Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, shareholders, and esteemed guests. My name is James Brown. I'm a director of Sayona Mining Limited. Under the terms of the company's constitution, the board has appointed me to chair today's 2024 annual general meeting, and I'm honored to serve in this capacity. Firstly, we would like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land we're meeting on today, the Turrbal and Yugara peoples, and pay our respects to their elders past and present. On behalf of my fellow directors, it's my pleasure to welcome you to this year's meeting. I'd like to introduce you to your other directors, both present in person and online. Joining me here in Brisbane are our CEO and Managing Director, Mr. Lucas Dow, Non-Executive Mr. Allan Buckler, and our newest member of the board, Non-Executive Director, Ms. Laurie Lefcourt. Laurie was appointed as a director in October 2024 and as part of the announced board enhancement program. Her election as today will be considered later in the meeting. Joining us online are Non-Executive Director, Mr. Philip Lucas, and Non-Executive Director, Mr. Paul Crawford. This is an important event where we reflect on the achievements and challenges of the past year, discuss the future directions of the company, and provide a forum for you, our valued shareholders, to voice your thoughts and questions. While there may be differing opinions, our collective goals remain the same: the long-term success and growth of Sayona. With this in mind, I want to emphasize the importance of maintaining a respectful and orderly meeting. The purpose of today's meeting is to foster open communication while ensuring a productive and efficient discussion. While we understand some topics may evoke strong emotions, I kindly ask everyone to conduct themselves with professionalism and respect for one another. Today's meeting is a hybrid meeting, both being held here in person at the Capri by Fraser in Brisbane and online via the Computershare online meeting platform. Online attendees can watch a live webcast of the meeting and have the ability to ask questions and submit votes online via the Computershare online virtual meeting platform. If anyone attending the meeting online experiences any issues or requires any assistance in relation to the online platform, they should call the support line on Australian number +61 3 9415 4024. If technical issues arise with the webcast, which result in a number of members being unable to participate, and I do not believe it is reasonable in the circumstances to proceed with the meeting, I will adjourn the meeting until the problem is fixed. Where the meeting is adjourned for a prolonged period, we will upload notification of the adjournment onto the ASX platform and the Sayona website at www.sayonamining.com.au. We will also provide details on those sites about when the adjourned meeting will be reconvened. I now call this meeting to order. I confirm that a quorum is present and now formally declare the meeting open. Our Group CFO, Dougal Elder, sitting in the front row here, and Company Secretary, [Dylan] Roberts, are also in attendance. The company's current auditor, Nexia Brisbane Audit Pty Ltd, now a member of the Moore Global network of accounting firms, is represented today by Miss Ann- Maree Robertson in the front here. Our share registry, Computershare, is represented today by Lewis Brimlow, who is appointed as returning officer, and Lewis is up the back there, so he'll be collecting the cards later on. To enable shareholders to consider the business of today's meeting, a notice of meeting was made available to all shareholders via Sayona's website and the ASX announcement platform. I will take the notice as being read. The signed minutes of last year's AGM are with the company secretary and are available for inspection if required. Before proceeding further, I advise that 789 proxies totaling just over 1.82 billion votes have been received for this meeting. When an available proxy vote has been given to the chair of the meeting without instructions, I will vote in favor of resolutions one to eight and against resolution nine if applicable. Let me outline the structure of the meeting to ensure clarity and smooth proceedings. First, I'll present the chair's address. I will then run through the formal meeting procedures. We will then deal with the resolutions, proxies, and voting. You will be able to ask questions on each resolution put to the meeting. The questions must be relevant to the resolutions being considered. Any other questions can be put forward after the formal proceedings are closed. At the conclusion of the formal part of the meeting, our CEO and Managing Director, Mr. Lucas Dow, will be presenting an update of the company's financial performance and operations, following which we'll open the floor for questions. For fairness, each shareholder will have the opportunity to speak one at a time. We request that any questions must be relevant to Sayona and its operations. If the questions have already been appropriately addressed, we will move to the next topic or question. To ensure everyone's voice is heard, we request that the questions remain concise and are relevant. Please understand that repetitive or inappropriate remarks may be redirected to maintain the focus of the meeting. The board and management will also make themselves available at the refreshment session after the meeting closure. If at any point during the meeting there are disruptions or interruptions, I'll remind everyone of the importance of decorum. Our team is here to ensure that this meeting remains a constructive and respectful space. Before we review our business and 2024 results, I want to comment on the merger between Sayona Mining and Piedmont Lithium. This transaction establishes a North American lithium leader with unrivaled project optionality and a robust pipeline of growth projects. The combination is highly strategic, positioning us as the largest hard rock lithium producer in the region, with immediate opportunities to progress a capital-efficient brownfield expansion of NAL, or North American Lithium Operation, and other projects in the combined portfolio. By aligning our resources and integrating our businesses, we anticipate achieving substantial efficiencies and cost savings through synergies in logistics, procurement, marketing, and corporate overheads. Simplified commercial arrangements and unified ownership structures pave the way for streamlined decision-making and enhanced efficiency. Together, we are creating a streamlined and agile organization well-equipped to capitalize on the growing demand for lithium products and to deliver superior value to our shareholders, partners, and communities. The merger is underpinned by a strategic capital raise, ensuring the financial resilience and growth capacity of the newly combined entity, with equity financing totaling approximately AUD 149 million. These are Australian dollars, by the way, supported by a cornerstone investment from Resource Capital Fund VIII. The company's balance sheet is significantly strengthened with this process. This enhanced financial foundation provides us with the flexibility to accelerate a development pipeline, pursue value-accretive projects, and withstand market fluctuations. The capital raise also demonstrates strong investor confidence in our strategy and positions us to capitalize on emerging opportunities across the lithium value chain. Now to the main business of this meeting. The last year has been transformative by our company, a year defined by significant milestones, robust growth, and a steadfast commitment to sustainable practices. As we look back, it is clear that Sayona has cemented its position as a leader in the lithium sector, well-equipped to play a crucial role in the global energy transition. Today, I'm excited to share an overview of our achievements in our strategic direction and the bright future that lies ahead of our company. Firstly, on safety, while the year was free of fatalities, we still have significant room for improvement in our safety performance. Safety and sustainability are at the heart of our operations, and a relentless focus on health, safety, and environmental management will be the hallmarks of the year ahead. Our safety programs and initiatives are moving us in the right direction, and the well-being of our employees and stakeholders will continue to be a priority as we grow. During the year, we undertook significant steps to enhance our corporate governance practices, reflecting our commitment to transparency, accountability, and sustainable growth. We strengthened the board with the appointment of independent non-executive directors, ensuring diverse perspective and robust oversight. Key governance structures were established, including the formation of the audit and risk and nomination and remuneration committees, which reinforce our focus on risk management, strategic planning, and alignment of remuneration with company performance. The refreshed management team has been pivotal in driving these changes, highlighted by the appointment of a new CEO, CFO, and company secretary, as well as the creation of a dedicated investor relations function to improve stakeholder engagement. Complementing these changes, we introduced new remuneration policies and enhanced remuneration reporting to ensure fairness, clarity, and alignment with shareholder expectations. These initiatives collectively position Sayona as a company with strong governance foundations ready to meet the challenges of a rapidly evolving industry. One of the most significant achievements of 2024 has been the successful ramp-up of production at our North American Lithium, or NAL, operation. The recommencement of spodumene concentrate production in March 2023 was a turning point for Sayona, demonstrating our ability to deliver complex projects on time and within budget. Since the restart, our operational team has continued to set new benchmarks in the lithium industry. By the end of fiscal year 2024, we had produced 155,822 dry metric tons of spodumene concentrate, with record monthly production at 19,314 metric tons in May 2024 and peak daily output of 919 dry metric tons in June 2024. These numbers are more than just figures. They are a testament to the strategic foresight, meticulous planning, and hard work of our entire team. The completion and commissioning of key infrastructure projects such as the crushed ore dome and the tailings storage facility one have been instrumental in stabilizing plant operations and enhancing throughput. These investments have not only improved reliability and increased plant utilization to over 90%, but also contributed to a high recovery rate now nearing 70%. Such operational efficiencies are pivotal as we continue to scale up our production capacity and strengthen our foothold in the market. Additionally, we have seen significant progress in our exploration efforts. The 2023-2024 drilling campaign at NAL completed 198 drill holes totaling over 56,000 meters. It confirmed high-grade lithium mineralization across multiple extensions. This resulted in a substantial 51% increase in our dual mineral resource estimate to 88 million tons at 1.13% lithium oxide. This robust expansion underscores our potential for future growth and paves the way for continued exploration aimed at supporting long-term sustainable production. Our exploration drilling campaign at the Moblan Lithium project has been a resounding success, with a total of 368 drill holes completed covering over 75,000 meters. This extensive program has substantially increased the resource base, now standing at 93 million tons at 1.21% lithium oxide, underscoring the project's world-class potential. Turning to our financial performance, I'm pleased to report significant progress to date, despite the costs associated with the initial ramp-up of production. For the fiscal year ending June 2024, Sayona reported revenue of AUD 201 million, a remarkable achievement for our first full year of sales from the NAL operation. While net cash flow from operating activities stood negative at AUD 65 million, our financial position remained strong, supported by a cash balance of AUD 104 million at the end of September. This strong liquidity underpins our capacity to continue making targeted investments that drive growth and innovation. Our capital expenditure of AUD 128 million reflects strategic investments in infrastructure and exploration. These investments are not just expenditures. They are strategic steps towards ensuring that Sayona maintains its competitive edge and maximizes future returns. From enhancing plant reliability to funding advanced drilling campaigns, our financial strategies have laid a solid foundation for sustainable growth. Looking ahead, we anticipate stronger financial performance as our optimization projects continue to yield results. Initiatives such as pooling seaborne shipments to reduce freight costs, selective mining to improve ore quality, and the absorption of the Piedmont offtake agreement subject to completion are set to enhance our profit margins and long-term financial sustainability. Sustainability and social responsibility, a cornerstone of Sayona's operations in 2024, was no exception. Our commitment to minimizing our environmental footprint and promoting sustainable practices is evident in the projects such as the Evapo Plant. It's a water treatment initiative, this innovative project which uses fast-growing willows to treat mining water and capture CO2. It exemplifies our proactive approach to environmental management by producing organic biomass that supports the rehabilitation of waste rock piles. This initiative is not only environmentally beneficial but also aligns with the principles of the circular economy. Equally important to our sustainability agenda is our engagement with the communities that host us. Throughout the year, we strengthen our relationships with local indigenous communities, ensuring that our growth is inclusive and mutually beneficial. Our collaboration with First Nations has been pivotal, exemplified by initiatives that respect cultural heritage and foster economic opportunities. We believe that true progress cannot occur in isolation. We remain committed to working closely with these communities to promote shared prosperity. A testament to our dedication to sustainability and community relations was our recognition as Business of the Year at the Quebec Mineral Exploration Association Gala. This accolade is more than an award. It's validation of our unwavering commitment to responsible and transparent operations that benefit not only our stakeholders but also the broader community. At Sayona, we understand that our success is built on the dedication, skill, and innovation of our workforce. In 2024, we prioritized initiatives that foster a positive, inclusive, and high-performing work environment. Our comprehensive recruitment and retention strategies have allowed us to attract top talent in a competitive market. Moreover, the implementation of programs such as a phased retirement and development scholarships reflects our commitment to supporting employees at all stages of their careers. Training and safety are paramount. We have invested heavily in upskilling our workforce and maintaining robust health and safety protocols. I'm proud to note that our focus on safety and well-being is paying off as we continue to foster a culture where safety is not just a priority but a shared responsibility. Looking forward, Sayona is well-positioned for continued success. Our strategic priorities in the fiscal year 2025 and beyond include further expanding our resource base, improving operational efficiency, exploring downstream opportunities, and completing the merger and integration with Piedmont Lithium. In conclusion, 2024 has been a year of progress, challenges, and substantial achievements. I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to our management team, employees, partners, and shareholders for their dedication and support. Your trust fuels our ambition and drives us to push boundaries, innovate, and deliver on our promises. With a clear vision, strong fundamentals, and an unwavering commitment to sustainability and excellence, we are poised to lead Sayona into a future defined by growth, resilience, and positive impact. Thank you for your continued support and confidence in our journey. I will now turn to the formal matters to be considered today. Excuse me, I'll just grab some water. Voting on all resolutions today will be conducted by way of a poll. Shortly, I will outline the procedure for the poll and then run through each of the resolutions to be voted on today. The wording of each resolution and the proxy votes which have been submitted for each resolution will be shown on the screen as each resolution is being considered. As a reminder, I'll take questions on each resolution from shareholders or their authorized representative. Questions should relate to the resolution being voted upon. An opportunity for general questions will be available following the formal business of the meeting. When voting on resolutions is complete, we will close the meeting. The results of the poll will be published via release made to the ASX and will also be made available on the company's website. I will now explain the procedures for the poll to be conducted on the resolutions. Online attendees can submit questions at any time. To ask a question, select the Q&A icon. Type your question into the text box. Once you have finished typing, please hit the send button. Please note that while you can submit questions from now on, I will not address them until a relevant time in the meeting. Please also note that your questions may be moderated or if we receive multiple questions on one topic, amalgamated together. To ask a verbal question, please follow the instructions written below the broadcast. Finally, due to time constraints, we may not get to answer all of your questions during today's meeting. If this happens, the appropriate person at Sayona will answer them as soon as possible after the meeting. And as I said earlier, the management team and directors will be available for conversations and catch up after the formal part of the Lucas's presentation. Again, voting today will be conducted by way of a poll on all items of business. To provide you with enough time to vote, I'll shortly open voting for all resolutions for those attending online. If you are eligible to vote, once voting opens, please press the vote icon on all resolutions. It will be activated with voting options. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. There is no need to hit a submit or enter button as the vote is automatically recorded. You will receive a vote confirmation notification on your screen. You can change your vote up until the time I declare voting closed. For shareholders and proxy holders who are attending in person, you will have received a blue voting card, this card here, from Lewis and his team. Please complete the reverse of your voting card, and a member of the Computershare team will collect your card at the end of the poll. I now declare voting open on all items of business. I will give you a warning before I move to close voting. The first item of business deals with the financial statements and reports. These have been provided to shareholders and are now presented to the meeting. These financial statements and reports are for the company's financial year ended 30th of June 2024. I should note that this is not a resolution. As I have advised, representatives from the company's auditors are present today to answer any questions shareholders may wish to direct to them in relation to the conduct of their audit or in relation to the preparation of the financial statements. I confirm that neither the company nor its current auditors have received any written questions about the content of the auditor's report or the conduct of the audit prior to this meeting. I now invite questions and comments on the financial statements and reports. Firstly, are there any questions from shareholders in the room? Please raise your hand and we'll bring you the mic. Okay, Moderator, any questions received online? There are no questions at this time for this resolution. Thank you. As there are no further questions, I will now move to the resolutions to be considered. Resolution 1. Resolution 1 is the adoption of the remuneration report. This resolution relates to the adoption of the company's remuneration report for the financial year ended 30th of June 2024. The remuneration report is contained on pages 53-72 of the company's 2024 annual report, which has been made available to shareholders. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this resolution. As a reminder, this resolution is advisory in nature and does not bind the company or its directors. However, as the company received a first strike last year, if at least 25% of the votes in resolution 1 are cast against the adoption of the company's remuneration report, for example, the company receives a second strike, then the company will be required to put resolution 9 to a vote at this meeting. I note that a voting exclusion statement applies to this resolution as set out in the notice of meeting. Firstly, are there any questions from shareholders in the room? Yes, Lewis. So, as you mentioned, last year, the remuneration report got voted down. Thank you. Last year's remuneration report got voted down. And I noticed when Lucas took over, he instantly went to a AUD 100,000 pay rise above what you were receiving. So there's an instant pay rise there. Now, when we look at this year's remuneration report, there's incorporation of LTIs, STIs, committee fees, plus super as well. Now, the targeted salary packages for Lucas this year is AUD 1.605 million. For Sylvain, it's AUD 1.4 million. And for Dougal, it's AUD 936K. But they can go up to AUD 2.236 million. So, at the start of the report, it mentions that you've listened to shareholders, you've had a first strike, we've taken that into consideration, but we've seen significant increases in the packages for a lot of the staff involved, a lot of the directors involved. And from where your salary was at 600 to a possible 2.236 million now for Lucas, it's quite a significant jump, particularly for a company losing on every ton it sells, particularly for a lot of shareholders like myself who are underwater. So, have you listened to shareholders and listened to what we've told you? And it's been nearly voted down again this year. And taken that into consideration fully? Because the report doesn't reflect that. There's probably two, and I appreciate that, Lewis. There's probably two parts to the story here. There's obviously we sit here as a panel, and we're not professional remuneration experts. We take on board what people are doing in the normal. So there's a peer group when you look at that. When you look at salaries, I'll separate myself out of here. I was left in position last year to stand up and guide Sayona through a very tumultuous period. In doing that, it was an honor to me. I didn't push for incentives. I took less than the previous managing director. That's on my back. And I thought that was fair to shareholders, that the amount of time, the effort was equivalent. Lucas is only back on the package that was equivalent to the previous MD. So, my anomaly is self-created because stepping in an interim role then demanding short-term and long-term incentives is inappropriate in my mind. The longer-term view is that we have a framework set up that offers attraction and retention, so retention of our staff members, and that goes across the board. When you look at the numbers, you're looking at maximums that people can earn. I think the important part that I just want to stress probably at the moment is we've adopted practices which have been measured against our peers. And obviously, it's a competitive market out there to get the caliber of people we have. And I think as you come along with the journey and you get to know Lucas more, you get to know the Laurie that's come on board, Dougal, that we all know has been in there toiling away for a number of years. And the recognition of the work that he has done and his team has done has been paramount in getting us to the point where we're really pleased. Andrew has come up to Head of Investor Relations, and Dylan is our internal COSEC and legal counsel. It's a competitive market out there. But looking at the packages, that's an earn up to, providing all of the measures are set. The other part is that these include long-term incentives and short-term incentives, which are performance rights. They're not shares. So when we do get to the voting today, you're voting on the issue of a performance right. Should Lucas, as an example, achieve the goals that he's on? Now, it doesn't mean it's guaranteed. It means he has the opportunity to do so. Particularly with the LTI, we're probably getting off track, but those measures were put in place under close scrutiny with our peers. We also see the LTI. We've measured ourselves against 16 peer companies. We've got to outperform in order to get those. That's where we're not the top of the scale for where these matters are, but for the growth, the size of the company, which Lucas will head up, a billion-dollar entity should the merger proceed, and that's proportioned to where we are. We think we're aligned with what the industry wants. The way it reads, yes, the numbers can look a bit larger on face value, but the only guaranteed proportion of that is the cash value. The rest of it is really in incentives. Those incentives are based on shareholder, let's say, increased shareholder profitability and margin. So could we not have waited till the merger went through? Could we not have put the wages on hold while we're still losing till the merger went through, if the merger goes through? And then looked at the package and said, "Okay, look, we're through the tough part now. It's time to remunerate the board. I don't see these guys going anywhere because they're here for the long haul by the looks of it to build up the company and get through this period." So I guess from the shareholder base, that's the concern. Yeah, I think putting it on hold, we had to progress our remuneration practices, and we did that. It's out there. It's auditable. It's challenging. I mean, none of these items, when we come to a total shareholder return, are a given, and it has to take into consideration market challenges. Probably, importantly to where we get to, and I'm not sure everyone covers this, but a lot of institutions will engage proxy advisors. So the advisors are professional groups. Obviously, companies like BHP don't read everyone's report, or some of the bigger capital funds like RCF don't have people dedicated to read people's reports, and they rely on the advice and the advisors from the proxy advisors. I can unequivocally say that both ISS, and, Glass Lewis, and Ownership Matters 100% support of the remuneration framework and the remuneration report. So in their eyes, we've got an acceptable result, whereas last year that wasn't the case. We take on board. We value our money, but we've got to make sure we're the best people at the job. Okay. And I appreciate the question, Lewis. I mean, it's a difficult one. Any more questions from the floor? No questions. No questions. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. Okay. I'll move on to resolution two, which is the re-election of Director Allan Buckler. The next resolution is the re-election of Allan Buckler as a director. Details of Mr. Buckler's qualifications and experience are set out in the notice of meeting. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this resolution. And firstly, any questions from the room? Yeah, Lewis? Can I direct them to Alan or? I'm the chair, but I mean, if I need Alan, I mean, it's probably you might want his perspective. He might want my perspective or anyone other than the directors, but I'll take the question for the moment. Yeah, because I guess you've been around for a very long time with the company, one of the founding fathers of the company. Up until last year, I probably never saw even a photo of you. So I sort of wasn't really aware of Alan's persona and his standing in the company. And this is from a fellow shareholder. So with respect, he's asking, since last year's AGM, what specific contributions have come directly from Alan to put Sayona in a better view in the market? And what is the long-term vision? What is Alan's long-term vision for the company? And do you ever plan to build or operate a carbonate facility at now? Yeah, I think it's probably a good time to get it out here because I suppose I've had a reasonable advantage to see what's been going on. And the changes in management last year meant I'm not saying dropped in the deep end because I had a close affiliation with NAL during the ramp-up. I was there most of the time. From Alan and someone reflecting on a non-executive director role, the hours he puts in is well above that. I know there's funds that he's put in to support the company from where it is over the last 12 months. He was a key driver and member of the remuneration committee, so driving the framework, reviewing it, approving it, along with the other directors of that committee. I recall it was prior to Lucas joining in January. I sought counsel with Alan to come and help me look at NAL. You'll remember the 22 former staff members that we had to cut our corporate costs, and Alan helped me participate and do that along with some of the local managers. He's been in there working side by side with me with the ramp-up, looking at the weekly reports, querying it, questioning it, giving us improvement initiatives. To be frank, we live or die by NAL in the ramp-up period, and that's been, to me, very, very, very comforting. He's been strategic in his participation in the recruitment of key appointments in Sayona. It's not for me or none of us solely wander around trying to find directors and/or chairmen and/or senior staff. So he's been integral in getting that done and fostering the culture that we've got in regards to the appointments. And he's always been an early mover and proponent of establishing a framework for the Sayona-Piedmont merger. I mean, I think we'll be heading off questions for that later on, but this is not something we dreamt up last month. It's been going for some time, and there's a number of ways to go around it, but he's been firmly part of that. And really, someone that does contribute for where he is and certainly doesn't build a company for a lot of expenses he goes through. So in the last 12 months, he's been particularly highly focused in not just NAL, but Sayona's development. Everyone doesn't appear here without some impetus there. I think the other side from all of us, and I know someone fired a question off to my phone. I don't know where they got my phone number from, but it was about, "Do you guys just bleed us dry? Do you have any skin in the game?" I mean, we've reinvested AUD 6 million between three of us in the last year. We've never received a free share. So our heart is in the business, and it stays in the business, so. Okay. Any further questions from the floor? Nothing online either. Okay. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online on this item. Moving to resolution three now. The next resolution is the election of Paul Crawford as a director. Paul's online at the moment. He wasn't, despite his valiant attempts, in a position to attend today. Details of Mr. Crawford's qualifications and experience are set out in the notice of meeting. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this resolution. Are there any questions, firstly, from shareholders in the room? Nothing online either. Okay. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. Okay. Resolution four, election of Director Laurie Lefcourt. Laurie in the middle over here. The next resolution is the election of Laurie Lefcourt as a director. Details of Ms. Lefcourt's qualifications and experience are set out in the notice of meeting. The company confirms it has undertaken appropriate background checks on Ms. Lefcourt and has satisfied the results of these background checks. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this resolution. First, I must ask any questions from the floor. Laurie, as a newcomer, and recently, if you'd like to do something, if you choose. If you choose not, then I'll honor whatever you'd like to proceed with. Sure. Well, thanks, everybody, for coming today. I'm very excited to be part of Sayona over the next several years. I started my career in a chartered accounting firm in Canada in the mining group. So I'm kind of coming full circle, I suppose, back to my mining roots that started many, many years ago. I spent most of my career in mining and infrastructure and resources. I have a really deep understanding of how mining and mining processes work and where you can find value in the mining supply chain and the process chain. My strengths probably lie with governance, risk, and strategy, which is an area that I really concentrated on building up my skill set over the course of probably the last 10 years of my executive career, where I sought out the opportunities to take on those roles and develop my skills in those areas. I think I'm going to be able to add a lot of value to Sayona, particularly in relation to how we improve our governance over time and also keeping that financial focus around risk management and controls. So I'm looking forward to being part of the organization and looking forward to seeing you guys all again next year. Thank you very much, Laurie. Any further questions before we go to the moderator? No? Good. We do have a question. The shareholder noted that Paul had indicated that he was retiring last year. What are his current plans now? It's a good question. And I think looking, I suppose we've had to work on two contingencies as we move forward. There's Sayona as Sayona alone. There's Sayona as the controlling entity of the merger, the surviving entity of the merger with Piedmont. So it's well documented in the merger documentation that was lodged last week that there will be a new board, maximum of eight, four from four. The only person certain of a position on that board is Lucas Dow. The rest of us will be chosen on whether the skills base, diversity, and contribution. So in the end, Paul wanted to see this through. As you know, Paul's been a mainstay of Sayona, good, bad, indifferent over the period of years. He's seen it from when we were a budding diamond operator through to graphite, gold, lithium, Australia, Canada, and he's been there all the time. He's quite an unsung hero, so Paul wants to see this through. His plans have been well known, and I'd expect you to make those public as we come to form the new board, but certainly, there will be an issue, not an issue, but one of the main things we need to address is independence on the new board of eight, so obviously, there's only seven spots outside Lucas, and we can only control three of those, so I think all of us want the best for Sayona. It's not for us protecting our position. We've got plenty of things we could be doing, but we love the business, and we'll work that out as we go along in applicability between the two companies, and I think probably added to that was the introduction of Dylan. You can imagine a custodian of a company for 22 years and handing over the material that belongs to that, let's say, archive emails, hard drives. It's a big ask, and it has been quite incumbent on Dylan to sit with Paul continually to make sure that handout was complete, which I believe it is. Okay. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. Remember, we're back on resolution four, which is the appointment of Ms. Laurie Lefcourt as a director. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. Okay. Moving to resolution five, which is the adoption of proposed new constitution. The next resolution seeks shareholder approval to adopt a new constitution for the company. Details of the material differences between the company's existing constitution and the proposed constitution are set out in schedule one of the notice of meeting. Please note that this resolution must be passed as a special resolution, meaning that it requires approval by at least 75% of the votes cast by members entitled to vote on the resolution. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this special resolution. Is there any questions from the room? Yes, sir. With respect to the merger that's going to occur with Piedmont, wouldn't this constitution then apply to the merged company as well? Each company will. I think particularly, it's a good question because our constitution is applicable to an ASX-listed entity. Obviously, Piedmont, with the primary listing and NASDAQ, would have different overriding auspices that it'll work under. This one particularly was predating, obviously, the merger announcement with Piedmont because the old constitution was around 20 years old. Anyone that's been around a while, I've seen there's been ad hoc changes proposed to that constitution, which really one part of it negated the success of the other part. So it was therefore wiping the slate clean and coming up under legal advice with a constitution which is not only applicable but suitable in the timeframe where we are. So it just brings things more up to date with the company's progressing under this instead of the old constitution. But the new merger will be adopting this constitution. Thank you. Okay. Any questions? No questions online. No questions online. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. Resolution six is the appointment of an external auditor. The next resolution seeks shareholder approval for the appointment of Ernst & Young(EY) as the new auditor of the company. The company's current auditor, Nexia Brisbane Audit Pty Ltd, has agreed to resign as auditor and has received ASIC consent to the resignation as required under the Corporations Act. The company has received a written notice of nomination of new auditor from Mr. Dennis O'Neill as a member of the company. A copy of this nomination is set out in Schedule 2 to the notice of meeting. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this resolution. Are there any questions, firstly, from the room? No? Any questions online, Andrew? No. There are no questions online. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. Resolution seven pertains to the grant of STI or short-term incentive performance rights to the CEO and managing director. The next resolution seeks shareholder approval for the grant of 14,700,000 STI performance rights to the CEO and managing director under the company's employee share and option plan. These performance rights constitute the equity component of the CEO and managing director's financial year 2025 short-term incentive award. The performance criteria applicable to the proposed issue of these STI performance rights, which are set out in the notice of meeting, have been selected by the board to firmly align the CEO and MD's remuneration with the achievement of outcomes which will positively enhance the company and enhance shareholder returns. These deferred STI performance rights are also subject to a further 12-month employment condition and are expected to vest no later than the 31st of October 2026. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxy received for this resolution. I note that a voting exclusion statement applies to this resolution as set out in the notice of meeting. Are there any questions from the floor? Any questions online, Andrew? No questions online. No questions online. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. Resolution eight, associated resolution grant of LTI performance or long-term incentive performance rights to the CEO and Managing Director. The next resolution seeks shareholder approval for the grant of 30,800,000 LTI performance rights to the CEO and Managing Director under the company's employee share and option plan. These LTI performance rights constitute the long-term incentive component of the CEO and Managing Director's financial year 2025 remuneration package discussed in the previous resolution. The performance criteria applicable to the proposed issue of these LTI performance rights are set out in some detail in the notice of meeting. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this resolution. I note that a voting exclusion statement applies to this resolution as set out in the notice of meeting. First, any questions from shareholders in the room? No? Good. Any questions online? There are no questions online. Okay. Thank you. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. Moving to resolution nine, noting this spill resolution is conditional. As stated in the notice of meeting, this is a conditional resolution. Although from proxy votes, it appears that resolution one will not receive a second strike with at least 25% of the votes cast on resolution one were against the adoption of the company's remuneration report. We will nevertheless put this spill resolution to the meeting. The spill resolution will only be passed if one, the resolution one receives a second strike, and two, an ordinary majority, more than 50% of the votes are cast in favor of it. If the spill resolution is passed, the company will be required to convene a spill meeting within 90 days as detailed in the notice of meeting. I refer you to the screen for details of the proxies received for this resolution. Please note that the board has recommended a vote against the spill resolution. I note that a voting exclusion statement applies to this resolution as set out in the notice of meeting. Any questions from the floor in regards to resolution nine and its applicability? No? Any questions online? None online either. Okay. There being no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote online for this item. In regards to the poll, as outlined at the outset of this meeting, I'll now put resolutions one through nine to a poll. Computershare will now come around and collect the voting cards, these blue cards here that are filled out. And thank you, Lewis, very much for that. Sorry. Mine was bigger than everyone else's. Everyone got their blue cards in? As all voting cards have now been collected, I now declare the poll closed. I've got just one more. Sorry, one more? Sorry. Thank you. All good? Thanks, Lewis. Thanks, Tyson. As all voting cards have now been collected, I now declare the poll closed. In conclusion, as noted earlier, details of the final results will be posted on both the company's website and the ASX company announcement platform later today. I'd like to thank you all for your attendance and participation, and I now formally declare the meeting closed. I now invite our CEO and managing director, Mr. Lucas Dow, to give a further presentation, following which there'll be an opportunity for further questions. So welcome, Lucas. Thanks. Thank you. Thanks and good morning. I think I got a chance to meet the bulk of you this morning. So really just want to give you a run-through this morning of a couple of key things. Obviously, a merger update. I want to describe, obviously, the structure, the rationale, an FY24 recap, and then I think, importantly, a strategy update and a look ahead for FY25. And then I think, most importantly, an opportunity for you folks to ask questions at the back end. So we can just go through. This presentation's been uploaded. You'll see the consistent disclaimers. So if we can just skip to the agenda, we're through that, and we'll just touch onto the merger. And take the next slide if you wouldn't mind. Thank you. So I think just before I get into the rationale, just a couple of things to say about the structure of the merger. So it's 50/50. And obviously, one of the questions is, well, could we have got a better deal? Reality is, in these sort of transactions, willing buyer, willing seller. And so just think about when you're buying a house, obviously, you want to try to get as low as possible price, but it depends on what the seller's prepared to accept. So we're at a 50/50. It'll be a 50/50 merger. So Sayona will be the surviving entity, which means that will be ASX domicile and ASX listed. The reason for that is a couple of things. Typically, the ASX and the investor pool in the ASX is a lot more informed as it relates to particularly upstream producers and developers. So we're in the right market as an ASX primary domicile listed company. Importantly, with the merger with Piedmont, we will, however, have a secondary listing on the NASDAQ. Why is that important and useful? The Piedmont team's developed a decent amount of liquidity there in the US as well. So we sort of get the best of both worlds. So ASX primary and then NASDAQ as a secondary listing as well. As James described, from a board perspective and governance, so I'll continue on in Merge Co. And sorry, and just for the avoidance of doubt, Merge Co. will not be the final name. We've had a couple of questions about that. There'll be some work, and the company will be renamed. I'll be in the MD and CEO role. Piedmont will have the chair of the board, and there'll be four representatives from both sides appointed to the board initially. And over time, we'd anticipate that'll probably reduce. So as James described, on our side, that means that a couple of our directors will be standing aside and similarly on the Piedmont side of things as well as we step through. So I'll just push now onto the rationale. So look, I think first and foremost, and James described this, there's a lot of work that's gone into this, and this wasn't something that just emerged in the last couple of weeks. So there's been a lot of work going into this. And obviously, years have probably accrued. An analogy. When you go to the butchers, you don't know how the sausages are made. You just buy what's being presented. And so there's been a lot of work done by the board and management to get us to this point. Now, why are we excited about this merger? Look, there's a couple of things. Obviously, it gives us scale. It gives us the ability to optimize and the ability to grow. It also gives us tremendous efficiency. And there's a couple of catalysts that I just want to describe. If we can just take the next slide, that really sort of have defined why we've gone after this merger now and why it's incredibly valuable and why we're very excited about it. So I'll come to the scale and the growth options in a moment, but just I want to talk a little bit about optimization and efficiency. Individually, Sayona and Piedmont are relatively small companies. The challenge is that when you're a listed entity, you still carry a significant amount of overheads as a consequence of that. So by being able to pool and merge, essentially, we'll be able to reduce those overheads. So we see synergies in the order of $15-$20 million USD on a combined basis. That's not insignificant for a company of our size. So there's that clear opportunity. The other part, and these things are not quite as obvious, but they're very important. With the offtake agreement that was in place with Piedmont, saying it was challenging for some investors. We'd heard when we were engaging with potential investors that, "Oh, it's confusing when it's not sort of investable." By removing that, it's a clear catalyst for investors to say, "Look, they understand exactly what they're buying as it relates to NAL." The other key catalyst for us, and what's changed over a little while, obviously, we've seen a market and a reduction in lithium price, which obviously has depressed the industry more broadly. But at NAL, we've seen a significant increase in the resource base. We've now got over 88 million tons of resource. Over 80% of that is in a measured and indicated. So we expect a high conversion to reserve. Why is that important? In short, with that resource base, and just to put it in comparison, Moblan currently sits at 93 million tons. So we're talking about a serious deposit at NAL. The reality is with the offtake agreement in place, Sayona had 75% of the equity, but we've only seen 50% of the offtake. We were never going to be able to invest or expand or do anything with NAL in a meaningful way. In short, as shareholders, what you had at NAL was all it was ever going to be with the offtake in place. And we can wring our hands and how did we get there? Look, the bottom line is we're here where we are, where we are. And what the board and management resolved is to be able to move forward and be able to add significant value at NAL. And the prospects and the potential at NAL are really quite enormous in terms of being able to increase volume and, importantly, reduce unit costs as well. And if you think about it from a brownfield expansion perspective, low cost, permitting risk low, and speed to market. So there's a whole heap of these elements that have come together that have really galvanized and crystallized our thinking about why this is such an exciting opportunity and why the board has recommended we proceeded with this merger. Now, obviously, shareholders are going to get a vote on that. We expect completion to occur the first half of next calendar year. It'll be subject to shareholder votes on both the Piedmont side and also the Sayona side as well. I'll just step now into if we take the next slide, please. Just on the scale side of things, and just to put things in perspective, if you look at where Piedmont sits and then where Sayona sits as individual, and then where we get at Merge Co., you can see we are going to be a global player in this space in terms of options. Now, this doesn't include Authier as well. Just it's around some disclosure elements from the Piedmont side of things. So that bubble chart's going to get larger. In short, and just to break it down, the size of the bubble indicates effectively you contain lithium carbonate equivalent. And then effectively you've got grade on the y-axis and then resource across the base. So we are a significant player. The other point to note, and this is incredibly important as we think about Merge Co., is the incumbency of being a producer. Because when the market turns, if you've got a greenfield project, yeah, sure, you might see a bit of an uptick in your share price, but you're not exposed. The reality is Merge Co. will be one of the most leveraged companies to a recovery in the share price, sorry, in the lithium price and as a consequence, the share price. So as shareholders, you should be tremendously excited about what the prospect of what merger is going to provide. And again, that ceiling and floor is completely gone with the offtake. So we will be a player of significant importance and, importantly, with growth options. If we could just take the next slide, please. And this is just a quick snapshot. So we've got obviously NAL producing incumbency. We're the largest producer in North America. We're in a unique position from that perspective if you think about IRA compliance and so forth. You look at a Merge Co. portfolio, we've got brownfield expansion opportunities at NAL and then advanced projects. So we've got DFS at Moblan, North Carolina, and Authier. And then early-stage projects as well with the prospect of downstream, and I'll come to that a little later as well. So the bottom line is Merge Co. is going to give us a fantastic opportunity in terms of both reducing our costs here and now, but more importantly, giving us a growth trajectory. And importantly, Merge Co. has also given us the platform to capitalize the business in a way that we can get through a low-price environment while simultaneously being able to advance these growth projects. And the final thing I just want to leave you with as it relates to merger, we were talking to one of the key analysts of the sector, and I hadn't thought about all this, but he said, "Ultimately, the options that Arcadium Lithium is going to hold will be unparalleled in terms of growth opportunities." Now, it doesn't mean they're all going to get developed, but the nice thing is we're going to have options about how we expand and what we expand in. So we are very excited, and we look forward to being able to deliver this for, obviously, for you as our shareholders and then obviously the Piedmont shareholders that will come into the register as well. If we could take the next slide, please. Just FY24 at a snapshot. Look, James is very understated in his comments. The work that James and Sylvain and the team in Quebec put in during FY24 was a Herculean effort to be able to get us ramped up, and for those who aren't familiar with the industry, to be able to get up at the speed that they have, and we have done at NAL, is nothing short of remarkable, so that has been a tremendous effort, and we've seen the run rates, and I'll come to an operating update in a moment, so obviously, sort of shipping volumes and revenue created for the year, and then in September quarter, we closed with AUD 104 million at bank as well, Aussie, so we had a strong FY24. The other component as well, and James already touched on it, being a significant governance overhaul and renewal at both board and management level as well. So it's been a really successful year, and I'll come to Moblan and NAL further in a moment. If we could take the next slide, please. And the next one, thanks. All right. In terms of operational performance, this is a September quarter update. Key points to note. Unit costs continue to trend down. Throughput and recovery certainly at industry-leading practices, and we've continued to drive that performance. So long story short, positive momentum maintained from the end of FY24 into the first quarter of 2025, and that's continuing. So we're in great shape. Obviously, more work to do on a unit operating cost perspective, but we're certainly trending in the right direction. Sylvain and the team have certainly got the bit between the teeth as we sort of continue to drive that on. Next slide, thanks. Moblan, sorry, NAL, I've already spoken. 88 million tons of resource. Look, it's an incredible resource, and so the bottom line is exploration just hadn't been done under previous management. We've done that work now. We've got a great opportunity, and so one of the key actions and activities that we'll have in the course of calendar year 2025 is to get that brownfield expansion DFS underway, so get the permitting moving and so forth. I just cannot overstate what a game changer that exploration work at NAL has been. I might also just add that exploration work at NAL and Moblan has all been done through flow-through share funding, so that was money that was specifically raised for exploration. It's a use-it-or-lose-it element. That actually expires in December of this year. We've got rigs spinning at the moment. They'll finish in December. That'll be the end of that funding. We'll have further MRE updates for both NAL and Moblan on the back of that. Moblan, if we could just take the next slide, please. Moblan is just the resource that keeps on surprising on the upside. Andrew Barber, who heads up investor relations for us, is a geo by training. He said, "Typically, when you start drilling, you start looking and you find that the ore body finishes, we just keep finding that there's more, which is great." Without doubt, Moblan, absolute tier one deposit. Very low strip ratio. On the order sort of 2.3-2.4. Of all the projects that are in that James Bay area, we're at the southernmost. From a logistics perspective, we've got a clear competitive advantage as compared to other greenfield projects in that area. Relatively benign from a flora and fauna perspective. All those things add up. The reality is we need to get going with the permitting, and we also want to revisit the DFS for Moblan. The DFS previously on Moblan was done at 300,000 tons of concentrate a year. With this increased resource base, it'll clearly support a much larger number. Now, it's not saying that we're going to jump straight to that, but we want to absolutely study it, get the permitting right, and make sure that we hold all those options as we push Moblan forward. If we could take the next slide, please. Strategy update and the next one if you wouldn't mind. Thank you. All right. So I think key things and points I want to make is the strategy is unchanged. Now, there is a bit of a nuance around the downstream piece, and I'll come to that. In short, if you think about where Sayona's strengths have existed and continue to exist, we're great at being able to identify, being able to discover and develop those operations. The path that we're focused on, and I'll come to exactly how we're thinking about downstream and partnering in a moment. In short, it's really been this left-hand side that we've been focused on over the last 12 months. That's very much been about getting NAL up and going onto an even keel and to a point now we can start reducing unit costs. Still more work to do, but I think it's been a mighty effort from Sylvain and the team, and James played a tremendously important part in that in getting us up. I wouldn't mind just spending a couple of moments on the market. So if we just take the next slide, please. I had a few mates when I took the role. I said, "Why did you take the role on?" There's not a better time to invest in lithium. Now, why is that? If we just take a step back, and I've been at this a while in different commodities, I mean, you see price cycles, and we're in a price cycle at the moment. Now, it's tough, and it's not fun, but we're just going to have to bite down on the mouthguard and get through it. But key things to note, on a compounded annual growth rate, so that's year-on-year growth, everyone's expecting lithium to grow in somewhere 10%-15%. Now, copper's doing about 5%, and everyone's mental for copper. So we are absolutely in the right sector. Now, in the near term, we're in a case where we've seen some oversupply, and that's starting to drag out. Demand is going to continue to grow, so that demand is going to continue to grow, so in the order of 10%-15%. So are we absolutely in the right sector? Yes. Are our assets in the right jurisdictions? If you think about Inflation Reduction Act compliance, so IRA compliance in the U.S., Canada, absolutely in the right jurisdiction. Even under a Merge Co. or Authier, also IRA compliant. We're table-to-table drilling as well. So we've got the right suite of assets and also proximity to the likes of Tesla, Ford, GM. So we are in the right vicinity, in the right neighborhoods to be able to really maximize that. So those elements are clearly strong. We've got the ability now with NAL to be able to do something quite spectacular under the Merge Co. scenario as well, so all these elements are really having got us nicely positioned from a player, and the other point is, as I mentioned earlier, when the price comes back, and it will come back because these prices are not sustainable, is it our share price is going to be entirely leveraged and exposed to that, which is great news. If we could just take the next slide, please, and look, I just want to spend a couple of moments. The graph on the left-hand side is near-term spot price for spodumene, and then on the right is lithium hydroxide. So effectively, you can get spodumene as a derivative of that. From September through the 11th of November, we've seen a bit of an uptick. There's a bit of seasonality and so forth. But I guess the point is it's not all death and disaster out there. We're seeing some elements of picking it up, but we just need to be careful of that. But I think the more interesting component, if we think about the medium and longer term, the graph on the right-hand side has got futures out till November 2026. So effectively, you're forward selling. So what we describe that as the market's in contango, where the forward price on the curve is higher than the spot price. So essentially, what the market's saying is they do not expect the price to stay where it is. Now, we've got opportunity and ability to be able to hedge and all those sort of things as well. But I guess what we're going to do is we think we're in the right sector, or we know we're in the right sector. And on the supply and demand piece, that is going to ride itself, and we will see price recovery. The great question is when. And coming back to it, that's why it's so important as Merge Co. that we're appropriately capitalized, be able to ride out this low-price environment and push our growth projects along. Let's take the next slide. Downstream. So if we just sort of went back in time, 18 months, two years ago, the entire world was mental about downstream. Yeah, we want to be downstream. What you will see from the board and the management team is we are a team that will make decisions on data and fact and not just sentiment. So we've spent some time to actually go back and actually have a look at downstream. And so just the graph on the right, if we look at this is the incremental margin. So if you had a choice at where you wanted to be at any point in the cycle going back from August 2020 to August 2024, if you were a refiner between the period of August 2020 and August 2021, you were making incrementally more margin than you would be if you were an upstream, so a spodumene producer. Subsequent to that, you essentially want to be above the line. Now, why is that? This is not an uncommon phenomena. Lithium sector is relatively immature in terms of just the period it's been going for. Contrast it with, say, copper and so forth. Typically, most other commodities, you'll find that upstream is where the economic rent is extracted. Downstream conversion is typically capital-intensive and low margin. So this bears out what you'd expect to see in this space. So in short, if you're thinking about economic return as a shareholder, we expect you are, where would you want to be investing? It's upstream. Now, we're not anti-downstream, but for downstream to occur and for us to participate in it, it really takes probably three key conditions. One, you've got to get the right policy settings from government. So Investment Quebec and the Quebec government absolutely want to see a battery ecosystem developed. So there's a tick there. Beyond that, you've got to be able to fund it, and you've got to be able to run it. The reality is that folks that have tried to run downstream operations outside of China, it's not gone well. We did work on preliminary DFS carbonate. I was actually just having a flick through it yesterday. At these prices, that project would be well underwater. I know people sort of think, "Well, we should pour into it." We're going to work through this methodically, and the data plays out that we want to be more upstream than downstream. If we're in downstream, right technical partner and the financial structure's got to be there. We're not going to bet the farm on downstream. Next slide, please. The next one. FY25 guidance, please just say unchanged. Volume 190,000-210,000. You'll see that there's a little more sales going out. Reason for that is we had a ship slip from June of last year into July, so there's a bit of carryover there. Importantly, cost guidance unchanged, so AUD 1,150-AUD 1,300. So certainly, we expect the second half to come home with a wet sale. Capital expenditure is on track, and that exploration expenditure on the far side is principally the flow-through share funding that we described earlier. So the good news is FY25 guidance, we're not out with anything being altered there, so we're in shape to be able to deliver on what we committed to. And then the final slide, I just want to give you a sense of what we're going to be focused on over the next 18 months. Next slide, please. So you've seen the first five pillars, and the sixth one is obviously the merger with Piedmont. As I said, completing the first half of next calendar year. It's obviously integration work. We want to make sure we get those synergies and extract all those benefits out of it. But in addition to that, key actions or key catalysts for us next calendar year, NAL brownfield expansion, Moblan DFS revisited. We also want to be able to push NAL along with some process improvement projects as well. There'll also be a project prioritization and ranking post-merger as well, and understanding where an Authier, Carolina, and those sort of things fit in as well. So there's a ton of work, but essentially, we've laid this out. So if you ask, "What do I get up and focus on in the morning?" It's absolutely this because this is the pathway that we're going to continue to where we'll be in a position to deliver superior shareholder value. With that, I'm going to pause. Happy to take any questions you folks have got. James, I think we've got a question over here. Yeah, that's all right. Thanks, James. How are you going, Ryan? Was IQ aware of the merger developing? Did they endorse it or provide any input into it? What's their feedback now that the process is documented? So short answer, so IQ is Investment Quebec. They're obviously a JV partner with Moblan, and obviously, we'd purchased NAL from them. Short answer is I was in Quebec last week, met with Investment Quebec, very supportive of the merger. They're excited about it. They were key stakeholders, so they've been engaged throughout the process. Yeah, I can't like they're as encouraged by it as we are. I guess just one more question is post-merger, you mentioned earlier speed to market. Will Moblan still be one of the top priorities bringing to market? I think the short answer is yes, and not sort of preempting where the board gets to. I think if I looked at the portfolio and if everything was a greenfield project today, Moblan's unparalleled. It's like it really is a bit of a unique opportunity. Reality is we're going to get through permitting at Moblan. Permitting, and particularly at an expanded resource base, is probably more in the space of probably five years rather than sort of being a quick three-year period. So it's got a natural sequence to it. So we'll have to work that through with the board. But yeah, I mean, Moblan's going to be at the top of the order. The question will be just how quickly we can get through the permitting. Thank you. James. Yeah, I'm James. I think in the last couple of years, many shareholders expecting offtake agreement with downstream partners or battery manufacturers or chemical companies, but it didn't happen, and then so far, you've done many things like improving motion utilization or production yield, so it's all good, but still, we don't have offtake, right? And now we're actually facing the merger with Piedmont, so everybody knows the limitation with Piedmont offtake, and then that really limits our ability to grow, so it's all solved now, so now you don't have any limitation or no problems at all, or we are ready for offtake with long-term good partners like that, or do you have any plan to do something? Because we're still waiting for an offtake agreement with the potential long-term partners, but I think merging with Piedmont, I think that cannot solve all the problems which Sayona has. So what's your opinion? Great. Thank you. So if I supply it back, clearly entering an offtake agreement with the Piedmont offtake arrangement in place was challenging. I mean, we had a relatively small volume to be able to do anything with. Piedmont have got existing offtake agreements with Tesla and LG Chem. They'll need to run their course. We're certainly interested in being able to engage with downstream. Interesting enough, the fact that we're spot price exposed at the moment has actually given us more flexibility and probably more pricing upside than we would have had if we had been in an offtake arrangement. So short answer is we're open, right partner, if it makes economic sense and commercial sense for us. Just the other point I do want to make, but having been across a few commodities, just having an offtake agreement doesn't guarantee you anything because it's not uncommon for the counterparty to not perform on their tons. So I'll just give you an example. Let's say someone's got an offtake agreement for 50,000 tons. They just say, "I'm only taking 25 this year." You're back on the spot. So I'd say offtake agreements aren't the solution to everything. That's just one more question. Please, James. I think a few months ago, I looked into the post-goal at some meeting. And then I found a presenter slide, and then they are planned for a year. And I found the map in a potential investment. So they're looking for some mining companies, and especially in Canadian mining. And with the map, I could find some two spots. It looks like just like Moblan and NAL. Well, who wouldn't want it? All right. So can they do that? And then so I would just consider because previously, the Posco Holdings, the material procurement chief actually visited NAL, and there was actually media in the kind of some news, whatever, in Korea and in Australia as well. But nothing happened. So still, do you have a kind of connection? So maybe you can still deal with them, or maybe we've got more resources here, and then also merged. So maybe more attractive to potential partners. I think, James, to that question, we are more attractive under a merged co. scenario. And you'll see that one of the last action items I had in that second last column was very much about engaging with those strategic partners. So particularly at NAL, and it seems obvious, but I can't overstate how important it is to be the incumbent producer. Lots of other folks are talking about producing. We're the only ones that are producing. So when we hear about downstream ambition and so forth from others, reality is we're perfectly positioned to be able to service that North American market. And that's why it's so important we get through this low-price environment. So when the market turns, we're perfectly placed. So coming back to your specific question, we're open to strategic partners, but it's got to make sense for us. And the great thing about the merger is it's given us a lot of options, and it's given us this financial stability and the balance sheet, importantly, without any debt to be able to go after our growth options and think about who we partner with. So we don't have to wait too long. It's been waiting so long. Well, yeah, but again, James, I'll come back to it. I mean, just entering into an offtake agreement for the sake of it, it's got to be the right commercial element. So I can rest assured the board will look through these things, but we're not just going to blindly rip into one to say we've got an offtake. It's got to make commercial sense. And as I said, what you'll get from me and the team is that we're factually driven of data and commercially rational decisions. All right. Thank you. Thanks, James. Lucas, we do have a couple of questions online. Please. Andrew, yep. Yeah. So the question is, will the Piedmont offtake commitment with LG and Tesla continue after the proposed merger? Short answer is yes. Great. Thank you, and h ow can we justify a 50-50 merger based on market cap when Sayona has majority ownership of NAL that's producing revenue and more mineral resources in politically stable and mining-friendly regions than Piedmont? Noting also that Sayona has no debt and Piedmont has projects in Africa and North Carolina which would require significant capital investment. Yeah. Thank you for the question. Look, I think, as I said at the outset, without oversimplifying, willing buyer, willing seller. I mean, the reality is that Piedmont wanted a certain price for it. If we looked at where our respective market caps had traded over the last 12 months, they fit the 50-50. So if you like the market, it priced it at that. In addition, we'd also had independent valuations done, look at what the offtake agreement's worth, what their assets are worth. It all aligned at sort of 50-50. So again, what a lot of us have got to where we're at 60 and they're at 40, sure, but we wouldn't have got a deal done. So the bottom line is that's the bargain that we could drive. Thank you. And will this merger with Piedmont reduce my current shareholding and dilute my shares? There will be more shares on issue. And I think one of the questions we had earlier as well, one of the key elements that we'll also be bringing forward will be a share consolidation as well. So as I said, not in the interest of setting any records for shares on issue. So something else for us to focus on. Just one more. Which organizations have been responsible for shorting of the Sayona share price, and what can Sayona do to address this matter? Well, I don't personally know who's been shorting, but I mean, the best thing that we can do is deliver on our commitments and just continue to demonstrate that we're a company that can and will perform. That's all for now here. Thank you. Ken Moss, I spoke to you earlier. Yes, Ken. Lucas, I obviously expressed my disappointment with some of the decisions that have been made as far as shareholder value. And obviously, this merger is one of those things. There's a couple of questions I've got regarding that at the moment. The first thing is, in the last week, the new Trump administration has announced a 25% tariff on goods traveling from Canada to the US. Does it include our lithium offtake to Tesla? Yeah, we're watching that closely. I think there's probably a few hooks in there. I mean, a lot of those northern states in the U.S. actually are entirely reliant upon Canadian power. Just by way of an example. So if you think about it, I mean, Tesla's got an offtake agreement with Piedmont. I'm not sure whether Musk is signing up for another 25% tariff on his side. I think there's. So he would be responsible for the tariff. Well, yeah. So I mean, there's a bit of water to go under the bridge. I mean, Trump, he's not yet in office. He's announced it. I think let's see. But we're obviously keeping a very close eye on it. Ultimately, if it's not attractive for us to go into North America, it'll go into the rest of the seaboard market. Okay. Secondarily, you said about the downstream portion of it. We've got a half-built carbonate plant that hasn't been completed. Why haven't we looked for a chemical partner to fund that and complete it? Well, I think there's a couple of things. As I said, the initial technical study that was done, and it predated my time, so I had to look at this with, if you like, a fresh set of eyes. Capital estimate was plus sorry, minus 30%, plus 50%. My experience with technical studies is only pay attention to the plus 50%. So you put that onto capital estimate was around CAD 555. So we're north of 700 there. Lithium, sorry, on carbonate prices, this project is probably underwater on a net present value basis, probably during about minus 300. So under those assumptions, then you wouldn't be advancing the hydroxide plant in North Carolina? I think the short answer to that will have to be something for the board when we get together as merge co. But I mean, again, you can expect to see the same rational approach and analyzing projects and what's going to get priority in merged co that you're seeing within Sayona. Okay. My final question, as I've covered most of it before, is regarding how close we are to break even at NAL. Yeah. So we're at last quarter on a cost of production tons sold basis. We're at AUD 1,300. If we look at it just on tons produced, because tons sold, obviously, you get an impact on inventory build and so forth with how much volume shipped. On a tons produced basis, we're AUD 1,088. Our realized sale price was AUD 1,067. So we're in the ballpark. There's more work to do. And I can tell you Sylvain gets up in the morning, gets safety volume and cost. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Wherever you go, yeah. Everyone's going to get an answer. Just unrelated to all this, but the Pontiac Claims. Yes. There's quite a few not very much information I've been able to glean on the Pontiac Claims at all. I know they're there. I don't know how we got them, how we acquired them, what they cost or didn't cost, whether they're given to us by IQ or not. Can you give us some information? Yeah. I haven't got all the history, but it's quite topical. I was just talking with Sylvain about them yesterday. It'll be something that the board's going to put some thought into over the next little while around what we do with those claims. I mean, at the end of the day, all these things got holding costs. You can't own all the territory. And like Candler, on the back of NAL and Moblan, I mean, there's only so much territory we should hold. How did we get them? I haven't got the full history, but I know Dougal's here, and we'll be happy to catch up with you after the meeting and give you a bit of the rundown if that's of interest. There is a story back there. Can I interject? Of course, James. So we don't hide things off. But sorry to interrupt, Lucas, because I asked the same question a year ago because I didn't know. They just sort of appeared. And I think of potatoes and cars and Pontiac is there. But it was an opportunity at a period of time where someone was underfunded. Our exploration manager was in negotiation, and there was a very meager payment for them because they were at some risk of losing them. They were acquired through that, so it appeared on the books. I'm talking less than material disclosure number. The work on them, and Lucas and I were talking about, I think on what's today? Thursday. Tuesday. Focusing on where we are from those areas there. We've got a plethora. I mean, I can only reinforce Lucas's statement. I mean, I sat with Sylvain in, I think, probably March 2022 in the lookout, if anyone's been lucky enough to be able to get a perfect lookout over NAL. I said, "There's got to be more to this than where it is." We took the punt and we found more. It sort of pushes those things down the line, and particularly Tansim Pontiac satellite pits and the energy, the risk and reward to get those into the supply chain, given you've got you don't want to sort of eat your Brussels sprouts before your crème brûlée. So you sort of get in line. So there hasn't been a lot done on them. There's different traditional owner requirements. And that area is a little bit sensitive. So we've been focusing on putting our directions into the NAL deposit. Yeah. I think Lucas said it. I have owned a couple of horses in my time, foolishly. And if you don't rationalize your business, you'll only have a stable full of slow horses. So they're always of value to someone. So on that analogy, we'll cycle through and find there's a lid for every pot. And we'll go through that way. Lucas is onto it because it just hasn't been in the pecking order. It's there. But we're really focused on holding costs of those because land can be cheap to peg, but retaining it can be expensive to cash out the door. Sorry. Sorry, Lucas. No, great. Thank you. Thank you for the question. Lucas, I do have another question for you. Yes. Have you and the board considered a plan for if the lithium price remains depressed for a period of time? What options are available to the management team, and what can be done to lower NAL operating costs from here? Well, I think we're on a trajectory that we're going to get ourselves into a pretty decent position and break even during the course of this financial year. So I think that's not far away. And as I described earlier, we're in the ballpark already. So the other point, I just want to sort of reiterate for people that may not have experience. I've had to deal with operations that are in care and maintenance. Care and maintenance costs you. There's not the zero holding costs. It's expensive. And the other part that people need to be cognizant of is you go into care and maintenance, the workforce goes. Now, in the Abitibi region, that's a strong gold mining area. Gold mining is still going berserk. Unemployment's sitting sort of sub 3%. So that workforce goes. They're not sitting around waiting for us to come back. Then the other point you've got to try to get right is the timing. And it's not a case you walk back in and flick the switch back on. You've got to be able to recruit a workforce. Realistically, take your 12 months from the time you take a decision to get back up to full noise again. So then the question I've got is, when would you make that decision about turning it back on? So the reality is we get ourselves to break even. We just basically ride this storm out and be perfectly positioned when the market turns because the reality is if you're out of the game and the market turns again, you're going to miss that opportunity. So we actually think we've absolutely pulled the right lever on this. And we're just going to, as I said, bite down on the mouthguard and grind through this period. Sorry, I think a couple more questions here. Yeah. Sorry, if you just grab the microphone so the folks online can. So if we're not going down sort of the carbonate plant, does that mean that we'll be continuing to send our spod to China? Yeah. So right now, that's effectively where, and that's where the conversion capacity is. I mean, there's a bit in Japan, a bit in Korea. We'd dearly love to see downstream capacity in Quebec. I mean, it knocks that logistics cost out. It makes a whole lot of sense. So don't get me wrong. At the board, we're absolutely supportive of downstream, but it's got to be the right technical partner, and someone's got to come with the right financing structure on it. We're not going to bet the farm at Sayona or Merg Co and moving downstream because there's an expertise there that is just not, it's not the same as mining. Andrew reminds me that Andrew has a long and storied experience around this. Chemical conversion and lithium chemicals is far removed from producing spodumene. Of course. One, you were saying your graph was lithium hydroxide. We're going into carbonate because that's what they. T hink of them the same, but on that graph in terms of the conversion. So if you were thinking about where's the economic rent being extracted right now, it's more so upstream than downstream. Downstream, capital-intensive, technically risky. If you were going to put a dollar in anywhere today, it'll be upstream rather than downstream. Hi, I'm Jamie. I just wanted to ask, how much more do you think we can get down to OpEx? Because last year, on an earnings call, Keith was saying some wild numbers, and I was just like, "That's pretty impressive if we can get there." Yeah, I wasn't privy to Keith's wild numbers. So look, I can tell you, Sylvain and I look, I've got an operating background. I'm a mining engineer. It's just got a methodical approach to continue to grind these out. I can tell you, Sylvain's negotiating with our mining services contractor. So we're doing that. Logistics, we're also renegotiating contracts. So we're really leaving no stone unturned. It's not just a case where trying to push recovery or more throughput through the mill, looking for all these opportunities. And obviously, with Merge Co, it'll also strip a big chunk of overheads out for us as well. All that cost that's associated with maintaining the JV falls away. So that's stuff that we're really looking forward to being able to do. And ultimately, that's a benefit to shareholders. Thank you. Just ask one more. I understand that the difficulty is in bringing back online, if you like, or completing the downstream plant. Is there any possibility, perhaps, of going somewhere midstream? I recall something about 12 months ago, 18 months ago, I think it was, where Rio Tinto was purchasing some spodumene from us and testing it in their. They've got a system where they can apparently increase from, say, 5% to 18% or whatever. Yeah. Would something like that be an option? Look, I think the short answer is we'd want to see that proven at commercial scale. Again, we're not a technology company, and we need to be crystal clear. It's the old adage, "Stick to your knitting." So we know what we're strong and good at. That's not to say we won't grow into areas. So one, commercially demonstrated. And then I think it's understanding what's the technical risk associated with it because like all these things, they all sound great on paper, but having been involved with the design of a nickel refinery and stuff like that, these things are not simple. And it's not the same mindset that we've got for someone that operates a truck is not the same that operates a chemical plant. Lucas. Thank you. So back to the merger. If I wanted to invest in PLL, I would have invested in PLL. I understand. I really take your point about cleaning up the offtake and the ownership structure. That is the clear advantage, way in ahead of anything else. But the technical ability they bring is nothing. The projects they bring, North Carolina, they've got a disastrous reputation. Tennessee's dead in the water. Ghana's in a jurisdiction no one would really rather be in. They're carrying debt. They've got multiple class actions against them. They were hemorrhaging money and not doing very well and probably sitting on Wall Street death row, really, in reality. Keith was walking up and down Wall Street trying to make deals, and no one would deal with him. I understand we've come probably then from a position of strength. My shareholder value now looks extremely diluted. You said diluted, but it's extremely diluted. It's 11.5 billion shares when it's all said and done. Is that your understanding? That'd be right, yeah. Yeah. Right. So it's more than what the register is now on top of what we have. So to get that market cap back, there has to be some significant moves for us to get that back in our shareholding. Pardon me. So there's been some quite extreme measures gone to get to that end goal of cleaning up the ownership structure when if we persevered with them and kept the pressure on, they might have folded anyway, and we could have got them on the cheap. So you also mentioned that the two offtakes we have to honor. Do you know the complexities of those offtakes? You know, the Tesla offtake is below par, and on the LG term sheet, it is a permanent discount to spot price. Yeah. So I mean, we've obviously done DD. So I've just come through it. So I mean, the elements you've described, Lucas, I'd take a different view on them, but we'd worked through them methodically. We had U.S. counsel, legal counsel engaged, Australian legal counsel. We poured all over those, the allegations around sort of class lawsuits and so forth. I mean, for those who are unfamiliar, in the U.S., those things are not uncommon. I mean, effectively, you've got ambulance chasers that just lob these things, and they basically throw them at the wall. We've researched them appropriately from a legal perspective, but I think people need to be a little cognizant of the jurisdiction in which you're operating. Coming back to this wasn't about cleaning up the offtake agreement. It was about really being able to extract the value at NAL. As I said, as a shareholder at Sayona, you'd have been sitting there and saying, "Well, what are you going to do next with NAL?" NAL was going nowhere. So we've now got a platform to be able to do something material. And coming back to it, Ghana is not Mali. Ghana is, in terms of jurisdiction, in Africa. I mean, Africa's got a different sovereign risk to other places, but arguably, Queensland's not everything it's cracked up to be for a coal miner either, right? So there's elements here that are a little. Do you know a bit about that, DM? Well, it's one of a few different commodities I've been in, Lucas. But the point I'd add there is that Ewoyaa is a very interesting project. We've had technical folks go down there. Sylvain's operated in West Africa for over eight years. He knows what it is to build and operate down there. So I think it's probably oversimplistic to say it's just about the offtake agreement. There's those elements. That's why we want to do the DFS because we need to be able to inform the market of the potential of NAL. That has really got the ability. As I said, you can't understate the value of incumbency because when the market turns, NAL will be exposed to that. As a shareholder, as you'd have been aware with the offtake, we were capped at AUD 900 for those tonnes going. And that wasn't indexed as well, right? So over years, that was going to continue to deteriorate. Yeah. Over the last year, the shipments that have been going out, the PLL offtake was actually probably earning us a little bit before we did the latest pricing structure, the formula-bound pricing structure. The PLL offtake was actually making us more than what we were getting with the traders out of China. So in itself, that offtake under these circumstances in this market wasn't that bad a thing. It was actually giving us more revenue than what we were getting via the traders. Yeah. I think, Lucas, I mean, we've matured a little bit in terms of who our trading partners are as well. So I think it's probably not an appropriate sort of comparison. So I think there's some stuff there. We had a time when we'd have done a bit better, but we're in decent shape now. I think Dougal and the team are doing a great job on that. So I think that's pushing forward. We understand what the requirements are in the LG Chem and the Tesla offtake as well. So we're coming in with our eyes wide open. I mean, at the end of the day, we think this is a way that we will realize superior shareholder value. And we're thinking about this not just on today, but the medium and longer term. And in some ways, Rio Tinto's acquisition of Arcadium has really sort of given you a sense of this is a decade-long bet. It's not about if you hear about the price today, really what management and the board are setting you up for is the medium and long term that this thing's really going to perform. You've also mentioned doubling capacity of the concentrator in NAL. Big OpEx, sorry, big CapEx, where we're losing on every tonne. Is that a longer-term strategy or? Well, I think, yeah. I mean, well, there's a couple of things. I mean, from a capital intensity perspective, NAL expansion would be, I'd suspect, would be the lowest capital intensity of any of those projects in Quebec because all the existing infrastructure and utilities are there. So effectively, you're talking about crushing, some crushing, grinding, and flotation. Logistics chain's already there. There's no constraints on that front. And then you think about, so for example, you've got a double volume. What that does for your unit cost basis, given you've got a significantly, let's say, 50% fixed cost basis, a quarter of your costs are going to come straight off just through dilution. Now, that's not the simple singular reason, but you start doing that, you're going to be sitting at probably high 500s on a US dollar per ton base, C1 FOB. I mean, that's going to ride out any storm. And you've got the incumbency. So look, we've got the work to do on that. So that's just sort of spitballing, but we think there's a way through there. And coming back to it, NAL was going nowhere without us transacting or doing something with it. Sorry, just coming back, and I think whether you'd asked the question or somewhere else, there is a world where Keith or Piedmont could have sold the offtake agreement as a royalty stream or whatever, and then NAL would have been doomed. So some of this is like we thought about these things. It wasn't just, as James said, something that popped in our head in the last couple of weeks. The composition of the board going forward, four apiece, chairman on one side, MD on the other hand. It seems like a landlocked board. If there's a PLL angle and there's a Sayona angle and they want Authier and we want Moblan, how do you resolve it? Well, ultimately, the numbers I've lived through these JVs where they're 50-50. And the great thing is it actually makes you people aren't trying to talk their own book. Basically, the numbers come up, and then you've got to make a decision. So again, without preempting where the board will get to, all those projects will have a batting order, and they'll have a value, and then we're going to make a decision about where we're going to invest. It's as simple as that. And in some ways, you've already seen that play out at the moment. I mean, Authier's gone on the back burner given NAL's Moblan's there. We've been in cash preservation. I would like to push Moblan on a little further than we had. We've been able to do the drilling. We'll get the MRE, and now that we're appropriately capitalized, we're going to push Moblan along, and probably just the other point, just back on the dilution aspect, if we were to go and capital raise in this market, absent this construct, I think it would have been a 40% discount. So I can't undersell the work that Andrew and the team did on that capital raise. To get it away, you get favorable terms. Yeah. I mean, very tight pricing, very tight pricing in what is a very, very difficult equity market, and also the caliber of people who sit in the register. Sorry, just the other point I should add on the merger as well, it's our intention also to have an SPP for retail to be able to participate in as well. Under the same conditions. Yes. All right. So Lucas, I do have a couple of questions online. Yeah. Look, I might just grab a couple of these and then. So first question is, does Sayona still have a joint venture with Morella, and what's the current status of that joint venture in tenements? Short answer, yes, we do. There's activity going on. Our Western Australian exploration manager's plugged in there and works continuing with JV. Okay. With the merger coming up that's a little bit longer dated, what are the plans or catalysts for the company's share price in the shorter term? Well, I think we've got one, we've got to continue to deliver on our reduction unit costs, so volume, safety volume and costs. So doing what we say we're going to do, that's obviously the key aspect. I think also MRE updates as well. It's probably a question of whether we get completion done before they get up, but MRE updates for NAL, Moblan should also be pretty significant milestones I would have thought. Great. Thank you. And one more. With Trump coming to power next year, what do you think's going to happen with the Inflation Reduction Act and how will this impact merge co? Yeah. Great question. I think given Trump's track record, no one really knows. But what's interesting is that if you look at where the bulk of the funding from the IRA, so the Inflation Reduction Act has gone, it's simply gone to Republican states. So Trump might not like it, but I'm sure his representatives from those states do. So I don't know. What's that all mean? Probably not much changes, I suspect. And one more. With the proposed expansion of NAL, what does that mean for Authier and the plans that have been outlined there for that project in the DFS? I think you do use James's analogy. We can't end up with a stable full of slow horses. Authier is probably a slower horse if we compare it with prospective NAL or Moblan. So again, something we've worked through on the batting order. And then the question is, how do we monetize that or do something smart with it? But fair to say it's down the pecking order. Probably just doesn't make a lot of sense for us right now. Last quarter, we did a few clever things which enabled us to report an increase in cash in hand by the time we reported. So one of them was drawing down the ROM. Now, we drew down on the ROM. I was just wondering, at NAL, you can't quite see it or break it out in a report, but do we spend any extra time over the summer months removing overburden, exposing the higher quality pegmatite in order to ease up the access over the winter months and perhaps reduce the mining costs over the winter months? What I'm getting at is, do we expect to see a small spike upwards in costs over the winter months while we're trying to charge the cost back down? Yeah. So I think two things. One, so we did see a bit of a dip in ROM stocks last quarter. They've been rebuilt during the course of this quarter. Interesting enough, I asked Sylvain, it was one of the questions I had, and it was probably from an Australian mindset, how much time do we lose in mining last year? Lost three days. You don't sort of see. I mean, what I would say is the Quebec folks say they're tough and they know how to operate in these conditions. Those seasonal variations that you'd expect to get, if I was to use the Australian analogy, we think about the wet season, it's going to knock us around a lot more. In the absence of blizzards and those sort of things, seasonal, not a great deal of variability. The other point I'd note as well is we've got the crushed ore dome in place. That wasn't going last winter. That's going to give us quite a bit more flexibility and contingency for the mill in winter as well. Short answer is, yeah, no material change in our cost profile through that period. Yeah, not much else to add. We're reporting 91% mill utilization. So we're getting up in a really well-performing end from the mill and production side. So obviously, the room for improvement there is reducing. So looking over to the mining side of it, do you feel that there's a lot more there that can be improved on to get that? Yeah. The short answer is yes. I mean, we're not where we want to be. I think there's two other elements just to note. One, we're still mining through remnant underground stopes. So there was an underground mine there previously. So there's some additional costs that we're carrying on that. Now, we'll be through that in the next two to three years. So we'll see material drop. That's not going to fix it. It doesn't help us today, but just as we think about the expansion and so forth, there's a material reduction in costs there. And the preliminary work that we've done around pit shells and so forth also indicates a strip ratio reduction on a life mine basis as well for the expanded resource base. So plenty of work for us to do in that space. So we're really quite positive. I think James is giving me the wrap-up now because we've only got this room here at midday, so. No, no, not at all. But I think, sorry, Lucas, in the interest of time. And fortunately, there's a lot of us to spread around. Well, there's a lot of me to spread around anyway. But feel free. I think we've got a great. Firstly, I want to thank everyone for their participation. And the way the meetings flowed has been terrific. I struggled a bit last year. Once bitten and twice shy, we were better prepared. The appreciation comes in the questioning, the line of questioning, the ability to foresee some of that questions allows us not to dwell on things that are problematic, so I thank all of you for that. That's really been terrific. Thank the board. I think, and certainly part of the board is Dylan coming on board here. It was an unusual circumstance, me sort of retiring from the interim role, Lucas coming in and recruiting people at the same time and sort of handing the baton across, and it's the most seamless handover I've ever seen, so that's been terrific. And certainly from the senior management side and all of the management side from Dougal and his team, Chris, Ian, Alex that are here today, Jane that runs everyone in there, Andrew coming on board with the IR as Lucas said, that being involved in that type of raise in this market and the positive feedback that came and the quality of the institutions coming in as a vote of confidence. It may seem difficult, but it is a really big vote of confidence. And probably not last but least is Sylvain and his team. He's online sitting up there and a little bit snowbound at the moment, but without he and Sal and supporting me, we would have struggled. So appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. I think that's the smallest part of the room, but we can utilize this part here. And sorry, I missed something earlier on. There are bathrooms out of the door and to your left and immediately to your right. I should have done this earlier. And the fire escape is immediately out to your door on the right there. So sorry if it'd be remiss if anything goes wrong. So just come and say good day, and we'd be more than happy to have a chat. Thank you.