Mining plc Investor Presentation Q&A. Throughout this recorded meeting, investors will be in listen-only mode. Questions are encouraged and can be submitted at any time by the Q&A tab situated on the right-hand corner of your screen. Simply type in your question and press send. The company may not be in a position to answer every question received during the meeting itself. However, the company can review all questions submitted today and publish responses where it is appropriate to do so. Before we begin, we would like to submit the following poll. I would now like to hand you over to Ed Bowie, Chief Executive. Good morning. Good morning, and thank you, Paul. Thank you, everybody, for attending today's presentation. I'll initially just run through the corporate presentation and then look forward to receiving and answering any questions that you may have. Beowulf Mining, as I'm sure most of you are aware, is focused on delivering critical raw materials for the European green transition. We are a U.K.-registered company listed both on the AIM market and the Spotlight market in Sweden. 80% of our register is currently on the Spotlight market. We have two core assets. We have Jokkmokk Iron and the Kallak Iron Ore Project in northern Sweden. Kallak is capable of producing an extremely high-grade concentrate suitable for supporting the decarbonisation of the steel industry. We're completing a pre-feasibility study on Kallak at the moment and looking to submit the environmental permit application later this year. In Finland, we have Grafintec, a business focused on developing an anode materials plant and with a number of other graphite projects. Finally, we have a portfolio of exploration assets, including Vardar Minerals, which is focused on Kosovo, but we have other exploration assets in the Nordic region. We are in the process of undertaking a capital raise. The raise we have secured GBP 2.1 million so far. Of that, we have GBP 750,000 from financial institutions. This is an important step forward for the company, bringing some long-term strategic investors onto the register. Coupled with that, we are looking to add additional funding through a U.K. retail offer and a rights issue in Sweden. Both of those are live. The subscription periods are open for both. The rights issue will conclude on Monday of next week, and the retail offer concludes at the end of this week. Further details are on the company's website. We operate primarily in the Nordic region. It's an area where environmental regulation is robust. Permitting regimes are stringent and rigorous, and the local population and government are very conscious of social and environmental impacts. We see this as a positive. We also benefit from being in the region. It's a significant producer of renewable energy, so we can operate with clean renewable energy with our core projects. There is also an enormous amount of innovation relating to decarbonisation and transition to the green economy, and we are looking to benefit from that as we develop both Grafintec and Jokkmokk Iron Mines. First, I'll talk about Jokkmokk Iron. This picture shows some drill core from the project, and in the middle of the picture, there is a magnetic pen, so you can see how magnetic the ore is. This is a critical feature of the project. It enables us to upgrade the material through physical upgrading benefication and to an extremely high-grade concentrate. Its magnetic properties are important. The map shows the Kallak project. It comprises three defined deposits. Kallak North is the core asset at the moment. There are two Kallak South deposits that have been drilled, but the focus is on Kallak North. Within Kallak North, we have a resource able to sustain production over a 13-year mine life, 14-year production life, and that sits within the blue circle, which is the exploitation concession, which was awarded to the company in 2022. The green squares are our exploration licenses, and we have further exploration licenses south of the Little Lule River, which runs just to the south of Kallak North. Importantly, this river has significant hydroelectric dams on it, so it is a major contributor to the renewable energy production in this part of Sweden. As I mentioned, the core feature of the deposit is that we can produce an extremely high-grade concentrate, but it has a number of other benefits. We are in an area, as I've mentioned, with a lot of renewable energy generation, and we are also in a region which has seen very significant large-scale mining over many decades. The little inset in the top of the image shows the map of Sweden. We're up in the Arctic Circle in Norrbotten County. To the north of us, we have significant mines such as Malmberget, Kiruna, both run by LKAB and major iron ore mines. There is also Boliden's Aitik Mine, which is Europe's largest open-pit mine, all within 150 or so kilometers from the Kallak project. There is significant infrastructure and a skilled workforce with experience in operating large-scale mines in the region. The importance of Kallak is that we can produce this high-grade concentrate. The reason that is important is the steel industry is seeking to decarbonize. It currently constitutes about 7% of global CO2 emissions, and the industry's ambition is to reduce the carbon emissions intensity by about 60% by 2050. That requires adoption of new technology, transition from blast furnace to electric arc furnace, and these factors require high-grade iron ore. Typically, iron ore contains a number of impurities, including silica and alumina. These are called gangue minerals, and they will block up an electric arc furnace. The critical factor for the green transition decarbonization of the steel industry is high-grade and low-gangue concentrate, and that is exactly what Kallak can produce. There aren't many projects globally that are able to produce this material, and therefore there's expected to be a bifurcation in the industry and high-grade iron ore concentrates receiving higher premiums than they currently do, the price sort of opening up for high-grade over more standard concentrates. We've done a lot of work towards the pre-feasibility study at Kallak. We have done all the metallurgical test work. We have designed the site layout, the processing plant and flow sheet, and we've made significant progress with transport, logistics, and broader infrastructure issues. The deposit, which is the pale grey sort of oval in the left-hand side of the image, outcrops at surface. The strip ratio of waste to ore is very low, 0.5 to 1, so we do not have to move an awful lot of waste to access the ore body. The in-situ grade is about 28%, and we will be upgrading that to about 70%. Initially, the waste is stockpiled in the waste rock dump, which is the brown sort of shape to the north of the image. The ore is then processed through the processing plant, and the concentrate is shipped to the rail terminal. I will talk a little bit more about that. The tailings from the processing is stored in a conventional tailings dam. We intend to produce about 2.7 million tonnes a year of concentrate, and as I mentioned before, it's extremely high-grade. Onto the logistics and transportation, we are very well placed to benefit from existing operations and existing infrastructure. We are 40 km away from the inland barn and railway, and the intention is our preferred option at the moment is to use a slurry pipeline. As I mentioned, we will be processing, producing a high-grade concentrate. This is a wet process, so it will be in slurry form. We will pump that slurry in a pipeline to the railhead where it will be dried, filtered with a filter press. The water will then be returned to the mine in a separate pipeline to the mine site, I should say, and used again and reused in the process. The concentrate in dry cake form will be loaded onto the rail and railed to the north, where it will then join the Malmbanan, which means iron ore railway, and that runs from the Bothnian coast at Luleå all the way to Narvik on the Norwegian coast. Our current preference is to use Narvik as our port. It gives us access to a deep-water ice-free port, so we can use cape-sized vessels and access international markets. The Baltic obviously freezes in the winter and has a lower berth, so you cannot take larger ships into the Baltic. Logistics is very well advanced. We are still doing a bit more work on the slurry pipeline, both technical and environmental. It is a very well-known and understood technology. However, it hasn't been used extensively in the Nordic region, and therefore we want to make sure that we do all the work that we need to to make sure that it is fit for purpose and it is something that authorities and permitting regimes are able to understand, and we can permit accordingly. We are well advanced on both the environmental permit application and also the pre-feasibility study. We have a number of items that are outstanding with respect to the permit application. These relate partly to the transport corridor and ensuring that we can permit the pipeline solution. We are also doing a social impact assessment and completing the World Heritage Impact Assessment. With respect to the technical work that's required, again, a little bit more work on the pipeline, and then we need to do the economic analysis. The one key element that still remains to be done is the infill drilling. The open pit has a little bit of inferred material in the north, close to surface. In a scoping study, this inferred material can be included. In a pre-feasibility and feasibility study, you can't include inferred material. We want to convert this into the higher confidence measured and indicated categories. It will then be included in the resource estimate, can then be included in reserves, and ultimately in the mine planning. We're not anticipating that 80% of the resource is already measured and indicated category, so we're not anticipating any significant change, but it's something that we just have to do to comply with the pre-feasibility study requirements. The scoping study that I mentioned, the economics are presented on the left-hand side. We believe there is very significant upside to those economics, and I can explain where those upsides come at this stage. Just comparing on a sort of like-for-like basis, the scoping study anticipated that 2/3 of the material would be lower grade, lower quality, and therefore be used as blast furnace feed. This material was only anticipated to deliver a $29 a tonne premium. What we've demonstrated through our metallurgical test work is we can produce actually a higher volume of material at the DRI grade, the direct reduction grade, and that commands a $45 a tonne premium. We are getting the full premium on 100% of our product. As I mentioned before, we are seeing a bifurcation in the sector, and we are seeing those premiums increase. We do anticipate that over time, higher quality material will command an increasing premium over lower qualities. The other factor to point out is the benchmark price that was used, long-term benchmark, was $80 a tonne. Now, the benchmark price for 62% Fe is presented in the chart at the top of the top right-hand side of the slide. The average over the last five years has been $125 a tonne, and the price has rarely touched $80 a tonne over that period. We've used a long-term consensus price of $97 a tonne, and that delivers close to a billion U.S. dollars of NPV and an IRR north of 30%. Robust economics. We obviously need to update our capital cost estimate, operating costs, and we've obviously revised the design of the plant. There will be some areas where costs go up, including the pipeline, but there are other areas where we've made significant savings, including with the tailings facility where we've already priced the changes on the tailings, and we anticipate significant savings there. There will be some movement both up and down, and those numbers will be updated in due course. Longer term, there is further upside with Kallak. This image shows the broader exploration license portfolio that we have. The pink areas represent magnetic anomaly. It was flown for magnetics some years ago, and the magnetics obviously follow the two Kallak North and the Kallak South deposits, but there's also extensive material to the south of the Little Luleå River. There have been two drill holes in south of the river. Both hit economic intersections, both in terms of grade and width. There is an expectation that we can grow the resource very significantly. Indeed, the exploration targets have been put on the magnetic anomalies of up to 700 million tonnes of material. A significant increase on our current 136 million tonnes of resource in Kallak North. Now, moving on to Grafintec. Grafintec is our Finnish graphite business, and we are focused on delivering an anode materials plant, processing graphite to produce the precursor for lithium-ion battery anodes. Until August last year, we had a site reserved in the GigaVaasa Industrial Hub, which is on the west coast of Finland. We actually allowed that reservation to lapse for a number of reasons, and we are in active discussions both with GigaVaasa but with a number of other sites about potentially locating our plant there. Last week, I was in Finland with Rasmus, and we visited one potential site. We think it has very significant advantages, and we are looking to move forward and make a decision on our final decision on where to locate the plant in the coming months. In addition to the development of the plant, we have a number of exploration projects. I will touch on those later, but just to highlight the Aitolampi project in eastern Finland, which currently has one of Europe's largest flake graphite resources, and just eight kilometers away from it, we have Rääpysjärvi, which has the hallmarks of being a similar size. The graphite market, graphite can be sourced from both mines, natural graphite, but also synthetic graphite, which is essentially a byproduct of the petroleum industry. Both sources of graphite are used in the production of anodes for lithium-ion batteries. The expectation is that the composition of batteries will increasingly favor natural graphite because it is lower cost to produce and has a lower environmental footprint. The key thing about both supply chains of natural and synthetic graphite is that China constitutes 75% of the market, and elements of both supply chains, they control nearly 100%. Very strong monopoly on the graphite space. Europe is aiming, under the Critical Raw Materials Act, has classified graphite as both a strategic and a critical raw material. If the growth in electric vehicles continues as expected or even half as much as forecast, there will be a huge increase in demand for graphite going forward. The Critical Raw Materials Act has a target by 2030 of mining 10% and processing 40% of internal consumption. Currently, there is very minimal mining, and there is no processing capacity within Europe. There is a huge market potential to fill, and Grafintec aims to do that. We've recently completed the pre-feasibility study on the anode materials plant. We're very focused on developing this in Finland. Finland has Europe's lowest cost energy, and it's also very low carbon energy, so no reliance on fossil fuels. Finland also has a very long track record of mineral processing, excuse me, and so has skilled workforce and expertise and understanding of the mineral processing sector. We feel it's a very positive place to operate. We also get significant support from Business Finland and other organizations looking to develop green industries in the region. Our plan is initially to import graphite concentrate. It then passes through a three-stage process: spheronisation, which essentially forms uniform particles; purification, which takes the concentrate and upgrades it to a grade of 99.95% fixed carbon content and higher; and the final stage is coating, where a carbon material is coated around the fine spherical graphite, which improves the physical and electrochemical properties of the anode material. The final product is called CSPG, or Coated Spherical Purified Graphite, and that is the anode precursor. We initially plan phase I production of about 25,000 tonnes of CSPG. We'll also produce some fine material, and this material has a number of potential uses, industrial uses. We need to do more work to investigate those, but it could be a valuable byproduct. We recently completed the pre-feasibility study. We've demonstrated that the technology that we're using can produce battery-grade material. Importantly, we have demonstrated it can do it with very robust economics. For an initial capital expenditure of EUR 225 million, we can generate an IRR of 37% and an NPV of close to EUR 1 billion. Extremely profitable project, generating free cash flow in excess of EUR 100 million a year when in full production. Importantly, we anticipate that the plant will be a very low-cost producer relative to existing producers and our peer group. There are a number of reasons for that. We benefit from the low-cost energy in Finland, but also the process that we are using is a more environmentally friendly process and requires fewer personnel to manage the hydrofluoric acid, which is used in a lot of conventional anode production currently. We see that as we can deliver low-cost and low environmental impact anode material. In terms of the development timeline for the anode material plant, we have completed the pre-feasibility study, and we're well advanced with the environmental impact assessment work. Once we have identified the site, which, as I've mentioned, we hope to do in the coming months, we can complete the environmental impact assessment with the site-specific requirements. The intention then is to initiate the pilot test work. We need to produce sufficient material that we can pre-qualify it with the end users and also demonstrate that our process works at scale. It operates well at bench scale, but we need to prove that it also works at pilot scale. That will take us through the balance of 2025 and into 2026. We'll then have a two-year construction period and hope to be in production during 2028 or 2029. Our longer-term strategy is to build a fully integrated, vertically integrated graphite business in Finland. I've mentioned Aitolampi, one of Europe's largest flake graphite resources. There is scope to grow that resource. Rääpysjärvi, the lower of the two maps on the right-hand side of the slide, has the hallmarks of being at least as large and potentially higher grade. The pink material on both maps is electromagnetic high, indicative of graphitic schist material. Obviously, there is at least as much material in the Rääpysjärvi project. Rääpysjärvi has never been drilled, but the surface sampling that has been done has delivered higher-grade material than we found at Aitolampi. We've done metallurgical test work on both projects. Both are amenable to upgrading to battery grade, so we believe they'd be very suitable feedstocks for the processing plant. Our strategy is to maintain these projects in good standing, to advance them, but really focus on developing the graphite anode material plant in the first instance. This is a longer-term strategy. Moving on to our exploration portfolio, initially, Vardar Minerals. Vardar has a large exploration portfolio in Kosovo, which is in the heart of the Tethyan Belt. On the map on the right-hand side, I've highlighted a number of the world-class assets that are located in the Tethyan. The two that I point out are Stan Trg mine, which is controlled by Trepça, Kosovo's state-owned mining company, and Rio Tinto's Jadar deposit in Serbia. Stan Trg mine is surrounded by our Mitrovica licences on the left-hand map on this Stan Trg has been one of Europe's largest lead zinc mines over many decades. It is undercapitalized and underperforming now, but it is still just about in production. There was a huge refinery and smelter complex in Mitrovica. It is no longer in operation, but the focus during Yugoslavian times up until the 1980s was to find more material for that lead zinc smelter. Exploration was focused on lead and zinc exploration, and other commodities were overlooked. We believe that we have potential Stan Trg analogs, so we have similar geology, similar material, particularly at the Red Lead deposit in the Red Lead target, in the south of the Mitrovica licenses. We have other exciting opportunities here. We have found what we think is an epithermal gold system, high sulfidation, in the Marten Peak licenses in the center of the Mitrovica licenses. Indeed, we believe there is potential for porphyritic copper material. We've found both porphyry with anomalous copper and other minerals, not at economic grades at this stage, but it is indicative that this system is being driven by, that this huge system is being driven by, a large porphyry at depth. It requires further exploration. We're in discussions with a number of different parties about coming in and joint venturing so that we can benefit from their expenditure and expertise in such a large target without incurring the costs ourselves. In the east of Kosovo, we have the Viti licences, and I would just flag the circular structure in the middle of the map. This is an ancient Miocene basin. It is the same geology and age as the geological setting for the Jadar deposit. We've done a little bit of stratigraphic drilling, and we've done significant spring water sampling. Both have demonstrated anomalous lithium and borate. Potentially, we're looking at a similar deposit type to the Jadar deposit. Again, no discovery hole at this stage, but we are in discussions with a number of large mining companies about potentially joint venturing this project. We have other exploration licenses with very interesting potential. We have a copper gold target just to the south of the Kallak Iron Ore Project. This could be what's described as an iron oxide copper gold target, of which there are a number that have been described in this part of the world. We've returned very high-grade, up to 14.6% copper from boulder sampling that we conducted in the last couple of years on the license. Historic drilling has also delivered significant and interesting results. In Finland, we've got the MS project, which was drilled by the Finnish Geological Survey. They were doing essentially scout drilling, inspected very interesting and highly anomalous cobalt and nickel grades. We've done a little bit of surface sampling, and the intention is, again, to find a partner to move these projects forward. In summary, our core assets are in the process of being de-risked or are significantly de-risked already. We have completed the pre-feasibility study on Grafintec and are very well advanced with Kallak. We believe both have strong growing markets, particularly given the focus on decarbonisation and electrification. We are in very good jurisdictions, benefiting from innovation and robust permitting regimes. We also have an exciting portfolio of exploration assets. Our intention is not to progress those too aggressively ourselves. We will do low-cost exploration, but we are actively in discussions with a number of parties to move those forward. We'd retain exposure to the upside, but somebody else would be spending their money, and it would be a win-win for us. Plenty going on in the portfolio. We're very focused on delivering our core assets, moving them through the next de-risking phases, at which point we believe we can attract significant strategic support from potential strategic partners and demonstrate the real underlying value of the assets. With that, I intend to stop the presentation and hand back to Paul. Fantastic. Ed, thank you very much indeed for the presentation. Ladies and gentlemen, do please continue to submit your questions just using the Q&A tab situated in the right-hand corner of the screen. Just want to take a few moments to review those questions submitted today. I'd like to remind you the recording of the presentation, along with a copy of the slides and the published Q&A, can be accessed via your investor dashboard. Ed, I know I haven't given you a great amount of time, but if you'd be so kind just to click on that Q&A section, and where appropriate to do so, just read out the question, give your response, and I'll pick up from you at the end. Thank you. Great. Many thanks. The first question is, how does the company plan to return value to shareholders following this raise? The plan is very clear. We have two core assets, one that we've just completed the pre-feasibility study and one that the pre-feasibility study is well advanced. We intend to progress both those assets, particularly the Kallak asset, to get that through the pre-feasibility study. The market over the last number of years, five years or so, has been very challenging for junior resource equities. We see that that has been changing this year, partly driven by geopolitical tensions that have really brought raw materials to the forefront of people's minds. I am hopeful that there will be a general rebound in the market. Regardless of that, de-risking the core assets, we think, will demonstrate their true value, and we will be able to move the projects forward, potentially bringing in strategic partners and demonstrating the underlying value. I am very hopeful that we will see a significant uplift in the valuation of the company going forward. The second question, can you provide an overview of the expected use of funds? Just to recap on the capital raise, we have secured GBP 2.1 million to date. I will just flip back to the capital raise slide. If the rights issue and retail offer are fully subscribed, we will raise GBP 4.5 million in total. There is an element of uncertainty about how much we will end up raising. This will determine how quickly we can move forward with both our projects, all our projects. If we are fully subscribed, we will be able to advance aggressively with Kallak. We will be able to initiate the drill program. We would complete the pre-feasibility study and the environmental permit application during the rest of this year. We would be able to push forward with the pilot testing on the anode material plant. The primary focus, if we raise less than that, the primary focus is going to be on progressing Kallak through those key milestones. We have a number of discussions, live discussions with strategic partners on GAMP. That would represent an alternative source of capital so that our funding would be focused on Kallak. The next question, question three, is, will funds from this raise go into building and upgrading the wider infrastructure around Kallak? The short answer to this is essentially no. The funding from this raise is focused on delivering the studies. It is certainly looking at the wider infrastructure around Kallak, but not focused on actually upgrading it at this stage. We will be doing technical studies, particularly on the pipeline solution, and looking at the environmental requirements for that as well. In terms of actually delivering upgrades to the infrastructure, that's not something we will be focused on. That would come during the construction phase of the project. The fourth question is, will any of the funds be used for Vardar? If not, what is the company planning to do with this asset? We continue to support low-cost exploration at Vardar. Our holding costs for the subsidiary are extremely low, and we are able to do mapping and surface sampling at low cost. We will continue to do that. The intention is to find a partner to come in on either one or both of the license packages in Kosovo. We would look for them to fund exploration going forward. Minimal funds under the current budget, but we are looking at ways of actually bringing in additional funding to offset that. The next question is, what is the implied dilution from the capital raise? We published the dilution in the terms of the capital raise that was released on the 4th of April. I would need to refresh my memory, but essentially, if fully subscribed, the total dilution, and this is assuming that existing shareholders do not participate, is just over 50%. Obviously, if the raise is not fully subscribed, then the level of dilution will be lower. The next question is, what is the projected CapEx and timeline for the pipeline at Kallak and associated pumps and infrastructure? Perhaps if I just initially flag what the infrastructure, the pipeline would entail. The processing plant produces a fine-grade concentrate. That concentrate, if we were using a trucking solution, would pass through filter presses at the plant site, be dried to a moisture content of about 7% before being loaded onto trucks to be trucked to the rail. With the pipeline solution, essentially what we are doing is moving the filter presses to the rail terminal. We'll pump the slurry in the pipeline, and then the filter presses will dry the material, and the water will be returned from the railhead back to the mine site. The infrastructure associated with the pipeline solution is essentially only the pumps and the pipeline itself, because the filter presses would be needed whether they're at the railhead or at the mine site. In terms of the projected CapEx, we have run a number of studies to date. We don't have a firm number that we are making public at this stage. The indications are that the pipeline is value-accretive to the project. The savings that we make in the operating costs would more than offset the capital cost of the pipeline. However, we need to confirm those numbers in due course. In terms of timing, we are looking to do this additional technical work to get the pipeline solution up to a pre-feasibility study stage and make sure that we have covered off the environmental elements of it as well. We will be looking to do that over the coming months. It slightly depends how quickly we can progress with the amount of funding will determine how quickly we can progress with this. Yeah, essentially, we will be looking to advance it to PFS stage, but it would be constructed as part of the full plant construction, and the CapEx would be incorporated in the full pre-feasibility study assessment. The next question is, how would the Kallak pipeline be funded? Hopefully, I've addressed that. It would be part of the broader capital cost of the full plant. It will increase the total capital cost, but our assessment to date is that it is value-accretive and that it will be because it reduces the operating cost. That, I think, is important to flag because, obviously, there is a capital cost hit upfront, but a lower operating cost gives you much greater flexibility in volatile commodity markets and when prices are lower. We would see it as a real benefit to have lower operating costs longer term. The next question is, the GAMP has been supported by funds from the Finnish government through the BATCircle funding. Are there similar initiatives in Sweden that Kallak can benefit from? BATCircle was focused on the circular economy and battery technologies. Obviously, that does not apply to iron ore and the Kallak project. Iron ore is also not a critical mineral under the Critical Raw Materials Act, and therefore, there are not the same funding schemes available for it. That said, we have had a number of discussions around the pipeline solution and particularly the initial test work, the pre-feasibility work that we're looking to undertake on that pipeline. It may be that we are able to receive some grant support because it is an innovative technology that can be applied to other mining operations in the Nordic region and supports a greener mining solution. There are potential funding schemes for specific elements, and we are certainly looking at options to benefit from those. There is not the same funding as is available for Grafintec. The next question is, Beowulf expecting to receive endorsement or additional funding from the CRMA, the Critical Raw Materials Act, for either Kallak or Grafintec? I've partially answered this already. Iron ore is not classed as a critical raw material, so we cannot benefit from the Critical Raw Materials Act for Kallak. However, the intention is that we will apply for strategic project status under the Critical Raw Materials Act during the next application window, which we expect will open up relatively soon. We think that Grafintec is very well placed to receive strategic project status, particularly now that we have completed our pre-feasibility study. We have a clearly defined project. Our intention is to apply for that status. There is certainly additional funding available for Grafintec because it is a battery technology business, and there is likely to be additional funding as a result of achieving strategic project status, sorry, if we're successful in doing that. The next question is, is your longer-term strategy to develop Kallak and GAMP to production independently, or are you positioning for sale or JV joint venture? The strategy is to develop both projects to a point where we can truly demonstrate their value. We will look to fund them in a way that is most value-accretive to existing shareholders as possible. That could be through an outright sale or joint venture, or indeed, it could be through taking the projects forward ourselves. We are trying to be very open-minded about all options. The market has been very challenging lately. Raising money, as we are seeing in this current raise, is dilutive. Obviously, that is something that we will look to avoid going forward. We are hopeful that we can attract significant support from E.U. sources for the anode material plant. I think there is the innovation funding. There are also tax incentives that are available for green transition technologies such as the anode material plant. We are certainly positioning ourselves to benefit from those. That will reduce our capital requirement for the GAMP. That said, we are also talking to strategic partners on both Kallak and GAMP, and as I mentioned before, the exploration portfolio. We will seek to fund and progress each project as value-accretively as we possibly can. The next question is, at what stage do you or have you engaged with potential offtake partners or end users? With both Kallak and with GAMP, we have a number of ongoing discussions with potential offtakers, both for the iron ore, but also for our anode material. I think the key thing with Grafintec was achieving the pre-feasibility study completion. We demonstrated the technical and economic viability of that project. Therefore, those discussions with potential offtakers or strategic partners have significantly accelerated following the completion of the pre-feasibility study. With Kallak, I would expect a similar sort of process and that when we have completed the pre-feasibility study, we will be in a much better position to have further discussions with potential offtakers and strategic partners. That is something that we will be focusing on, positioning ourselves so that when we've completed the pre-feas, we'll be in a position to have those discussions. The next question is, you mentioned the potential generated by green steel production, but the iron ore market is still suppressed, with demand expected to stay relatively weak. What is your longer-term view for the market and Kallak's place within it? I touched on this during the presentation. We see that the market is likely to split somewhat, and the high-grade iron ore, there'll be greater demand for higher-grade iron ore than there will be for standard and lower-grade material. That split in the market is being driven by decarbonisation of the steel industry. The steel industry is forecast to continue to grow through to 2050. We're seeing significant growth coming out of Southeast Asia, not specifically China, but India and Vietnam, also with the development of the African continent. There will be further demand from there. Steel is going to grow. Iron is the major feedstock for the steel industry. Therefore, the iron market as a whole is going to grow. The split between electric arc furnace material and blast furnace material, I think, is going to become more apparent, and therefore, Kallak will benefit from that. We're positive on the outlook for iron ore longer term and particularly positive for high-grade material. The next question, you mentioned the importance of graphite in batteries, but we hear more about lithium. Why do you think this is? How important is graphite in the battery industry? Actually, this is a very good question, something that I totally agree with. Lithium and indeed, the cathode materials in the battery typically have received greater interest and focus over recent years. I think the primary reason for that is they tend to be higher-value materials. While graphite is the largest constituent of lithium-ion batteries, it isn't the highest-cost element. Therefore, I think that's the primary reason it's received less interest. I genuinely think it will begin to, and it is beginning to receive more interest, and that could really become more significant depending on how the ongoing political tensions go between China and the U.S. China has control of the graphite market. In 2023, they announced restrictions on the exports of graphite and graphite materials, and they could certainly tighten those restrictions. They control, and I'll flick to the relevant—they control pretty much 100% of certain elements of the graphite processing market. Therefore, there are not batteries globally that have not passed through China in some shape or form. If they wanted to essentially switch off supply of graphite, then in the current time, they could. I think this highlights the importance of developing an independent, secure supply chain that has no reliance on China. I think that will help to drive the sort of relevance and the investor appeal in graphite going forward. The next question is, does the new political landscape in Sweden and Finland and the geopolitical situation change the outlook for Kallak and GAMP respectively? Both Finland and Sweden recently joined NATO. I think the issues with Ukraine have highlighted the importance of NATO and certainly defense. Graphite has significant applications in the defense industry. That's, I guess, another factor to the previous question. The importance of domestic supply chains is also widely talked about across Europe. I think that improves the outlook for both Kallak and for GAMP. The political will within Sweden to develop its mining industry is very strong, and they make that very public. Clearly, there is local resistance to certain mines. I think it is critical that we take that very seriously and we build local support for our projects. It is something that we have really changed in the last 18 months, the approach to dealing with local stakeholders. We certainly will continue to do that. The broader political backdrop, I think, certainly helps the case for both projects. The next question is, how does Beowulf assess the risks related to the environmental permit process in Sweden, and how might it impact the project timeline? Kallak is a large and complex project. The most challenging aspect of Kallak is probably the environmental permit. It is probably the biggest risk for the development of the mine. We are extremely focused on ensuring that we submit a very robust permit application. We have been working extremely hard with local stakeholders to both educate them about our plans, but also to receive feedback and support and, indeed, ideas from them. The pipeline solution is an example of development of an idea based partly from feedback from local stakeholders. The transport solution was something that they were extremely worried about or concerned about. Had we gone with a trucking solution to the railhead, the 40 km from Kallak to the rail, that would require a 90-tonne truck to pass in both directions every six minutes, 20 hours a day. For people living along the road, for the reindeer herders, for other local stakeholders, that is a significant impact. The benefit of the pipeline is it would be buried. It would be unseen, unheard. After its installation, it would have almost no social and environmental impact. We see that as a major improvement for all local stakeholders and for the ability for us to permit the project. It does add a little to the timeline, but we see this as an important step. I think this highlights the fact that the importance we place on getting the environmental permit application right. The current timeline that we're assuming is that it will take a two-year period for the permit to be reviewed. That's based on the recent success of the Viscaria mine, copper mine to the north of us, next to Kiruna. We are planning on a two-year timeline. We're going to complete the application subject to funding as quickly as we can. Importantly, we want it to be extremely robust so that we address all key concerns and potential impacts. The next question, given political uncertainty between America and China, do you see the business case for graphite being stronger? I believe I've addressed this question already. China has a device-like grip on the graphite market. The U.S. obviously requires significant graphite primarily for defense, but also for any electric vehicle or lithium-ion battery application. The case for graphite is ever stronger. The case for all critical raw materials has really been brought into the limelight through the current trade war that is ongoing between America and China. I certainly see this as something that will strengthen the case for graphite. I think I have one final question. That is, why SEK 2.9 million for Sweden and GBP 0.7 million for the U.K.? I think this is the proportion of the capital raise. The question then goes on, does this just reflect the relative market caps on AIM and Spotlight? That is absolutely correct. The capital raise comprises three components. First of all, there was the placing. In the placing, we secured support from board and management of about GBP 250,000 and about GBP 750,000 from new financial institutions. The balance of the capital raise is essentially split: 80% Sweden or Spotlight market through the rights issue and 20% through the U.K. retail offer. That reflects the current 20% shareholding on the AIM market versus 80% through the Swedish depository receipts on the Spotlight market. That is the reason for that split. However, if one of the financings is undersubscribed and the other is oversubscribed, we have flexibility to issue more shares through one or other of the mechanisms. I think that is the final question. With that, I'll hand back to Paul. That's fantastic. Ed, look, thanks very much indeed for covering off all those questions. Of course, any further questions that do come through, Ed and the team will have the ability to review those and move public responses where appropriate to do so on the Investor Meet Company platform. Before redirecting investors to provide you with their feedback, and those particularly important to you, Ed, may I just ask you just for a few closing comments, please? Yes, certainly. First of all, thank you, everybody, for attending, and thank you for a really excellent set of questions. I hope that I've addressed them adequately. Beowulf is at a critical juncture now. We've completed the pre-fees for GAMP. We're well advanced for Kallak. With support through this fundraise, we'll be able to accelerate the completion of the Kallak pre-feasibility study and environmental permit application. Both will really de-risk that project and demonstrate its true underlying value. The next 6-12 months will be very critical for the company. I'm very hopeful it will be very positive, both from technical and permitting development, but also in terms of share price appreciation. Obviously, that's something that we're very focused on. We hope that the geopolitical backdrop will be supportive and we can enjoy a positive year. Thank you for attending, and I do hope that you'll support the ongoing capital raise. Many thanks. Ed, thank you very much indeed for updating investors today. Now, please ask investors not to close this session. You'll be automatically redirected to provide your feedback in order that management can better understand your views and expectations. This will only take a few moments to complete, and it's greatly valued by the company. On behalf of the management team at Beowulf Mining, we'd like to thank you for attending today's presentation. That concludes today's session. Good morning.