Welcome to what is primarily an overview of the acquisition of Santa Rita and Serrote in Brazil. It's also an opportunity to update you on our green metal strategy. There's been a number of announcements over the last few weeks, and I intend to cover some of those briefly. I also wanna say good morning to our investors in North America. As in all our presentations, please take note of the safe harbor statement. They are forward-looking statements. I also wanna say I know that most of you will know me, but I do suspect that based on the announcements of this morning regarding Santa Rita and Serrote, there may be some new interest in our company. I would not be surprised. Let me introduce myself. I'm Neal Froneman, the Group Chief Executive Officer. I prefer to be known as the chief enabling officer. For those of you who want to look at my bio, there is a brief bio at the bottom of the slide. Just starting a little bit with strategy and linking the acquisition of Serrote and Santa Rita into our strategy. Core to our strategy is embedding ESG excellence as the way we do business, and that's evolved into a sustainability strategy, which I'll cover in the next slide. Coming out of that sustainability strategy is really the strategic focus area of building an operating portfolio of green metals and related technologies, which, of course, is what this presentation is all about. As I said, moving on to the next slide. The sustainability themes that underpin our ESG commitment or commitments are embedding human rights and ethics, developing a climate change resilient business, and I'll come back to that. Entrenching long-term economic sustainability, and you can see all the sub aspects to that. Of course, being a data-driven and considered decision-making business as well. What you can't measure, you can't manage. Coming back to developing a climate change resilient business, there are two aspects to that. There's the road to carbon neutrality, which is really embodied within plans on assets we already own. Important to the climate change resilient business is building a portfolio of green metals, and that is in a considered way driving our external growth strategy. Of course, all of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals feature in underpinning our ESG commitments. Just looking at our strategic growth track record and where Santa Rita and Serrote fit in. Important to note that we established ourselves as an industry-leading dividend payer through our gold business. Our gold business has still got long life. We took a conscious decision after two years of planning to enter the PGM space, and we made a number of acquisitions in South Africa. More importantly, we started the externalization of Sibanye, and changed the name to Sibanye-Stillwater when we acquired the Stillwater assets in 2017. That was a transformative transaction, and I would suggest very similar in many respects to the acquisition of Santa Rita that was announced this morning, and I will tell you why a bit later. The acquisition of Stillwater gave us the best geographical diversity of any PGM company. It also gave us very substantial access to the circular economy through the PGM recycling business. Once we had completed this, we had a very good understanding of the underlying demands for the global car pool and how that would include battery electric vehicles, and we started a two-year planning exercise in terms of getting to understand the electric powertrain. We acquired SFA Oxford in 2019 to help us do that, and that was the start of our fourth sigmoid curve into green metals. Two years later, we've confirmed our understanding of the chemistries that are important for battery metals, and we've listed it under the sigmoid curve, lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese. Graphite is not a metal, but important. Of course, recycling is going to feature even more predominantly, and we are very happy to grow our exposure in the recycling of battery metal somewhere in the future. Uranium, we have considerable amounts of uranium associated with our gold business, and we'll be bringing that to account. Of course, the PGMs will transition into the hydrogen economy. I wanna make it very clear at this stage that we remain very confident about the future demand for PGMs, and I will cover it in the next slide. Of course, copper is an important element, and then, of course, we have also grown our exposure to the circular economy through tailings retreatment. Post understanding what are the right battery metal chemistries and what metals make that up, we've recently made some very quick moves to acquire Keliber, Sandouville, the Rhyolite Ridge joint venture, and then of course, the announcements this morning of Santa Rita, which is nickel and cobalt, and Serrote, which is copper. We'll be going through that in more detail. That is how we see our strategic track record and the evolution into green metals. There's no doubt there is strong demand for both battery metals and PGMs. Again, I'm gonna say it a few times, please do not read our entry into battery metals as having lost confidence in PGMs. In fact, these two graphics below actually show you out until 2030, we see very little change in PGM demand. We do see very significant penetration rates by battery electric vehicles. We see fuel cell electric vehicles becoming more of the demand post 2030. I also wanna say that we believe most assumptions on battery electric vehicle penetration rates are overstated, and that will become evident when you look at the deficits in the, in the metals that are required to achieve that. We remain very confident in our very substantial PGM business, but we're building a value proposition in getting exposure to the battery metals as well. If you look at nickel specifically, you can see the growth in nickel demand is predominantly through growing battery demand. You can see that in the two pie charts. We expect it to reach about 20% of nickel demand, and of course, there is a nickel sulfate premium, which has averaged about $2,000 per ton, and we think that will increase. If you look at copper, it's absolutely essential to meeting global decarbonization goals through electrification. That's not new. That's well-known. I think though when you look at a surplus or deficit graph, when you see large deficits for a period of time as you see in the graph on the left-hand side, clearly that is not sustainable. Either you have to provide more supply, which I think is gonna be quite challenging, or there's gonna be constraints in what can be achieved, and there will be reactions to price. I think that's probably more likely the scenario, but it's not the scenario that we've included in our valuations to acquire these assets. In fact, the same picture is clear for lithium as an adoption of battery electric vehicles and this being a primary metal for batteries. Clearly these deficits tell you that something's gotta change. You cannot have such large deficits. Again, our view is that this will have an impact on the rate of penetration of battery electric vehicles into the global car pool, which of course will be to the benefit of PGMs as well. They will both play a role, and hence our need to have exposure to all these metals. Right. As I said, the primary reason for today's presentation was to share with you the acquisition of Santa Rita and Serrote in Brazil. Santa Rita is a nickel cobalt project, and Serrote is a copper project, and we'll cover them both separately in the following slides. Let's just consider the key terms in terms of the transaction. It's a $1 billion upfront payment for the acquisition of both assets. I wanna make it very clear that we're not taking on in addition to that $1 billion, the debt. It's at closing, it's subject to the normal customary adjustments for net debt and working capital. That's all included in that $1 billion. That $1 billion really is based on the reserves of the Santa Rita open pit, and the Serrote existing open pit operation. The 5% is an option fee, essentially an option fee, for the potential underground extension of the Santa Rita nickel deposit. Normal conditions, or there's actually very few conditions precedent to this transaction. The South African Reserve Bank approval is required, which we think we will get, confident in that. There are no antitrust approvals expected in Brazil or elsewhere, and then funding is fully internal from available resources. Closing of this transaction is expected in Q4 2021. If we look at the rationale, and I'm sure that, my introduction has already covered some of the rationale. If we look at the asset quality and clearly this is part of us doing a risk management related to the acquisition. Santa Rita is a top 10 nickel sulfide asset. First quartile cost production, a seven-year life of mine with potentially 27 years of underground extensions. That's still got to go through proper engineering work, and as I say, the 5% royalty is related to that underground extension. Serrote, similar in terms of, it's also in the lower quartile of cost producers. It's got a 13-year life of mine. Both these assets have potential for mine life extensions and I don't intend to go through all the issues in terms of strategic fit. I think in terms of ESG, what's important to us, very important, is the strong relationships with local communities in both cases. It won't surprise you that a single management team has achieved that, and that management team I'll get to now will be joining us as the ongoing management team for our Latin American growth aspirations. Important to note, 85% of energy is hydropower-based at Santa Rita. First quartile carbon emissions and in fact, at Serrote we also have first quartile carbon emissions. I wanna just stop on the management team for a brief moment, and say that in our investor days, we very consciously and specifically exposed you to the deep depth of leadership that we have within our company. People are considered the most important part of our business, and I will conclude with this as well. To us, it was very important that we identify assets of this size with a quality management team. Certainly we have done that. We've had very good interactions. By good interactions, I mean, we have assessed a management team that has a good culture, is very competent and certainly provides us with the confidence to back this management team to grow our position within Brazil. Very pleased to say that this management team has agreed to join us. I know one of the questions we're gonna get is what assurances do you have that they will stay? Well, the only assurance that I know of when you talk to people of this quality and this caliber is that they have to enjoy their jobs. Of course, remuneration is a fundamental underpin, but it's just a hygiene issue. We will ensure there's lots of enjoyment. They will be proud to be part of our company going forward, and that's the assurance that we will provide and have. Just looking at value creation, I can assure you that in modeling the value of these assets, we all know what Appian paid for them, we know what capital was spent on them. To me, that's irrelevant. What's relevant is what is the value of these assets in our hands? I can assure you on conservative commodity price assumptions, they more than meet our hurdle rate. That's for, let's say, the areas of the business where we have a lot of confidence. It's in the open pit reserve plan. It does not include the option value ascribed to the underground extensions at Santa Rita. That's upside. In fact, I will go as far as I said in the beginning to say that Santa Rita is very much like Stillwater was when we acquired Stillwater. They both had reputational issues through our competence in understanding mining assets through the good work of the Brazilian management team, which you're going to meet shortly. There's no debt that we have to deal with as in the past. We saw that at Stillwater. We saw the upside in the palladium price. We saw the upside in terms of Blitz, and here we see the upside in terms of both nickel prices and of course the underground extension. We're very comfortable with what we're paying. It's an attractive entry point in the commodity cycle. We may think that copper and nickel prices are relatively high. As I've shown you, we are working towards very substantial deficits, and I suspect it'll be difficult to bring on supply to offset those deficits. We expect a price reaction, a positive price reaction. Both assets will contribute very substantially to free cash flow at current commodity pricing, so they're value accretive from day one. Just in terms of upside potential, I've alluded to this already. Santa Rita has an underground extension, which once we've done the engineering and as long as it stacks up, will extend the mine life by 27 years. There's on-site resource potential and of course, there's regional exploration opportunities both at Santa Rita and Serrote. At Serrote, we have the potential to debottleneck the system or the plant. As you would have seen, this is in the early stages of ramp up. Again, lots of potential upside. Again, just to reinforce the fact that these were acquired at an attractive entry point from a value point of view. We've looked at multiples, enterprise value based on 2022 EBITDA multiples as an example. You can see the acquisition multiple is well below nickel peers. It's below the copper peers as well. If you look at P to NAV multiples, again, the acquisition multiple is well below some recent acquisitions and peer comparisons. We are absolutely elated with the fact that we've been able to acquire these assets that exceed our hurdle rate in terms of our own measurements. When we stack them up against the market peers, we are also very happy with our acquisition. As I said, I was going to introduce you to the in-country management team, and Paulo Castellari is the leader of that team. Paulo is well known in mining circles and more importantly, his team has been related to some really high quality companies and developments across the world. I'm going to, at this stage, hand over to Paulo to present the Santa Rita assets and the Serrote assets, of which this management team manages both. You can judge for yourself. With that, Paulo, please take this forward. Thank you. Thank you very much, Neal, and good afternoon, everyone. Great pleasure to be here. I am Paulo Castellari, and I have for the last couple of years, 2.5 years, working in building the platform that Neal just introduced to you. I will now invest a few minutes providing you a little bit more color on the platform itself and on the two assets that we are currently managing. As Neal said, we have built, over the past couple of years, a very strong team with relevant local and international experience that have been doing a fantastic job in these assets. Let me then start by taking you through the cost structure of these two assets, starting with Santa Rita. As you can see on the slide, Santa Rita fits very well on the first quartile of the cost curve, clocking just under $2 per pound C1 costs, $1.97. This position, combined with the strong fundamentals of nickel sulfide, as you are well aware of, will take us to a very good position in terms of strong cash generation. This is really based on very strong pillars for the long run, based on the revised mineral resource plan that we have done, both for the open pit and for the expected extension to the underground. Based on very robust ore classification, focusing on nickel sulfides, and also based on an optimized mine plan where we have adapted the mining method using a more selective mining method, therefore achieving lower strip ratios, using smaller, locally sourced equipment, that actually underpins the good, strong positioning in terms of costs for the long run for Santa Rita. Moving to Serrote. Serrote, as you can see in the slide, Serrote with the cash costs for Serrote are at $1.11 C1. So we sit on the first half of the second quartile of the cash cost curve. Here, too, a very robust cost position that added to strong fundamentals for copper will enable strong cash generation going forward, strong cash margins. At Serrote, we have a near surface conventional open pit mine, strip ratios of 1.7 times, a very privileged location. Our product is differentiated. We are producing a high-grade copper concentrate that offer attractive downstream costs, as well as we leverage from a privileged location in Brazil, in the north part of Brazil, with easy access to a number of ports, also helping on logistics costs. All these things underpinning the strong cost position going forward. If we move forward and provided you with a little bit more color detail on Santa Rita, this is our nickel sulfide mine located in the state of Bahia in the north-northeast part of Brazil. This is a mine that has one of the largest nickel sulfide resources in the world. We have the right product in a favorable location managed by a very experienced team with a strong growth potential. It is the right product because it puts us in a very strong position into the future. We all know the relevance of nickel sulfide in terms of contributing to the battery value chain. We are in a favorable location, a mining-friendly jurisdiction with easy logistics, with very strong support from local stakeholders. We have a very strong management team. We have managed to keep essential staff from the old days that this asset was managed, so this helped us a lot in the restart, in the ramp up of the restart. More than 75% of our people are employed locally. Finally, we have a very strong potential in terms of growth. We have an open pit life of mine for seven years and the extension into another 27 years for the underground, as well as a number of options in the surrounding areas. We'll cover that later on. At Santa Rita, we restarted operations in October 2019. We have managed to deliver a safe, responsible ramp up with very strong leading and lagging indicators. We'll share this with you later on. Operations right now present good stability. We have delivered in the first half of 2021 5 shipments and 9 shipments to date, just over 6,000 tons of nickel in concentrate for the first half with $2.53 per pound C1 costs. We have at the moment 2,500 people on site. As you can see on the slide, there is more information. There are some key metrics on life of mine, on production, on strip ratios, and costs for Santa Rita. Providing yet more detail on Santa Rita and detailing the key drivers for the restart of the operations. We have been through a detailed technical and operational plan, taking into account the entire value chain for mining. Starting with a strategic review of the mineral endowment, almost 130,000 meters drilled since 2018, by the way, equivalent to more than a third of all the drilling ever done in this asset. We have revised the mine plan, adopting a more selective mining method, adopting smaller, locally sourced equipment. Equipment that is easy to purchase, easy to manage, easy to replace, and therefore achieving lower strip ratios and obviously lower costs. We have improved and continue to improve processing performance based on better ore classification, as I mentioned, due to the drilling and all. Rolling out our operating model, leveraging lean manufacturing practices and of course, continue to working on the journey to stability of operations. We have been selecting top-class suppliers, so the mine contractor and all other key suppliers, long-term relationships that we have from the network that we've been managing for the last many years. We have reshaped the sales portfolio to have a more balanced arrangement in terms of tenor, location, as well as volumes. Of course, working with growth as we will see on this next slide. This slide shows you the structured approach that we have taken in terms of building a strong business plan for Santa Rita, learning from past experiences, leveraging from the team, leveraging from the excellent facilities that we have. I think you are aware that more than $1 billion has been invested in the facilities for Santa Rita from the original owner. We started with the current operations, ensuring that we make the optimal use of the current facilities. We have a plant that, as I said, it's world-class with a capacity of 6.5 million tons per annum. We have been rolling out since early 2019 our business improvement framework, not only to support the ramp up, but also to build on the journey to stability. On the second block, the middle block in the slide that you see, working on the expansion of production from the underground. We have finalized in the first quarter of this year a PEA that shows tremendous potential for the underground. A lot of potential by using sub-level caving for an additional 27 years life of mine for this asset with improved grades and very probably improved volumes as well going forward. Finally, on the third part of this slide, leveraging from the regional potential that Santa Rita presents. We sit in a very prospective area. We have more than 30 titles in the surroundings of the main plant and the mine. So we have been doing lots of work on them, and some of them show to be very attractive. A very good example that is nice to share with you, and I'm sure that in the future we'll share more and more, is Palestina, which is a target that is very close to the mine. It could well be another Santa Rita, and material from Palestina could be used in many different ways, different avenues to support this path for growth that I've just been through. If we moved to talk a little bit about Serrote. Serrote is our scalable copper operation in the state of Alagoas in the northeast region of Brazil. We started the construction of Serrote in early 2019 with a planned investment of $243 million and a start-up planned for the second half of this year. This project was delivered safely. We clocked 0.57 LTIFR. We delivered this project before schedule. We started operations on March 31, 2021, and we delivered this project below budget with $195 million. This is a very interesting deposit. It's a scalable copper operation that's been very well-drilled, therefore it's very well understood. We have managed to keep a very strong team for Serrote. A number of our team members have been with the project for more than 10 years, so there's very good understanding of the deposit and its potential. We have defined an initial reserve pit with 13 years, and there's a lot of potential to grow that further on. We have, similar to what we described in with Santa Rita, and we'll cover that in a minute, put together a very structured, robust growth plan, leveraging from the mineral endowments that I just described and also leveraging from regional plans as we can see here in this slide. Firstly, I mentioned about the safe delivery of the project. We are now in ramp-up. We have been operating well on the ramp-up with very safely and responsibly. We have been leveraging a great deal from the experience that our team holds in starting up mining projects here in Brazil and abroad. Similar approach to what I described in Santa Rita, three main items. We have a number of opportunities to optimize the original life of mine plan, looking at plant optimization and leveraging the business improvement framework that we have in place already. Extending the life of the mine because there is significant resource potential beyond the current pit design, the one that I described for the 13 years, as well as the treatment of oxide material. This deposit has oxide material, so we are looking at the possibility of building a new plant, an SX/EW plant to treat the oxide material in the future, which would be an avenue for growth as well. Finally, the regional growth pipeline. We have 10 titles in the surroundings of the existing treatment facilities, and some of them very good. One example to share with you is Rogério. That, again, very close to site. We will be working forward with Rogério and investing in exploration and understanding more the paths for growth. In conclusion, over the past two-three years, we have built an attractive platform here in Brazil, looking at relevant assets in terms of industry, in terms of size, in terms of growth potential, and of course, in terms of profitability and cash generation into the future. We have managed to attract a team that share strong business principles and values on care and respect, on accountability, on delivery, on looking at all stakeholders inside and outside the gate, and most importantly, on ESG. This is what we treat in this slide, looking at safety, both at Santa Rita and Serrote, delivering world-class safety standards. At Santa Rita, LTIFR below 0.24 year to date. More than 2,100 safety engagements, which is one key leading indicator for us. At Serrote, 0.58 year to date LTIFR and more than 1,000 safety engagements. Keeping in mind that there are less man-hours worked at Serrote, and thus the number is slightly different in terms of comparison for the safety engagements. In terms of environment, we have very strong, well-managed, and endorsed by world-class consultants downstream tailings facilities, working well and following the strictest standards there are. Finally, on governance, with a comprehensive framework on governance in general terms, on the appropriate controls, processes, and of course on inclusion. This is what I wanted to share with you. I would like now to hand back to Neal so that he can take you through the rest of today's conversation. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Paulo. I'm sure that the audience would agree with me that this has really been a smart acquisition by us as Sibanye-Stillwater. I'm sure the audience would also agree that well done to you and your team for what you've achieved with these assets. We are very happy new owners of Santa Rita and Serrote. I do want to just very briefly just go through some updates on previously announced acquisitions and partnerships. Let's start with Rhyolite Ridge, which is a lithium joint venture that we have done together with Ioneer in Nevada. I'm really gonna focus on the right-hand side of this slide. Ioneer is the owner of the Rhyolite Ridge project. The joint venture will be a 50/50 joint venture between ourselves. Ioneer will be the operator. We will obviously provide very substantial operating support as well and input into the JV. For $490 million, that is what the cost to us is. That's direct funding into the JV. We've also made a $70 million investment in Ioneer, which has resulted in us owning 7.1% of Ioneer as well. Ioneer will contribute the Rhyolite Ridge South basin, which will form 100% of the JV, and then subject to a $50 million option fee from ourselves, they would then contribute the Rhyolite Ridge North basin. Again, this is quite a remarkable project. If you look at the investment highlights, this particular project is world-class in a really high quality jurisdiction in Nevada. It's got potential significant market presence. It'll be one of the first major lithium suppliers in the United States. It's well-positioned to benefit from the increased focus on regional supply chains, which is part of our focus of looking at really at Europe and North America. It's got a 26-year mine life with very substantial expansion potential. This is really a tier one asset. If you look, it'll be a first quartile cost position. It'll have a first quartile cost position, I should say, after the boric acid credits at current assumed pricing. It's got a net present value of $1.3 billion after tax at a discount rate of 8%. I think the focus is clear that it's going to produce 22,000 tons of lithium hydroxide from years 4 to 26. Important as the by-product is the 174,000 tons per annum of boric acid production, which is right from startup. Again, a great acquisition or investment. What has been important to us along this journey is the quality of partners that we have come across and established. These external relationships are very important when you have partnerships around JVs and so on. We have been suitably impressed with the Ioneer team and we've asked the Executive Chairman of Ioneer, James Calaway, just to say a few words. Thank you, James. Well, thank you so much, Neal, for that wonderful discussion of our joint venture. As Chairman of Ioneer, I just want you to know how much it means to me, the relationship that you and I have already developed, the trust that we both feel towards one another. I must say that not only do I feel that way, but in the work that we've been doing over the last weeks, we, the team on our side have just been delighted to work with Sibanye-Stillwater's excellent people. You know, in the end, a joint venture has to work when two teams come together with common values, common objectives, and determination. We feel very confident that that is exactly the kind of joint venture we have between our two companies. You know, our project is a unique project. It's a specific mineralogy that has not been seen anywhere else on Earth. It is a remarkable material. We call it searlesite at Rhyolite Ridge. This material allows us not only to produce a tremendous amount of high-quality lithium chemicals, but at the same time, through the same basic processes, generate a huge amount of boric acid, which is a less known material, but very important in its own right. The combination of those two coming out of the same process then means that we have the lowest cost production of lithium on Earth. As somebody who spent eight years as chairman of Orocobre, developing with the team, Olaroz, I always thought that was gonna be pretty much at the bottom of the cost curve. With the kind of execution that we're going to have at Rhyolite Ridge as a team, we're gonna have not only a world-class asset in terms of size, it's gonna be at the lowest cost on the total cost curve and which is very important to me and I know to you. Finally, I think we should not underestimate the importance of it being right in the middle of the United States. You know, the United States is blessed with so many things, but in terms of lithium production so far it's a peanut. We have about 15 miles from our asset the only production in the United States, and it's 4,000 or 5,000 tons per year. So woefully inadequate. Our project is by far the most advanced. It's ready essentially to start construction as soon as we receive the final federal permit. It will quadruple America's production in phase one. I can tell you folks with absolute confidence that the growing interest in our material is quite pronounced. So many companies, many OEMs around the world are starting to plan and going to be building large supply chains in the United States to support the electrification of transportation and, they're gonna need our material very much. We're very optimistic about the future, and I think we're just extremely delighted, Neal, to be a part of and a teammate with you. We've got a lot of challenges that we face like anyone who's building a brand-new large facility. I think holding our hands together, being a part of a circle of commitment, living with the values that we articulate and you'd articulate even better in your tree, together we can make this a tremendous success for both Ioneer and for Sibanye-Stillwater. Thank you so much for including me. Right. Thank you for those kind words, James. We look forward to working with yourself and the Ioneer team. Moving on to Sandouville, which is a nickel refinery, a hydrometallurgical nickel refinery, located in the port of Le Havre in France, Le Havre, I should say. And again, strategic from its positioning in Europe. The transaction structure here was a put option to acquire 100% of Sandouville from Eramet. That was announced on the thirtieth of July. We've been in an employee consultation process, and I do believe that will end in a positive way. The closing is subject to the transfer of permits, and that's expected to occur in early 2022. It's an effective cash cost acquisition price of approximately EUR 65 million. This facility's got a design capacity to produce about 12,000 tons of nickel metal, approximately 4,000 tons of nickel salts, and approximately 600 tons of cobalt chloride. So it's a very substantial facility, strategic. Now, of course, when you couple that with the acquisition of Santa Rita, we now have the feed to go through this refinery. In fact, some of Santa Rita's feed already goes through this refinery. It'll also be a position to grow our European recycling business. We already have looked at plans to do that. I also think it's important for you to understand that Eramet initiated a project prior to us acquiring this. That was to position this plant as a multipurpose asset platform for high value add projects. It's still in the ramp-up phase as of now, and it'll take a further few years to achieve that. We have some additional ideas, and we are looking forward to investing in France and growing our profile in this particular area. I'd like to also just recap on Keliber. It was one of the first lithium projects or steps into the green metals that we announced right at the beginning of the year. It's also a lithium hydroxide project. We currently have a 30% stake in Keliber. We have the right to increase that to a controlling position with further investment and that is intended to take place after a definitive feasibility study. Again, relationships and people are so important and in Finland, I'm very pleased to say that our partners are the Finnish Minerals Group, which is the group through which the Finnish government holds its mining shareholdings. We had to jump through very significant ESG tests, and I'm pleased that we were able to do that. We have established a very good working relationship with our shareholders and with the Keliber team. We expect first production in 2024 with an annual run rate of about 15,000 tons. I think very importantly, as I've alluded to, regional supply chains are of interest to us. We do see de-globalization of supply chains. Europe is a focus area, North America is a focus area. The Finnish government has stated that they see Finland becoming the battery hub or one of the battery hubs of Europe, and this would be the first fully integrated lithium producer in Europe. We look forward to playing our role in that area. As I've said, we've built up wonderful relationships and I'm going to ask Mika Seitovirta, the Chairman of Keliber, to please say a few words. Greetings from Finland to all of you. My name is Mika Seitovirta. I'm the Chairman of the Keliber Board. I joined Keliber in November 2019, and actually I got excited about the project because very encouraging development in resources and in reserves. Very good financials already at that time. Also a good team, and it seemed to me that the permitting is going very well with the local authorities. When I talk to local communities, I could hear a very supporting voice from everywhere. On top of that, we piloted this process, and we got immediately almost to battery specs lithium hydroxide. We know it works. As part of 2021 activities, perhaps the most important was that we started our bridge to financing efforts. We wanted to update our definitive feasibility study before the project financing and the construction phase. We met a number of investors. During this process, it became clear to us that actually what we wanted to have, if we could choose, is a strategic partner, obviously a partner who could help us in funding the project, but who could also contribute to the process. Meaning an industrial strong partner having expertise not only in mining, but also understanding battery metals and the market. Now, we have been working together with Sibanye-Stillwater in the board almost 10 months, and we have known each other for more or less one year. Couple of observations from my side. First of all, I think Sibanye-Stillwater is a very humble company. Despite of the success and the excellent track record from the last years, it's a very customer-oriented, feet on the ground organization, which we respect a lot at Keliber. Secondly, it is a very transparent company. You get what you see, and they walk the talk. We have been working on the board as well like a team with the same agenda, and also the board is a team with the leadership team that we have. Again, having the same agenda and objectives. Maybe a third observation from my side is that Sibanye-Stillwater is a very ambitious partner to us, and so are we. We have the feeling that, Sibanye-Stillwater is continuously raising the bar, and that suits us well. Just to give you an example, the company wants to be truly transformational when it comes to sustainability. That's on our agenda as well. ESG, the whole sustainability thinking, we wanna be world-class. We are going to be the first integrated European lithium hydroxide provider, ramping up 2024, and at the same time, we want to be a sustainability showcase that we can build together with Sibanye-Stillwater. It helps us because we can control the process from the mineral right to the end product, lithium hydroxide, meaning quality-wise and cost-wise. I really look forward to this journey together, and thank you all for this opportunity to give you my understanding of Sibanye-Stillwater as a partner. We are really doing a great job together. Looking forward to talking to you next time again. Thank you. Bye for now. Thank you, Mika, and again, we are very proud to be partners and shareholders with you in Finland, and we look forward to growing our presence there as well. Let me briefly conclude. I wanna say the key takeaways for today are the following. We've made substantial progress on building a climate change resilient business, actually in a very short space of time. Again, I wanna highlight that we did two years of pre-work where you would have seen no outputs, and now you can see the strategy unfolding in 2021. We believe, and we don't do things just for strategic reasons, we believe our green metal strategy will deliver significant future value. We are very disciplined in making investment decisions. What you also don't see is how many projects or acquisitions we look at and we turn down. There are many, many more than what we actually buy. We are very consciously increasing our revenue diversification outside of South Africa. That is by design. We're improving our geographical risk diversity, and we look forward to continue doing that. We have secured meaningful positions in high quality and strategic assets. Again, I want to come back to the people part. We've given you an external view of the relationships we have with people outside of our organization, but it's suffice to say, great people, a good strategy, and quality assets will make a great company. Thank you for that, and we would now be very happy to take any questions you may have. Thanks, Neal, and thanks to everybody for participating today. I think I'll direct most of the questions to you, Neal, and then I think you can direct them on to the appropriate people. First one is, the timing of acquiring the PGM assets has been highly rewarding. However, is now really the optimal time to buy these green metal assets, taking into account the supply chain issues which are pushing up green metal prices temporarily? I'm not sure if that's a question or a statement, but perhaps you can respond, Neal. Yeah, certainly. Thanks, James. Look, I remember similar concerns when, you know, even at a low in the PGM cycle, we made the acquisitions that we did. We were very confident with the assessment we had done on supply and demand. I have to say exactly the same now. There is no doubt that demand is gonna exceed supply in all these metals. There will be further, let's say, upside in commodity prices. I also wanna make the point that we have said that our entry into PGMs was very beneficial because there was really very little competition at the time. We recognize there's significantly more competition for green metals or battery metal assets at this point in time. Every acquisition has got an underpin of value associated with it. It has to exceed our hurdle rates. Perhaps the value creation may not be as much as we created in PGMs, but it'll be very significant value creation in terms of our company. You can certainly sit on the sidelines and perhaps there is an oversupply of metals. I don't think that's our view. These are not impulse decisions. We've been working on assessing this strategy and implementing it for the last two years. No, I think that it's a prudent entry. Yes, it would have been nice if we could have made it a few years back, but it is what it is today, but there's still lots of upside. Thanks, James. Thanks, Neal. There are quite a few questions asking for more detail on forward-looking metrics, CapEx, costs, et cetera. Just so I don't offend anybody, I'll just say up front, we need a bit more time before we can present that kind of detail to the market. Obviously, we need to conclude the transaction first, and then we need to get onto site to do a more detailed review of the plans and the profile. If you don't mind, we won't get into that detail. Related to that, there are questions about the sustaining CapEx outlook, and particularly at Santa Rita, where on the one slide, we showed quite a significant increase in costs, all-in sustaining costs relative to C1 costs. It's much bigger than the quantum difference on the Serrote mine. Perhaps you could explain why all-in sustaining costs are so much higher at Santa Rita than C1 costs. I think that Paulo is probably best placed to do that, James. Why don't we ask Paulo to answer that question, please? Hello, Neal. Hello, James. Do you guys hear me? Yep, we do. Yeah. Okay. Thanks very much. In trying to address the point on, say, business-sustaining CapEx for Santa Rita compared to Serrote, I think, we have just completed the construction of Serrote and, like for like, this is a company that is now ramping up and then fully capitalized in terms of investment. So it is bound to be a lower sustaining business CapEx like for like. So that's element number one. The second item, perhaps, to share as well, is that there have been, postponements and deferrals of, investment at Santa Rita, of course, just to optimize cash flows and these sort of things that, could be allocated for next year or even further optimized. I think these are the two key drivers that one could see in terms of having a little bit more spent business CapEx for Santa Rita when compared to Serrote. Thanks, Paulo. Perhaps this question is probably for you as well. Where would Santa Rita move on the cost curve if the mines commenced underground production? I think we've indicated that on the slide. Perhaps the question that came up was why the underground costs, C1 costs, are lower than the open-pit costs, C1 costs on that slide. Perhaps you can explain why that is the case. Sure. I think first and foremost, I mean, we are in preliminary economic assessment, PEA phase still, so there's a lot of work to be done. Personally, I'm very happy that we have a very strong team from Sibanye-Stillwater to work with us and optimize further the work that we've been doing. We are very optimistic about the potential because the deposit is indeed fantastic, but there's still a lot of work to be done. Conceptually, number one, grades on the underground are higher and will, by definition, drive lower costs. Also the current plan, which again, important to mention, could be further optimized. We do it in stages, and we are, at the moment, assuming anything between two, perhaps even three years of development. CapEx is going to be much, much slower, at a slower pace, therefore not impacting as much. By far, the key driver for lower costs for the underground would be higher grades. From the tests we've done and all that, it looks like we're going to be using the same plant and the same facilities. I mean, probably not very much investment on the processing side. Again, with the big caveat that we have to do further work on the underground. Thank you, Paulo. Another question, also in line with that is, how long after achieving commercial production would we expect Serrote to take before it begins generating positive free cash flow? Maybe you can answer that on Santa Rita as well, because I've had a few similar questions to that. Sure. Look, Santa Rita is cash positive, and as you've seen, I mean, the cost positioning, and the price that that. Any assumption that people look at use based on the consensus, will be generating cash as it is the case in the moment. For Santa Rita. Sorry, for Serrote, beg your pardon, we expect to generate cash before debt towards the first half of next year. As from first half of next year, we would be generating cash before debt. If you assume the debt servicing, it would take us towards the end of next year. Needless to say, there are numerous options to deal with the project financing that we have at Serrote, particularly now that we're joining Sibanye-Stillwater, who has, of course, a number of possibilities to deal with that. Thanks, Paulo. This one, I think is for you, Neal. Is when would we need to approve Santa Rita's underground development to ensure that the operation produces at a stable 16,000 tons per annum? Actually, it might be for Paulo, but I'll pass it on to you, Neal, first. Yeah. Thanks, James. I would say in the next three-four years is probably the right time. I just wanna reinforce what Paulo said, is that I think we must understand that we're only at preliminary economic assessment on the underground operation, which is why we could only ascribe an option value to it and why we came up with a royalty structure. That's important. These numbers are very preliminary that you are hearing today. I think the other thing I wanna reinforce, James, is what you said, that although we've done a very detailed due diligence, which underpins the $1 billion purchase price, we normally like to go through one planning cycle with the new teams before we provide public guidance, which is what you were alluding to, James. In other words, it's not that we don't know what's happening on site. We know exactly what's happening on site, but we would like to be part of the planning process, and we will then provide proper formal guidance. Thanks, Neal. A question on tailings deposition for both sites. Are they compliant with the latest standards? If not, could we please comment on timelines and capital required to comply? Yeah. Paulo is probably best placed to do that, but from our point of view, these are downstream structured facilities. The right structures we have very high standards, which you know we will probably roll out. Plus, we've also considered dry stacking in our assessments as well. That's been very carefully considered. Paulo, you're probably best placed to comment on your view of the standards of your tailings facilities. Sure, Neal. Thanks. Just to complement what you just said, both tailings facilities for Santa Rita and for Serrote are downstream structures. They are fully compliant with the revised Brazilian legislation, as well as with the Canadian Dam Association guidelines. Both of them are compliant at the moment. We have not only our dedicated team managing the day-to-day activities, the management of the tailings facilities, but also the plans for the future huggings and all that, as well as a resident consultant from a first-class consulting firm dedicated just to that. Those are the key elements. As you said, Neal, that there is always the option for dry stacking, which again, based on the cash generation that these assets can provide, are more than feasible. Thank you. The next question is, from Martin Creamer for you, Neal, I think, is please reiterate Sibanye-Stillwater's own plans to decarbonize itself and to go green. Mining Weekly's specific question is, do your new partners share your approach? Thanks, Martin. Absolutely, they share our approach and in fact, these were key considerations in their carbon footprint, and you would see the detail in the slides. I think, there was reference to Santa Rita receiving most of its power from hydropower and being in the first quartile of low carbon emissions. That's probably the best way to describe it. Serrote, as I hear it's pronounced, is also in the first quartile of low carbon emissions. Most of the acquisitions we are focused on, that is a key component. ESG is not just something you do back home. These type of ESG requirements are actually part of the value proposition when you buy new assets. In terms of what are we doing back home, the decarbonization is a commitment to be carbon neutral by 2040. I think we've said that we will get there much quicker, but that's a firm commitment, and it's based on renewable energy primarily in the South African operations to deal with the Eskom emissions, which are coal-fired power stations. That's about 500 MW of installed wind and renewable energy. Martin would be happy to give you more detail offline, but that is very broadly our approach to decarbonization at other assets. Thanks, Neal. Just another point there is that nickel sulfides have a much lower carbon footprint than other nickel mines or other ores, like nickel laterites, et cetera. So it is inherently a lower carbon product. Just three questions in one here. Neal, maybe you can choose which one you want to answer, and pass the others on as you see fit. First one is, what is the impact of the offtake agreement at Santa Rita on price realization against benchmark prices? Second one, is there an opportunity to process the nickel through the Sandouville site? Are there synergies? And then, what logistics costs are factored into the cost guidance? Again, I think I would actually ask both Paulo and Laurent to comment on this. I'll just give a high-level comment. Obviously, these things have been well considered, and in fact, we believe some of the Santa Rita production actually already goes through Sandouville via Boliden. So that's already happening. Of course, in the longer run, we'd want to see more go through there. Let me ask both Paulo first and then Laurent to just also add a bit to that question. Sure thing, Neal. Let me start with the points that you just made, and that there are obvious, very, actually very smart synergies to be unlocked there, as you said, through Boliden, that there is the opportunity to process Santa Rita material over there. That's for sure. All logistics costs, there was a question on logistics costs. All logistics costs are incorporated in the C1 indications that we shared with you today for both assets. Keeping in mind that because of location, because of the nature of the product, and also our volumes, logistics costs are very attractive. Finally on pricing, I mean, when, as commercially careful as one can be, the pricing that we have been able to clock at Atlantic Nickel and on the contracts. Sorry, I beg your pardon. At Santa Rita and the contracts that we have in place for Serrote going forward are very well in line with market. We have been able to balance further the sales book for Santa Rita, which was something that people have suffered in the past. We have a very balanced view in terms of volumes, location. Perhaps my final comment before I hand over to Laurent to comment further is that we are very fortunate to be dealing with the right products. I mentioned in the beginning of our conversation that these are fantastic assets dealing with the right products in very favorable locations. That also helps us very much in making sure that we can get the best netback result. Laurent, perhaps if you can comment further. It is really important that the management team is implementing a turnaround plan for this site. They are ramping up their production. The target for them is to get near 16,000 tons based on the existing site. When you're looking at the Santa Rita operations and their average production of 13,000 tons, it is clear that there is connectivity between these two sites going via the Boliden smelter. What is very interesting is that since we've announced the Eramet Sandouville transaction, this will accelerate following the announcement of the Appian transaction. We have seen a lot of interest from traders, from strategic partners for our battery metal strategy, which is going to help us to refine our plans for the transformation of the Eramet Sandouville site, which will be announced during the course of 2022 following some detailed engineering work to refine the plans. I think that when you're looking at Eramet, the key synergies actually, which you have to bear in mind, is around the nine hectares of available land adjacent to the existing plant. You're going to have two sites into one, and this will enable us next year to continue clarifying the synergies to be extracted out of this battery material strategy. When you're looking at this whole, at the fact that we announced Eramet Sandouville first, now you can see, because we were working on Appian in parallel, why there was a natural fit between all these acquisitions. Finally, as Neal mentioned, if you look at the existing site of Eramet Sandouville, there is room to be able to accelerate our growth in autocatalyst recycling. This should be quite interesting because this will transform relatively quickly the profitability of that site. We're going to work on it very hard and we'll come back to investors in the middle of next year with all the detailed plans. Thanks for that. I think for now we'll quickly see what questions there are on the phone lines. Are there any on the call? Yes, there are, sir. The first one comes from Adrian Hammond of SBG Securities. Adrian, your line is open if you can ask a question. Can we try the next caller? Maybe Adrian- Thank you. He might be having technical issues on his side. The next question comes from Patrick Mann of Bank of America. Hi, good afternoon. Thanks very much for the call. I just wanted to ask a little bit about where Santa Rita is at the moment. I think you said it was sitting at around $2.50 a pound at the current C1 cost. Just wondering what's the pathway from here to the below $2 a pound cost? Is that really just kinda continued ramp up of the open pit mining? And, you know, we're seeing quite a lot of inflationary pressure across the board that everybody's experiencing. You know, although are you confident in that number, or is it more of a relative position in that, you know, if you experience inflation from steel prices, you'll still keep your relative position? Thanks. I assume that's for Neal or Paulo. Paulo? Mucho. Thanks, Patrick, for your question. Look, I think you addressed yourself half of the topic and it is related to volumes. We have still some work to be done to reach what we expect in terms of full stability and all that. I must add that we're very much excited to being able to count on the additional technical support from the team at Sibanye-Stillwater. That's one part of the topic. The other part, indeed, I mean, we're all concerned about inflationary pressure, particularly here in Brazil as a result of the weaker currency. To date, we have not experienced that in major items. We constantly monitor that, and the number that we are sharing with you is something that we are comfortable with. As always, we just need to constantly monitor that and see if there are any ways to contain costs and all that. All in all, we believe in the number that we are indicating at this stage. Thanks. Thank you very much. Could I maybe just ask one more follow-up? If I look at the releases from Appian and yourselves, I'm seeing a 2.75% NSR at nickel and then stepping up to 7.75% for underground. But then in another part of that same release, it talks about only a 5% NSR, and I think your main presentation also speaks about it. So I just wanna make 100% sure that I've got the royalty structure right, that it's 5% net smelter return royalty on underground nickel production from Santa Rita, 'cause it seems like a little bit. I'm getting confused a little bit in reading the releases. Thanks, Patrick. Maybe we can refer that to Neal or Laurent. Yeah. Patrick, if you look in the presentation under the transaction highlights there's a certain number of tons of nickel that have to be produced before that 5% smelter royalty NSR kicks in. It's been designed to really be a royalty on the underground portion, not the open pit. Laurent, I don't know if you wanna add any color to that as well. Sure. I think that when you look at the royalties, the reality is that when that site was actually developed, you had some royalties in there for the local communities, and for some state agencies. They are in there. You have one from the state mineral resources company. You have one from the federal agency for mineral resources, et cetera. You have this first level of royalties, and it's absolutely normal to have some royalties to local stakeholders. The second one is that you have some royalties which were also embedded in these assets, payable for exploration assets. Both in nickel and in copper, if you were to develop adjacent assets, there are some royalties that are there and Appian and these royalties will be payable to Appian. The only thing that's new here, as when you look at the purchase price, one, you have a $1 billion cash up front, and that's it. That's for the producing assets. The only new thing is a 5% royalty. It's only for the nickel assets, only for Santa Rita. It's only for the underground. If you think about it's going to be payable in a few years' times as we develop the underground. That's why when you're looking at the overall returns for this transaction, because I think that your question is about returns, yes, we have a transaction that is accretive in terms of NAV, in terms of EPS from day one. I think that perhaps, as Neal said, it's one of the most important thing is that it is ESG accretive from day one because it's a very important asset for our net zero strategy, if you think about the decarbonization, our overall footprint on the way to Sandouville. If you look at it, we will be very happy to pay this 5% royalty to Appian on the underground because when we built the underground, this is going to add significant more value to the Appian assets because then you get 27 years of mining. The grades improve over time, by the way, on the underground. That gets you know, a very, very strong pillar to underpin the battery metal strategy. Okay. Thank you, Neal. Thank you, Laurent. Thanks, operator. The next question comes from Leroy Mnguni of HSBC. Good afternoon, guys. Thanks for the call. I've got a few questions, please. The first question is, how much of the Santa Rita's bottom quartile positioning is driven by the byproducts, and how sensitive would your costs be to changes in the price or assumed price for the byproducts? Would you look to secure offtake agreements with OEMs for some of your other battery minerals? What is your strategy around that? The Santa Rita mine life seems quite short if you don't do the underground expansion. My question around that is, what is the payback of your investment on that mine? Is there any way you could give us a split of your purchase consideration? How much of that would you kind of split between the two mines? Or give us a sense of, on your assumptions, what the two sort of mines NPVs are so that we can calculate that split, please. Okay, Leroy, you made the most of that opportunity. That's a whole lot of questions. Neal, I don't know if you got all of those, but perhaps you can direct them to the right people. Paulo, if you could answer on the by-products. I will just say that on the OEMs, Leroy, as you know, our approach to the supply chain is quite different to most. We do like working with the end users. We've done it in the PGM sector. It provides you with much better intel, much better strategic views of the market and certainly it establishes a mutually beneficial strategic relationship. Let me say what we're not gonna be. We're not gonna be contract miners for fabricators. We have a very specific need to be involved in the supply chain. Yes, downstream, and it's not immediately now. The OEMs will definitely be part of, you know, that, the offtake agreements. The life of mine is short, but let's just say, I think you probably, or you know, the market knows that, in mining projects, IRRs north of 15% are required in regions like this to make them, let's say commercially acceptable to a board. Even with the short mine life, we exceed our hurdle rates. I don't wanna say exactly what it is, but the payback period, even with the short mine life, is ahead of the mine life. The other one I've just forgotten was the split between something and something. If you can just clarify that one again. We think about 'cause you're obviously paying $1 billion for both assets. Could you give us a sense of what the split in value is between the two, please? Listen, I can't disclose that. I think we'll have to find a way of giving you guidance, because part of our success in acquiring these assets was by bidding for both. I think it would probably be against the non-disclosure agreement that we entered into. I just want to make one thing clear because there's been a lot of press speculation about we were the winning bidder and the assumption is we paid more than anyone else. I wanna tell you, we knew who our competition was. We certainly did not pay more than others. We won this on having a risk-free proposal. I think that's very important for everyone to understand. I can't give you that split. I'd have to check with legal counsel and find another way of doing that. Leroy will get back to you on that. I don't think you would be far out thinking something along the lines of a 60/40 split, for the asset 60%, Santa Rita 40%. You know, I can't give you more guidance than that, 'cause it was part of our competitive process. Perhaps, Paulo, you could just indicate the sensitivity to by-products. Will do. Thank you. Will do. Thanks. Thanks, Neal. Look, as context, our product at Santa Rita has quite a few by-products in the order copper, gold, PGMs, and gold. We have a very smart commercial arrangement, so we are paying for all of them. In terms of planning and conceptually speaking, we always use anything between 15%-20% of the total costs being benefited by the sale of the consideration, the value from the by-products. Year to date, however, for all the reasons we know, higher copper prices, higher PGM prices, we clocked just over 20%. Anything between 15%-20%, and then year to date, just over 20%. Thanks. Thank you very much. Those are all very helpful. Thanks, James. Thanks. Thanks, Leroy. Thank you. We've been rejoined by Adrian Hammond of SBG Securities. Adrian? Sorry, we still aren't getting audio from him. That's fine, operator. I've actually got questions from him online, so I'll take over if that's okay. Thank you. Thanks. Okay, the questions from Adrian are, in true tactful style. If the assets are as attractive as you say, why is Appian Capital exiting? Again, that's a question that's come up a number of times. Santa Rita never produced a profit sustainably in its past. What is different now that we should have faith in your forecasts? Can you please provide expected EBITDA from Serrote next year at spot? What is the breakdown of annualized sustaining and growth CapEx at the two mines, please? I think we've covered those last two already. And then a question on environmental liabilities, are they fully provided for? So the three are they. If they're as attractive as we say, why is Appian selling? Santa Rita's not been profitable before, why would it be different now? I think we covered that in the presentation, but maybe you can comment, Neal. Yeah, certainly. Adrian, I think, you know, you've got to look at a private equity fund holding an asset. They're not long-term holders. I think they are driven by IRRs and timing. This was a favorable time for them to exit. They, you know, Appian Capital, they've got some really outstanding, you know, industry stalwarts in it that understand mining. But I don't think they are in this for the long haul. Certainly, I think that's very different to a long-term holder like ourselves. That's why they would exit. They see exactly what I think we see, but they make a return on their original investment. That's why they would exit. They're not in the business of, I don't believe, of long-term mining. I think in terms of the question around Santa Rita and its history, I think we've tried to cover that in detail in the presentation. As you heard, it's a much more selective mining model. There's very different approaches in metal accounting and assaying. The strip ratios are very different. The proof in the pudding is look at the results. We've looked at the results. We can see exactly what it's doing and we're very confident in what it is forecast to do. I think all the other questions have been answered. Adrian, we can certainly provide you with detail offline if you did miss it earlier on. Thanks. Neal, just, on the environmental liabilities, it might be useful to just explain or for Paulo to give a sense of how environmental liabilities are dealt with in Brazil. Absolutely. I forgot to answer that. Paulo, please go ahead. Sure, Neal. Thanks. Look, there's not much to be said. There are no liabilities on the environmental side. Everything is, you know, following the strictest standards, so there's really nothing to mention on that. Thanks, Paulo. We can provide more detail after the call as well, Adrian. There's a question here for you, Paulo, I think it's technical. What's the difference in price between G1, I assume grade one nickel metal and nickel sulfide? Does the latter sell for 85% of the former? All right. Look, what I can comment and perhaps Johan can help me further. I mean, conceptually speaking, the different kinds of products within the nickel basket, call it, will have different prices. Historically, ferronickel had premium over the LME. Now there's a discount over the LME for all the reasons we know, carbon footprint, all these things. Nickel sulfide is, of course, an input to class one nickel. There are already premium being applied to the right products, the right kind of concentrates for nickel sulfide for, again, the reasons we spoke today. When it comes to class one, I am not following very closely what it is that Class 1 nickel, the nickel that is traded LME is actually clocking now compared to nickel sulfide concentrate. I think the key concept here is around understanding the differences of the two kinds of products, particularly coming from laterite and sulfide deposits, as we said in other occasions. Thank you. There are a couple of questions on this topic as well, Neal, I think for you. Someone used flurry, but this one says, after announcing four deals this year, is Sibanye still planning any more acquisitions in battery metals, or is this now time to consolidate? The other questions refer to you know, the next six months to twelve months, can we expect more? All in the same kind of vein. Yeah. I think there is more to come. I can't obviously, you know, lay it out in detail. We continue to look at opportunities. We are very disciplined in what we do. I do think there may be something smaller in the pipeline, you know, in the nearer term. I would also say that we will regroup, integrate these transactions. Of course, there's a much bigger team in Sibanye-Stillwater that if there was anything significant still to come in the shorter term, we have plenty of capacity to integrate. I would say we'll probably regroup and reassess, integrate and then look forward. Certainly we're not gonna be stopping any work on our green metals strategy. Thanks, Neal. Maybe similar kind of topic that a couple of people have asked about is how much more do we need to do to build the battery metals business to match expectations, or to reach our desired contribution from green metals? It's probably worth also mentioning that, you know, this flurry of deals is not an overnight outcome. We've actually been working on this for more than two years, and we're finally putting the steps in place. Maybe you can talk about where we want to be and, you know, when you think we'll get there. Yeah. Certainly. We've publicly said that, for our portfolio of gold, PGMs and green metals, we would like to see them roughly a third each of earnings. These acquisitions and Santa Rita and Serrote will clearly add EBITDA to the bottom line, are very significant steps when you factor in, if you look out probably two or three years, something like Rhyolite Ridge and Keliber, and of course our earnings out of recycling, which I've put into the green metals box as well. We are actually getting. We're not far from having a third of our current EBITDA coming out of the assets that we've acquired. Obviously gold is a lot less at the moment, but that's not a priority focus. You can see exactly why at the beginning of the year we said we will not be prioritizing gold and you can see exactly what the result of that has been. In sort of the three-year timeframe, which is what we've used, I think you will see a third of our earnings coming out of the green metal acquisitions and projects that we've recently announced. Of course, I think there's more to be done as long as it can be done value accretive. Probably also very important, and I did put it in a key takeaway, one of the valuation issues we suffer is the very high level of earnings that come out of a risky environment in South Africa, and that is changing now very fast. We are becoming much more internationalized and that should bode well for a market that receives us different as well. Thanks, Neal. A technical question maybe, for Paulo, about. Sorry, just let me find that again. Oh, now I seem to have lost it. Sorry. Let me ask another question in the meantime. Which of the green metals has the highest priority in our strategy? Neal? Yeah. Listen, I think it's lithium. Lithium, if you wanna say it has the highest priority because it's got the most upside, then certainly that would be the highest priority. Nickel is a very close second. Cobalt is more difficult, but cobalt is also reasonably risky in terms of its future demand. There are question marks around cobalt in the longer term. I would say lithium is really our highest priority at this point. Thanks, Neal. Yeah, I found that question. I think it's for Paulo, probably. At Serrote, is it possible that you may explore heap leaching and SXEW and sell copper cathode rather than concentrate? Thank you. When it comes to Serrote, again, very early days, but there are very good indications and tests and all, to support the case for treating the oxide material, through an SXEW plant. That is something that we are considering. I mean, we are looking into, and there are studies and oxide materials in mind as we speak and put aside. We haven't done any work on the heap leaching side, I need to investigate further whether the ore would allow that. I wouldn't be able to tell you that right now. The work that we're doing right now is really focused on possible expansion of production from treating the oxide material through an SXEW process. Thanks, Paulo. I've got a couple of questions which are similar in nature regarding financing of the transactions. I think it's about, you know, how are we gonna finance these transactions and potentially future transactions? What is our desired or I guess acceptable kind of target, as it were, and do we expect future bond issuance to fund the acquisition? Maybe Charles or Neal. Yeah. Listen, we wanna maintain an investment grade, so we will not be over-leveraged. I also think that we'll be opportunistic when it comes to the refinancing of our bonds or you know accessing the debt capital markets. Essentially, for the acquisition of Santa Rita and Serrote, we're really using our own internal capacity. That's not a primary driver to do anything. That's how we think about it. I think we also should recognize that we will cut our cloth to suit. Our capital allocation framework is very clear. You know, it's sustaining our current business. We're happy to invest in maintaining sustainability of our assets. We are committed to paying dividends according to our dividend policy and also being opportunistic about share buybacks, when appropriate. Thanks, James. Thanks, Neal. This question is not specific to this transaction. It's more about the Rhyolite Ridge transaction. What is the status of federal permitting? We've seen some challenges for peers. Details around construction plans to reach battery grade, whether on-site or shipped, et cetera, would be helpful. It's from Christopher De Salvatore. I'm not sure if Neal or Laurent maybe wants to give an opinion on that, but we can certainly also contact Christopher after the call and discuss some of the detail. Yeah, certainly. Perhaps that would be appropriate. Suffice to say that we both ourselves and Ioneer recognize the environmental sensitivity in that area. That was most very apparent in the DD, but there are very good plans and initiatives in place to address the concerns. They are very good concerns that you know people in that area have, and the environmentalists in particular. I think because of our very high commitment to the environment, our commitment to you know to considering and creating value for all stakeholders, once we've had a chance to engage with you know affected and interested parties, I think we will resolve the concerns in a very amicable way. I remain confident that we will of course do the right thing and there'll be an appropriate outcome. I think it's very important for the U.S. to establish its own supply chains of these very strategic metals. For the balance of that question, let us come back to you. Thanks, Neal. Last question, yeah, and then I think we'll call it a day, is regarding international acquisitions. Have we got a strategy for investing in Africa? Yeah. Again, I think we suffer currently a bit of a discount in our share price from the point of view that a lot of our revenue comes out of a risky or perceived risky jurisdiction. We make the point that it is a difficult area to operate, but we have been very successful in operating in that environment. I don't think we'll improve the perceptions related to risk if we build up a portfolio of assets in Africa rather than in other destinations where there's perceived less or lower risk. We're not anti-Africa at all, but I think our focus is on regions, Europe and North America, and being part of the supply chain into those regions. Once we've got a substantial base in those areas, we will certainly look at perhaps doing more in Africa. Thanks, Neal. We've got a couple more questions, but most of them I think we've covered previously. I think on that note, I'd like to thank everybody for participating today, and I'll hand over to Neal for some concluding remarks. Yeah. Thanks, James. Again, everybody, thank you for your time. I believe what you are seeing is a clear action in terms of a strategy which we have very transparently shared. Mika from Keliber, the Chairman of Keliber, said something that resonated with me today, and that is, we are very transparent in what we do. We don't fly kites. We share strategies, and then we implement them. I think you've seen strategy and implementation over the last few weeks. Thank you for your time. I believe we are creating lots of value. We are certainly addressing climate change as a producer, both internally, and we are gonna provide products that address climate change in a very constructive way. Again, thank you for your time, and I look forward to talking to you again in the not-too-distant future.