Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Sandfire Resources June 2024 Quarterly Report. All participants are in a listen-only mode. There will be a presentation followed by a question-and-answer session. If you wish to ask a question, you will need to press the star key followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Brendan Harris, Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director. Please go ahead. Hello and good morning. I'd like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands on which we stand, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation, as well as the First Nations peoples of the lands on which Sandfire conducts its business. We pay our respects to their elders and leaders, past, present, and emerging. My name is Brendan. I'm the CEO of Sandfire, and I'd like to welcome you to our June Quarterly Call. I'm joined here in Perth, as always, by my colleagues Megan Jansen, Jason Grace, Richard Holmes, Catherine Bozanich, Victoria Twiss, and Scott Browne. Starting with safety, thanks to our team's unrelenting focus, we closed the financial year with a total recordable injury frequency of 1.6. There's nothing more important than the health and well-being of our people, and we can and must do better. As I've said before, sustainability should permeate everything we do, from the way we ensure our people are safe to the work we do with our local communities to create lasting positive outcomes. In June, we released the findings of the external investigation we commissioned into the historical disturbance of artifact scatters at our now-closed Monty Mine, which, as you know, primarily occurred in 2017 and 2018. We remain focused on implementing the recommendations contained within this report and working with Yugunga-Nya to rebuild our relationship and ensure the company delivers on the commitments within our framework agreement. Turning to our operating performance, on the back of a solid June quarter, we've delivered a 47% increase in group copper-equivalent production to 133,500 tonnes in FY2024, which was within 1% of the annual guidance we set in July 2023. We knew when setting this guidance it would require a near-faultless ramp-up of our newest operation, Motheo, and it hasn't disappointed, delivering outstanding results while establishing the platform from which we'll grow group copper-equivalent production by a further 13% in FY25, as the mine runs at its expanded capacity for a full 12 months and Motheo recovers from a blockage in its post-fill delivery infrastructure and achieves another record processing rate. For the quarter itself, we delivered group copper-equivalent production of 37,200 tonnes, an increase of 12% from the prior quarter. This, together with stronger commodity prices and the outstanding performance of our outbound logistics chain at Motheo, contributed to unaudited sales revenue of approximately $935 million in FY24, the underlying group EBITDA of approximately $360 million. Notably, this included an increase in the implied underlying EBITDA margin of MATSA to 44% and Motheo to 57% in the June half-year. The meaningful inflection in our net debt position to $396 million, which is down significantly from the $481 million reported at the end of the March quarter, reflected this strong improvement in financial performance and the further deferral of approximately $14 million of capital expenditure at Motheo. At MATSA, we sustained record annualized mining and processing rates across the quarter of 5 million tonnes and 4.6 million tonnes, respectively, for a significant 17% increase in payable zinc and a modest 4% reduction in payable copper production. Disappointingly, this was not enough for MATSA to achieve annual guidance, as it took longer to regain access to the Aguas Teñidas Western extension, with the resultant lower grades and recoveries contributing to the 4.6% shortfall in copper-equivalent production when compared with guidance to 88,800 tonnes in FY 2024. On the cost side of the equation, MATSA has continued to mitigate the impacts of inflation, with underlying operating costs expected to be marginally lower than prior guidance at $72 per tonne of ore processed. Turning back to Motheo, you will have noticed that the processing plant's average annualized throughput rate increased to 5.4 million tonnes per annum in the quarter, following a three-day shutdown, which did deliver a step change in plant reliability. With this, Motheo produced 13,600 tonnes of contained copper and 500,000 ounces of contained silver, for an outstanding 29% increase in copper-equivalent production in the quarter to 15,100 tonnes. As a result, Motheo's copper-equivalent production rose to 44,700 tonnes in its first full year of commercial production, a 6.4% beat when compared with annual guidance, which, you'd recall, set a very high bar. I should note underlying operating costs at Motheo of $42 per tonne for FY 2024 were also broadly aligned with annual guidance. These costs did, however, increase temporarily to $45 per tonne in the quarter, as we consumed ROM stocks, increased sales with associated transport and royalty costs, and recognized a maiden corporate recharge. With an EISA long-term value, we also completed the first life-of-mine optimization study of Motheo's open pits. With the rephasing of the T3 and A4 development schedules that we did discuss on the recent site tour, we will achieve a better balance between ore presentation and waste stripping, while allowing for higher rates of vertical advance should mill throughput rates of more than 5.2 million tonnes per annum be achievable on a sustainable basis. We also expect to optimize the mine plan and deliver a further improvement in waste stripping and incrementally higher production in FY 2026 and 2027, with first ore now expected to be mined from the A4 open pit in the coming December quarter. This process has, of course, led to timing differences in our capital expenditure plans, with a cumulative $40 million originally included in our FY24 plan being deferred into FY25. At a strategic level, we were pleased to announce an updated MATSA mineral resource and ore reserve estimate. This included initial contributions from the recently discovered MATSA Olivo and San Pedro zones, and resulted in a 9% increase in mineral resource and 6% increase in ore reserve tonnes, more than replacing depletion. To ensure we maintain momentum in this important area, we have also finalized a comprehensive five-year drilling plan designed to deliver a significant increase in reserves at both MATSA and Motheo that will necessitate a step-up in exploration activity, and we're pressing on. At Motheo, drilling continued at T3, where eight holes were designed to test the potential of the footwall zone, and we expect to have three rigs operating in Botswana before the end of FY25. You will also have seen the encouraging results from Sandfire Americas' ongoing drilling program that's targeting Black Butte's lower copper zone. This work is providing important information as we prepare for an investment decision in the next 12-24 months. In conclusion, we finished the year solidly. The copper market is more reflective of our optimistic view, albeit, as you can see, it's volatile, and we're well positioned to deliver growth into this increasingly tight market while doing our best to manage local inflationary pressure now that we're back on the journey toward net cash. Let's go to questions. Thank you. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two, and if you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Ben Lyons from Jarden. Please go ahead. Oh, thank you. Good day, Brendan and team. First question is on Botswana fiscal terms, please. There's a couple of news wires that are currently reporting comments attributed or appear to be attributed to the current mining minister, which appear to propose that mining companies may be required to sell to local interests at 24% equity interest in new developments. Now, I'm aware that Motheo has a potential requirement to divest a 15% equity interest to the Botswana government, which has not been exercised, to my knowledge, to date. These comments come in the midst of an election cycle, which is scheduled for later this year in Botswana. I'm not sure how true these press articles are or not, but perhaps you can shed some further information on that commentary. Thanks. Yeah, thanks, Ben. I didn't think it would take long to get to that, so I appreciate it. Look, we note the reports in the media in relation to the proposed amendments to the Mines and Minerals Act of 1999, and, of course, the broader initiative to support citizen economic empowerment. I'll ask Jason to comment in a moment because of his long-standing history with this, but it's fair to say we've been engaging with the Ministry of Mineral Resources, Green Technology, and Energy Security on proposed amendments for several years. And you can imagine, given this is coming out through the media, it's somewhat premature for us to comment expansively on the specifics. However, what we would note is that it is our current understanding, based on advice, that the proposed legislation, the proposed legislation, if enacted, will not be applied retrospectively. Irrespective, Ben, as you said, there's historically a requirement for the government to contemplate whether it will exercise an interest, the 15% you mentioned at the time that you convert to a mineral license. The government, as you said, has forgone that opportunity. Again, Jason may comment on some of the history there. So, look, that's the status quo. Irrespective, we deeply understand the importance of broader citizen economic empowerment. Clearly, as an increasingly strong contributor to Botswana and particularly the local Ghanzi region, you know it well. We're working very, very hard to provide a lasting social and economic benefit to the community, as we should. And as you know, again, in our first year of commercial production, we're really proud that we've established very much a local team that's more than 95% Botswana. And we continue to assess opportunities to foster and develop local supply chains. That's from trucking right through to supporting the development of capacity to build or develop things like your property plant equipment, your safety goods and services. So, there's a range of things we're doing there to develop that, and we need to do more. I should say as well, and we'll continue to watch this closely and engage as we have good dialogue with government and a very good relationship, I might add. We believe there is a fundamentally shared understanding of the importance of fiscal stability. Indeed, Botswana, as you know, is a destination of choice for mining investment in Africa, as defined by the Fraser Institute, with a stable democracy, competitive royalty regime, and proud mining heritage. We think it's critically important for the country to maintain this brand. When the president was here in Western Australia only recently for the Africa Down Under conference, those were elements that he certainly espoused as well. So, again, the dialogue is strong, the relationship is strong. We're watching the news wires like you are and engaging at different levels of government, and we'll certainly provide more comment when it comes to hand. But at this stage, I think the critical point I make there is our understanding is this would not be applied retrospectively. Jason, again, just given the history you've had, it's something you've had extensive dialogue on over a long period of time. Absolutely. And look, these proposed amendments in varying forms, and when I say varying forms, there hasn't been a great deal of variation, really date back to about 2016, as far as I'm aware of. And as a company, we've been dealing with this and, if you like, engaging with the government on the proposed amendments over a number of years, basically since we took ownership of the project and the assets there back in 2019. So, government's been very upfront. We have looked at it, and where Brendan is right in terms of it not being retrospective, if you look at the proposed amendment as drafted, right, and where we currently sit under the current Mines and Minerals Act, the government can only take or elect to take a stake in a mining project upon the granting of a mining license. Now, it's worth noting that Motheo has all of the mining licences that we require to undertake all of our operations. So, that point has passed and will and truly pass. Now, the proposed amendments basically don't move or vary that in any way. All it does is just vary entitlements in terms of the government stake potentially going over to citizen-owned entities there as well. That would be in a future greenfield-type environment. Correct. As we understand it. Does that help, Ben? Oh, yes, extraordinarily helpful. Thank you very much to both of you and Jason. Maybe just one final point of clarification on that one before I move on to the next question would be whether the A1 ore body, for example, is already sitting on a granted ML, or would some of those potential future developments have to go through that sort of mining license granting process? Thanks. Yeah, I think that's where it's probably too early for us to know exactly how the legislation or the proposed amendment would land. Other than to say, when you look at A4, be aware that that was actually granted in a way as an extension of the existing mining license. And so we would be exploring all of the opportunities around that, considering that clearly it would become a feeder satellite mine to the broader complex. Okay, awesome. Moving on from that topic, but staying in Botswana. Yeah, there was incredibly impressive performance during the June quarter with a 5.4 million tonne run rate at the mill. I guess in that context, I was a little surprised to see that the initial guidance numbers were based off a 5.2 run rate for the coming 12 months. Are there any major shutdowns, for example, to be aware of? And secondly to this, given the slight delay to getting into the A4 mineralization, do you have a sense that the 5.2 can be fed entirely from fresh in-pit ore, or do you think there might be a requirement to supplement the feed from some of the stockpiles? Thank you. Yeah, thanks, Ben. Look, I'll pass to Jason on some of the detail. Obviously, we've got an extensive ROM stockpile. We actually worked hard to add to that over the course of the year, and that was obviously important towards the back end of the year in what was, as you said, a stunning fourth quarter. Look, we agree. When you look at the numbers on face value, 5.2 relative to the run rates we were achieving, even the metal production that we've flagged looks soft relative to the fourth quarter. What's probably missed in that, and hence your question is very well placed, is we have two shuts across the course of this year planned. We've actually just undertaken one, and there's another one towards the back end of the year. And, of course, we've captured those elements. The other thing we'd note is that in the first year, you have a relatively limited maintenance. It's a brand new piece of kit that will progressively rise over the course of the year. But that's not to say that we're not going to be looking at all avenues to see whether we can squeeze more capacity out of the mill. I mean, it's fair to say that if we did 5.4, I should say, annualized across the quarter and we had the major shut that saw the step change in reliability or delivered the step change in reliability, it's fair to say we finished the quarter even stronger. So, we know there's potential. It's still a relatively early mine. I sort of somehow reflect that if you remember when we provided guidance at the start of FY2024, I think it was thought to be somewhat courageous. It's amazing how things very quickly shift, and there's perceptions perhaps that we're being a little bit soft. I think it's still early days for this mine. We're very confident that we can deliver the plans we've put out. I said this last time, hold us accountable to those, but be sure we'll be pushing hard to do what we can to deliver more. Jason, just in terms of we've spent a lot of time, you and I, talking about the rephasing of the mine plan, and actually it's delivering, I say, better outcome overall. I think, firstly, I know there's been concerns in some quarters as to whether water is a challenge at A4. I think you've used the term that A4 is now as dry as a chip. So, we're managing water there. It's not a case of being constrained in the rate of advance, if you like. It's just that we've redirected activity. But maybe we're going to talk about how that impacts the availability of ore across the year to meet the required plans. Ben, you're aware from the site visit that we had intersected water very close to surface out at A4. What we've got is once we punched through the calcrete, we've actually dried that up very quickly. With dewatering, and as Brendan said, I've been quoted there before, it's as dry as a chip out there at the moment. That's simply because we were dealing with a perch water table that was near surface associated, particularly with the basal contact of that calcrete. As we move further down, we will intersect more water. Certainly, that's what we've been investing in over the last quarter is making sure that we are prepared for that, and it's not going to slow us down at A4. So, in particular, and with the staging designs, all right, and as we discussed, and we went through this quite a bit on the site visit, there's two key learnings from us over the last two years at mining at T3 and certainly early days at A4 is that, firstly, we've seen geotechnically we're dealing with more favorable or certainly favorable conditions there in pit. All of our walls look great. We haven't got any major structures that are causing us any concern whatsoever. And then the second one is our dewatering at T3. We're dealing with much lower groundwater flow rates than we had originally modeled during the feasibility study. So, we've got a drier pit. We've got a pit where we're not dealing with geotechnical issues. So, what it's allowed us to do is actually, if you like, step in some of our minimum mining widths for our staging designs and slightly increase our vertical rates of advance so we can actually reduce our waste stripping upfront and bring forward higher grade ore from the main part of the ore body much earlier. And then there's a third one there as well is that it gives us a much cleaner transition in terms of high-grade ore supply in between transitioning between mining stages. But overall, it gives us a much better outcome from the life of mine, and particularly, as Brendan said, really optimizes that waste stripping and, more importantly, brings forward higher grade ore through and available to the mill earlier in mine life. Probably the second part of your question about FY25 and in terms of fresh ore rather than drawing down stockpiles, if you look at our data tables at the back of the release, we are guiding that we'll mine 3.9 million tonnes of high grade from Motheo in FY25 and 1.9 million tons of low grade. So, that gives us a total of about 5.8 million tons. So, on paper, we have all of the ore that we need well and truly there to cover the 5.2 million tonnes per annum rate without drawing down our existing stockpiles. Now, there's a couple of disclaimers on that. There's a timing component when that comes in. But more importantly, operationally, we actually split our low grade into, I don't say low and lower, but we call it a medium grade and a low grade. What it allows us to do is make sure when we are having to draw down and feed lower grade ore, we're able to put in higher grades earlier in mine life as well. So, what I'm kind of saying there is we've got more than enough ore coming out of the pit, but it will be a combination of direct feed plus some drawdown on the existing stockpiles as we move through FY25. Yeah, I think maybe just to round that out, Ben, so to reiterate something we've said before, we don't feel constrained in the mining sequence. But sort of circling back to your earlier query, that if we are able to run the mill consistently above 5.2, so if we can release more than that, even accommodating for the shuts, etc., you don't get a linear progression on higher tons at standard grade because if we start running materially above 5.2, we will supplement that with lower grade material. And so you would see incremental improvements, clearly value accretive, but incremental improvements in production. So, we just warn people off assuming that metal upside is substantial if we can get higher throughput. Thank you very much. Really appreciate the comment. Thanks, guys. Thank you, Ben. Thank you. Your next question comes from Kaan Peker from RBC. Please go ahead. Thanks, Brendan and team. Just following on with the same line of questioning, I think you've called out Motheo could achieve throughput rates above that 5.2, and we are seeing in the numbers. You've recently had that new filter press commissioned. You're talking about the open pit being adjusted to handle higher throughput and more consistent grade. I think you called out 1.1% copper. So, what's needed to be a bit more definitive about going beyond 5.2? Is it just a time and reserve function? Look, I think it's purely getting the necessary confidence. If you like, the shutdown that delivered a step change in reliability, which was really realignment of the bearings, etc., in the ball mill. That only occurred at the start of the quarter. So, while we're really happy and really pleased with how Motheo's going, the team's doing an incredibly good job. It's early days. So, I've always said 5.2 was the nameplate. Let's prove that we can do that consistently over a period of time, and then let's see what is possible. So, we're still very, very confident in the fullness of time that there is capacity there, but we think this is the right position for us to take at this time of the year. It's as simple as that. Sure. Understood. Thank you. And just a second one on MATSA. It seems like mining depletion is lower than ore mined, so it appears that mining outside of reserves there. Obviously, there's a positive of underestimating mine life. But just wondering if this is continuing to occur currently? Kaan, the short answer on that one, if you look at, and I'm aware of what you talk about with our recent ore reserve, mineral resource and ore reserve update, if you look at it, firstly, that depletion for that period was over nine months, so not a full 12 months. And even within that, and you're absolutely correct. Now, the thing that we need to remember here is that we've changed our geological interpretation, and that's had the biggest impact at Aguas Teñidas. And what we've done is we actually started to transition over to the new interpretation earlier in FY24. And what it meant was with the transition between the two interpretations, so supporting the FY23 ore reserve and then the FY24, we're actually mining material during FY24 that was outside of the previous ore reserve but inside of the new one. That's why there's a lower net depletion when you compare it back to FY23 numbers. Yeah. And maybe if I can count, this is an area that we're incredibly optimistic on. And that's a function of the work that we've now done between Richard and Jason's team on the development of our five-year plan for overarching exploration, both greenfield, but particularly in MATSA's case around extensional and infield drilling. And what that's given us is an even greater degree of confidence that the aspirational goal of having 15 years of life, while never certain, is much more tangible. And it's actually about doing the work. If you look at the ore body itself, it sort of looks like a cigar that's plunging down, obviously, into the earth. The reality is that that shape is just a schematic that's a function, a statistical function of the drilling results that we have to date. At depth, in many areas, the ore body is completely open. And we're drilling some of those areas as we speak. I was in Spain two weeks ago, and I saw some of the core that's coming out of those areas. And really, what we have now is a systematic plan, hole by hole, area by area that we expect to undertake across a multi-year period that we believe will not only enable us to continue to replace depletion but actually grow our reserves over time. So, look, again, like any good geologist would say, the worst thing you can do is drill something. It's a great way to destroy targets here. It's much more tangible. We understand the rocks, and we've just got to do the work. You'd also understand that in an underground setting, one of the challenges is it's partly around the development sequence that enables you to get drilling platforms and having the established foundation to manage the geometry that you're dealing with at depth to deliver those outcomes. That's why, as I say, whilst we're really encouraged and it's very tangible, there's no silver bullet at MATSA. It's literally going to be a very, very consistent methodical approach over a number of years that we believe is going to deliver the outcome. Motheo's obviously in a very different camp to that. If I could just squeeze another one on MATSA, more around Sotiel, seems like there's a bit more zinc-dominant ore being included in reserves. Does that support standalone operation there given recoveries would benefit? So, we've always said that as we grow reserves, as we hope to grow reserves, that it starts to open up opportunities for us to think about Sotiel. We have completed a concept study through the course of this year as we committed to. What it's told us is that, not surprisingly, is that Sotiel is in many ways more of a zinc ore body than a copper ore body. So it's, in a way, being mined suboptimally today. We have work underway, and we're moving through into the next phase over the next 12 months of considering what our various options are from batch processing in a different way, Sotiel ore, if there was capacity in the existing plant, to looking at leaching technologies and so on that a number of other players have been looking at in the Iberian Pyrite Belt. So, all of those elements still remain open. I think, again, having been in Spain two weeks ago and looking at the increasing ore body knowledge that we have of Sotiel, I still think there's enormous potential. And we shouldn't underestimate. If you look at the flanks, and Jason can remind me of the name of the zone. Elvira? Elvira. That was an area we drilled literally because we couldn't drill elsewhere, and we actually discovered very high grade and large volumes of copper-bearing ore. So, we still have a lot of work to do at Sotiel to really understand the opportunity. But it's a fair point of yours that over time, there's likely to be a conclusion that we can optimize the way we're working with Sotiel, indeed the processing route that we're taking. I don't know, Jason, if there's anything you want to add to that. No, I think you've captured it well. If you look at it broadly, Sotiel, as Brendan said, is a zinc-dominant or a polymetallic ore body. The effect that you're observing there as well is, if you like, there's one zone which is copper-dominant, and that's the one that Brendan mentioned, which is Elvira. Consequently, that's also our highest NSR or our highest value ore. So, we've been pushing that in terms of mining that upfront. Now, the effect that you've seen with reducing copper content there is largely driven by depletion of that Elvira zone during FY2024. Yeah. Yeah. And I think, Kaan, just to remind people on the call, when you look at the Iberian Pyrite Belt, really simplistically, in the southern trend line, you have the Sotiel-type deposits. They're typically finer grain. They're more zinc-iferous than copper-iferous versus the northern trend line, which is your Aguas Teñidas, Magdalena type ore bodies. So, there is a difference that we don't just see in our ore bodies. It's more characteristic of the belt. Understood. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Rahul Anand from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Apologies. Rahul has dropped off the line. Your next question comes from Levi Spry from UBS. Please go ahead. Hi, good day, Brendan and team. Thanks for your time. So, can we just start on the guidance? So, you've given us production there, but not costs. Can you just talk through, are the $73 and $45 a tonne sort of good takeoff points for the two mines? And I guess, what have you told us about capital, the $40 that's rolled over from 2024 into 2025? What have you told us there? Yeah. Good. Thanks, Levi. Look, you can help me to account for this one. I'm probably a bit old-fashioned when it comes to this stuff. I think the reality is when you haven't completed your audit and you're paying respect to your external auditor, you've got to be somewhat hesitant with the amount of financial information you provide. So, that's something I'm quite passionate about from a governance perspective. When you look at what we have said is that we think we maintain costs very well this year. I've said many times, we often get asked about industry-wide cost inflation, and I intentionally sort of respond with a quizzical look because I think it's more of an issue in some of the Western economies. We haven't seen the inflationary pressures in Spain or Botswana, and we've done well. We've done well managing that. As you can see in the numbers, what we set more than 12 months ago has effectively been delivered. As we look forward, what we have said is that there's a point in time, and I said this actually a long time ago as well, that you'll start to see some of those local inflationary pressures coming through. So, if you look at the current guidance, what we're, I guess, stressing is that we'd expect to see some local inflationary pressures start to be evident in our total underlying mine operating cost numbers on a per-ton basis. So, we'd really appreciate it if you reflect that. I think the other key point that we've highlighted is in C1. Clearly, you'll see that byproduct credits are playing a much bigger role, as is the impact on some of the TCRCs that we see going through there. And so, you put all that together, notwithstanding that, with good cost control, I think our underlying C1 Costs are looking very, very competitive on a global scale. If you then turn to capital expenditure, clearly, you can see the capital expenditure again is coming lower than what the revised guidance we put out in March was. And partly, I think primarily what that relates to is the further deferral of spend that they referred to at A4. And it really is timing differences. They're hard to predict with precision. As I said, and Jason's mentioned a number of times now is we've directed that activity towards T3. So, $14 million was the delta between capital versus revised guidance in March. But if you look at it cumulatively across the year, it's $40 million. So, what we would really encourage you is if you're developing an open pit and completing the construction of the associated infrastructures, you don't get to avoid that. It just means it's going to come through in next year. So, again, I'd encourage people to build bottom-up their underlying assumptions for capital that they've had in the past and then make sure that they're capturing that spend that was forgone in the current year. Look, of course, when you look at our net debt number, which I think has shown a very strong turnaround, it's not a AUD 40 million delta in capital. The difference relative to guidance for the quarter is AUD 14 million. So, hopefully, that helps, Levi. Yep. Yep. Thank you. Yes, it does. And maybe just a high-level one. So, Black Butte's some really nice headline numbers. What are the next steps? Just remind us, next steps there incorporating some of this high-grade drilling? Yeah. Look, I think the team's doing a very good job there. We took a view some time ago as we go and finalise, if you like, the full feasibility, which will be the incorporation of Johnny Lee with Lowry, that firstly, we need to be confident of the project standalone Johnny Lee. That's where we have the permits. We also need to make sure we capture general capital cost inflation that's occurred since the early 2020s, remembering this isn't a large footprint plan. And of course, prices are better than they were then. But primarily, the big driver for us here is if we can get more high-grade ore in the Johnny Lee lower copper zone, that's going to really juice up the economics because of the way we can, if you like, bring that into the mine plan. And that's exactly what you're seeing here. I think what we've provided now is over a period of time is a series of results, which is showing that there's high grade and even some of the highest grades we've seen. But also, you can see in the plan view that we're increasing the scale, the area of that zone overall. That's what that plan's designed to do. We're hopeful that there's a substantial increase in overall tonnages that will be identified as we finalize and bring this all together, which, as I said, will then feed into the finalization of a feasibility study that then will really be a question for us as to the toll gate towards definitive final feasibility and then ultimately a decision around investment for Sandfire Americas and clearly our role in that. We would expect the latter is probably sort of 18-24 months away. So, some of the things we need to think about when it comes to Montana is, truthfully, as a relatively small company with a global footprint, do we see substantial opportunity beyond Black Butte? Because to go into a new time zone, the U.S., with all of that complexity, we've got to see potential, I think, in that region for us that goes beyond just Black Butte. There's some of the things we need to think about as we move towards that final investment decision. Okay. Great. Thanks. And just a sneaky one back in Botswana. So, what is the timeline on the election? And I guess what projects could be impacted by this? So, what are the next ones off the rank in terms of getting their ML? Is it Banana Zone? So, the election's October. We understand that the bill may have been tabled. We're getting scant reports, and that can go through a process in their parliament quite quickly. So, again, the critical thing for us is the view that it's not retrospective in nature. Of course, we don't control the Banana Zone. That's probably a question for MMG at this stage. I think it's fair to say that Richard's pretty excited about having three rigs drilling in and around Botswana. Two of those will be focused, what we call, in the hub area of Motheo. So, that's in and around the existing mines, which, again, goes back to Ben Lyons's earlier question and really whether, if we have a further discovery, we extend the mining license that exists or not. As we go into the south, which is where we're going to also have effectively a hub with an additional rig because of the prospectivity we see there. If we had a major discovery down there, obviously, if there was a change in legislation, we'd need to work through that. But there's a lot of minutia in this. So, I'd also suggest you wait and see what the actual fundamentals of the bill are because, again, I can guarantee you it would be a little bit more complex than we all are probably talking to on this call. Great. Appreciate it. Thank you for your time. Thanks. Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Levi. Thank you. The next question comes from Daniel Morgan from Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Hi, Brendan and team. Just, I guess, a top-down holistic question just about where the business is and cash harvest. So, you spent a lot either buying and building projects the past few years and now delivering. This next 12 months, is that a period of just harvesting cash? I mean, not for the most part, but not completely. But is it harvesting cash, get debt down, extend reserves? Is that fair? Yeah. I think, look, not trying to be cute, Dan, but tell me what your price assumptions are. It's a pretty volatile world out there. But certainly, on the base view I have and we have as a team, I think that's precisely the case. We're very excited about where we find ourselves. We've still yet to deliver all of the, I guess, the growth that we promised, but we're just even better positioned than we were this time last year. We think we've managed our costs relatively well. Yes, there is some of the deferral of capital, but as we've explained, we've made those decisions intentionally because we think they're just giving us better outcomes, so better risk-adjusted value outcomes. The comment I made right at the end of my opening remarks was pretty intentional. We're back on the journey toward net cash, which I think is something that we were particularly pleased about. So, for now, keep our head down, work hard, hopefully deliver the tons at a good cost, build the cash, and direct it into the balance sheet. And I think because of the work that Megan did over the last number of months with regards to the corporate revolver, we have more flexibility as well in terms of the way we manage cash and being able to bring it back to centre. And so, that's something that we'll talk more about at the results. But Megan, anything you want to add to that? I think, Brendan. And hi, Dan. I like your phrase, cash harvest, by the way. And one of the things just on that in the waterfall that we do highlight, we paid AUD 10 million off the new revolver during the quarter. And that was pleasing given we sort of took that out earlier in the year to take out that facility A, which we've spoken on extensively before. That momentum and that trend is something we're looking to continue with. And to Brendan's point, it depends on the price. But we're very focused on paying down the debt. And whether it's the corporate revolver or the Motheo project facility, which also has the cash sweep, what you'll see in the next quarter is continued progress in this regard in reducing that debt balance. Yeah. Basis to margins, you're seeing it. Motheo, the nice problem to have, it's probably going to pay its debt facility back quicker than we'd like. So, again, nice problem to have. I think, so again, cash harvest, but I just do want to stress a significant ramp-up in exploration activity. So, to give you a sense, we'd expect to see exploration expenditure at Motheo and Motheo and these rough numbers go up somewhat more than 50%. But within that, and this is something that's easy to miss, is that will embed a circa threefold increase in drilling meters. The reason for that is if you think about the last 12-24 months, we've spent all of our time on the critically important foundational geological work, things like the geophysical surveys, the AGG, a lot of the work around that to gain an even better understanding of the geological setting. We are, particularly in Motheo now, we are ready to really amp up the drilling meters and hopefully with that, learn more and increase our probability of success. Thank you so much for your perspectives. Thanks, Dan. Thank you. The next question comes from Kate McCutcheon from Citi. Please go ahead. Hi, Brendan. The updated life of mine plan for Motheo or MATSA in 2026, 2027 sounds good. What should we expect with that? Will we just get financials? Will we get recut OpEx and CapEx too? And what are you most looking forward to sharing with that update? Yeah. Look, I think you can expect that the guidance table that we provided in last year's financial results will replicate something pretty much the same. So, hopefully, that's the consistency I think is important. So that helps you as you have to absorb a whole lot of information. We're not ignorant to the fact that many of you are covering 20+ stocks. I'm somewhat embarrassed, actually, when I saw this morning that we're releasing on a day where Tom, Dick, and Harry are basically putting out results as well. And I think it makes it pretty hard for you. So, we'll try and look at that as well. Okay. And the five-year drilling plans, you had some commentary on Motheo, but other than that, can you just talk to the focus there and what that split looks like? Is it extensions? Is it trying to prove up something bigger to support a mill at Sotiel, the greenfield split? Sort of some more color on what you're looking at, Dan. Yeah. Loose numbers again, it's circa 50% in the way you see exploration reported. We're doing a lot of work. I mean, again, I went out and toured around the district only a couple of weeks ago, and it is quite incredible. Wherever you walk and you find old workings or old pits, it's where there's gossans on the surface. So, these things show up very, very readily. We're drilling at the moment, actually, down plunge from one of those old historic workings and old gossans. That potentially could become quite interesting, but it's very early days. There's so much, I guess, fertile ground in that area. It's quite unique. It's been somewhat untouched across a number of years now. So, the ability for us to bring modern mining techniques and analysis is certainly something that, again, the team's very, very excited about. But that's not to understate, actually, where the real focus for us is. And I don't want to upset my colleague Richard here because he's very excited about that work. But what gets me probably most excited is the significant increase in drilling and work we're going to have underway at MATSA, which is that resource extension infill drilling. So, I talked about a near threefold increase in drilling across the areas that we're focused on. But if you look at the infill drilling and extension drilling at MATSA alone, it's almost threefold again over and above that in terms of total meters. And that's really something that we'll sustain across a number of years now. As I said, there's no silver bullet at Magdalena or Aguas Teñidas, but there's a hell of a lot of good ground. So, we just need to drill it and really prove up the reserves and resources that clearly the analysis that our teams have done suggests is there. Okay. Thanks, Brendan. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Mitch Ryan from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Thanks, Brendan. I don't know if you called out the fact that you've now started to put through a corporate recharge to the assets. Can you just put some color around the quantum of that? And then does that impact taxes being paid in each of those jurisdictions? And how we should sort of think about that. Yep. Okay. I'll pass over to Megan. Hi, Mitch. Thanks for the question. So, yes, this is our main corporate recharge. And really, with MATSA facility A removed, in part, that's actually helped us to be in a position to do this for the first time now. If you refer to the guidance table, what you'll see is actual outcomes for corporate costs for the year are around that AUD 30-31 million number relative to the guidance we set a year ago, which was at AUD 37 million. So, the delta is broadly the sum of the parts of that recharge. I don't think it's going to differ wildly going into financial year 2025. And that's a sort of reasonable assumption from our perspective. I think maybe, Mitch, having come out of some larger companies, it's not lost on Megan and I that our corporate recharge, even at this level, is very low compared to what would be recognized in other organizations. So, we've got to be very mindful of precedent as well. And it's part of just the overall modernization of how we think about the organization in the global context. Okay. So, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Just to clarify that corporate recharge, so that delta of AUD 6 million. Was the corporate recharge put through in this quarter on a—was that the full annual amount, or should we re-annualize? Yeah. That's the annual amount, Mitch. So, it's a catch-up for the full year. And it's plus or minus. So, it'll be within that range of 6-8 or thereabouts. And Brendan made some valid remarks in relation to part of that modernization piece and evolution. And it is relatively modest. And for full transparency, we are including that in our underlying operating costs. And I think that's a good thing, certainly from my perspective. Yeah. But again, to your point, it's all lumped in the quarter, which it'll be smoothed out across in future periods. Perfect. Appreciate the color. Thank you. Good. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Adam Baker from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Thanks for the time. You might have touched on this with Dan's question, but I'll ask it anyway. So, as far as copper production's grown from about 80,000 tons in FY23 to 98,000 in FY24, now you're guiding to about 109,000 in FY25. You've got Black Butte, which could be added to the pipeline in time after more drilling and further optimizations. But just interested to see how you're thinking of the business moving forward in context of evolving from more of its growth phase to a steady output moving forward. Thanks. The way I'm thinking about it is that there's a raft of mining companies over generations that have sought to grow and destroyed enormous amounts of capital. So, we'll grow where we think it makes sense to grow, where we think it makes sense because we can fundamentally increase total shareholder returns. That's our focus for now. It's deliver on the commitments we've made. We think we're very well positioned to do that. We should always be looking and seeing what the other alternatives are. Clearly, as you mentioned, we've got a wonderful option sitting within the portfolio. Black Butte has the potential to add 30,000 tonnes of copper per annum to our production base. The more we expand the Johnny Lee lower copper zone, the longer we can sustain that higher rate of production. That's really what the idea of juicing up the economics is. So, ultimately, it drifts back to the 20,000-25,000-tonne rate. The more lower zone you hold, 30,000 tonnes longer. I sort of often reflect on the fact that 30,000 tonnes relative to what we produce is like BHP adding its copper business alone. So, we shouldn't underestimate the significance of it. But again, I'm still not certain, something we talk about internally from a strategic point of view as to how ultimately it fits, because I think for the complexity, we need to see more than what we currently do. Again, that's why we're doing the work. Thanks, Brendan. Just a quick operational question, if I may. Just the blockage in the paste fill line at Aguas Teñidas. Just wondering if that's being rectified now, and how's zinc production likely to look quarter-over-quarter through FY25? Yeah. Look, I don't probably want to get stuck in yet to sort of quarter-on-quarter projections. We'll provide a lot more information with our full-year result we've described. I've already mentioned that we've had a shut at Motheo early in the current year. But it's fair to say that we're absolutely back into that area. We were back into it through much of the quarter. It just took longer to re-establish, if you like, our presence in the western extension. That's where, obviously, we needed to be for grade. Because remember, of course, it's not just the grade that you get impacted by when you lose, if you like, access. But with lower grade, you see lower recovery. So, you can see both of those things coming through. So, it's a compounding effect. Look, one thing I might just mention that we haven't touched on, Jason and I are really looking forward to the fact, but probably not as much as the operating team at MATSA, that towards the back end of this financial year, we'll actually get into the Olivo zone. And by getting into the Olivo zone, it actually just opens up more degrees of freedom again. So, it just starts to, to some extent, de-risk the overarching mine plan further than I think we have already. Of course, that's not to say that we don't have a meaningful increase in stock turnover. This year, we do. And that's one of the reasons why the combination of local inflationary pressures and just more work to achieve the throughput rates, that's why we expect to see some modest pressure on operating costs. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Paul Young from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks, hi, Brendan. Hope you're well. Brendan, a question on Magdalena. Just the performance in the fourth quarter, 580,000 tonnes of ore mined, really good performance. The guide for 2025 is 2.2. And in the quarter, the June quarter, that was a record, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, for Magdalena. So, just curious around the guide for 2025 versus the June quarter performance. Was that just a function of more stopes available pushing hard into the year-end, or is there something more to it? Thanks. Okay. Look, I'll throw to Jason. Just one thing. I mentioned I was over at MATSA a couple of weeks ago. I actually took one of our new board members, Paul Harvey, over there as well. He's got extensive underground experience. And we were both—we both remarked on just the quality of the conditions underground at Magdalena. The team's doing an incredibly good job with housekeeping. Ground conditions were good. So, we're particularly pleased with that. We're also starting to see the work they're doing to basically develop through paste on both sides to open up some of these, I guess, tertiary stopes that have paste around them, high-grade stopes paste around them on all sides. So, there's some really good work going on there. They're trialing new equipment, new technology, automation, which is really, really pleasing. But maybe just with regards to Magdalena, Jason, and what you're seeing there. Yeah. Brendan's 100% correct. All three of our mines are operating a lot better than when we took ownership. That's across the board. But as you know, Magdalena and reliability around particularly maintaining production rates has been our biggest issue to address. The team over there, Dan and the rest of the mining team, I can't speak highly enough, particularly the work that's going on in Magdalena. So, they've really been focusing on productivities and stabilizing the mine plan and getting more reliability out of it. That's why if you look forward into FY25, we're forecasting around about 2.2 million tons out of Magdalena. We're pretty confident that they'll be able to maintain that rate. But you're absolutely correct. Q4 was a really good quarter out of Magdalena. We're looking more for stability and making sure that they can get those rates on a quarter-on-quarter basis. Does that answer your question, Paul? Yeah. No, it does. I think everyone can take a view whether you've been conservative on 2025 mining rates. But obviously, we know there's volatility on this asset. But no, it does. We can make a call on that. That's fine, Brendan. Yeah. As I mentioned, Paul, sorry, Paul, you did touch it. As I mentioned, we are seeing, as you get with these mines, as they get older, you're seeing stope turnover rise. We're starting to move through some areas where, as I said, we've got paste on both sides, which the rise is really, really attractive from a grade perspective, but you tend to have slower rates of development. Obviously, we'll work very hard to get better at that. But it's somewhat new for the team there. But I was very pleased with what I saw. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. A question on Sotiel, Brendan. The comments around the zinc grade there and being with more zinc as an ore body and comments around looking at a different metallurgical process. Can I just confirm? You said that you're going to look at some hydromet technology. So, what the concept study we know has said that we've got to look at alternatives over time to get the most out of that ore body. If you look at it, it's a very large resource that's producing a very small component of our feed. We also know that when we build it into the, if you like, the batch, that we're trying to optimize for copper recovery for an ore body that perhaps could be better utilised. First and foremost, one of the real questions for us is whether or not that approach in the current mill is the best approach and whether or not there's a better way we could batch process Sotiel. But in behind that, we're still monitoring very closely what others are doing in the region with regards to hydromet. Yeah. Okay. Probably part B then, Brendan. Just as far as there is one mine that is closed at the moment that has done a lot of work on the hydromet. Have you had a look at their technology? Do you have any views on that? Look, we've had some really, really positive engagements. Like anyone, we understand our neighbors and we value the relationships with them. I think what the party you're talking about, their recognition that silver is a very good catalyst in hydrometallurgical processes in terms of gavaging or attaching to the metals that we want to produce. Typically, people don't use silver in hydromet because it's very expensive. But when you've got it in the ore bodies, perhaps it provides a cheap solution. I think it's interesting. But it feels to us it's still very early days. We do think the Sotiel resource is better than the resources that are akin to it in some of the places you're talking about. And we think the value's in the resource. Again, we'll monitor the progress they have. We're also very mindful of the work that Atalaya's doing with its E-LIX process. I know a lot of people are watching that. I could be wrong here, but I have a personal view that if and when those sorts of technologies are proven, they get commercialised. I'm of the view that if they're successful, there'll be a pathway, if you like, towards gaining access to them. Yeah. Understood. I don't think you want to take on that risk if it's not proven. Agree. Just switching back onto Black Butte, Brendan. Just want to clarify some comments you made around adding another time zone to the portfolio from a development perspective and your time in that broader management same time. I know that Sandfire Americas has a management team there already. But can I just clarify that you're making the comments that it's either Johnny Lee has to get bigger and/or there has to be another opportunity in that region. If that's the case, do we include in that region? Do we include Canada in that region? Good, good, Paul. If I look at the globe, it's probably up that way. I guess, and not wanting to be facetious, what I think is that you've coined it well. You characterized it well. Our primary objective is to grow the lower copper zone at Johnny Lee because we know that's going to juice up the economics. You can see the grades. It's sort of self-evident. And in behind that, Richard and the team, the thing I've tasked them with is to help me understand the opportunity in the broader belt. I think I've mentioned before, it's easy to forget, but the Butte area and the Butte mine effectively electrified the United States. It just hasn't been a region that's had substantial new mine development across many, many, many years. And so for us, it's trying to understand both the landscape for permitting and how that's evolving, given we're the first company to achieve a permit, not Sandfire Americas's, over many years. And also understanding the geological potential, which our suspicions are is it's significant. It's how do we bring all of that together with, obviously, what we think is shaping up to be a very attractive, albeit boutiquey Sandfire-type development project at Black Butte itself. How do we bring all that together in the context of the complexity it adds to a company of our size that wants to keep a lean corporate office when you add another time zone? So that's really all I'm trying to remark on, Paul. That's fair. Okay. Thank you, Brendan. Thanks, Dan. Thank you. That does conclude our time for questions. I'll now hand back to Mr. Harris for closing remarks. Look, I've said this before, but we really appreciate your time, particularly when you've got such a busy day. We'll also have a look at our calendar where we can see whether we can avoid adding another company onto a very, very busy schedule for you. I know Ben and David Wilson, who's obviously joined the investor relations team, will be leading it up. They're available to take any additional calls. I'd also just like to thank Ben because I think, Ben, this is probably your last quarterly call. You'll still enjoy the financial results. Ben's moving into a critical strategy role for us, which we're really excited about. But thanks, everyone. Wish you a good day. Good luck. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.