Thank you for standing by and welcome to the Jupiter Mines Ian Murray Investor Call. All participants are in listen-only mode. You will get a presentation followed by a question-and-answer session. If you wish to ask a question, you will need to press the star key or press number one on your telephone keypad. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Brad Rogers, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead. Well, thanks, Kelly, and thanks everyone for joining. As usual, I've got Ian Murray, our Chairman, on the line, as well as Melissa North, our CFO. As usual, I'll just give a few opening remarks, and then we'll throw the line open for any questions that might be out there. So I'll be providing the key comments summarized from the September quarterly that was released to the market this morning. And for those that have had a chance to read that quarterly, you will have seen that the September quarter was a particularly strong quarter operationally. We had sales of 1.04 million tons for the quarter, which was actually 3% down on the June quarter, which was a very strong quarter, capitalizing on high manganese prices prevailing in that quarter. But the September quarter figure I just mentioned was 12% up on the prior comparative period, the same quarter last year. From a production perspective, volumes were even higher than that, with 1.21 million tons of manganese ore produced for the quarter, which was 33% up on the June quarter and 54% up on the prior comparative period. That represented, in the month of August, a record achievement out of the production circuit, which was obviously pleasing as we looked through our strategy and figured out the capacity of Tshipi to potentially do more on a sustainable basis. That represented a run rate from a sales perspective of over 4 million tons per annum annualized compared to an average over the last six years or so of about 3.4 million tons. So strong sales, even stronger production. The strong production and the production being higher than that sales level I just mentioned was intentional and targeted towards building finished product stockpiles, which will stand us in good stead ahead of potential wet weather disruptions, which at Tshipi occur between about November, about now, and February. So to the extent that there are some wet weather events at the mine that may flood the pit, then we'll be prepared with finished product stockpiles to continue the desired run rate while we're standing any wet weather interruption. I will say, though, with abating manganese prices, and I'll talk about that in a moment, we should expect volumes for the current December quarter to be lower than the very strong sales and production figures that I've just mentioned for the September quarter. We've talked before about how sales work at Tshipi. One of the reasons why sales were still elevated during the September quarter, notwithstanding soft manganese prices produced through the quarter, was that those sales were volumes that had been priced in the June quarter. So as we come through the September quarter, manganese prices reducing, we should expect to see somewhat lower volumes when we're talking about the December quarterly post-calendar year-end. Mining was strong in the quarter as well. 4.1 million bcm represented a strong mining performance, and that was 27% up on the last quarter. So from a sales-production-mining perspective, all very strong figures, and that was pleasing for the quarter. Logistics was down slightly, 14% volume-wise down on last quarter, and that was reflecting lower road volumes given the manganese price environment. Obviously, road haulage is the most expensive way of getting our ore from mine to port. FOB cost of production at $233 per dmtu was 7% down on last quarter, and broadly in line with where I've sort of been guiding where we're expecting to get costs to come in given inflation and also given exchange rates. The manganese market for the quarter was softer than last quarter, reasonably significantly softer. Average spot CIF prices were $4.24 per dmtu compared to $5.50 per dmtu for the June quarter. By the end of the September quarter, so 30 September, the price had reduced further to $3.74. Prices have stabilized through September and October. Today, the price is $3.71, so relatively low levels, but it has stabilized at those sorts of levels through September and October. The FOB price today is $2.97, so the prices we've just been quoted were CIF prices. The FOB price, to give you a feel, has varied between about $2.94 and about $3.05 pretty much for September and October. So relatively low levels. The kind of average FOB price for the last five or six years is around $3.80. So the price has stabilized at a much lower level than that, but it has stabilized. It hasn't kind of continued the sharp downward trajectory that it was on through the course of August. So that's good. The reduction in price that we saw through August, and the reason why it's much lower than average today, really is a function of Chinese demand, which has softened. And sentiment around Chinese steel production and the profitability of steel mills and those sorts of factors has driven steelmaking material prices, including manganese, lower. There has also been, through July, August, September even, an increased level of manganese ore exports, mostly from South Africa, and Tshipi volumes have been part of that. So the main factor in manganese prices reducing through the period, as we've just talked about, is demand-related, but supply has exacerbated that. With lower manganese prices prevailing, as we've just discussed, through August, September, October, there has been a correction on the supply side. So you have manganese ore sales through October and November, and I guess in the next few months being at lower levels than we've observed through July, August, September. That will take a while to flow through to China, and so we see the supply-side correction to lower manganese prices, as you'd expect, already coming through. At the top of prices, as you can see in our quarterly that we're observed through the September quarter, Tshipi was profitable and cash-generative, but the manganese mines aren't, and so naturally, those mines, in that situation, pulled back on their own production, and that helped to support and stabilize the manganese price, which appears to be what's underway right now. Shipping rates were lower through the quarter, and that's good. That good. That helps, and you'll see in the quarterly that shipping rates today are around $27 a ton for our shipping, and that compares to $30.60, which was the average through the June quarter. Looking further out, looking at next calendar year, we included in the quarterly some World Steel Association forecasts. And on the demand side, what the World Steel Association is expecting to occur next calendar year 2025 is for growth in steel productions and demand of 1.2%, comparing to a contraction of 0.9% this year. And so most people are expecting that factor on the demand side, as well as moderating manganese ore supply, to start to support improving manganese prices over coming months and as we move into 2025. From a financial perspective, as laid out in the quarterly, as you'll imagine, our financials were mainly driven by the manganese price quarter on quarter. So earnings and cash both positive but both lower in their generation than in the June quarter. From a cash perspective, Tshipi's cash increased to AUD 97 million. There were some accounts receivable unwound in that, but accounts receivable is still relatively elevated, and that's not surprising given the high volumes of ore shipped through the September quarter. And so that accounts receivable unwound should be a factor in the coming quarter or quarters as well. That increase in cash at Tshipi to $97 million occurred notwithstanding, as I mentioned before, there was an inventory build during the quarter when we produced more manganese ore during the September quarter than we sold. And so that was a good outcome that we saw an increase in the cash balance, and that occurred notwithstanding low manganese prices and notwithstanding a bit of an inventory build as well. Jupiter's cash was down $4.9 million quarter on quarter, but that was entirely because of the dividends that we paid to shareholders during the September quarter. In summary, strong quarter for Tshipi operationally, in some areas very strong. Again, Tshipi demonstrates itself performing well in a weak manganese price environment. Tshipi's been around a long time and has performed well through the cycle, and it's performed well again in the September quarter across the areas that I mentioned against a poor manganese price backdrop. Prices are low and were low through the September quarter, but they've stabilized. We are expecting, based on the observed metrics that I mentioned a moment ago, hopefully stronger steel demand according to World Steel, but also we can see moderating manganese ore supply that manganese prices have commensurately stabilized, which should see some support over the forward period. From a Jupiter perspective, in addition to providing ongoing support to Tshipi, we're obviously focused on the execution of our own corporate strategy, and we are planning to provide an update on where we're up to in relation to the strategy to shareholders this quarter. So those are the key points I wanted to draw out of the quarterly. Again, feel free to go through the greater detail in the quarterly in your own time, but Kelly, I'll see if there are any questions on the line now, please. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to come out. If you would like to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please take out the handset to ask your question. Your first question is from Adam Baker and Macquarie. Hey, guys. Brad and Kelly, and thanks for the call on the inventory build during this quarter. I'm just wondering how you're seeing Tshipi output for the rest of FY25 and whether these production and sales rates can be maintained. There's a couple of quarters now where you've achieved sales of over 1 million tons. Can that be sustained moving forward? And likewise, for production, can these production levels be maintained moving forward as well? Yeah. Thanks, Adam, for the question. So you'll know that in the strategy that we've announced to market, we have, as part of the second amendment growth part of our strategy, a piece of work aimed at determining what is the right level of output from Tshipi and what's the right time if we're to increase that level of production to move to that higher level, so that piece of work is underway. And the idea with that would be to step up to a level at a targeted period of time and stay there. That's not what we're doing right now. We've gone through June quarter with high manganese prices and moved into a September quarter where we're, in part from a sales perspective, delivering against prices that were executed towards the tail end of the June quarter and also in July. So that kind of explains why sales were elevated. We don't intend to stay at that 4 million tonne per annum run rate for the moment. From a production perspective, that was high in the quarter, in part to deliver against those higher sales volumes in part to build some of the inventory that was set ahead of the wet season. So given where manganese prices are, given that we're ongoing with that piece of work I mentioned before, you shouldn't expect that we're continuing to deliver around four million tons per annum for the moment. That's not the intention. But what the performance does do is obviously demonstrate our ability over a reasonably prolonged period of time to achieve it within the existing flow sheet and crushing circuit. The rate-limiting step on that volume is the crushing circuit. I'd also say that we are road hauling the stretched tons. We have a rail allocation of just under 1.8 million tons, and road haulage is the most expensive way of getting our ore to port. Obviously, seeing through the financials, notwithstanding lower manganese prices, it's been profitable to road haul tons through this quarter, but it's definitely less attractive to do that when manganese prices are low. And that's exacerbated if we're doing it with low grade. And so we're getting lower prices again for low grade. So not a huge incentive to keep running at that sort of rate with these manganese prices prevailing. And so for all of those reasons, long answer to your question, Adam, I think we'd be looking to pull back somewhere between that average level and where we've been in June and September. But it gives us the ability to prove to ourselves that on a tactical basis, manganese prices improve, we're able to capitalize, but also the flow sheet stands up to a higher level of volume. Thanks for the color. And maybe just the stock of given you've said that it's an inventory build, just the inventory build from this quarter or the additional high-grade stockpiles in addition to the low-grade ones? Yeah. We normally don't run; we haven't been running a kind of excessive high-grade stockpiles. And obviously, through June, we were looking to maximize the amount of high-grade we could ship out at them. So it really was just this quarter. So if you look at the kind of amount of high-grade that was produced in excess of the sales in the quarterly, that sort of gives you a bit of a guide. And it's really just, again, focused on having a bit of mitigation capacity in the stocks through November, February. Obviously, if manganese prices hopefully improve and we see a little less wet weather than we might, then it also gives us the ability to perform on the upside. Thanks, Brad. I'll hand it off. Perfect. Thanks, Adam. Your next question comes from John Schulze with Argonaut. Hi, Brad and team. Few questions. Maybe the first one just on the Tshipi distribution. Could you give us an updated timetable on when the distribution would likely occur? Yeah. So thanks, John. You know that there are two times where Tshipi considers a dividend per year. We're on an Australian financial reporting timetable, both Tshipi and Jupiter now. And so the next time that a dividend from Tshipi would be considered would be after the 31st December period ends. And I'd say March would be when you should be thinking about that, probably late March in line with the interim financials when that would be decided. The payment of a dividend from Jupiter is obviously a two-step process. There's a dividend declared from Tshipi, the board of Tshipi, and then the board of Jupiter reviews a dividend off the back of that. As a reminder, Jupiter's dividend policy is that we'll pay a minimum of 70% of any dividend that we receive from Tshipi or any other asset in which we're invested. So to answer your question, after 31st December, but obviously allowed to that for the completion of financial consideration and dividend. So the next one would be communicated in March. Okay. Great. Thanks. And could you give any updates on the talks with Ntsimbintle and the production consolidation and what else is happening in Kalahari Manganese? Yeah. So growing Jupiter, both in terms of production at Tshipi, but also growth within Kalahari is part of our strategy. And there are numerous options that we can work on. Obviously, it comes down to opportunity and executability. And some of those factors across the various opportunities in the field aren't completely controllable by Jupiter. The second thing I'd make is obviously those discussions across any opportunity are commercially confidential. So I'll provide in the strategy update just prior to our AGM as much additional color on all elements of the strategy as I can. But people should expect that it'll be until there's something that's now more relatively detailed given the confidentiality. But we are working through all elements of our strategy on an ongoing basis. Completely understood. And then maybe just one more. So we've seen some money in the U.S. being given to high-purity manganese plays. How's your strategy going with the high-purity manganese? And is there a U.S. angle there as well? Yeah. Thanks, John. We've seen that. And our strategy, as people have read our scoping study summary, which is on our website, is to build an HPMSM conversion facility in the U.S. And in part, that's because of the availability of the sort of grant funding that you've seen announced by others. There are other factors as to why we think North America is an ideal location for that processing infrastructure. You can incidentally qualify for that same type of funding if you locate the facility in other countries that have a free trade agreement with the U.S., so South Korea, for example. So that's why if you read our scoping study, it's kind of US sub-branded because some of those factors are still moving around. So that is part of our study work. I'll provide an update on that part of our strategy work as well. We have been working on refining the flow sheet, and we've been pretty pleased with the improvements we've made in that regard. So we should be able to provide a bit of color on the financial and risk improvements that will result from the flow sheet refinement. We're building a small sort of lab scale pilot plant, and that should be finished so that we can be able to share material with customers. The key thing for me in this phase of the work, John, in that area of our strategy, is that by the end of this pre-feasibility stage, we want to have essentially non-binding offtakes in place standing behind the volume of output that we're looking to scale to if we execute this strategy. And that is an area where we're confident that that volume will be. There will be able to get to that stage. But on the customer side, it's still kind of going. So we're still talking to customers. But that whole EV battery demand space, frankly, I think is moving a bit sideways at the moment. So we're continuing the work. We're very happy with how things are going from a technical perspective and customer conversations are continuing. But I think everyone who's in this battery mineral space is seeing the customer demand taking a bit longer than they would like to form up. So ultimately, we're confident that that demand will be there and that manganese has a strong value proposition within that space. But we also want to see that kind of demand firmed up before we move into any sort of pre-feasibility studies phase. So what we're doing is continuing those discussions, continuing to refine the flow sheet, finishing the pilot plant so that we can take those customer discussions to the next phase of work. The other areas, funding, grant funding, location selection, etc., I regard as kind of lower risk and more uncertainty than customer demand at the moment, and so we're really doing everything to focus our efforts on that area right now, and again, that's sort of providing some highlights of what you're getting the strategy update in that regard, but that's how we're seeing things, and there's grant funding available in the U.S. There's grant funding available elsewhere in the world as well with alternative geographies that we're looking at and authorities we're talking to, so it's an area where I think if you've got the right business model, you've got the right customers, and you've got some certainty around volume, then you'll be able to get the funding, and grant funding will be part of that. And so North America is still the base case, and getting the sort of grant funding that others have announced would be part of that work as well. But I think the most important priority at the moment is to really be firmed up and confident that we'll be off risk in relation to customer demand volumes for HPMSM before moving into the DFS phase of work. That's excellent. Thank you. Applause, John. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from Mark Cherra with Foster Stockbroking. Yeah. Hi, Brad. Just a couple of questions from me. Firstly, just on the cost side, just given Tshipi's history in recent years, costs have been on that FOB cost around that $2-$2.20 range, sometimes even lower. I just wanted to clarify now with what you mentioned about the impact of inflation and that sort of $2.33 that you're charging Jupiter. Is that sort of a level we should be thinking of, say, for sort of a year ahead in terms of costs? Yeah. So you're right, Mark. We've had this for the last few years, averaged in that range that you said, $2-$2.20, sometimes we've gone as low as $1.85. I think the level that we're at for the September quarter is around where we've been saying for probably a couple of cents higher. I've been saying $2.25-$2.30. In some months, it'll go lower. In some months, it could even go a bit higher than that. So that's kind of where I think we should be thinking about it, in averaging out. What is behind that and what's behind the costs of the last few years as well is that there's been a tailwind from foreign exchange where incurring costs, mostly in rand, but reporting them in U.S. dollars and the rand being on a long-term depreciating trend. More recently, that has reversed. And so you haven't had a tailwind. You've had a headwind from the exchange rate. More confident conditions in South Africa post-election, etc., all of that has factored into that sort of trend of the rand-U.S. dollar exchange rate helping has, in fact, kind of hindered for the moment. So that has masked some cost inflation to some extent that's always been there. Cost inflation in South Africa runs at 6%-7% and has done through that period of time. And some elements of the cost overall bulk ore miners have been higher than that at times. And so underlying it, you do have cost inflation. Some of that's been masked by foreign exchange. Tshipi has done a good job. If you take out Forex, I think of managing efficiency gains such that they're well positioned from a cost perspective relative to other producers. And that is still the case today. If you look at and it is difficult because a number of the producers in the Kalahari aren't happy, but those that are going to higher costs at the moment than Tshipi is, Tshipi's reporting. So long answer to your question, yes, around the level right now is kind of what you should expect. And that's still positioned Tshipi well, even in a poor manganese price environment and well in terms of other producers. Right. Okay. Thanks. And the other question was just related. There was mention of a one-off demurrage charge. I was just wondering if you can give me an idea of the quantum of that and why that occurred. Thanks. Yeah. So I think that affected not just Tshipi, but other producers as well. It was from memory. I think I'm just looking at my notes. Resulted, yeah, actually, I don't have all I'll just have all producers exporting from that corporate basis. So I think there was a general issue with the port there that impacted Tshipi as well as other producers. And I think the impact was around ZAR 10 million. Right. Okay. That's it for me. Thanks. Thanks, Mark. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Rogers for closing remarks. Okay. Thanks, Kelly. And thanks, everyone, for joining and for your questions. Look forward to talking to you next time.