Good afternoon and welcome to the Beowulf Mining's investor presentation. I'm joined today by Chief Executive Officer Ed Bowie. Questions are encouraged throughout this webinar and can be submitted via the Q&A box situated on the panel on the right-hand side of your screen. Thank you for joining us today, and I would now like to hand over to Ed to begin the presentation. Great, thank you very much, Rachel. Thank you all for joining us. I'm going to quickly run through the corporate presentation, provide a bit of context, and then we'll go into the Q&A session. As I'm sure you're all aware, Beowulf is a U.K.-registered company listed both on the AIM market and the Spotlight market in Sweden. We have two core assets, the Kallak iron ore project in northern Sweden, which is capable of producing a very high-grade concentrate suitable for the decarbonization of the steel industry. We also have a graphite business in Finland and are looking to develop an anode materials plant to supply the lithium-ion battery sector. In addition to this, we have a portfolio of exploration assets which offer further upside. As most of you will be aware, we are in the process of undertaking a capital raise. It comprises three components. We have secured GBP 1 million of investment from the board and management, and critically, some new financial institutions, primarily from the U.K. This is an important step forward for the company. We have not had any institutional support before, so this is a strong endorsement of the company. Coupled with that, we are doing a rights issue in Sweden. Currently, approximately 80% of our register is based in Sweden or invested through the Swedish market. We are doing a partially underwritten rights issue. The combination of the underwritten element and the U.K. placing will bring in about GBP 2.1 million, which is sufficient to see the company through the balance of this year and into 2026. However, we are hopeful that we will receive further subscriptions through the rights issue, and we are also doing a retail offer in the U.K. for our U.K. retail shareholders. In total, we hope to raise close to GBP 4.5 million, and that will enable us to continue to progress Kallak through the pre-feasibility study and to submit the Environmental Permit Application, to initiate pilot test work on the anode materials plant in Finland, and further our exploration activity. In terms of the timeline, the subscription period for the rights issue and the retail offer in the U.K. began today and will run for approximately two weeks. Now, ESG is very important for us, environmental and social governance. We operate, obviously, primarily in the Nordic region, but both Finland and Sweden have strict environmental rules and a population that is very conscious about the environment and social responsibility. We take these things very seriously. We have some significant benefits of operating in this part of the world. Both countries have very good levels of innovation and new technology being developed to support the green transition, and we are well positioned to benefit from that moving forward. Examples of this include autonomous electric mining vehicles and equipment, and we're in discussions with a number of groups about using these as we move forward with the development of Kallak. First of all, I'll talk about our iron ore project through our subsidiary Jokkmokk Iron Mines. The Kallak iron ore project is located in northern Sweden, in Norrbotten County. We have a measured and indicated resource of over 100 million tonnes. The majority of the resource is in the high confidence measured and indicated category. The critical thing about the project is we can produce an extremely high-grade concentrate suitable for what's called Direct Reduction Iron, which is used for green steel production and in electric arc furnaces. The map on the presentation shows the Kallak North deposit, the northern red blob. We have two other defined deposits to the south, the Kallak South deposits. The focus of most of our activity is on Kallak North, and that is where the economics of the project are being developed. It lies within an exploitation concession, the blue circle, and that also lies within the exploration license, the green squares. Kallak North has the capability of producing a concentrate of 2.7 million tonnes/ year of over 70% iron content with very low impurities. As I mentioned, this is very important for decarbonising the steel industry. The project is well located for infrastructure, close to rail. The river that is shown on the map produces a lot of hydroelectric power, so we have access to low-cost clean energy. The region has a long history of mining, particularly large-scale iron ore mining, so there is a local skilled workforce. We are well located. The project has received its exploitation concession, and we are well advanced with the development of the pre-feasibility study and the Environmental Permit Application, which I'll talk about a little bit more. In terms of the market opportunity, I won't dwell too long on this slide, but the steel industry accounts for 7% of global CO2 emissions currently. The ambition of the industry is to reduce this by approximately 60%, the carbon emissions intensity. To do this requires the use of electric arc furnaces as opposed to the highly polluting blast furnace technology that has been widely used historically. Electric arc furnaces and indeed green steel production requires either scrap metal or high-grade, low-impurity iron ore, and this is what Kallak is capable of producing. There are not many projects globally that can produce of the scale that's required, and therefore there is an expectation that there will be a supply deficit moving forward, and with that, an increase in the premium that is received for this high-grade material. Kallak is very well placed. We can produce what is clearly a market-leading product. We have done a lot of work over the last 12 months moving the project forward. The image on the right-hand side of the slides shows the infrastructure layout of the area. The Kallak open pit is the deposit that comes to surface. We intend to mine 9 million tonnes of ore a year, and it has a very low strip ratio of 0.5 to 1. The advantage of Kallak, another advantage, is we can process using purely physical processing beneficiation. Initially, magnetic separation gets us to over 69% Fe content. With a final physical separation process, we can get it over 70% and remove further silica and alumina to get it to a good DRI product. We are not using chemicals. We do not need to use flotation, which has significant advantages from a permitting perspective. The waste from the material will either be the waste rock, which will be stockpiled in waste rock dumps, and the tailings from the beneficiation process will go to a conventional tailings plant. The product, the 2.7 million tonnes/ year, then has to be transported to the rail. We have reviewed a number of options, including sort of conventional trucking, but our preferred option at the moment is a pipeline solution, and the blue line that you may be able to see to the north of the infrastructure site is the proposed pipeline route. I will talk a little bit more about the pipeline in due course. This image shows the infrastructure for the project. The Kallak mine, as I mentioned, is 40 km from the railway. The pipeline, the intention would be that material, the concentrate coming out of the end of the plant, would be left as a slurry and would be piped the 40 km in an underground pipeline to the rail, where it would be dried, loaded onto the rail, and the water would be returned to the plant site. The advantages of using a pipeline solution are it is buried. It is not seen. Using trucks obviously creates emissions, and there are safety issues on the road and impacts on both the environment and the local people. The pipeline is a significantly more environmentally and socially friendly option. There is a bit of additional capital at the front end to install the pipeline, but our initial estimates suggest that this will be more than paid off by the lower operating costs of running the pipeline. It is highly reliable, low maintenance, and requires a little bit of electricity to operate the pumps. We feel this is the optimal solution. On the railway, we initially use the Inlandsbanan, which runs to the north, and then it will be transferred onto the Malmbanan, which is the iron ore railway, which runs from the Baltic coast at Luleå to the Norwegian coast at Narvik. Our current plan is to transport material out of Narvik. It is an ice-free deep-water port, so large cape-sized vessels are able to use it, and we can then access international markets. There is a growing demand for green steel, and there are two green steel development plants in Sweden. The current growth in the market is in the Middle East, and therefore we believe that at least a significant portion of our production will need to find those international markets, and therefore the port of Narvik is our preferred option. We are well located. I would point out that north of us, about 150 km to the north, is the town of Kiruna, and Gällivare is about 100 km to the north. Both are major mining centers. The Aitik mine, Boliden's large-scale copper mine, Europe's largest open pit mine, in fact, is at Gällivare, along with the Malmberget Iron Ore Project. At Kiruna, there are a couple of mining projects as well of international scale, including LKAB's Kiruna mine. We are well located for mining expertise. In terms of developments with the project, a key development over the last 12 months has been the metallurgical test work, which has demonstrated that we can produce this high-grade concentrate. We have also done an awful lot of work on the environmental permitting and building relationships with local stakeholders. That work continues, and indeed will continue not just through the course of the development of the project, but through the mine life and following mine closure. On the environmental permitting side of things, we have a number of activities that are ongoing, including the World Heritage Impact Assessment and Social Impact Assessment. In addition, we do need to do some more work on the pipeline solution and looking at the transport corridor and ensuring that we have our environmental baseline studies done for that transport corridor. On the technical side of things, as I mentioned earlier, the project is 80% in measured and indicated category. We do have a bit of inferred in the early years of the mine life, and we plan to convert that to measured and indicated so it can be converted into a reserve and used in the mine schedule. It's a very minimal drilling program that is required to upgrade that inferred material. That will then lead on to an upgrade of the mineral resource estimate, the mineral reserve estimate, and then the mine planning. Beyond that, we need to do the economic analysis, and essentially the majority of the rest of the work on the pre-feasibility study is complete. I should point out we do need to do a little bit of technical work on the pipeline to prove up the technical viability, but our initial assessment is that it is a very viable solution. In 2023, we completed a Scoping study for Kallak. The economics from that Scoping study are presented on the left-hand side of the table on this slide. What we have demonstrated is, rather than the two products, a blast furnace material representing two-thirds of the production and a DRI Direct Reduction Iron product for the balance, as was anticipated in the Scoping study, we have demonstrated we can produce a larger volume and 100% of it as DRI material. The benefit of this is we can command a higher premium. The other factor that I would point out is the benchmark price used in the Scoping study was $80 /t. The graph on the top right-hand side of the slide shows the five-year benchmark price for iron ore. The numbers are rather small, but you may be able to see that the price has rarely dipped below $80 /t. The consensus price, long-term price for iron ore from a range of analysts was recently put at $97 /t. Using this consensus price and 100% of the high-grade material, we can generate a much more robust project NPV of $829 million and an IRR of north of 30%. Significantly stronger economics than were presented in the Scoping study. The ambition is with the pre-feasibility study to target valuation metrics of this sort of scale. In addition, the project has the potential to be a longer life asset, and this slide really talks to that. The Kallak North is at the top of the map. The pink areas to the south are magnetic anomaly, so indicative of additional magnetic material or iron ore. Estimates have suggested that we have to the south of Kallak North, we have an exploration target that is of similar scale to our existing mine, so it could potentially double the mine life. In the exploration licenses to the south of the river, there has been a further estimate for about 700 million tonnes of iron ore. We could have a very long-life mine at Kallak with further exploration. This is obviously longer term, and we are focusing on demonstrating the economics of Kallak North in the first instance. Moving on to Grafintec, our Finnish graphite business. As mentioned previously, our focus has been on developing an anode materials plant. We recently completed the pre-feasibility study and demonstrated extremely positive economics. An MPV of EUR 924 million and an IRR of 37% for our phase one development. Very importantly, we have a very low-cost production profile, and this is key for our competitive positioning going forward. Being in Finland, we benefit from a number of factors: very low-cost energy, the lowest-cost energy in Europe, a highly skilled workforce with a long track record in mineral processing, and a growing market for lithium-ion batteries, our ultimate market within the European Union. The opportunity for Grafintec is really demonstrated on this slide. China dominates the supply chains for both natural mined graphite and synthetic graphite. The European Union classes graphite as a strategic and critical raw material, and its objective is to mine 10% and process 40% of consumption by 2030. Currently, there is very minimal mining and no processing capability, so there is a huge gap to fill. If the projections for growth in lithium-ion battery production in Europe are met, then there will be a tenfold increase in demand for graphite over the next decade or so. We think there is a huge market opportunity here. We are in discussions with a number of areas in Finland for building the plant. We did have a site reserved in the industrial hub of GigaVaasa. We allowed that reservation to lapse, and we are still in discussions with GigaVaasa, but also talking to a number of other sites. As mentioned previously, Finland has a number of significant opportunities, skilled workforce, low-cost energy. We also receive a huge amount of support from Business Finland and from the EU to support our research and development activities and in furthering the business. The plans for the anode materials plant are initially to import material, and we have a very long-standing relationship with a mine that has been in production for many decades and can produce very high-grade concentrate, which is what we require. The process is then a three-stage process: spheronization, purification, and coating. We produce a Coated Spherical Purified Graphite, CSPG, which is the precursor for anodes used in lithium-ion batteries. As mentioned previously, our initial phase one production is to produce 25,000 tonnes/ year of production, and we would look to triple this in phase two, subject to market conditions and availability of capital, and that would take us to 75,000 tonnes of material a year. The initial phase one would be sufficient for demand for 357,000 new electric vehicles a year when in full production. I briefly touched on the economics of the project, but they're presented on this slide here. An initial capital of EUR 225 million, but this generates an MPV of close to EUR 1 billion and free cash flows of over EUR 100 million a year when in full production. A highly profitable operation. We've completed the pre-feasibility study. The next phase is to move into pilot test work and to the feasibility, and we will be looking to advance both of those activities during the balance of this year. We have a number of discussions with strategic partners, and the intention is, as we progress through the pilot testing phase, that we will bring a strategic partner in to support the further financing and technical development of the project. Beyond that, we then go into a two-year construction phase with first production anticipated in 2028 or 2029. It is worth pointing out that in addition to talking to strategic partners, there is significant funding available within the EU to support industrial development in support of the green transition. We anticipate that we will be able to benefit from some of these grant funding and tax incentive schemes that are available through the EU. Longer term, we would look to fully integrate our graphite resources into the business and develop our own graphite mines within Finland. In Aitalampi, the northern map, we have one of Europe's largest flake graphite resources. We have demonstrated that Aitalampi has the potential to produce very high-grade graphite suitable for battery application. Eight kilometers away from Aitalampi, we have the Rappusjärvi project. It has never been drilled, so there is no resource. The surface sampling and trial mining pitting on surface that we've done has indicated that there is higher-grade graphite, and the geophysics has identified significant material. We anticipate it will be at least the same size as Aitalampi, potentially higher grade, and therefore we would look to move Rappusjärvi forward as we progress both projects. I would stress these are secondary priorities after the development of the anode materials plant. Finally, I'll touch on our exploration assets. We own 100% of Vardar Minerals, which is focused on Kosovo. Kosovo lies in the heart of the Tethian metallurgic belt. It's a major province with a number of world-class projects. The two that I would stress are the Stan Trg mine, which is controlled by Trepça, the state-owned mining company in Kosovo. I'd also point out Rio Tinto's Jadar deposit in Serbia, which is a lithium borate project. Our two main licence areas, Mitrovica licences, are in the north of the country, close to the city of Mitrovica, and surrounding the Stan Trg mine. Stan Trg was one of Europe's largest lead zinc mines for a number of decades, and the area was previously explored for lead and zinc, but no other commodities. We have done significant exploration. I would say that that historic exploration was really ceased in the 1980s, so nothing has really been done since then. We've done extensive exploration work, mapping, sampling, geophysics, and identified a number of significant targets. The initial drilling that we've done, the scout drilling, has demonstrated that there is metal in the system, and we've got very interesting results. No discovery holes at this stage, but certainly worthy of following up, and we are in what is potentially an extremely large system. The Vitia licences in the east of the country have a geological setting very similar to Rio Tinto's Jadar deposit. The spherical structure that you can see on the map is a historic basin, a Miocene-aged basin, and the drilling that we've done and the surface sampling have identified that there is an anomalous lithium and borate, so it could potentially be a Jadar-like deposit. Further work needed, and with both of these project areas, we're talking to a number of major mining companies about joint venturing the project so they can bring their expertise and funding to bear, and we can retain some of the potential upside in any discoveries made. We have other projects in the Nordic region, very exciting copper gold project just south of the Kallak mine in Sweden with very interesting results. We have a nickel cobalt project in Finland, again with economic grades intercepted through scout drilling undertaken by the Finnish Geological Survey. We've done limited work on these low-cost exploration, and we are in discussions with a number of groups about joint venturing these so that we can move them forward, but with the funding support from another party. Essentially, our focus remains on moving Kallak forward, advancing GAMP through the pilot testing phase, and really through completing the key de-risking phases of the pre-feasibility studies and submission of Environmental Permit Application s, demonstrating the value of the assets. We believe that we're in a very good location in the Nordic region. We benefit from low-cost energy, from lots of innovation, and lots of government support. We think we have the right commodity suite in the right jurisdictions, and we think with the geopolitical backdrop, the timing is very good for us as well. That is the end of my presentation. I'll now hand back to Rachel to start the questions. Thank you, Ed, and thank you all for your questions. There have been a number of questions pre-submitted and submitted live. Just as a reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please type them into the Q&A box situated on the right-hand side of your screen. The first question is, a year ago, you completed a fundraise with the same purpose and use of funds as has been outlined for this capital raise. Has any progress been made over the last year? Absolutely correct. We set out a year ago to raise sufficient funds to get us through the pre-feasibility studies on both GAMP and Kallak. Unfortunately, we did not raise the full amount that we were targeting last year, and therefore we have not been able to complete the pre-feasibility study on Kallak, but we did complete the pre-feasibility study on the anode materials plant, and we have made very significant progress at Kallak, both on the environmental permitting side of things, but also on the technical development of Kallak and in preparation for the pre-feasibility study. We are very well advanced, but yes, the fundraise now is essentially to complete the work that we initiated with the fundraise from last year. Thank you, Ed. The next question is, there have been three recent fundraises, all promising to take the Kallak project through PFS and the environmental permitting stage. How is it that Beowulf has yet to complete these stages? I have only been involved in one prior capital raise, and prior to that, the company had a Scoping study. We took some time to relook at that Scoping study in preparation for the launch of the pre-feasibility study. I can really only talk to the last fundraise, and as I mentioned in the last response, the capital that we raised was not sufficient to take us through both pre-feasibility studies, and that is why we are where we are today. I would say we have very significantly de-risked both projects. We have demonstrated that we can produce the market-leading concentrate at Kallak that is critical for the DRI market, for the decarbonising steel, and we've done the pre-feasibility study on GAMP, so significantly advanced both projects. The fundraise that we will do now, if fully subscribed, will enable us to complete the pre-feasibility study on Kallak, sorry, and submit the Environmental Permit Application. We are very hopeful that we will receive good market support for that. Thank you. A follow-up question is, will these funds lead to a more accelerated development of either project? To a certain extent, it depends how much we are able to raise. If we only raise the minimum, the GBP 2.1 million that is currently secured, then essentially we will have to continue on a relatively slow and steady basis. If we raise the full amount, then we can accelerate the studies on Kallak more aggressively. However, I would say that we continue to have discussions with respect to each of our project areas, and if we are able to bring in a strategic partner on one or other of the projects or indeed funding to offset some of the costs so that we can direct additional costs to the other projects, then we can accelerate the development. We are looking at all funding options at the moment as we move forward, and certainly we will look to keep the projects moving forward as quickly as we can. Thank you. The next question is, when the share price has fallen below the issue price on the last three fundraisers, what will stop this happening this time? Private investors have seen a 93% fall in share price over five years. How would you convince private investors to risk more funds? Again, I can't speak to the two prior fundraisers because I wasn't involved in the company. It is very regrettable that the share price has fallen since the last capital raise, and I think we have been operating in a very challenging market environment. There has been a—it has been challenging across the junior resource sector. There has been significant uncertainty with the AIM market as well, which has not helped. I think there are a number of factors that have not helped with the share price performance. I think despite that, we have managed to deliver on the projects technically, and I believe the company's focus has to be on demonstrating that we can deliver these projects, demonstrate de-risking them, moving them forward, demonstrating their underlying value, and I believe the markets will begin to improve. I think it's important to point out with the geopolitical backdrop that we have at the moment with the trade wars that are waged between China and the U.S. and discussions about annexation of Greenland and mineral resources in Ukraine, it highlights the importance of domestic supply chains and of critical minerals. Now, both our projects are critical for supporting the green transition, and I think their value is being underlined by the sort of broader geopolitical backdrop. I'm hopeful that the hard work that we have put into moving the projects forward will begin to be recognised by the market, and we will see share price appreciation. I would say the other thing is, as we have moved the projects forward, the range of institutional investors and potential strategic partners that we talk to has increased significantly. If we are not able to get the support in the market and see the share price appreciation in the market, then we will clearly look at other sources of capital to ensure that we can move the projects forward and benefit our shareholders ultimately. Thank you, Ed. The next one is also on the share price. How are you able to describe the past year as transformational when the share price has fallen by more than 80%? I genuinely believe the assets, the portfolio has been moved forward, and it has been transformational from that perspective. It is disappointing that the share price has not performed. It is a real frustration for me. We will continue to try and move the assets forward, and I will certainly be focused on trying to demonstrate the value of the assets with the market. I do really believe it has been transformational. The Kallak project is a genuine development asset, whereas 18 months ago there was a Scoping study on a resource. The Scoping study is essentially a paper document, a paper exercise. We've now done very significant technical studies with world-renowned experts, consultants, and really significantly de-risked the project. GAMP, again, we've now completed a pre-feasibility study, so we've done significant technical test work and demonstrated the economics of the project. I strongly believe it has been transformational, and I think we have to work harder to get the market to recognize that, and I'll certainly be focused on doing that. Great. Thank you. The next question is, how well invested are the management team in the company? The management team and close associates are putting approximately GBP 250,000 into the placing. For me personally, it's a very significant investment, and I think it both demonstrates our belief in the underlying assets but shows our commitment to moving Beowulf forward. Yeah, we're heavily invested. Thank you. Could you please elaborate on the specific objectives for the capital raised in this share issue and how the funds will be allocated between the Kallak project and GAMP in Finland? The majority of the funds will actually be allocated to Kallak and to advancing Kallak through the pre-feasibility study and with the submission of the Environmental Permit Application. With GAMP, we have obviously completed a major milestone with the completion of the pre-feasibility study. The next phase is pilot testing, and we can approach that in a fairly measured way and manage the expenditure. The priority remains on getting Kallak through that pre-feasibility stage. With GAMP, because we have completed the pre-feasibility study, it has opened up a number of opportunities to talk to both sources of grant or low dilution capital, but also strategic partners who could be long-term partners in the project. I think it's been a key milestone for GAMP. That may obviously allow us to accelerate GAMP a little bit more quickly, but otherwise we'll focus more specifically on advancing Kallak. Thank you. You mentioned that the funds will complete the PFS at Kallak as well as the Environmental Permit Application, but will another raise be needed to fully complete the PFS at the GAMP? The PFS at the GAMP has been fully completed, and the results have been published. This fundraise, as just mentioned, will be primarily focused on advancing Kallak. What I would stress is if we are not able to receive a good level of subscriptions in the rights issue and the retail offer in the U.K., then it will limit the speed and how far we can get with advancing Kallak. If we are fully subscribed, then we can complete everything that we want to achieve on Kallak and in a reasonable time frame, but it does require a level of support from the market. We are very hopeful that we will receive that. Thank you. The next question is, realistically, Kallak environmental permitting is expecting to take two years minimum. How do we expect the company to survive until then with no revenue stream? That is a good question. The reason we have put a timeline of two years on the Environmental Permit Application process is that is the timeline that the Viscaria mine has just been through for their environmental permit, and they actually received their environmental permit finally fully endorsed today. That is the background for the two-year period. In terms of how we are going to survive during that period, junior resource companies and resource projects do take a long time to develop, and investors ought to be cognizant of this. There is significant technical risk that needs to be tested and de-risked through technical studies. The pre-feasibility study is the first major sort of de-risking point. This would be followed by a feasibility study. At each of these points, through de-risking the project, the value of the asset should be unlocked, and additional value should be attributed to that asset. I'm hopeful that we will start to receive more value in the market for the GAMP, given that we have de-risked that through the pre-feasibility study. As we progress with Kallak, I would hope the same. We do intend to update the market with some more specifics on the progress with Kallak and potentially put out some interim economics on Kallak just to demonstrate the progress we've made. For instance, to incorporate some economics around the metallurgy that I talked about earlier, which has a significant impact on the overall value of the asset. It is a good question. Ultimately, we will be looking at a number of sources of capital. We can talk to strategic partners at the asset level. We'll also obviously be talking to strategic partners at corporate level and strategic investors. Ultimately, what we will try and do is grow the value of the business in the interim. The next funding raise, if we come to the market, will be at a significantly higher value than the one where we are today. Thank you, Ed. We've got a number of questions. What is the reason why the environmental application was delayed the last time? When will it be submitted? How do you feel about submitting the application before you know the answer to whether the inland railway will be upgraded or not? We initially intended to submit the Environmental Permit Application towards the end of last year. I know that prior to my joining the company, there were expectations that we would submit it significantly earlier, but insufficient baseline studies had been completed. We have delayed the submission. That is partly we did not raise as much money as we had hoped this time last year, and therefore we have gone a little bit slower with some of our activities than we would have otherwise hoped. The other factors are that we have identified additional work streams that we want to complete to ensure that our permit application is as robust as it possibly can be. I think the pipeline is a good example of this. Through our public consultation process, transportation was identified as a very significant risk for the project or a very significant issue for local stakeholders, I should say. We have listened to that feedback. We have looked at a range of alternatives, and we concluded that the pipeline is the optimal both from an economic perspective but also from a social and environmental perspective. However, we do need to do additional work, and there will be additional environmental work feeding into the environmental permit that is required as a result of that decision. Overall, we think it is a value-accretive decision for the project and one that will improve our Environmental Permit Application, but it will take a little bit longer to get to that point. That is a reason. In terms of when we anticipate being able to complete the Environmental Permit Application on this now, as I've mentioned before, it really depends on the availability of funds from this capital raise. With a fully subscribed raise, we will be able to complete and we'll be able to move forward more aggressively than if we do not receive full subscription in this raise. Thank you. The next question is, what are the next three key deliverables for Kallak that we should look out for in Q2 and Q3 of 2025? That's a slightly difficult question given my last answer and the fact that until we know how successful this capital raise has been, it's difficult to plan exactly the work that we need to go to move forward. The key deliverables are completion of the Environmental Permit Application and submission of that. We would hope to be able to do that within the coming six months, subject to availability of capital. The other technical work that we really need to do is the infill drilling, and then that will lead relatively quickly into the submission of the or the completion of the pre-feasibility study. Those would be the three key activities at Kallak. Thank you. What are your thoughts on the potential for Kallak to become a flagship project within the EU's green industrial strategy, and what would that mean for Beowulf Mining? The steel industry is, or perhaps I backtrack a little, the iron ore sector as a commodity is by far the largest of all commodities mined, and it is to support the steel industry. Steel accounts for 7% of global CO2 emissions, and through green steel technology and electric arc furnaces, this can be reduced very significantly. I think Kallak has a critical role to play in decarbonizing the steel industry and therefore is genuinely a very green and environmentally important project for Europe going forward. Iron ore, and particularly high-grade iron ore, is not classified as a critical mineral within the EU, but it is in the U.K., and it is also in a number of provinces in Canada, so Newfoundland and Quebec, which also produce significant volumes of high-grade iron ore. It is something that we have had discussions with Swedish representatives about, whether we can reclassify iron ore as a critical mineral. I think we will look to demonstrate its long-term importance to the green transition as we move forward. Another related question, Ed. A number of European resource projects have recently been awarded strategic project status, which should provide quicker routes to permitting and potentially open doors for funding. Given the green transition and the drive to reduce carbon emissions associated with steel production, could high-grade iron ore become a critical raw material? Is there scope for Kallak to gain strategic project status and with it the associated benefits? As I mentioned, currently, iron ore is not classified as a critical raw material within the EU. The list of critical raw materials is reviewed periodically. Perhaps in the future, it will become so, and we will certainly be lobbying to get it. Without it being classified as a critical raw material, it is not capable of being classified as strategic. We cannot classify Kallak as a strategic project. The graphite anode materials plant in Finland, however, graphite is seen both as a critical raw material within the EU, but also a strategic mineral. Therefore, the GAMP could qualify as a strategic project, and we will be applying in the next round for strategic project status. That is the intention with GAMP. It's a possibility in the future for Kallak, but it's less likely. Thank you. The next question is, with iron ore being an emissions-intensive industry, are there plans to minimize emissions in mining, transport, and processing? That's a very good question, and we are actually very fortunate being located where we are in the Nordic region. Excuse me. Also being a greenfield operation. In the Nordics, there is a huge amount of technology around electrification and reducing emissions, reducing reliance on fossil fuels. For example, a number of vehicle manufacturers are developing electric autonomous or semi-autonomous vehicles that can be used as mining trucks. These would have greater reliability, greater flexibility, and greater safety than conventional trucks being autonomous and can potentially reduce the capital for infrastructure in the project because you can use smaller vehicles and therefore reduce ramps and transport ways. There are certainly opportunities within the mine. Elsewhere, the plant will be operating on electricity, and we are in a region that is a major generator of hydroelectric power for the north of Sweden. We would anticipate being able to benefit from that renewable energy. There is the potential for us to be effectively a carbon-neutral operation. The pipeline, again, is another technical solution that would significantly reduce our potential CO2 emissions. Obviously, trucking, even if we used electric vehicles, the pipeline solution would use far less electricity and would not create other environmental impacts such as dust, noise, and safety on the roads. Yes, we believe we can create a mine that is at least very close to being carbon neutral, and the objective would be to focus on that as we move forward. Thank you. The next question is, like me, I'm sure there have been many small investors that have been loyal to Beowulf during the development of its world-class iron ore assets. Could you please outline a plan when this is expected to be realised, in particular when a significant partner comes online to support the project? Thank you. I mentioned earlier that as we progress the project through the technical studies, the pre-feasibility being the first sort of major study, we should be able to demonstrate the underlying value of the asset, and that should be recognised by the market. The opportunity to bring in strategic partners also grows as you de-risk the project technically. There is certainly an advantage of delaying bringing strategic partners into projects so that you can demonstrate their value, and you have to give away less of the project. It is clearly a balance. We have a number of live discussions with potential partners. We believe that it is currently better for us to progress the projects on our own and move the Kallak forward on its own until we get to a point where we can really demonstrate the value, and that's ultimately at the pre-feasibility stage. I think the intention is we keep developing the assets, we demonstrate their value, we de-risk them, and that value should be recognized by the market, and we should see share price appreciation. At the same time, it does open up more doors with strategic partners and potential other investors into the asset or indeed the company. Thank you. If the projects are as valuable as previously indicated and progress is good, why is this subscription being made at a discounted price? That's a good question, and I think it really reflects the challenges of the current market. We have managed to raise significant capital from financial institutions, and that's really the first time that that has happened with the company. I see that as a big step. We were not able to secure enough funding to get us through the next 12 months through these strategic investors, institutional investors. We had to resort to the rights issue approach and the underwritten rights issue approach, and that comes with a heavily discounted price. It is regrettable, but we had to make sure that we secured sufficient funds to keep the company going and allow us to move forward, and therefore, the board felt that it was the right decision to move forward on that basis. I think bringing the institutions onto the register bodes very well for the future, and we will look to build on that as we move forward. I'd also hope that we will see a general market improvement, and I would anticipate, particularly with what's going on globally, that that will happen, and there will be a recovery not just of our share price, but the general junior resource market. Thank you. Why was the decision made to use a pipeline as the transport solution for Kallak? Would the additional studies required push the timeline further back? I think I've addressed that question previously. We think that the pipeline not only offers the economically most viable and value-accretive option, but it also will be the best from a permitting perspective. It has the lowest environmental and social impact, the lowest impact on reindeer herding. It's a buried pipeline, so it'll be neither seen nor heard. There are many reasons why the pipeline is the preferred option. However, we do need to do more technical work, and we need to do more environmental work. That is pushing the timeline back a little. However, as I mentioned earlier, it should result in a more robust and a permanent application that is less able to open to challenge. We think it is a small delay that is worth taking given the scale of the project and the opportunity here. Thank you. The next question is, what steps are you taking to ensure broad local and regional support, particularly in light of historical opposition from Sámi communities? That's a very good question, and it's something that we take extremely seriously and have devoted an awful lot of time to. I would certainly credit Dmytro Sergeyev, the project director, with having really advanced the work that we've done on this account. We have an office opened in Jokkmokk, which is 40 km away from the project. It's the nearest town, and we lie within the broader municipality of Jokkmokk. Dmytro and his team of consultants and experts have engaged with all local stakeholders, a whole series of meetings, very regular meetings, open dialogue, very transparent about our approach and our objectives. It's really the first time that dialogue has occurred. We initiated the public consultation process at the end of last year, and this is a formal part of the Environmental Permit Application. It is a formal process to obtain feedback from local stakeholders that we then either will look to address or incorporate in our Environmental Permit Application. As I mentioned earlier, the pipeline was something, or the transport solution was something that was flagged as a critical issue for local stakeholders, and we see the pipeline as a way to really mitigate some of those issues. I think we've come great strides in building a relationship with our local stakeholders. We're certainly not complacent about that. We want that engagement. We want that dialogue as we move forward. We need to have all stakeholders understanding what we're trying to achieve and in dialogue with us in order that we can achieve the best outcomes, not just for the project, but for the whole community. Thank you, Ed. How has the BAT Circle funding from Business Finland aided the GAMP project? We've received two rounds of funding from BAT Circle. BAT Circle is a funding, it's essentially EU funding that is filtered through Business Finland to support battery technologies and the circular economy. The funding that we have received has enabled us to do a number of things, but part of it is looking at the essentially helped fund research and development, and it has supported the optimisation of some of our secondary process streams for the GAMP, enabling us to identify opportunities to recycle reagents, but also to receive value from some of our byproducts. It has been extremely valuable. The way the funding works is we spend 50%, and we receive 50% back from Business Finland. We have received grants for over EUR 500,000 and then a further EUR 200,000 or so in the second BAT Circle 3, the second round of funding that we received. It has been very valuable, and we continue to work on the BAT Circle 3 programme. Thank you, Ed. The next question is, does the failure of Northvolt and to some extent the difficulties or setbacks for the green transition generally have an impact, positive or negative, on Kallak or GAMP? I guess Northvolt has not been an ideal situation for anybody operating in the battery supply chain. I think there are a number of reasons, as I understand it, for the failure of Northvolt. I suppose in an emerging market such as the lithium-ion battery sector, it is inevitable that there will be some bumps along the road. It is unfortunate. I do not see that it really will impact our longer-term development, but clearly, it is not ideal in the shorter term. I don't see that it really has any impact on Kallak because it's operating in a different part of the sector. Thank you. The next question is on Kosovo projects. How do you view geopolitical risks in the region? Are there strategic plans to fast-track explorations or JV options? There have obviously been historic geopolitical tensions in the region. Kosovo is home to the largest U.S. base in Europe, so military base, I should say. It receives an awful lot of support from the U.K., from the EU, and from the U.S. It is critical that the tensions do not flare up. Anecdotally, from our team on the ground, the situation continues to improve in relations with its neighbor, Serbia, continue to improve, albeit it is not something that's going to be resolved completely very quickly. In terms of sorry, could you ask the second part of the question, please? Are there strategic plans to fast-track exploration or JV options? We are in discussions with a number of groups about our portfolio in Kosovo, but also in the Nordic region, our exploration portfolio. The intention would be to find a way of moving the projects forward without using our capital. The burn rate in Kosovo is very low. We are not doing any drilling. We're not doing any expensive exploration. We are doing fieldwork and sampling. The costs of maintaining that activity is very low. We continue to do that. We continue to engage with a number of major companies, and we would look to bring them in as a joint venture partner to fast-track development. Thank you. The next question is, would the sale of Vardar not be a better option for raising funds? I guess we are looking at all options with Vardar. An outright sale in the current market environment, I think I'm not sure we would get best value for it. I think really for us to get best value out of the real excellent potential with the portfolio would be to bring in a major partner who can spend significant capital drilling the project. We've done a bit of drilling. We know where the drill targets are. We think that there is every chance of making a significant discovery, but it does require significant capital to do a drilling programme. That is how we see the best value being obtained from our investment in Vardar to date. But we certainly would not rule out an outright sale if the right opportunity came along. Thank you. Has there been any discussion regarding sales of any of the assets, Kallak or Grafintec? There is no support from the government or Sweden. Would it not be best to sell the Kallak? I would actually say that the government of Sweden is increasingly pro-mining and very supportive. I would slightly dispute that last comment. Have there been discussions about a sale of the assets? We have had discussions about a sale of interests in each of the portfolio assets, but not an outright sale of either the GAMP or Kallak at this stage. Thank you. What are the benefits of being listed on both AIM and Spotlight in Sweden? How is the company leveraging this dual presence? Each market has slightly different characteristics and slightly different benefits. We get excellent retail support from the Spotlight market in Sweden. We have a very broad range of shareholders in Sweden, which we're going to look to develop our relationship with them and contact with them going forward. I think the same is true with the U.K. market, although it is a somewhat more concentrated shareholder register. The U.K. has traditionally been a more resource-focused investment market than Sweden, than Scandinavia. Therefore, my view is that there is more likely to be more institutional support at the early stage, in the pre-production stage, from the U.K. market. Therefore, I see AIM listing as important from that perspective, supported by our strong retail following in Sweden. I think each market has its strengths, and we will try and make sure that we benefit from each of those. Thank you, Ed. How does the company plan to grow shareholder value to offset this dilution? Is there a clear path to ROI? I think the answer is very clear. We will try and unlock the value of our assets, continue to demonstrate that they are world-class assets and with very significant value. As we do that, we will hope that that value is recognized by the market and we see share price appreciation so that this current raise is at the lowest price and that we move the price higher going forward, increase the number of strategic and institutional investors that are able to invest in the company as we advance and grow. A lot of institutional investors will not invest at pre-feasibility study, and therefore we are beginning to get to the point where we can attract these larger institutional investors. The intention is to demonstrate that we are moving in the right direction. We will do our utmost to get the market to recognize that and reflect that in our share price. It is certainly my hope that the future raises are done at a significantly higher valuation than the current. Thank you. We are running out of time. Just the final question is, the share price has been on a continual decline over the last two years, even with positive PFS and Scoping studies. The current MCAP is GBP 4.8 million, with projects with the potential of plus GBP 1 billion. What are the catalysts to improve the share price, and when are these expected? The major catalysts are clearly hitting the pre-feasibility study for Kallak. We have achieved that for Grafintec, for GAMP. Those remain the key catalysts. I think the next stage is demonstrating that we can raise capital both from grant funding sources or European Union sources and potentially from strategic investors and start to grow our business through other sources of capital alongside our investment from shareholders. The key catalyst has to be demonstrating that the projects are viable both technically and from a permitting perspective, and we're very focused on delivering that. Thank you for joining us today. That's all we have time for. That concludes the Beowulf Mining Investor presentation. Please take a moment to complete a short survey following this event. Please be aware that the recording of this presentation will be made available on the Engage Investor platform following this event. I hope you enjoyed today.