Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Pilbara Minerals FY24 interim financial results conference call. At this time, all participants are in the listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. Please note, Pilbara Minerals will only be taking one question per person, with one related follow-up question permitted. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one one on your telephone. Pilbara Minerals will also take some questions from the webcast towards the end of the call. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Pilbara Minerals Managing Director and CEO Dale Henderson. Thank you, Crystal. All welcome to those who have joined us on the call today, in particular to our long-term shareholders. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners on the lands on which our businesses operate, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation in Perth, where we are undertaking this call today, and Nyamal and Ngarluma people, where our operations are located in Pilbara. We pay our respects to their elders, past and present. I'm joined today by Luke Bortoli, our CFO, Vince De Carolis, our COO, and the wider team is also in the room supporting the call. We know that it's a very busy day of reporting today, so we will limit the call to 45 minutes. The focus of the presentation is, of course, centered on the half-year financial results. However, we will take the opportunity to recap on the progress during the half and finish with some market commentary. For this update, we'll step through a short presentation and followed by the Q&A, as outlined by Crystal. As always, look forward to your questions after the presentation. Moving to slide three for some opening commentary. The half to the 31st of December was a period of strong delivery for the company at a time when we saw pricing moderating downwards. For Pilbara, we're looking through this period, and we remain focused on the long-term opportunity this market presents for our shareholders. Pilbara is uniquely placed given our cost position, scale, operating track record, market understanding, and balance sheet strength. We have navigated the uncertain waters of the lithium market for some time. A few highlights for the half include, at the operating level, strong production volumes, and since the end of the reporting period, a few significant expansions to our offtake profile. As it relates to cost, given it's a ramp-up year and, as flagged previously, we have pre-invested in supporting some business capacity. However, we have simultaneously been driving our cost through improvements and efficiency improvements. The unit cost was AUD 691 per tonne FOB for the half. As it relates to projects on track for schedule and costs of P680 and P1000 expansions, and a reminder that the production capacity for this year is back-ended. Care of the P680 expansion. As it relates to chemicals, progress with the POSCO joint venture, of course, with the opening ceremony in the December quarter and the midstream demonstration plant moving forward. As it relates to the financials, I won't spend too much time on numbers because I don't want to steal Luke's thunder, but EBITDA margin for the half was 55%. So despite pricing being softer, that's a very healthy margin I think many businesses would long for. As it relates to the balance sheet, very healthy balance sheet at over AUD 2.1 billion, and we have taken prudent steps to further defend our strong balance sheet with some CapEx deferral and other capital preservation steps. Moving to slide four, we've touched on a few of the sustainability highlights for the half. As it relates to safety, strong improvement in TRIFR from the prior period at 17% reduction to 3.89. As it relates to our decarbonization strategy, we released our power strategy, so a meaningful outcome which sets out a pathway that we're pursuing. As it relates to community, we've issued 12 community grants for the period, supporting a number of regional community groups across important areas such as education and mental health. As it relates to our strategy, moving to slide six, just to quickly recap on this, our strategy is prioritized to generate the most rapid value creation for our shareholders in service of our vision, which is to be a leader in the provision of sustainable battery materials products. In pursuit of the same, the business is wired against four strategic pillars. Firstly, the operating platform. It is the engine room of the business driving our returns for our shareholders and stakeholders. Secondly, expanding that operating platform to make the most of this tier one asset. Thirdly, chemicals. This is about dovetailing our production to chemicals to realize additional margin per lithium unit while ensuring a more resilient business through downstream integration. Fourthly, and a distant fourth to diversification. Ultimately, we're looking to diversify if and when an appropriate accretive extension is identified. Moving now to chemicals on slide seven, a reminder of our different pathways. On the left, you have our spodumene concentrate being our core business today. In the middle, our midstream product, which is an intermediate lithium chemical product. And the right, downstream battery chemicals being hydroxide or carbonate, and increasing value add moving from left to right across those products. As it stands today, our business is almost entirely weighted to upstream production being spodumene concentrate production. Of course, we continue to build out that platform. To this end, we've provided a couple of update photos, reference slide eight for both the P680 and P1000. Those photos are as of the 20th of February. You can see the P680 crushing and ore sorting there, on schedule and on budget, targeting ramp-up in the September quarter this year. P1000 expansion remains on track also, on schedule and on budget, targeting ramp-up in the September quarter 2025. Moving to slide nine, outside of the reporting period in January, we announced a significant expansion of our existing offtake agreement with Ganfeng, one of our longstanding major customers. Ganfeng are a foundational customer of Pilbara Minerals and one of the largest producers of lithium chemicals globally. They've commercialized many key process routes and lithium products used widely today, and they have the customers who matter. This amended offtake is a significant increase in the allocation to Ganfeng with some of the allocation at our discretion, which preserves our ability to increase spot sales if and when we think that will create greater shareholder value. Moving to slide 10, more recently, we've also announced an extended and expanded offtake with Chengxin Lithium. Chengxin are another leading lithium chemical converter with operations in China, Indonesia, Argentina, and Zimbabwe. I just want to make a few more general comments about both these contract extensions to Ganfeng and Chengxin because they represent a couple of key points. Firstly, lithium demand. These extensions are material, and they evidence the underlying outlook that these two major converters see for the industry. And of course, Pilbara sees the same. Secondly, these agreements with Pilbara are a vote of confidence in Pilbara as, of course, a preferred supplier. And thirdly, these midterm contracts reduce short-term sales uncertainty while preserving our longer-term optionality regarding allocation. So we like to think we're getting the best of both worlds with these couple of extensions. I'd like to add that since we announced these amended offtakes, we have seen a marked increase in inbound inquiries from existing and new customers who are keen to lock in medium to long-term supply. I'll offer some more comments on the market later, but at this point, I'll now hand over to Luke for a deeper dive through the half-year financials. Over to Luke. Thanks, Dale. Good morning to those on the call. Please turn to slide 12 of the presentation for a summary of the group's key financial metrics for the half-year ended 31 December 2023 or H1 FY24 period. There were a number of financial highlights in the H1 FY24 period notwithstanding the impact of lower prices. As Dale mentioned, we reported profitability which was healthy with an EBITDA of AUD 415 million and an EBITDA margin of 55%. From a cash perspective, we also reported a positive cash margin from operations pre and post ongoing CapEx. In addition, our ending cash balance was above AUD 2.1 billion, broadly in line with December 2022 or the prior corresponding period. Turning to physicals, we reported production volume of 320,000 tonnes in H1 FY24, 4% higher than the prior corresponding period. This was achieved through higher mining and processing volumes. As previously disclosed, FY24 production volume is weighted towards the back end of the financial year in line with the ramp-up of the P680 primary rejection facility, as Dale noted. Sales volume was 306,000 tonnes in H1 FY24, 7% higher than the prior corresponding period, enabled by higher production volume. Average realized price declined from $4,993 per tonne in H1 FY23 to $1,645 per tonne in H1 FY24, a 67% reduction. As a result of declining prices, group revenue was AUD 757 million, 65% lower than the prior corresponding period, albeit with the benefit from some higher sales volume. As mentioned earlier, EBITDA was AUD 415 million in H1 FY24, a reduction of 77% on the prior corresponding period. Like revenue and the remainder of the P&L, the decline in EBITDA primarily reflected the impact of lower realized prices. There was a partial offset from lower total costs period-on-period driven by lower royalty expenses. Statutory profit after tax was AUD 220 million, an 82% reduction on the prior corresponding period, reflecting the same drivers as EBITDA. Turning now to slide 13. Slide 13 provides further detail on the group's profit and loss, including the key metrics used by management to assess the performance of the business. Operating costs, excluding depreciation amortization, improved by 17% relative to the prior corresponding period to AUD 276 million in H1 FY2024. The declining costs reflected a continued focus on cost management as well as lower royalties due to reduced pricing. On an FOB unit operating cost basis, unit costs increased by 16% in H1 FY2024 compared to H1 FY2023 at AUD 691 per tonne, consistent with our December quarterly. This was a result of our previously disclosed advanced investment in operating costs to support the P680 expansion project. On a CIF basis, unit operating costs were AUD 900 per tonne in H1 FY24, a 21% reduction on the prior corresponding half, primarily due to the decrease in royalty costs mentioned earlier. Turning now to slide 14. Slide 14 provides a chart which tracks our production volume, revenue, EBITDA, and EBITDA margin percentage over time. On this chart, we can see that despite declining revenue driven by lower realized prices, we maintained a healthy EBITDA margin of 55% in H1 FY24. This margin contributed to maintaining our strong balance sheet and cash position. Turning now to slide 15. Slide 15 shows a summary cash flow statement for the H1 FY24 period and H1 FY23. As mentioned earlier, cash margin from operations measured as receipts from customers, less payments for operating costs, was AUD 536 million in H1 FY24. Moving down the cash flow statement, the previously announced FY23 income tax catch-up payment totaling AUD 763 million and AUD 111 million in income tax paid relating to FY24 contributed to a net operating cash outflow of negative AUD 319 million. In terms of investing cash flows, there was a significant increase in CapEx in H1 FY24 with payments for property plant and equipment and mine properties of AUD 398 million in line with our previously stated guidance. This includes growth capital expenditure of AUD 211 million on the P680 and P1000 expansion projects, AUD 78 million of capitalized mine development costs or deferred stripping, AUD 47 million of new projects and enhancements on site, and AUD 40 million of sustaining capital spend. Our net financing cash outflows were AUD 349 million, primarily reflecting the final FY23 dividend payment of AUD 421 million made in September 2023. There was also a net increase in borrowings of AUD 126 million, mainly attributed to additional drawdowns under our government agency loan facilities for the funding of P680 project works. Turning now to slide 16. Slide 16 provides a waterfall chart representation of our H1 FY24 cash flow statement. During the H1 FY24 period, we saw a total change in cash or cash outflow of AUD 1.2 billion, with cash declining from AUD 3.3 billion as of 30 June 2023 to AUD 2.1 billion as of 31 December 2023. The AUD 1.2 billion declining cash in the period largely reflected the previously announced FY23 income tax catch-up payment, as mentioned earlier, of AUD 763 million and AUD 421 million of dividend payments relating to FY23. In the absence of these two cash outflows, the change in cash in H1 FY24 would have been broadly flat. As mentioned above, and importantly, cash margin from operations measured as receipts from customers, less payments for operating costs, remained strongly positive at AUD 536 million, reflecting the strong cash generation of the business even at today's lower spodumene prices. Importantly, cash margin from operations, less ongoing capital expenditure, deferred stripping, and sustaining CapEx was also positive. These metrics highlight that even with the lower spodumene prices observed in the half, the group was cash flow positive pre-growth CapEx and financing cash flows. Turning now to slide 17. The group continues to have a strong balance sheet position with net cash of AUD 1.8 billion as of 31 December 2023 and cash and available liquidity of AUD 2.1 billion. As mentioned earlier, during the half, additional drawdowns were made under the group's government agency loan facilities established in February 2023 in support of P680 construction. Turning now to slide 18. Slide 18 sets out our summary balance sheet. At 31 December 2023, the group recorded net assets of AUD 3.2 billion, relatively flat on the prior period. Turning now to slide 19. As mentioned at the December quarterly, the group's cash balance and overall balance sheet position is a competitive advantage relative to many of our peers in the lithium sector. This is particularly the case in an environment of lower spodumene prices and potentially more difficult capital raising conditions. With a low unit cost structure and strong balance sheet position, the company is uniquely placed to withstand and capitalize on a period of lower prices that could rationalize the market. With increasing production capacity, the group is also uniquely placed to take advantage of an improvement in market conditions when the pricing cycle turns. Notwithstanding this balance sheet resiliency today, the group has increased its focus on operating cost efficiency in the ramp-up to P680 and P1000, and it has also conducted a review of other non-essential spend as mentioned in the December quarterly. As a result of this review, as previously disclosed, the group has revised its FY24 capital expenditure guidance from AUD 875 million-AUD 975 million to a revised range of AUD 820 million-AUD 875 million, with a number of new projects and enhancements deferred for conservatism. This represents a reduction of AUD 100 million at the top end of the original guidance range and AUD 55 million at the bottom end. It's also equivalent to a reduction of one-half or a third of the discretionary component of CapEx that relates to new projects and enhancements. We also note that to further preserve the group's balance sheet strength, the board has not declared an interim dividend for the H1 FY24 period. The combination of CapEx and reductions and pausing on a dividend payment results in approximately AUD 200 million of total cash savings at the top end of the range relative to what would have been spent otherwise. These reductions will place the group in an even stronger position going forward. The group's financial strategy remains focused on P680 and P1000 expansion while seeking to reduce unit costs through that expansion as well as cash cost optimization. This will further position the company ahead of its competitors and enable it to capitalize on both downside and upside cycles in this emerging lithium sector. I'll now hand it back to Dale. Thank you, Luke. Now moving to the markets, so slide 21. I'll touch on my commentary on four parts here. First, a little bit about the long-term outlook. Secondly, the industry landscape that is emerging in response. Third, some short-term and more current observations of the market. And lastly, how we, Pilbara Minerals, are thinking about navigating the evolution of the sector. So starting with the long-term outlook, long-term outlook remains incredibly positive. Growth stimulants continue and other markers for long-term upward directional trend continue. Noteworthy facts of late include, of course, EV sales globally, the calendar year 2023, 13.6 million, an increase of 31% on the prior year. As it relates to China, EV sales, of course, a major part of the market, 7.8 million sold for 2023, increasing 34% on the prior year. As it relates to supply chain investment, some notable transactions include with LG Chem on the 15th of December announcing $821 million for a 60,000-tonne NCMA cathode plant in the U.S. On the 7th of February, LG Chem announced $18.6 billion cathode supply deal with General Motors. On the 11th of February, JSW investing $4.8 billion for a battery plant in India. On the 18th of January, Ganfeng announced a four-year supply deal with Hyundai. On the 16th of January, Northvolt secured $5 billion loan for gigafactory expansions. So it appears to go on and on. In terms of government support, these continue. Some noteworthy highlights here. 15th of November, U.S. government providing $3.5 billion to cell manufacturing. 6th of December, European Commission planning an additional EUR 3 billion in battery manufacturing. 13th of December, South Korean government investing $29 billion over five years in support of battery companies and critical minerals in Korea. On the 2nd of February, the German government setting up a EUR 1 billion fund for critical raw materials investment. Now we've included a slide on slide 22, which also sort of highlights at a summary level some of the government policy support, which is, of course, helping support the uptake of EVs in addition to their organic growth and uptake of EVs more generally. And of course, EVs being a key subset are not the only demand subset. We also have mass energy storage, which is harder to get a read on given the addressable market is not clear. However, the various data points we have seen are very positive to the growth in that sector as well. Now, EVs, mass energy storage combined plays through to effectively a new industry that we're seeing stepping forth. Slide 23 provides an outline of the expected forecast specifically around EV market share penetration and EV-related battery demand. Probably one thing to take away from this is the dominant position that China holds for both demand currently and forecast. So I just highlight that one. Moving to the industry landscape that is emerging in response to this new demand set being lithium battery products, I appreciate that many investors are probably familiar with this landscape. However, not all are. As such, we thought it would be helpful to provide some additional detail on this area. So moving to Slide 24. This details the supply chain that is evolving, specifically noting the growth for the lithium chemicals manufacturing, two, cathode making, and three, battery manufacturing referred to as the gigafactories. What is noteworthy from this slide is, again, China, the extent to which China is the center of the lithium mine supply chain today and is expected to play a major role in the future. By extension, so will the technology and partners from this region. The other noteworthy point is the global growth potential, which is expected. As you can see, it's across the board. However, generally speaking, the existing bases of manufacturing outside of Asia do not exist today and is unlikely to exist for some time. There will be a period of gestation, we believe. Given this evolving landscape, which we see emerging from the small base, this has shaped Pilbara's actions over the last few years in three principal ways. Firstly, Pilbara's made a practice of partnering with established supply chain partners whom have an established track record, know-how, and supply chain relationships, and which, of course, these groups see the same in Pilbara. Secondly, Pilbara's taken a measured and incremental approach when entering different domiciles and downstream businesses. Pilbara's minority position with POSCO for our joint venture together in South Korea and the option step-up at Pilbara's election to increase equity speaks to this approach. The third principle that Pilbara has pursued has been about preserving optionality. Pilbara's preserved optionality with the sales book that retains significant tonnage allocation for calendar year 2027 beyond, thus enabling the benefits of short-term security through participating in the supply chain that exists today while retaining long-term optionality such that we can scan the horizon to make sure that Pilbara's shareholders and through Pilbara are dovetailed into the most optimal business propositions as this landscape evolves. That's a little bit about the industry landscape and how that's shaped some of our thinking. Moving to short-term observations of the current market, the insights we can offer here are, firstly, as it relates to our customers, all our customers for avoidance of doubt taking their product and in some cases asking for more as it relates to pricing. Over the recent while, it appears to have leveled. We also note that there's been a small increase in the pricing for lithium carbonate of late. As it relates to new sales inquiries, as flagged earlier, yeah, we have seen some more activities, more inbound inquiries. I think we've had more over the last sort of eight weeks. We've had quite some periods. Great to have those inquiries coming to us. Having spoken to the long-term outlook, the industry landscape, which is evolving, and some of these near-term observations, what does this mean for Pilbara's strategy? In short, no change to our strategy. In fact, I hope this commentary helps to explain the deliberate and careful steps we've taken over the years and what's guiding the decisions in support of our strategy. We'll keep our focus trained on what accelerates value creation for our shareholders and strengthens our position that we've established. That is our operating track record as a low-cost producer with scale, the engine room of the business, growing that operating platform to full extent, providing production volumes and yielding scale benefits that lower unit operating cost and positions the business for higher-priced environments as we've seen historically, chemicals participation, taking a measured, incremental approach with established partners with the aim of extracting more margin per lithium unit for our shareholders. And I would also add prudent management of the balance sheet that Luke spoke to, a key strength relative to others in the industry. This combination uniquely positions Pilbara Minerals, a low-cost operation, scale, operating track record, and balance sheet strength. It's hard to think of a better combination to best leverage this growth market. With that, we'll now move to questions. Back to you, Crystal. Thank you. Thank you. As a reminder to ask a question, you will need to press star 11 on your telephone. Please stand by. We'll compile the Q&A roster. Our first question will come from Manav Shah from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Hi. Good morning. It's Rahul Anand from Morgan Stanley. Good morning, Dale, and team. Look, my question's around the downstream. We had one of your peers report today that has been involved in a bit of downstream lithium production. And their comments were very strongly against having a downstream strategy and that the economic rent, so to speak, in the lithium market lying with the miners. So taking that into account, I just wanted to perhaps get an update from you on how you're thinking about that downstream strategy. Is that still front of mind for you? And how do you think of the economics there? And as my follow-up, then just an update on Calix and when you expect first production there. Thanks. Good day, Rahul. Thanks for your questions. As it relates to downstream, the pursuit of downstream, I fully appreciate that there's different approaches being deployed out there. I appreciate that given the mixed results from different downstream businesses out there, that creates questions around the merits of participation or not. Now, I can't obviously speak to the specifics of others out there. But what I can speak to is the first principles approach Pilbara has always thought through in this space. We think the right downstream proposition makes sense for two reasons. Firstly, it needs to be about the economic returns, obviously. And there will be, we think, downstream operations that will win into the future, ones whom are low-cost operations who achieve the right product quality, whom are then able to unlock that additional margin care of the service of converting spodumene concentrate into a high-grade battery product. There is margin to be made if it's the right proposition. So the economics is there. But the second benefit, which I think does not get quite the attention it deserves, is the merit of supply chain integration. Downstream participation causes a codependence, which is both important for the raw material supplier and the converter. Further, it's actually very important for their customers as it relates to the qualification of materials and ultimately the optimization of cost and safety outcomes to achieve that aim. So in this regard, it's different from other commodity types. And to call it a commodity is probably not necessarily a good characterization because of this factor. So all that being said, we will judge propositions on its merits. It's part of the reason we've taken a staged and incremental approach. But we think there is opportunity there. So we'll continue to pursue that. We will, as I say, be staged and incremental. As it relates to Calix, that project is moving forward. We're on track with that one. Does that answer your questions, Rahul? Yes, it does. And I know you've pressed for time. So I'll pass it on and cue back. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks, Thanks, Rahul. Thank you. Our next question will come from Levi Spry from UBS. Your line is open. G'day, Dale. Good morning, team. Just a quick question, I guess, getting your views on the domestic Chinese lepidolite supply sort of situation. Have you got any updates for us on what you're hearing there? We've seen the newswires around CATL potentially having some disruptions and then potentially some environmental inspections maybe disrupting some of the supply. I guess, have you got some views? What's your latest on, I guess, the supply and cost structures of that part of the supply side? Yeah. Thanks, Levi. Yeah, as it relates to that particular piece of news around the closure or the pause of that particular operation, I don't have any unique insight around that. But I do find that bit of news very interesting because if it is to be true, it signals effectively a swing price potentially for spodumene, i.e., a price which knocks out lepidolite supply. And of course, being owned by CATL, the world's largest battery maker globally, if there was ever a group who could keep a mine running, it would be CATL. So certainly, I guess, in some ways, a positive signal. But no, I don't have any particular unique insight there, Levi. No problems. Thanks, Dale. Thanks, mate. Thank you. And our next question will come from Alex Papaioanou from Citi. Your line is open. Hi, Dale. One of your peers today noted that they may pull back volumes of one of their build expansions pending market conditions. Are you still planning to bring P1000 online as soon as you can? And is there any change in the thinking there? G'day, Alex. No change in the thinking. As outlined in our commentary, our intent is to carry on with the expansions, noting, of course, that they are in mid-flight but also noting that the delivery of these expansions supports a lower unit cost. And of course, we study the landscape in terms of the competition. And we're feeling fairly comfortable about the ultimate cost position that we are pursuing and look, if other groups are looking to come out of the market. That would be their decision. And I completely respect that. Thanks, Alex. Do you have a follow-up there? Yeah. Just on that on costs then, given that your G&A's now annualizing at around AUD 60 million per annum, should we think about that being the common number going forward? Yeah, I can take that, Alex. Thanks for the question. Yes, from this point forward, we don't foresee that there would be any material uplift in the G&A and broader exploration feasibility study cost base. I think it's fair to say that there's been a level of investment required to mature the business from what was 12 months ago a very small corporate office that was playing catch-up in respect to the size of the company and the size of the operation. But from this point forward, we would see it as relatively stable. Great. Thanks. I'll pass it on. Thank you. Our next question will come from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Morning, Dale and Luke. Thanks for the update this morning. Just one on spodumene pricing. If I go back to your full-year result in August last year, you gave production guidance at both 5.2 and 5.7 kind of hedging around a lower pricing environment, meaning you'd need to increase the grade of your product. Where are you at now, do you think, in the current pricing environment? Are you seeing existing customers or any of your recent offtakes start to preference material towards that higher end? And maybe are you seeing a shift to more than just a linear pricing discount? If so, thanks. Good day, Hugo. Yeah, no change in the product grade strategy. So still targeting around the 5.2 type level. As to any requests or pressures to change that, the answer is no other than every converter always would prefer the highest grade because it makes their life very slightly easier. But no, no push or pressure on Pilbara to shift in product grade. And as it relates to any penalty or discount, I can confirm no. No, it's just linear. And I don't foresee any change in that in the current market. Thanks, Hugo. Do you have a follow-up? If I can squeeze in a follow-up, just on your CapEx piece, maybe for Luke, are you able to just elaborate a bit more on kind of the moving parts of CapEx still expected in FY24 around the P1000 and maybe any indication on what you're expecting around the tailings facility and other spend into FY25? I'll refer you back to the CapEx guidance that we previously provided in aggregate. I think it's fair to assume that we are tracking to that guidance across all the categories that we specifically outline. We don't go into the detail that you're looking into. Thanks, Luke. I'll Pass it on. Thank you. Our next question will come from Kaan Peker from RBC. Your line is open. Good morning, Dale and team. Two questions from me. First one is on sales and production. Given that we're mostly through 3Q, how is sales tracking versus production for this quarter? Thanks. Yes. G'day, Kaan. Obviously, we'll update as part of the March quarterly release. We're only halfway through the quarter. But happy with progress. Things are chugging along. They're matching sales is tracking with production? So yeah. As a, I guess, a sales strategy philosophy, we have always worked on the basis of not stockpiling, inventory moving, moving finished goods. No change to that strategy. Occasionally, there's some ebbs and flows in inventory as a function of shipping timing, particularly over that sort of quarter cutoff. Sometimes we get a little bit of inventory at those times. No, nothing other than that. No, there's no strategy around stockpiling finished goods or anything. We try and match our production closely with sales to keep moving it as quickly as we can from the mine to the customer. Sure. Understood. Second one is just noticed that the ROM inventories have been increasing. I mean, is this a strategy to reduce risk with the P680 ramp-up? I'll offer a comment and potentially Vince might weigh in. As it relates to ROM strategy, what drives ROM strategy can be partly around, obviously, volumes required for the mine throughput. And of course, for the high throughput, you need high end feed volumes. That's sort of part A. But the other aspect of ROM strategy is a function of managing grade and mineral variability as it flows from the mine. And that's very much driven by mine plan and where you are in the pit development. So that does change over time as a function of where you are in the pit development. And the team, we've got sort of thinking through how to optimize those feed sources for ultimately optimal recovery, which of course plays through to lower unit costs. Yeah, Vince is okay with that one. Someone else has got that one all right? Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. Thanks, Kaan. Okay, Dale. We're going to move to some questions from the webcast now. First question is, how can we manage short selling, which is impacting the share price? Yes. So I guess the best defense to short selling is deliver on what is in our control. And that's always been our objective to run the business well and deliver on our promises. So that's the most important thing we focus on. Obviously, we can't control pricing and the market evolution. But we can control what we can. Control. So that's typically the best defense. But as it relates to the short position in Pilbara, I'd just like to highlight a couple of aspects around this is being the largest pure-play lithium group on the ASX. We're one of the few instruments available for those who are wanting to bet on the market dynamic. So that is an aspect. And what we hear is those who are choosing to short are more choosing to short based on where they see the market. That's one aspect. I'd also add we're not alone. I mean, when you look to the other markets and some of the other lithium companies listed on other exchanges, some of them have some quite high short positions. So again, kind of reflecting that dynamic. But yeah, as I've said in the past, those holding a short position, yeah, in many respects, they're pretty brave because given that this industry is taking shape quite rapidly, what we've seen is pricing does move quickly. And it does shift very quickly. And maybe that happens. Maybe it doesn't. But if it does happen, that could catch out some of these people who are betting on downward movement. Only time will tell. But for us, we'll carry on delivering our promises. Okay. Thank you. The next question is, when can we expect to hear something about the JV partnerships from the P1000 tonnage? Yes. So later in this quarter, we'll look to update on that one. Okay. Next question. Someone has picked up the changes to the chemical slide where we've changed some of the numbers from in lithium metal. Maybe just want to give an explanation on why some of those numbers have changed. Sure. Sure. Now, the reason it's not so much a case of the numbers being changed, it's more a case of representing the content of lithium using different units. We've done this quite deliberately to make it a bit clearer. The percentage of lithium metal versus lithium hydroxide or lithium oxide, the percentage varies depending which of those compounds you're talking about. What we've chosen to do is to provide these updates are all about making it clearer the difference in lithium concentration that you get across those different product sets. There's a few footnotes there which speak to those conversions. Okay. Thank you. Some of your peers are curtailing supply. What gives you the confidence to maintain growth from P680 and P1000? What gives us confidence is our operating performance and track record and unit cost performance against the other competitors in the landscape. This is the principal source of confidence. That plus the groundswell of positive news that I mentioned earlier that we see is supporting ultimately the formation of an incredible industry. We, Pilbara, want to be positioned to enjoy the benefits of future strong pricing environments as we did historically with the Altura acquisition. Our shareholders were well rewarded as a function of being positioned for that point in the market. And we're hopeful for déjà vu. Time will tell. Okay. I think that's a wrap. I appreciate others need to jump onto calls. Thank you all for your time. And we look forward to updating at the March quarterly. Thank you very much. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect. Have a wonderful day.