Good afternoon, and welcome to our operational update for our first quarter results in 2024. Thank you for dialing in. In Q1 2024, we achieved group production of 885 mtV, a weighted average production cash cost of $28.04 per kg, and sales of 880 mtV. We had an impressive quarter to kick off the year at Vanchem, which saw a substantial increase of over 90% from Q1 2023, with production of 498 mtV. This was underpinned by better ore quality, improved online time, and overall plant efficiencies. Our cash costs were also down 26% at $25.30 per kg, compared to the same period last year. I'm delighted to report that production for Q1 2024 represents our best result in a single quarter since we purchased the asset in 2019, with March alone representing Vanchem's best production of 200 mtV, another new record. These production records and cash cost figures were achieved despite losing 11 days of production earlier in January due to the delayed settlement of funds. These results showcase the positive effect of our turnaround efforts, and are as a direct result of the work that has been done to ensure stability at the asset before building towards further growth. Turning to Vametco, as previously communicated during the quarter, we conducted a 25-day planned kiln maintenance shutdown in January and February, which was completed in mid-February, resulting production at Vametco was 357 mtV in Q1 2024, and cash costs of $32.80 per kg during this period, owing to lower volumes. We continue to see significant improvement in our total injury frequency rate, which stood at zero for Q1 2024, supported by improved internal reporting of lead indicator analysis and the successful implementation of safety measures across both our operations. Moving on to the sale of 50% interest in Vanchem and the 64% interest in Mokopane to SPR. We announced this morning that approval from the Competition Commission South Africa, initially anticipated for February 2024, is now expected to be granted at the earliest in July 2024. Following this, the sale of the Vanchem and Mokopane will complete. Furthermore, as previously announced, Acacia was due to settle its subscription of $3.5 million on or before 28 February 2024. The company has not received the subscription monies from Acacia. Acacia continues to be in breach of the terms of the subscription letter, which it signed with the company on 30 November 2023. We have instructed our lawyers to commence legal proceedings against Acacia. The delay in receiving funds, coupled with the lower realized vanadium price, now some 15% lower than we budgeted, has meant that our working capital position is extremely tight. With the completion of the sale of 50% of Vanchem and its share of the Mokopane to SPR being delayed, the company is dependent on a receipt of further funding to continue operations, and is proactively engaging with stakeholders to find an appropriate and optimal solution which would ensure operational continuity. Lastly, we will provide 2024 guidance once we have clarity on the funding position. Thank you for listening. I will now pause to take questions. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to ask a question or make a contribution on today's call, please press star one on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question from the queue, please press star two. So again, that is star one for your questions today. We will pause for a brief moment to assemble the queue. So once again, that is star one for your questions today. We now take our first question from Sergey Raevskiy from SP Angel. Please go ahead. Hi, Craig. Thank you for the update. And good to see the performance at Vanchem, despite challenging pricing environment. Can I ask you, like, in terms of production at Vametco and Vanchem, are you sort of... If we don't think about the working capital constraints and assuming that the funding, you know, comes through, just ignoring that, are you happy with the performance, like, after the maintenance been done, are you happy with the performance of both operations? Let me start with the easy one first. Vanchem. I certainly wasn't happy in the month of January when we were down for 11 days, we didn't have funding to buy raw materials. I was happier in February, and I'm content with March's performance. It's, it's more than we budgeted. We assumed a phased approach where we'll get up to 200 in Q2. So I'm, yeah, I'm reasonably comfortable and, and happy with where we are with Vanchem. It's about sustainability. The test will be when we have a shutdown for Vanchem in May, and whether we've got sufficient funds available to do the appropriate maintenance, 'cause I've seen far too often where we are not funded sufficiently for the opportunity, and we don't have the opportunity to do a proper maintenance. So yeah, I'm happy with Vanchem. The test will be whether we have sufficient funds to do the maintenance in May, and then, you know, get out of the starting blocks, all guns blazing in June. But would I bank the Vanchem result, which is nearly double what we did in Q1 last year? Absolutely. Can we do more? We have to. So reasonably pleased with the overall quarter, less so for January, but very happy with the March. 200 is a magic number, you know, it's double what we've done in the first half of last year per month. So that's something we'll bank, and it's pleasing. We're going to celebrate with the guys as soon as we can. Vametco, less so. Look, we did have nearly a month shutdown. You've got to build that into the equation. It was brought forward, which is never ideal. The budget was to have a shutdown of 17 days in March and 17 days in July. But not surprising, when you keep kicking the can down the road and you defer the maintenance, something's gotta go. And of course, come January, we didn't have the funds that came in, so we again did the best we can. Not an ideal position to do a 25-day shutdown to refurbish the kiln and refabricate the kiln when you don't have the funds. So what happens when you do that? You don't go to your preferred critical OEM supplier. You go to an alternative generic supplier, who charges you more and does an inferior job. So we had to have this done, and we went to an alternative supplier. Guess what happens? In March, we discover we're down for in excess of 7 days because a certain batch of the lining done on the cooling side, which is the discharging side of the kiln, was an inferior product, and it had to be redone again. Yes, the supplier came and redid it. That's not ideal. That's a function of not having funds. You know, you have downtime on the leach process. Guess what? We've got zero critical spares in stock because the funds didn't come through in time. Instead of losing two or three hours to replace a spare, you lose three days because the engineers have got to run off to town and go look for a generic part to replace the spares. So no, I'm not happy with Vametco. We haven't done the maintenance. I always said that if you looked at the plan, the funds were all supposed to come in end of December. We take the bulk of the funds, we address the long outstanding overdue creditors, which is generally the OEMs. Now we're in a good position to actually start engaging with the OEMs to get the maintenance done. We haven't attended to any of the maintenance requirements that we planned to do at Vametco because the funds come drips and drabs, and that's far from ideal. So, no, I'm not happy with Vametco at all, and, and probably won't be until we can actually be in a position to get the funds to do the right maintenance. That's a hell of a long, story, probably more than you asked for, but I hope that answers your question. That was a good overview. Turning to the funding and working capital, two questions. First one is, Did the authorities provide you the reasons behind the delay? It's quite a bit of a delay in the approval of the transaction. Another one is, you mentioned that, you know, you are looking at further funding to address maintenance and to address the delays. Do you have a amount in mind, how much sort of you are looking? So I think there are two questions in there. This, I'm not great speaker, coming up. The first question was, do we have enough authorities in place to address the funding in the short term? We have some authorities in front in place, but it's not the ideal number to address the entire shortfall of cash that we require. And of course, it depends on what price, you know. If we were to, and I say if, do certain pricing, you know, we're not gonna get the premium we enjoyed when we did it at 3p. So it would probably be closer to par, and it depends on what the price is will influence the quantum of whatever value we may look at obtaining. So I think that was the first question: do we have enough authorities in place? The second question is, you know, what sort of quantum are we looking at? I'm not gonna disclose that now because we're busy dealing with a whole host of stakeholders, and there's various balls we're juggling at the moment to determine what is the art of the possible. And until I've finished the negotiation with the various stakeholders, will I be in a position to declare the quantum of that potential funding. Thank you. Thanks, Craig. I just, I mean, I might not have been clear enough, but on the authorities question, I meant, is there... Did South African authorities give you a reason why there was a delay in the approval of the deal, of the Vametco and the Mokopane transaction? Okay. All right. Sorry, I thought you were talking about the share authorities. Okay, that authority. So there's a couple of reasons for the delay. It never rains, eh? It just pours. There are a couple of reasons for the delay. The first thing is, SPR were late out of the starting blocks to actually submit the application. We have influence of it, but we don't have control. So their lawyers were late in the submission, so that's the first point. The second point is, we've realized, and you only realize this once you see the data that SPR shared with us, it's a large merger, not an intermediate merger. An intermediate merger would have taken a month or six weeks. Given the size of SPR, it falls under the definition of a large merger, which takes longer. Coupled with that, we've just heard that the Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition will now also be involved in this application. It happens from time to time. We're told they have a random selection of Competition Commission applications. Ours happens to be one of them. And we're told that, you know, that when the Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition gets involved, you can expect more delays than what you would have otherwise. So there are three reasons. It was submitted late. It has been submitted now, but it was submitted significantly later than it was supposed to. The size of the merger is a large one, not an intermediate. That adds on time. And the minister himself, in terms of the trade and competition, is gonna be involved. And that, all those three factors contribute to the fact that we're now likely to get Competition Commission approval, at the earliest, in July. Hope I've done a better job this time of answering your question. Understood. No, thanks. That's very helpful, and and best of luck. Hopefully, it all comes through. Thank you. Yeah, we hope so. Thank you so much. Thank you. With that, I'd like to hand back over to you, Craig, for any additional or closing remarks. Yeah, thanks very much. You know, I mean, it's been a bittersweet quarter, isn't it, eh? Really sweet with Vanchem's exceptional performance, and the bitter side is the constraints we face with funding to do the right maintenance required at Vametco. But I look forward to continuing to update our shareholders and stakeholders over the year ahead, including in our forthcoming annual report. While it is frustrating to have setbacks and funding delays, we believe that with a swift and effective resolution to these difficulties, we will continue to progress with our turnaround strategy and demonstrate more of the record production we saw at Vanchem in the first quarter of 2024. Thank you, everybody, for listening. Bye.