensure that the management team is equipped to lead us through the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. A fresh perspective, innovative strategies, and renewed energy can benefit all shareholders and our company as a whole. Transparency and accountability are paramount. It is our right as shareholders to understand the decisions made by management and how our capital is being deployed. In conclusion, we believe that by addressing this key issue, we can pave the way for a brighter future for our company. As shareholders, we have a vested interest in the decisions made and the management of our capital. Thank you for your attention. I'm not sure what the question was, but thank you for your perspective. Take that, and I'm sure the shareholders will take your thoughts. We obviously strongly disagree with your assessment. We think that we've been very careful in our use of resources. We focus them on what counts, what actually matters. We're obviously aware of what's necessary to get to a ROD, which is obviously our highest priority. We're focusing intently on completing that, and we have high confidence that we have the resources without dilutive shareholder dilution to achieve those goals. So we just basically disagree with your assessment, but we thank you for your comments. I'll just add one thing, please. Sure. So in relation to your comments around the burn rate, I explained that they were discretionary spending that was required in preparation for commencement of construction next year. Those decisions were not taken lightly, and they were also taken in conjunction with our partner, Sibanye-Stillwater. So we think that they were the right decisions to make in order to maintain our timelines. But they were discretionary, and we made it clear that they were one-off things that related to being ready to commence construction next year. So we made that clear in the quarterly report that those levels of spending would not be continued into the following quarters. So I think your concerns around that are unfounded. Yes, name, please? Michael Chang. Hi, Michael Chang here. I just wanted a quick question. Since, obviously, since the feasibility report, inflation increased substantially. I I just wanted to get sort of an idea of how leading into the project, what the funding requirements what will be, if there's gonna be a major change in the funding requirements needed for the project, and how you guys are feeling about that at this point, given that you've done so much work on the project. I guess you've got a fairly good idea of where costs are sitting at the moment. I'm gonna turn it over to Bernard in general, but let me just answer in general. Obviously, we had our DFS three years ago, and I would certainly not stand before you and say that we don't understand the impact of inflationary costs on cost of materials, cost of labor, et cetera. So obviously, we've been clear that the cost estimate that we had in the DFS is dated. Now, as it relates to knowing the costs that we're gonna incur, we are doing right now, working through, and we'll be certainly presenting to the market and to our funders at DOE, a Class 2 estimate. So we're well along in a very detailed exercise with Fluor on an updated cost estimate model, which of course is necessary to have a very good idea of what our costs are gonna look like. So that's coming, and obviously we don't anticipate it to not reflect reality. The exact figures we think are, we are very optimistic, represent still a very good project for our shareholders. Bernard? Yeah, that's right. So we are working on those updated, both CapEx and OpEx estimations. They'll be available next year, and I think as James said, we're, we're mindful that they've gone up, and we were mindful of that when we put in place the funding with Sibanye-Stillwater and the Department of Energy. So we have available to us $1.2 billion versus the $800 million estimate, CapEx estimate from the 2020 feasibility study. So while we don't have final numbers, we, we did take those things into account when we were negotiating, particularly with the Department of Energy, and hence the $1.2 billion in place. I might add that it's, it's nice that we're the only people that have been able to get those loans, because while 10-year Treasury is the interest rate we're paying, it is very concessional in its cost. And, you know, everyone, you know, if I could tell you the exact interest rate as we draw down in, you know, 2025, 2026, those loans, I'd be on a 1,000-foot yacht in the Mediterranean, 'cause I... Nobody knows that. But we do anticipate that while interest rates are up close to a little around 5% or so for 10-year Treasury, that those are gonna come back down in the timeframe we draw. So, you know, look, You'd like—you'd really like to be where, where I and here is from the point of view of the capital and our, our simple structure and our ability to draw down low-cost capital. I mean, nobody else is in as good a position as we are to do that, despite some of the comments earlier that suggested somehow we are incompetent. I don't know what that means, but anyway, any other questions? Yes. Oh, wait, let me get you the mic. Sure. Just thinking as you've been going through all this. Yeah. I don't know where I'm headed with this very freely again, sorry. Yes. What does the price of lithium coming down like it has in recent times do to you? Like, how do you think through that, and what are the ramifications going forward? Right. Well, that's of course a very good question. It's interesting. We have paid actually no attention whatsoever to these $60,000/ton, $70,000/ton, $80,000/ton figures. We thought that would be irresponsible to even think about that. We, you know, our contracts have half of them have floors and ceilings that don't have anything to do with that. We don't really think that long-term, significant offtake agreements are gonna be done at that kind of level. That's one. Number two is, and it's I think it's very important is that, you know, y'all in Australia, I think y'all are conflating something. Y'all act like people that produce spodumene concentrate are lithium producers, okay? They're precursor manufacturers who are completely dependent upon conversion in China, okay? So they get very excited about, you know, spot prices in China, et cetera, et cetera. We're sitting over here with a much rarer, much, much rarer asset where we're producing lithium chemicals. We're not producing 6% concentrates and shipping it to China. We're gonna produce the materials that go into the EV chain in the United States and are IRA compliant, okay? So that's number one. Number two is we actually have never spent any time in these kind of zones. I mean, we first of all don't even think that it's—it's the right thing for the industry, because it's $60,000-$80,000 a ton for lithium. You're never going to have the kind of cost structure in electric cars to drive the growth that we want. So, you know, we spend our time thinking more in the, you know, $20,000-$22,000 a ton range is perfectly good for us because we're going to be a very low-cost producer, and we're gonna be in the United States, unlike so many of the people we get lumped in with, which are really precursor manufacturers. And it's much harder if you haven't noticed. They're much—there are very few big projects coming on stream that are making actually lithium chemicals in the West. Most of the action is in people making quick profits, producing spodumene and sending it into China. That's a very different vulnerability than we have. And I also think it's misunderstood in terms of the importance of what we're creating. We're creating the first huge manufacturing capability in the United States. You know, I think that people underestimate, first of all, how challenging that is to achieve, which is what we're about to deliver, and also of the, the very strong value that's gonna create, be created for our shareholders. So, you know, look, I'm a big shareholder myself of this company, as is Bernard, and look, we've suffered along with everybody else by what we think is really a very unreasonable downdraft in our shareholder value. I personally think that, you know, I wish that I could figure out how to unlock that. I do know that the way to do it is to get our Record of Decision. We do have the resources to get to the Record of Decision, despite what might have been said. and when we do that, and we deliver getting this thing into construction for those shareholders that are smart enough to understand what we're actually doing, it's gonna be very, very good return on our investment. So that's, that's where we are. You think I wasn't the one who understood what you were doing? Where does Allkem take it to? Do they take it right through to the chemicals? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. When you look at the world, the brine operators do take it to lithium chemicals, different grades, obviously, depending on where they want to go. In my old company, Allkem, you know, they're actually trying to bring up a very high fidelity Naraha to take technical-grade carbonate converted into hydroxide in Japan. They're still struggling with that, but they're working at it. But yes, they make lithium chemicals. Certainly, obviously Albemarle and all the Salar de Atacama and up in the other key operations where FMC or Livent and who are now part of our company. Those all make lithium chemicals, but the spodumene guys, as you know, they don't. I mean, they're trying, but basically they make a 6% concentrate, as you know, and they put it on a ship and haul it over to China. And it really, you know, look, let's put it to you another way. Don't forget that for all the guys that have been exuberant about the spodumene, you know, spodumene guys have been sticking it to the Chinese for a while, okay, with very, very high spodumene prices. Now it's basically being turned on the head, and the converters are gonna be squeezing the spodumene guys for a while. That doesn't really matter to us. I mean, that's interesting, but, you know, for IRA compliant materials, those are much rarer and more valuable, in my opinion. Thanks for your answer, James. Appreciate it. Yeah, thank you. James, Mr. Chairman, I might, As an online question. Some of the online questions. Yes, please do. ... So we've got a question that says: Could you please explain how you can backfill the pit when you have multiple economic horizons to exploited depths? I'll let Bernard take that one, he's the geologist. That's actually a very good question. And so basically, it requires the mining of those mineralized layers, because you're not going to come back and remove backfill. So we won't backfill until those other layers are removed. And there are various parts of the deposit, which mean that we can do that pretty quickly, and there are other parts, because of the thickness and the volume of material, where we would have to leave that for later. So you know, we're working on all of that, and we're mindful that you know, that is an important factor when it comes into mine scheduling and when we would be in a position of backfill. We also have the flexibility that not all of our overburden goes into backfill. We have two permitted or that are in our permit. When it's permitted early next year, we'll have both of these overburden storage areas permitted. In the interim, we will use those overburden storage areas, which are surface facilities and have got more than enough capacity to hold many decades of overburden. Just continuing on a similar theme around those expansion opportunities. Given the three discrete types of mineralization, what would be the estimate of the total mine life of this deposit? And from that, what would be an estimate of what the yearly production possibly could be? Okay. So, one other thing, I'll just finish on the previous question also, because I didn't add this, is that the clay that is the subject of the deal that we've just announced with EcoPro, that actually sits above the main ore horizon, so we, we'll be removing that anyway. And so it was always in the plan that we would stockpile that, so that it's only the material that lies below, okay, that comes into the mine scheduling. In terms of the entire deposit, the resource, and this is resource, I wanna make clear, not reserves. But the resource is 3.4 million tons of contained lithium carbonate, and it's still open in three directions, so we would expect that it's going to get larger than that. But currently, as of today, it's 3.4 million tons of lithium carbonate equivalent. That's excluding the boric acid. And we would be, in, in our phase I, mining it at 22,000 tons a year, so you can do the math on that, but it's a long time. And of course, the reasons why we're doing growth studies is to look at expansion opportunities. The process plant that we showed you before, that is designed to produce 22,000 tons of lithium carbonate and 174,000 tons of boric acid a year. Now, if you were processing material that didn't have boron, then you could potentially push more through that plant, because it's sized around the boric acid. you can think of it as, essentially, a train that produces ±20,000 tons of carbonate a year. Really, if you're going to expand it, you'd be doing it in approximately 20,000-ton increments. We have the ability to do, of course, multiples of those based on the size of the resource. Sorry, James, I've got a couple more here. Go ahead, unless there is another in the room. This is turning to construction costs and, are we seeing price pressure come off or even decrease in relation to constructing the plant? This person's aware of that U.S. steel prices have come off, for instance. We're definitely seeing materials and construction costs falling. I mean, look, you know, the situation in the world with the inflation and then the monetary response to that is starting to have a bite, okay? And, you know, quite frankly, you know, all these secondary projects that are supposed—not nearly the quality of our projects, they're all saying they're gonna go into construction. They're all having to slow down a lot. So I think that, you know, all... We're certainly seeing all of our vendors, you know, key vendors, very eager to get on with this project and with the capacity to do it. So yeah, I think that's the case. I mean, labor is certainly moderated in terms of the increase in cost for our expectation for labor. We'll have to see as we get closer and get into full-blown construction, what those labor costs look like. You know, we do, because we take the money from the DOE, we have a requirement during construction to use sort of essentially labor rates that are consistent with unions. So that does hold back the downdraft in labor costs, but materials of construction and other costs, like trucking costs, for instance, have come off. You're gonna haul a lot of stuff in. So transportation costs are coming down. Labor, you know, materials of construction, the work environments for all of our subcontractors, they're not feeling quite as exuberant. So, you know, we think that that plus our, we have a very sophisticated process for procurement, and I think that some of our open book methodologies are allowing us to keep looking into our subcontractors' cost structures and making sure we aren't being taken advantage of. Yes, another? Thanks, yes. Just the last question. ioneer's market cap is currently $330 million. Yeah. Why would Sibanye proceed with paying $470 million, but $490 million, for half the South Basin when they could buy the whole company? I don't think that they. Well, first of all, they're prohibited from trying to buy the whole company. That's number one. Number two is that I don't think anybody thinks that they could go in and buy ioneer on a, on a hostile basis for anything vaguely like that. So I, you know, we have no, we have no reason to believe that, that they would even think like that. If they did try to act like that, they. And therefore, they would become not our partner. I assure you, there'd be plenty of others who would love to step into their shoes. We know about who they are. They talk to us frequently, so we, you know, we just are not concerned about that at all. Any further questions from the floor? Ah, yes. Well, let me, let me get you a mic. Richard Cannon. James, thank you for your presentation. Yes. I'm a bit worried about the comment of your brokers, Bernard. Yeah. In their recent research, they mentioned on, like, there's a 500-meter perimeter for the buckwheat, which is- Yeah ... not in accord with the mining plan at the moment, and I therefore would like you to explain why they're wrong in what they said. I'm gonna let Bernard take it because it's easy to misunderstand. Go ahead, Bernard. Yeah. So I think some of that was poorly worded. And so the 500 meters is what the U.S. Fish and Wildlife have declared as critical habitat for Tiehm's buckwheat. Now, you can go to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and they have fact sheets on this. But critical habitat for any endangered species is not off-limits for development. But the test is, the disturbances that you would create inside that critical habitat, would they jeopardize the viability of the species? And in our case, we're going, in the early years, 0 disturbance up to 10% of the total critical habitat, and after 20 years, we would be at 20%, and that's where it maxes out. Okay? So Fish and Wildlife, from all of our discussions, are quite comfortable with 20% disturbance inside the critical habitat. So the important thing is, it's not an exclusion zone. It's just a zone that we have to get the permission of Fish and Wildlife, which is exactly what we're doing, in order to have disturbance, activity, mining, or whatever inside. Now, we don't have anything else inside that critical habitat in this mine other than the mine itself. So we're minimizing the disturbance inside the critical habitat. And the example that I actually like to quote is that there is a desert tortoise in Nevada, and it is an endangered species listed under the ESA Act. The critical habitat for the desert tortoise includes Las Vegas, so the Las Vegas Strip is inside the critical habitat of the desert tortoise. So you can definitely have development and disturbance inside critical habitat of any species, as long as it doesn't run the risk of jeopardizing the viability. So we, we're comfortable with that, and we've had very extensive consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service about this exact matter. I would like to add just one... Could I have just one last thing coming in, and I'll- Yeah. As I understand your comment, your comment is that [Ords] are wrong in assuming that it could affect your mine plan and therefore delay the project and the FID. I think they were wrong in the sense that they've confused people, and rightly so by not rightly so, and it's not right, but I acknowledge that they've created confusion. That, to insinuate that that may mean that you cannot develop inside there, that is not the case at all. Just to be very clear, our mine plan of operation, which is going to be permitted and have a ROD, the ROD has to include the permission from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has to make a determination on the level of disturbance inside the critical habitat. So those what's been written has confused people, and in that sense, it's been wrong. Yes, I guess they still are our brokers. What I'd like to also note that our plans that go into the habitat in, you know, the out years, in no instances would we have impact or directly impact any plants. So we're only talking about the, the habitat, not... which has a big zone around it. Okay, so we're not talking about going in 20% in and taking 20% of the plants. We're not taking any of those plants. And all the work we've done is mainly on things like pollinators, you know, impact on our indirect impacts, okay, with Fish and Wildlife Service. 'Cause we've already agreed not to touch directly any of the plants under any, at any time frame. So all the work we've been doing, and extensive work, is to work with them to make sure that all of our mitigation plans have, make it to where the plants do fine by themselves. We also, by the way, didn't even mention this, but we have successful greenhouses. We've been growing, collecting seeds. We've been growing Tiehm's buckwheats very, very well. We have hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of plants and getting ready to have thousands of plants that we're growing, and we'll be starting to populate other growth zones 'cause we, we do not think that, that is unique to... The soil is not, we don't think it's a soil specialist, by the way. We're pretty highly confident about that as well. So look, all this is part of the process of working with the government, listening, making sure that we protect Tiehm's buckwheat, and at the same time, have a viable way to mine and produce this critical material for the world, to save the world. We're doing, we're doing that. That's what's taken so much work. And so, you know, what Ord is... I'm gonna read this.... you know, you know, these analysts, they write things, and they may not fully grasp the subtleties of what they're doing. We'll certainly talk with the board. They've been very supportive of us. I think they-- we'll, we'll have to talk to them and maybe get them to put out a correction on this point you've raised, so we certainly will do that. Can I ask another question? Yeah, of course. About the government funding. Yes. Is that amount flexible? I mean, you say you're working with the government, you all want the project to proceed. If your costs come in greater than what you imagine they are- Yeah. when you're doing final analysis Right. Will they be flexible enough to give you extra money, or are you going to go back to shareholders? Well, look, we, you know, we certainly aren't in a position right now to answer that question because, you know, look, the DOE find it thinks this is a... They've been very clear, this is a critical national project that has to get done. Okay? Certainly, we don't anticipate some kind of a need that's significantly above what we already have. Okay? But if we were to, in the end, find that we're wrong about that, I certainly think that we would be able to have constructive dialogue with them about that matter, but I can't speak for the government, you know, about that. Maybe I could just- Yeah. I would add, though, that we're, you know, $700 million is not a magical number. It's the number that the project, when they analyzed it, you know, was supported that amount of debt, based on their assumptions at the time. So really, that's the number, and it, it's determined by the economics of the project. And let me just add one thing, because I'm sure you're thinking in your mind. When we did that, they, like us, paid no attention to spot prices in China. So the... I just want to make clear to you that the assumptions that we have, and they have, and everyone has with regard to the price that we would expect for our, our material, has nothing to do with those kind of exorbitant prices. So that's, that's—we don't see that as a risk. Any further questions? Yes, I had just one more that's come in online. Okay. And the comment is meant positively, but it says, "I feel that the chairman was a little dismissive of the concerns shown by the shareholder in terms of use of capital. Could he please explain better as to how the current cash reserves will last a bit and beyond? And as he is so positive and confident on this project, what is he doing to raise the profile of the company, especially in the U.S. splits? Thank you for that, those questions. Well, I certainly don't plan to be dismissive, but if I don't agree with something, I'm not gonna sit here and say, "I don't disagree with that shareholder's opinion." You know, that's just... I don't do that. You know, as far as our confidence, I mean, first of all, we're managing our capital resources very, very carefully. We are very engaged with our partner, Sibanye-Stillwater, in making sure that we are well capitalized to get to where we need to go. We have high visibility as to where we're going. We talked about, we had some, you know, one-off expenses that we needed to make in order to be able to execute the construction on time. We don't have those in the coming months, and we're managing very carefully. So, you know, we've worked really hard to do all the things that are necessary and to not go out to the shareholder, asking to dilute shareholders. We've worked very hard to do that, and we will continue to do that. We're very acutely aware of how we're spending our money, where we are. We think we're gonna get there. I can't say anything really more than that. What was the other part of the question? I'm sorry. What we doing to you, with you- Oh. -as well? Right. Well, you know, we continue to go to the capital sources to meet with fund managers, to participate in various conferences and other things to try to get the point across. You know, we've sort of come to the conclusion that we'll continue to do all that, but we sort of think that the key right now for us and where we spend most of our time is executing against our plan and getting this thing into construction. We really feel that, you know, until we get this thing permitted, we can talk and talk, but I think there's too many uncertainties from the perception of the market. We're trying to explain that they shouldn't have those. That's probably the best we can do. We're certainly out talking, talking, and talking to tell our story, and we're gonna continue to do that. We certainly are excited to finally be able to talk about our growth opportunity. I think that's really good. I think that when we get the draft EIS out very soon, I think that'll be a very strong message to the world that we're there and ready to go. And I certainly think that our partners, Sibanye, are beginning to speak up more forcefully and clearly about their commitment to what we're doing together. So I think that those are the key things that we need to do, and we are gonna continue to do. Can I just- Yeah, please. Can I just add, just wanted to add a couple of things. In terms of the, you know, the spending and no dilution of, of shareholder value, then I also think it's relevant to look backwards, not just be looking forwards. And, the last time ioneer raised capital was through a placement to Sibanye-Stillwater at AUD 0.65-AUD 0.66, and that was in 2021. And the time prior to that, that we raised capital, which was with the shareholders, was in 2020. So we've actually raised no money with the market, with shareholders, since 2020. So, we, we've actually got a very good track record of raising money at high valuations and limiting the amount of, capital that we've had to go back to the shareholders and raise. If you look at the Sibanye deal, let's not forget that was done at an Australian dollar valuation of AUD 1.6 billion. Both the AUD 0.66 or AUD 0.65 placement and the $490 million commitment. The second thing, again, which sort of same sort of rationale, let's look back and see what we're comparing things with here. The average timeline to permit a mining project in the United States is 15 years. We are fully expecting to be fully permitted next year, and the BLM has said that. And the Department of Energy has said that there's a clear pathway to permitting on this project after 2 years of due diligence. That would mean 8 years for start to finish of permitting, discovery, drilling, permitting this project. So that is half the United States average. I question some of the comments that were made earlier around the delivery of this project in the context of where it is and what it is. Is that it? No further questions. Great. Very great. So let us then, since there are no more questions, let us move to the formal business of the meeting. So, the notice of meeting was lodged with ASX on 29 September 2023, has been sent to all members and can be found on the ioneer website. I will take the notice of meeting as read. Voting. All voting today will be conducted by way of a poll. If you are eligible to vote at this meeting, click on the polling icon in the Lumi platform and select one of the voting options, or submit your paper proxy form at the end of the meeting. Polling on the resolutions is open. The company secretary will display the total number of valid proxy votes received in respect of each resolution. In accordance with the proxy form, which formed part of the AGM pack, I intend to vote all eligible undirected proxies in favor of Resolution 1 through 6. We will now move to the first item of business as set out in the notice of meeting. To receive and consider the consolidated financial statements for the financial year ended 30 June 2023. The company's financial statements and reports are taken as tabled. Ian, are there any questions or comments on the company's financial statements and reports or questions for the company's auditors? I don't have any online. Are there any in the room? Anyone in the room? Okay. There being no further questions, we move to the next order of business. The second resolution is to consider, and if thought fit, pass the remuneration report for the year ended 30 June 2023. The remuneration report is contained in the annual report. Note that your vote on this resolution is advisory only and does not bind the directors of the company. The number of proxies received on this resolution are shown on the screen. Should 25% of the vote be cast against this resolution, this will constitute a first strike for the company for the purposes of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), whatever that means, I'm not sure. Questions? Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect of this resolution? No questions, Chairman. [Take it back]. The next item of business, Resolution 3A, is to consider, and if thought, pass, that Rose McKinney-James is reelected as a Director. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. The Directors, other than Rose, unanimously recommend this resolution. Are there, Ian, any questions or comments in respect to this resolution? No questions. Thank you. The next item of business, Resolution 3 B, is to consider, and if thought fit, pass that Margaret R. Walker is elected as a Director. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. The directors, other than Maggie, unanimously recommend this resolution. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect of this resolution? No questions. Given my personal interest in the next item of business, I will hand over to Bernard to take over the chair for this resolution. The next item of business, Resolution 4A, is to consider, and if thought fit, pass that shareholders approve and authorize the issue of performance rights to James Calaway or his nominees, in lieu of Directors' fees, on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory memorandum. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. Yes. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect of this resolution? No questions. I'll now hand back to James to chair the meeting. Thank you very much, Bernard. The next item of business, Resolution 4B, is to consider, and if thought fit, pass that shareholders approve and authorize the issue of performance rights to Alan Davies or his nominees, in lieu of directors' fees, on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory memorandum. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect to this resolution? No questions. The next item of business, Resolution 4 C, is to consider, and if thought fit, pass the shareholder approval and authorize the issue of performance rights to Stephen Gardiner or his nominee, in lieu of directors' fees, on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory memorandum. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect to this resolution? No questions. Okay. The next item of business, Resolution 4D, is to consider, and if thought fit, pass that shareholder to approve and authorize the issue of performance rights to Rose McKinney-James or a nominee in lieu of directors' fees on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory memorandum. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect of this resolution? No questions. All right, great. The next item of business, Resolution 4E, is to consider and, if thought fit, pass what the shareholders approve and authorize the issue of performance rights to Margaret Walker or her nominees, in lieu of directors' fees, on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory memorandum. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect of this resolution? No questions. The next item of business, Resolution 5, is to consider, and if thought fit, pass, that shareholders approve the grant of 3,736,218 performance rights to Bernard Rowe and or his nominees on the terms outlined in the company's 2023 annual report and under the equity incentive plan, and the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory memorandum. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on the screen. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect of this resolution? No questions. Given my personal interest in the next item of business, I'll hand it over to Bernard to take over the chair for this resolution. The next item of business, Resolution 6, is to consider, and if thought fit, pass, that shareholders approve the grant of 1,992,077 performance rights to James Calaway or his nominees on the terms outlined in the company's 2023 annual report and under the equity incentive plan on the terms and conditions set out in the explanatory memorandum. The number of proxies received for this resolution are displayed on screen. Ian, are there any questions or comments in respect to this resolution? No questions. I'll now hand back to James. Great. That concludes the last item on the agenda and the formal business of this annual general meeting. I shortly close the voting system. If you have not done so already, please ensure that you cast your votes. Thank you for your attendance today. We look forward to working hard on your behalf to ensure the development of Rhyolite Ridge and the success of ioneer Ltd. Voting is now closed. Results. The results of these votes will be released to the ASX later today. Thank you very much for coming. We look forward to talking to you.