Good day, and welcome to the Bushveld Minerals Q3 2022 operational update conference call. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Fortune Mojapelo, CEO. Please go ahead. Fortune, just to check that you are coming up, we need to know where to start. Over to you, Fortune, when you're ready. Thank you, Marianne. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us for this quarterly operations update for Q3 2022, as well as for the nine months to end September 2022. I am joined on this call by Tanyaradzwa Chikanza, our group CFO, as well as Chika Edeh, our investor relations head. As you will have seen from the RNS, we have held a solid rate of production for the quarter, with group production of 1,016 mtV for Q3, and 2,657 metric tons of vanadium for the nine months of 2022. It is fully testament to the work we have put in prioritizing stability in operations at Vametco and the ramp up of the third kiln at of kiln number three at Vanchem. Despite ongoing power problems from the national supplier, Eskom, the ramp up at kiln three has seen monthly production more than double from the production levels seen in July. I'm pleased to report that as a result of kiln three, total production at Vanchem has now increased 83% compared to the previous quarter. That being said, I must make the point that load shedding continues to be an issue that we contend with. In Q3 alone, load shedding accounted for as much as 218 hours of curtailed production. Obviously this has an impact on our production levels. The September load shedding numbers, particularly, being the worst recorded on a monthly basis in the past five years of records. Vametco's operational performance was not affected by these periods of load curtailment as much as Vanchem. There is no impact on the plant's production performance. The reason for this, as we've explained before, is that Vametco is linked directly to the national utility, Eskom. In terms of load shedding, the request is typically to just reduce consumption rather than a complete cutoff of electricity supply. Vanchem, on the other hand, purchases its power through the local electricity distributor, the Emalahleni Local Municipality. In times of load shedding, Vanchem is affected pretty much like residential households as well, through a complete loss of power during those moments of load shedding. In order to lessen the impact of the lack of grid source energy at Vanchem, we have implemented diesel generators to try and bridge the shortfall. Worth noting, however, that the generators cannot completely replace the total power requirements of Vanchem, and this will always have an impact on our production levels. There are efforts underway with the local municipality at Vanchem to explore ways to migrate to a power service regime similar to what we have at Vametco, which would see us having to just curtail or reduce our power consumption during periods of load shedding. There is no certainty that these efforts will necessarily be successful, but we are hopeful, and we will continue to push as hard as we can. In the medium to longer term, self-generation solutions remain at the center of our solution. We think that ultimately with the regulatory regime, changes that have been introduced, generating power, combining solar storage, solar and battery storage, will ultimately give us the most sustainable power security solution for our operations. In this respect, I'm particularly pleased that we have commenced construction of our mini grid at Vametco, which is a 3.5 MW of PV solar and a 4 MWh VRFB battery. This project is particularly important in demonstrating the business case and the viability of these self-generation solutions, which we are certainly quite keen to scale up to cover the remainder of our power requirements, both at Vametco and at Vanchem. Having said that, given that we still use diesel generators, the increased use of diesel will be reflected in the group-weighted average production cash cost for the quarter, which has averaged about $29.30 per kilogram V, compared to the weighted average production cash cost of $28.90 per kilogram V for the nine months. We maintain our group guidance of between 3,900 and 4,100 mtV, and remain on track to reach our targeted steady-state production run rate of between 5,000 and 5,400 mtV by the end of the year. Production cash cost guidance at each asset is maintained as we expect costs at both operations to normalize through the rest of the year. Also as we continue a focus on cost containment initiatives. I must also highlight here, however, that significant inflationary pressures, which are not unique to us, but are common to the entire industry and I dare say to the rest of the economy, are a risk that we have to contend with and we continue to contend with, going forward. To drill down into the detail of our individual operations, I will begin with Vametco. Production for Q3 was 666 metric tons of vanadium, 40% higher than the last quarter, which was 477 mtV. Production for the nine months was 8% higher than the 2021 comparable period, with 1,892 metric tons of vanadium compared to 1,753 mtV last year for the same period. Vametco remains on track to meet our full-year production guidance of between 2,550 and 2,650 mtV, supported by continual operational stability. You may not remember that we increased this guidance when we released our interims, increasing it from 2,450-2,550, up to this 2,550-2,650. I'm pleased to see that we are on track to meet this revised upwards guidance. The first nine months of the year have seen a higher cash cost, however, at $24.80 per KGV, over last year's $24.40. Here, the big factor has been inflationary pressures that have been experienced across the group, particularly felt within our raw materials, which has resulted in a higher cost there, as well as higher energy costs. This has been, however, partially offset by a weaker South African rand, US dollar exchange rate, which has helped somewhat mitigate these inflationary increases. This has also impacted the cost for Q3, which is $26.90 per KGV. However, as indicated earlier, we expect the cost to normalize through the rest of the year, with 2022 production cash costs expected still to be within guidance of between $22.70 and $23.50 per KGV. Noting again the inflation-related risks that we do hope do not materially worsen in the remaining months of the year. At Vanchem, the nine-month 2022 production of 765 mtV was lower than that of last year's 876 mtV, and this was owing, as mentioned, to increased load shedding, as well as the prolonged ramp up of Q3, which came online later than had been originally anticipated. The production for the quarter at Vanchem was 350 mtV, it's 3% higher than the Q2 numbers, backed by the improved performance of Q3, with an increase from 61 mtV in July to 151 mtV in August and 138 mtV in September. That September number needs to be read in conjunction with the severe load shedding experiences that I referred to earlier. Vanchem's performance would have been much, much higher, much better if it had not been for the electricity load shedding impact. That is a point that I think I've made enough emphasis on. Note again that load shedding has been particularly bad in September and indicated the highest frequencies that we've seen this far. We just caution here that this may impact Vanchem's production guidance for the year, which is set at 1,350-1,450 mtV. We are hopeful, however, that we will see improvements in terms of energy availability or power availability with less incidents of load shedding in the remaining months of the year. Vanchem has experienced higher costs for the nine months, with cash costs at $39.10 per KGV over the last year's $28.70 per KGV. The increase in costs is largely been due to lower production volumes, higher raw material costs and costs associated with the ramp up of Q3. Similar to Vametco, these increases are somewhat offset by a weaker South African exchange rate relative to the US dollar in the same period. Q3 2022 production cash cost was $33.80 per kg V, 30% lower than Q2 2022 numbers of $48.50 per kg V. This reduction being supported by higher production volumes during the quarter. This underscores why it's vitally important for us that we get that Q3 operating at the run rate, that it is designed for. Hence, once we get to that level of 2,600 mtV per annum, we expect that the cash costs for Vanchem will improve even further, going forward. Thus, we do expect that costs are going to normalize for the rest of the year, particularly as we see the production numbers at Vanchem with Q3 performing better in the remaining months. Production cash costs, in terms of our guidance, has been set at $34.90-$35.50. This guidance, we are maintaining it to the end of the year. Relative to Q2 2022, vanadium prices in the U.S. and Europe softened during Q3 2022, while they strengthened somewhat in Asia. Sales volumes and markets have been flexed to maximize revenues by optimizing sales of natural vanadium into the higher price North American steel market and increasing premium vanadium chemical sales into the aerospace and the petroleum catalyst applications. Demand for Bushveld Minerals suite of vanadium products remains strong and the flexibility afforded by the diverse product mix and wide geographic presence is a significant strength when the current reduction in steel capacity utilization is considered, and this allows emphasis on higher value products and markets. The expectation remains that sales volumes will equal production volumes. I am pleased with the progress that Bushveld has made over the quarter and over the course of this year. Proud that the diligence we have undertaken to ensure stability and consistency of operations is now being reflected in the numbers. While there are factors outside our control, such as the national power load shedding, we have smooth production and are on track both to meet our production guidance and our anticipated run rate for the year. I look forward to updating Bushveld shareholders and stakeholders on our progress at the end of the next quarter. I would as well like to remind investors that we will be having an Investor Meet Company session, which we will be hosting on the eighth of November, during which we will provide an update on the company's progress and take questions from the audience. I'd like to thank you at this point, very much for your time and, we'll pause here in order to take questions. Thank you very much. Thank you. We will now take questions from investors and analysts. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question from the queue, please press star two. Again, please press star one to ask a question. We will take the first question from John Meyer from SP Angel. Please go ahead. Hello, Fortune. Thank you for delivering those results and well done on increasing the third quarter production. If I can just ask several questions all at once. Can you give us a view on where you see vanadium prices going, particularly in the U.S. and China? I see Chinese prices are rising again. In fact, have been rising for a few months. I think given the great sensitivity of the group to vanadium prices, it'd be useful for us to hear more of a view there. Could you also talk us through the recovery rates of Vanchem and Vametco? I see Q2 recovery rates from the kiln were higher in Q2 than Q3, and I wonder, is that a load shedding issue? Can you give us just a little bit more of a view on are you going to continue to suffer load shedding, the load shedding that you've seen through September, through the fourth quarter? Thank you. Thanks. Thanks, John. I'm gonna start with the vanadium price question. You know, we always say this right about vanadium prices, that they're very difficult to predict. My stock standard answer to questions around vanadium prices goes back again to what we are seeing in terms of vanadium demand versus vanadium supply. In respect of demand, yes, obviously, you know, with the global economy going through a lot of volatility, particularly in Europe, you know, we know now that there has been a softening of the steel market. What I find a lot encouraging is that notwithstanding, we haven't seen vanadium prices drop significantly. If anything, I think we've seen them relatively stable in that market. In China, we have seen prices actually start to edge up, which is encouraging, and they have not reached $30. To see them, you know, sort of, yes, in the first half of the 30s, but with some signs in China of prices nudging up, that is quite encouraging. Now, talking about China, what we have also observed is the announcement of quite large energy storage VRFB projects. I think some of the numbers we are seeing are already running into gigawatt hours worth of projects. Certainly when we look at the inquiries we are getting for vanadium for electrolyte purposes, they corroborate that growing demand for vanadium from the energy storage space. I look at forecasts, not only from energy-focused analysts, but you know, you look at the likes of, well, Roskill isn't there anymore, but there are some analysts like Wood Mackenzie. When you look at their forecasts, and these are analysts who have tended to be very conservative around the demand for vanadium in the energy storage space. I think for me that is one very big encouraging sign in support of vanadium demand going forward. Of course, this is all happening in an environment where we are not necessarily seeing significant increases in vanadium supply. As a consequence of that, we think that that balance will continue to be supportive. More of a price upside than price downside for vanadium prices. The U.S. market has held on steady quite well in terms of prices, north of $40, closer to more in the mid-$40s, the kgV, and that is also quite good because we are also seeing an acceleration of the energy transition and energy storage mandates in that market, in addition to, I think growing push for infrastructure spending there. A consequence of all of which is that the demand in the U.S. remains fairly robust. Overlay all of what I have said with the geopolitics of the Russian-Ukraine conflict and how it affects the flows of vanadium material in Europe, China, versus the rest of the world. I think that, you know, all of that taken together, should be supportive of, vanadium prices improving, going forward, rather than, worsening. But again, you know, it's something that we must continue to walk towards very, very closely, but so far, those factors that I've highlighted are supportive of vanadium prices. So that's the first point. Then I wanna go to the third question you asked about load shedding. Look, I think it's fair to accept that we're gonna have load shedding in South Africa for quite an extended period of time. Our hope is that it's twofold. One is that we're not talking about load shedding at the kind of levels we have seen in September, but that we see reduced load shedding. I think if you listen to Eskom CEO, he basically said that we need to brace ourselves for as much as 18 months of regular load shedding going forward. That is why in the short term, we think that the solution really lies in moving to a similar power supply arrangement as Vametco. I mean, it's interesting that through all of this significant load shedding we're talking about, Vametco's production hasn't been as badly affected, and that's because of the curtailment arrangement that is there. If we can move to that arrangement at Vanchem, we think that that will mitigate this load shedding in a huge way. Of course, in the medium to longer term, our on-site generation solutions should come into play here. I think I'm comfortable that between those two, we have the kind of solutions that we require to safeguard our production going forward. The third question was a question about recoveries at Vanchem. I think the point I'll just make there is that firstly, you will note that we did indicate that during the commissioning, the first focus is availability. It's making sure that you don't have the mechanical problems, and we dealt with those quite successfully. The levels of availability when there is power that we see with the kiln are very good now. The next focus area becomes one of recoveries. When you're talking about recoveries, it's a function of the ore that you're feeding in, the mix of that ore. We feed ore at Vanchem that comes from Vametco, that also comes from an old stock pile we acquired from Highveld, as well as other sources. It's important that we maintain a very steady blend of the ore, number one, but also number two, the reagent mix that we utilize, given the nuanced differences between Vanchem and Vametco. What I mean by that is that at Vametco, for example, at the end of the kiln, you have a 10-meter kiln section where you do your cooling. As a consequence, after this, then you feed that through into your leaching circuit. In Vanchem, we discharge pretty much directly from the kiln straight into your leach vat. Therefore it follows that the temperatures at which you do your roasting at Vametco and at Vanchem, you need to manage them carefully, because it has an impact, and this is the key finding here. It has an impact on the kind of recoveries that you can expect when you discharge into your leaching circuit. That's all part and parcel of your commissioning and of your ramp up. We're comfortable that we have now settled on the right levels in terms of both the reagents that we're using at Vanchem, which gives the right operational parameters to give us the kind of recoveries that we expect. That explains the discrepancy. I'm sorry that it's a bit technical, but I think the takeaway from it is that it's all part and parcel of the commissioning process. We are comfortable now that with the kind of levels of recoveries that we are seeing in the kiln, and an answer to that is to do with the reagent mixes that we use and the quenching that we do post the kiln into our leach vat. I'm gonna stop it there before I get all the more too technical and confuse everybody. Thank you, Fortune. I appreciate the technical advice. We will now take the next question from Mark Ryan from Tower Capital. Hello, good afternoon. I have three or four questions, if I may. Question one. Two years ago, you borrowed cash from Orion and earmarked ZAR 24 million to take production at Vametco to 4,200 mtV and an overall production of 6,800 mtV. Can you explain where the cash went and why you failed to hit 6,800 mtV? Indeed, why you failed to hit the successful phase two target of 3,750 mtV at Vametco? Second question, how do you see the Orion CLN situation being resolved? Are you confident that the company will have the cash to pay off the loan? Question three, why do you now need to spend ZAR 61.1 million at Vametco, which will only raise production capacity to 3,400 mtV, which is still 350 mtV below the successful phase two expansion of four years ago? My final question, do you think investors were deceived by the company's growth plans for vanadium production and VRFB deployment, or has the management team been naive or incompetent? Thank you. Fortune, just check if you're not on mute anymore. Thank you for that. I was on mute indeed. Thank you for those questions. I'm gonna start with the question. You asked a couple of questions which talked to our growth plan. Yes. I'm gonna combine those. You are right that when we started talking about our growth plans, we indicated that we envisaged growing production at Vametco to about 4,300. We also talked about the growth phases that we were anticipating at Vanchem around the refurbishment of the kiln. We gave some high-level estimates of the funding that would be required to do that. Having done that, we also, I think, made mention that we were going to be undertaking detailed feasibility studies to give us a greater degree of confidence on the numbers themselves. We went ahead and undertook very detailed feasibility studies, and which we completed, and we announced to the market. What those detailed feasibility studies showed was, yes, a significantly increased amount of capital required to achieve those production growth increases. I must mention also that, you know, when you're moving from estimates, capital estimates that are based on desktop studies to numbers that are based on detailed feasibility level studies, increases in capital expenditure numbers is not something that is unexpected. I will admit to the fact, though, that those increases were quite significant, if not substantial. You could only really ascertain those numbers once you've done the studies to that level of accuracy, which those feasibility studies that we did demonstrated. Also, when you do your detailed feasibility studies, I mean, a number of things come into play, including, for example, in terms of your option analysis, understanding what sort of constraints you can work with. At Vametco particularly, I will give you an example that we operate with a barren dam, where we essentially take barren solution after we've done the precipitation before we take it to our salt recovery plant to recover the sodium salt. That barren dam is in the salt recovery plant capacity is an important bottleneck that you'd need to unlock when you're looking to increase your production. Ultimately, what it meant for us was when you look at Vametco, and when you look at Vanchem, I wanna also emphasize here that when we started talking about our growth plans for Vametco, that was prior to the acquisition of Vanchem. Now, when we acquired Vanchem, we had to prioritize and identify which expansion is gonna give us the biggest return. I think it is quite clear based on the numbers that we have shared to the market, that we get much better return by prioritizing Vanchem production increases ahead of production increases at Vametco. Those are the developments, and I have to emphasize again that when we acquired Vanchem, that was in November 2019, and only after that when we did the feasibility studies of ramping up production at Vanchem, that you do have to sequence because you can't do everything in one go. The sequence that we published and we shared with the market is the one that we came and landed at as being the most optimal. I will make this comment, Ryan, again that the issue is not so much a case of not so much. I would deny that there was a misleading of the market in any way. We gave information to the market that was at our disposal at the time, qualified appropriately by the fact that it was desktop level work that we had done, that would need to do detailed feasibility studies, which we have since done, and we have since published to the market. The second point I want to talk about is in respect of talking then about how we've gone ahead with the implementation of that growth work. We have prioritized getting Q3 done, and that is what we have commissioned now. Q3 gets from Vametco Vanchem production to the level of 2,600 annualized. We also wanted to prioritize that because that's the minimum level that we believe will allow Vanchem to at least be generating a positive EBITDA, and not requiring any subsidies. Thereafter, we believe that we have a platform between Vametco and Vanchem, which is profitable, of course, subject to certain price assumptions. We're comfortable that at these sort of price levels that we have and that we think are sustainable, both of these operations will be in a positive margin territory which is supportive to cash generation. You asked a question around the Orion convertible loan note. That note is maturing in November of 2023. A couple of points I would highlight. 2020, as a company, we made a loss. I will remind everyone that vanadium prices averaged $23 per kilogram V in that year. 2021, we saw some improvement of vanadium prices, but not enough for us to generate a profit also. Also, taking into account the level of production we had at Vanchem in 2021. We have since moved into positive EBITDA in 2022, and that is continuing, and we expect and hope to continue that through into 2023. So there is scope for us generating cash to allow us to pay back the Orion convertible. But that is not without risks, of course, because we live in a world with a lot of volatility, and we do need, I think, to be prudent about that and make sure that we have alternative contingent plans to address that. All I will tell you now is that we do have them. We are engaged with that right now. I cannot say more than that, but we will inform, of course, the market at an appropriate time. Our duty is to make sure, number one, that, we solve for any overhang that the convertible might have on our share price, particularly as we get into a 12-month window to maturity. A lot of our efforts are addressed at specifically that. While at the same time we want to retain as much as possible the scope and the possibility to repay that convertible. I think I can say, based on our outlook, based on our production levels, that we believe that there is certainly scope for that to happen. I will emphasize again that risks still do remain, and it is important that we make sure that we address those risks well in advance, and that is something we're busy with right now. Thanks very much. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one. There are no further questions on the phone at this time. I will now hand back over to you, Fortune, for any closing remarks. Thank you all for your time. I want to just end by reminding everyone about the meeting that we put in our announcement, which will be taking place on the eighth of November, the Investor Meet Company. I look forward to much more engagement with investors on the topics of our production, our costs, as well as what we are doing with respect to Bushveld Energy. There is a lot to talk about. I hope those of you who are able to attend that meeting will attend. For now, let me take the time to say thank you all very much for taking the time to listen to us. I'm certainly very encouraged by where we are, and I hope that the next time we are providing another quarterly update, it will be demonstrating even further improvements to our operations. Thank you very much. Thank you. That will conclude today's conference call. Thank you for your participation, ladies and gentlemen. You may now disconnect.