Evolution Mining Aktie

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Evolution Mining Limited March 2026 quarter results. [Operator Instructions]

I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Lawrie Conway, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Ashley, and good morning, everyone. I'm joined on the call today by Matt O'Neill, our Chief Operating Officer; Glenton Masterman, LVP Discovery; Fran Summerhayes, our CFO; and Peter Rocky O'Connor, our GM Investor. .

Today, we released our March quarterly report and an exploration update, which will be the reference points for the call. A key milestone and highlight for the quarter was the transition to a net cash position on the back of another very good quarter after generating $406 million in group cash flow at just under $2,500 per ounce, we are now in a net cash position of over $40 million.

Our cash balance at the end of the quarter was $1.37 billion, and we have no debt repayments until FY '29. The rapid deleveraging, where we have moved from over 30% gearing to net cash in just over 2 years, is a reflection of Evolution's high-margin portfolio consistently delivering to ensure the benefits of the high metal price environment are banked.

To put this into perspective, we have removed around $1.7 billion of net average achieved gold and copper prices that were $2,100 per ounce and $3,200 per tonne below current spot prices, while still investing in high-grade projects and paying dividends to our shareholders. We are on track to generate approximately $3.6 billion of operating mine cash flow in FY '26, where the June quarter is planned to further improve our net cash position.

The charts on Page 1 of the quarterly report are a great graphical representation of our cash-generating capability and the momentum being built while at the same time, investing in high-return projects that either grow production or extend mine life. This outcome is a credit to everyone involved in Evolution. We continue to safely deliver the plan with the right level of cost and capital discipline.

In the March quarter, we produced 170,000 ounces of gold and 11,000 tonnes of copper at an all-in sustaining cost of $2,220 per ounce for continuing operations. The high all-in sustaining cost for the quarter was driven by the lower production and especially the lower copper byproduct credits at Ernest Henry. We delivered the quarter safely with our TRIF remaining low at 5.9%.

The March quarter was expected to be a lower production quarter due to the impact of the weather event at Ernest Henry in December and the planned semiannual maintenance work at Cowal. Ernest Henry is now back to normal operations. The outcomes of the weather impact at Ernest Henry will mean that we are expected to be around the low end of the group copper guidance.

We remain on track to deliver our FY '26 group production at the all-in sustaining cost guidance of $16.40 to $17.60 per ounce. This all-in sustaining cost guidance is 6% lower or better than our original guidance. The group cash flow was on the back of $769 million and $486 million of operating and net mine cash flows, respectively. It should be noted that these were achieved despite Ernest Henry being cash flow negative for the quarter. Mine cash flows are on track to lift significantly in the June quarter.

All our projects remain on plan and budget. The recently approved Northparkes E22 coarse particle flotation and expansion study projects have progressed well in the first 6 weeks while the preparation to commence development of the bird deposit at Ernest Henry is underway. I want to make a couple of comments about the current global fuel supply situation.

To date, we have had no material operational impacts not just from fuel, but our overall consumables. Matt and Fran are actively managing our supply chain logistics and have appropriate response acting plans in place. The greater focus of the team is ensuring continuity of supply of all goods and services.

Specifically on fuel, supplies are contracted with major oil distribution companies who continue to fulfill their obligations. Fuel represents 2% of our total costs. And while there is a current elevated pricing, it is not having a material impact on our cost base.

On the exploration results released today, Glen and I are very excited at what they offer in terms of adding low-cost ounces to the portfolio. They show that Mungari and Cowal, there is a lot more gold to be discovered and what are already long-life operations. Some key highlights include the very encouraging results in the underground areas of Genesis and Arctic at Mungari, which supports our aim of extending the high-grade underground mine life at current production rates.

While at Cowal, significant high-grade results were received at the Ovan underground target Meanwhile, significant new results in multiple locations across the planned E41 open pit will provide useful insights into the full scale of the deposit ahead of its development. Regional exploration around Ernest Henry will be accelerated over the next 6 months following our consolidation of large tenement holdings surrounding the mine. We've also started work on the 2 most recent projects in British Columbia.

With that, I'll now hand over to Matt to take us through the operational performance

Thanks, Lawrie. As Lawrie has already mentioned, the operational performance for the March quarter was in line with our plan on the back of the renovated Ernest Henry in and the normal plant maintenance schedules. Our safety performance remains in a very healthy position with the continued strong performance in this area, thanks to the tireless work occurring across all parts of our business. and I'd like to take this opportunity to say a big thank you to all our employees, who contribute to this set.

On the production front, we are on track to meet full year guidance for gold and to land at the lower end of burdens for copper. The most significant operational milestone through the March quarter was the resumption of normal operations. And for me, the highlight of the work conducted by this team was the fact that it was completed without any significant injuries or incidents. .

Throughout the March quarter, the Cloncurry region continued to experience higher than average rainfall, which did slow our recovery activities, resulting in additional impacts to the full year production for Ernest Henry, which are now estimated to be between 9,000 to 11,000 ounces of gold and 6,000 to 8,000 tonnes of copper.

At Cowal, we also saw wet weather have an impact on the completion of mining Stage H in the E42 pit. Pleasingly, the processing plant operated uninterrupted with additional feed sourced from surface stockpiles throughout these weather events. We also completed the regular plant maintenance program on schedule at Cowal. As we move into the June quarter, we will be mining the final ore from Stage H. And as previously advised, we will then move to the stage I cut back and be processing stockpile ore in FY '27.

This will see Cowal producing around 10% lower ounces next year ever, importantly, we'll not see a material change in cash flows from the processing of the already mined ore. Northparkes, Red Lake and Mt Rawdon all performed in line with expectations, with the quarter's highlights at these operations being the approval by the Board of the growth projects at Northparkes, the cash flow generated at both Red Lake, which was a record $104 million for the quarter and nearly $225 million year-to-date. And at Mt Rawdon was $13 million in the quarter and over $30 million year-to-date from processing very low stock material.

Mt Rawdon is planned to complete processing at the end of this financial year. Mungari delivered a raft of new records over the quarter with the fully commissioned mill operating at nameplate capacity throughout the quarter. Most notable of these records are the quarterly net mine cash flow of $175 million and gold production of 51,000 ounces.

Mungari has generated over $320 million of net cash flow so far this year, confirming the decision to invest in the planned expansion and the establishment of the Castle Hill mining hub. Looking forward, we are well set for a strong final quarter with the return of Ernest Henry to normal operations, the continued strong performance at Mungari and Cowal having completed its annual maintenance program and mining back in Stage H.

I'll now hand over to Glen to talk through the exploration announcements made.

Thank you, Matt, and good morning, everyone. I'd like to turn your attention to our exploration announcement, which was also released this morning to give a brief update on where we've seen some some momentum over the last 6 months. Starting with Mungari. I want to briefly revisit some of the commentary I made the last time we updated our drilling results. What the team has achieved recently has fundamentally changed the view on historical geological thinking around, which had largely written off the potential for meaningful new discoveries particularly beyond the well-known high-grade tram track positions. By challenging that old geological mark, we've intersected high-grade veins in new structural positions outside where the traditional models were looking. That's significant because it effectively broken the old paradigm, opened up entirely new search spaces around Kundana. In practical terms, that gives us a much bigger opportunity to continue growing high-grade underground resources and reserves. The best example of this occurs at Genesis, where drilling has targeted extensions of a known system we discovered, which is shown in figure one of the update. Infill drilling across a 300-meter gap northwards towards the Barkers Mine, that previously had no drilling whatsoever, recently returned narrow intervals but at very high grades, including numerous short intervals grading about 10 ounces to the tonne, yielding intercepts better than 90-gram meters and confirming mineralization occurs continuously across this zone.

The results I am describing all occur outside the resource footprint and are importantly located near listing underground infrastructure. So it has real implications for extending mine life. At the nearby Arctic deposit, surface drilling but pit has also yielded high-grade results. These build on previously reported work and continue to demonstrate the potential to expand underground resources, particularly at depth where historical drilling has been limited.

The objective of ongoing follow-up drilling is to delineate the scale, continuity and geometry of these mineralized systems with the clear ambition of converting into a long-term underground reserve securing high-grade production over a longer mine life capable of maintaining at or above the currently achieved annualized rate of 200,000 ounces per annum.

Turning now to Cowal, where step-out drilling highlighted in Figure 2 of the release has been equally encouraging. We recently received results from the surface drilling at E41, which, as a reminder, is located a few hundred meters south of E42 and will be mined as part of the open pit continuation project. Results released this morning returned broad consistent intercepts beyond the outline of the planned E41 pit.

What's notable is that perpendicular to the mineralized veins rather than parallel as much of the historic drilling was is opening up areas that were previously considered well tested. This highlights clear potential to grow the E41 footprint, particularly to the north towards E42 and the underground mine.

I should also add that the E41 pit shape referenced in Figure 2 was optimized at a very conservative gold price of $1,760 per ounce. Underground at results continue to build confidence. Drilling is targeting major mine scale structures and a favorable geological contact that elsewhere at Cowal is known to host high-grade mineralization. Importantly, the recognition of this key contact illustrated in Figure 3 on Page 4, has unlocked an entirely new search space to the north and south between the E42 hit and the Glen, which has hardly ever been drilled. We received multiple high-grade intercepts that support the potential for Oben to evolve into a new independent mining front over time and a geological position where I'm confident further work will lead to the delineation of future resource ideation in the mine plan in the years ahead. This will be a major focus going forward. Looking beyond the operations, we're also continuing to build our longer-term pipeline. In North Queensland around Ernest Henry, we've expanded our landholding and identified several drill-ready copper gold projects with an aggressive drilling program planned over the June and September quarters.

And in Canada, permitting and community engagement are progressing at 2 time spread and Cosbacco in British Columbia with drilling planned across the summer field season. Meanwhile drilling is underlay at the October gold project joint venture in Ontario with assay results expected later in the June quarter. Overall, these results reflect our discovery strategy in action, continuing to unlock value in the short to medium term at our operating assets while building a strong pipeline of drill-ready and more advanced exploration plays with the potential to deliver new greenfields production opportunity in the medium to long term. With that, I'll turn the call back to Ashley to open the line for questions.

[Operator Instructions]

Your first question today comes from Hugo Nicolaci with Goldman Sachs.

First one just on Mungari. You got above nameplate through the quarter. I just wanted to get a sense of how much of that is running softer or are you already finding opportunities to start to push that nameplate a little bit .

Thanks, Hugo. I hand that to Matt asked in the same question while going at the higher rates, but it is all.

No, it's an obvious one when you look at those numbers. So it is some of the transitional or easy to have ore from Castle Hill that's causing the increase there. That said, it's obviously something that we're going to target. But at this stage, it's running at nameplate when we put what we designed for it.

That's helpful. And then second one, maybe a 2-part on exploration. I mean, obviously, some exciting drilling results that you put out today. I guess, just firstly, when should we start to see those flow into resource updates? Is that something for the update this year? And then secondly, at Cowal, I think the resource and asset life upside seems to be firming up at both the open pit and underground there. I think I asked you this last time, but at what point do we start to consider mill expansion studies at Cowal?

Glen will talk to the first 2 parts. The last bit about the plant expansion is I think as we get more information, we'll look at it. But it's going to be predicated on once we get into E46 and E41 as to what we do with the plant. So we're probably at least 12 months off worrying about that one. .

Yes, the results that we put out this morning for Mungari and for Cowal won't be captured in the next MRR update they've just come in a little too late for us like those. But we have already delivered a resource and reserve atnasys. So that is a growing kind of ongoing concern. It would be the best way to describe it. And what we're excited about is that we can see the opportunity unfolding along that trend between the Pope John pit. So it's a Honeywell structure that sits outboard of it. And it looks like it's going to link into markers, and we believe that we're going to fill in that gap between Genesis and Barkers and what we're looking to do, particularly in the next 12 months to drill that really aggressively so that we can capture it in the 2020 MROR statement. So that's the plan there. I would say turning to Cowal with the -- particularly what we're doing at Oven, there's a lot of space there. And if on Figure 3. One of the things that we really like at Oven is the contact that I described earlier. Pit appears to be very similar, if not a repeat, we haven't confirmed that of the contact which controls all the underground mineralization in the underground mine at the moment.

So another one of these that if -- what we're showing in that image is all of the drilling and there's hardly anything along it. So there's a long way to go there to explore, but we had the targeted open and we'll continue basically to expand the story as we know it, along strike, north and south and look to get more drilling into that space over the coming 12 to 18 months.

Fantastic. And last one, just I know you 100,000 to 200,000 away at Northparkes and Cowal, but any impacts to safety or mine disruption from the earthquake overnight? .

No, none from the Northparkes or Cowal.

Your next question comes from Kate McCutcheon, Bank of America.

Thank you for the '27 Cowal, remind you that. So for this year, still on track for the guidance. Help me think about the 4Q step-up here to get you to that circa 190-ounce level that you did a couple of quarters back? I assume it's Cowal plus Stage H grade with Ernest Henry normalizing. Can you just talk through that?

Yes. Matt, to add to it. I think he's got too much to add, but the 2 biggest drivers are Assets.

Yes, I think the 2 big ones that people are well aware of, finishing the scheduled maintenance at Cowal, Ernest Henry coming back online are the 2 primary. And then outside of that, the Mungari operation continuing to run at a pretty good rate. Northparkes is doing what it's done. You will see a little dip with Northparkes with the old stockpiles from E31 coming towards the end. But outside of that, business as usual with the uplift from the 2 ones that you identified. .

Okay. Got it. And then how the underground opportunity there. I like it. Returning hits of 1 to 2 grams under E41 and the undergo is extending. Obviously, the price is getting out more high-grade underground tonnes. And Glen spoke to this a little before, but I guess what do you need to get confidence to say, another exploration decline there? Or how do we think about timing on stage gate for a larger underground operation?

Okay. I was hoping someone would ask that. So look, I think when we -- if we go back to the discovery in of the underground mine, we -- particularly the Del Witty load, which really made the difference there. That was about a the first drill results into commencing production in the underground. So that is the time frame that we would be thinking. So on a minimum of 3 years. this is going to require a lot of drilling. We actually also have to get new positions into get -- well, to improve the angle of attack on the ore body, but the I should say. So that would be something that we need to be doing. And I'll be learning on that very heavily to help drive that us so that we can get the rigs in use to do that.

So I'd see that being a 3-year opportunity. And then I think sort of reflecting on the results at E41, the historical drilling has been largely oriented in an east-west direction and that, as we have learnt in the Cowal underground has been a suboptimal drilling orientation. So we've pivoted the rigs around now to hit those veins at a much better angle. And what we have seen historically in the underground is when we've done that, we do see, in some areas, improvement in grade. So we're hoping that as we start to fill that in at a much better angle, we'll see similar behavior E41. And then obviously, as I mentioned, there was -- the pit shell that we're showing there is a fairly conservative shell. So we do expect as we get resource drilling or resource base drilling into E41 that we can improve the way that pit optimizes.

Okay. Got it. And if I can sneak one, one quick one in. So the operating cash flow projected this year, you've noted no intent before to sit on a cash stockpile or do deals at record prices. Is it fair to assume the Board revisits the capital management policy at the FY or how do we think about capital earns?

Yes. So we previously said as we get to the end of the financial year, we -- once we've got our life of mine plans in Brian and the team will put together an updated capital management plan looking at what we do with dividend policies and capital returns. So that will come out with the full year financial results.

Next question comes from Levi Spry with UBS.

maybe another question for Fran and so just on the costs, Marcus obviously focused on across Allsec. Diesel is only a very small portion of your cost base and you're probably relatively but much better setup than some of your peers, but what about the rest of the pie chart? What are you seeing there? How do we think about what happens into FY '27?

Yes. Matt, I'll Levi -- just in regards to the costs, when you look at our cost structure, nearly 50% of our costs are labor. I would have said 6 months ago as inflation was sort of trending in the sort of 3.5%, 3.8% range and and trending down, and that's certainly changed now.

We would expect you're probably going to be seeing somewhere between 4% and 5% in terms of labor cost movement going into FY '27. When you then look at our other cost power fairly well set up there with Cowal and Northparkes pricing fixed, Ernest Henry and Mungari are through FY '27 as well in terms of pricing, but some slight escalation there. And then when you look at our consumables, it is going to be dependent upon how long the current situation lasts in terms of temporary pricing that would be requested to cover for additional logistics costs and the like.

But so given that, that's sort of 50% of our cost base, you're probably going to see a few percent increase in that bucket as well. But overall, I think it's still being well managed, but it does depend on what happens over the next 3 to 6 months.. .

Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan with Barrenjoe

.My question on Mungari just on costs. And for this question, can we just put diesel to one side for a moment about what we're experiencing in a live session. But just on costs, was this a representative quarter for Mungari I 2150 asked in previous quarters on the cost side, we had obviously some capitalization of different spend. And obviously, the project wasn't fully ramped up. Just wondering if you feel this is a representative quarter .

Yes, Dan, it's getting close. I mean, we expect that we set around a 16% reduction in all-in sustaining costs once it is running and depending then on the mix of the ore. We would see it's probably somewhere in the $22.50 to $23.50 range is what you would see, $24.00 at sort of the upper end, which would be in line with what we had projected. So it was a good quarter. Really predicated, I'd say, on the the campaign of the EKJV, higher-grade material, therefore, helping us in terms of both mining and processing costs there. So what you'd see in Q4 is slightly higher, but then you're getting close to the reflection of what Mungari will operate at. .

And just on Cowal, I mean it's quite clear that you're moving from Stage H and that high-grade ore next quarter towards Stage I, where you're going to be pushing back. Just wondering how long is it before you start to get material access to Stage I? Or is this FY '27, obviously, a lot of hard work through there, but do we start to see better grades in '28?

Yes, it will be first half of FY '28 is when we'll start to get back into Stage I ore and also be getting into good material coming out of E46 as well. But there will be nothing really of substance in and a little bit coming through in the first half and the second half of '28 when you see it start to ramp up in stage H. It's about 18 months. .

And last question just on Red Lake. Has been a bit of a better stability, delivery. I think one of the comments you said, set up for a good end of the year can we just expand on the latest live view of ops through the end of this year and anything beyond?

Yes. It's Matthew. Dan, it's essentially the final quarter, we're going to a couple of higher grade areas driving an expected a little bit of an uplift in trade. But the development, if you have to look through that, that's been really quite consistent. Same thing, a little bit of a drop with some ore in terms of throughput in the quarter. We had a few interrupters with power and the winter side of things. But outside of that, that's really where it's headed. So pretty consistent, pretty well set up for both grade and volume for the next quarter.

And is that sustainable or are the benefits sustainable?

So Dan, I mean, the position on Red Lake still hasn't changed. We're focused on getting 30,000 to 40,000 ounces out quarter in, quarter out positive cash and what Matt's been working well with John and the team is making sure they've got contingency in the system, given you know the difficulties you have at Red Lake with those make sure that when some things don't work out, they've got other areas to get to...

Okay. Sorry. You just cut off.

Our next question comes from Jon Sharp with JPMorgan.

First question, just on Ernest Henry. You've said you've returned to normal operations. Just -- can you just explain what exactly back to normal is? And is there any improvements there to go in this quarter and probably more importantly, -- has anything changed with dewatering or water management to prevent this happening again or even just decreasing the consequences. Just trying to understand if it remains an operational constraint in the future?

Yes. I'll address the first one. Normal operation is basically back to running out of the cave as we were prior to the event. So that's essentially what we've done. So running our truck loops and the crushers and everything back operating there.

There's some minor work still to go. We're still dewatering the bottom section of the mine. It's not an operational area. It's where we're doing our development. So there is still some dewatering activities occurring through there, but they don't impact the day-to-day operations at the moment. In terms of going forward, where we've done the investigations and we're working through that process as we talk now. There will be some learnings from it. But I think it's important to remember that event was sort of 3x what we've seen previously in '23. So while it's easy to sit here and say it's a one-off event. It's something that we need to learn from. And the key for us will be even preventing the water from getting there in the first place and then being able to work with it once it does. So we are learning from it and we will take steps to make sure we minimize the chance that it happens again. .

Yes. Okay. That's clear. And just a second question, Lawrie, you've reiterated this morning that you're tracking below the original all-in sustaining cost guidance. With 3 quarters now complete Ernest Henry back to normal. Do you have any -- or do you have enough visibility to indicate whether this year's all-in sustaining cost is likely to land below the midpoint of the updated range?

I won't put map into a difficult spot or ran by saying where our view is we're going to get in that range is there's a number of things that will determine it. You got the gold price, copper tonnes, copper price. One thing I will say, and as I mentioned on the call, the cost and capital discipline in the business. We're running very well in terms of our standing capital and our operating costs against budget. We'll be in the range. That's the political answer that you needed to give Matt some room.

Next question comes from Matthew Frydman with MST Financial.

Sure. Can I firstly extend on Levi's question on diesel. Obviously, pretty modest in isolation on the pie chart at 2%. Just so I'm clear, how does that play through in terms of the various kind of rises and falls across some of your mining contracts and other contracts you might have in place across the business that are sort of sensitive to diesel. Are there annular exposures outside of that sort of 2% in isolation that we should be thinking of? And then in particular, I suppose, your sort of CapEx plan, the major projects you've got in your pipeline presumably a lot of that is waste movement or underground development. So should we be thinking about, I guess, diesel or explosives or sort of other cost sensitivities there also -- and is it fair to kind of assume that, that sort of low single-digit number is a representative sensitivity in those areas of CapEx also?

Yes, Matt. I mean if you look at it, the rise and fall for any of the contracts that require use of diesel, be that haulage or mining contractors, you will see that diesel costs flow through. And as we've said, though, it's still captured in terms of the cost of our business. It's not the major part of it, Labor is still half and then you've got power at around 9%, 10% and the like.

So we're not seeing a material impact, but those rise and falls do come through. In terms of then the capital, yes, you look at the biggest mine development, We've got going over the next couple of years is at Cowal with E46, Stage I and the like. In terms of the mining cost. The material movement isn't going to be significantly higher or nothing that's of consequence for us in terms of our cost there. We just have to monitor it over the next few months to see where it all lands. Matt.

Understand. And maybe secondly, just quickly, it's -- I mean it's not a particularly material one, but obviously noting that in any during the quarter, you kind of highlighted nonoperating costs of $26 million related to recovery from the December quarter, presumably with the ongoing impacts in the March quarter in terms of whether there will be some ongoing, I guess, nonoperational recovery costs in future quarters. Can you give us a sort of indication of what we should expect there, whether that's going to be a bigger quantum in the June quarter or onwards? Yes, I expect there's some sort of tail costs there. .

Yes. Look, similar to what we had in March '23, you'll start out as a large amount of costs of recovery and getting equipment out and getting all the infrastructure back to normal and then it tails off. I would say, through the June quarter, you'll see some more. As Matt said, we've still got water at the bottom of the mine that we need to get out and the like. We've still got some equipment. So but it will trend down. I don't think you're going to see multiple quarters at $25 million, $26 million. But I think most of it is being captured in this first quarter.

Your next question comes from Adam Baker with Macquarie.

Congrats on achieving your net cash position. and appreciate a new capital management plan will be provided with the financial results. Just -- but I'm just trying to hear your initial thinking surrounding capital management moving forward. Do you think the current dividend policies fit for purpose or we see a change to this current dividend policy? Or could we potentially see an implementation of a buyback like some of your peers have done?

Yes, Adam, thanks for the acknowledgment of net cash. It's actually really pleasing to see the business get to that point with what we've been able to do over the last couple of years. It does give us a good problem. I think it's fair to say over the last 2 quarters, Fran and I have received the most amount of feedback from shareholders as to what to do with the cash versus increased dividends, reinvestments, specials, buybacks, we'll take all of that into consideration in the June year-end and discuss it with the Board. And as I said, it's a good problem to have. It's come earlier than we probably would have expected. But I think the interim dividend that we paid, which was a material lift based on the cash that we've generated, and we paid forward some of the second half cash. I think that's a good reflection of what shareholders should expect going forward.

That's positive, Sigal. And just a clarifying remark with Cowal. You mentioned 10% lower ounces for FY '27. Just wondering, is that 10% lower versus the midpoint of current guidance? Or is that 10% lower versus a lower point of guidance. Just trying to get the understanding here could be anywhere between 275,000 and 286,000 ounces. .

I'll try and help you out here, Adam, I'd say if you take work out your estimate for the June quarter and take 10% off the full year. That's going to give you a pretty good estimate of would be for next year. And Matt explained, we've finished the shutdown, you'll see an uplift in production in the fourth quarter, work that one through, and then that will give you the number for next year. Matt and Joe won't like means the guidance for next year is almost being set.

Your next question comes from Baden Moore with CLSA.

Thanks for your comments on your fuel supply situation. I was just wondering if you could talk a little bit more to the duration of your contract position. So what sort of time frames that you have in place? And then maybe whether you've had any conversations with government about how all your suppliers and how you might be prioritized for fuel in the event there is any level of rationing in the country? And then I guess the third layer might be, just what are the -- how do you think about just resilience and planning around if there's any disruption to supply. How do you plan around that? What are the safeguards for you?

Yes, I'll answer the second question first in terms of government. I mean, our position has always been that we're responsible for our operations and making sure that we've got on annuity of supply, and that's what Matt and Fran and the site teams are working through. We don't put out reliance on in terms of that government support. In terms of if they make a decision on rationing, we would address what the impact is on our operations at that point in time. I think -- the one thing I'd say is our open pits are the largest diesel consumers. And at both Mungari and Cowal, we do have stockpile material that we'd be able to put through the plant. .

It would mean you would slow some of your mine development down to preserve that use of diesel. So when we then look at the other consumables and everything like that, that is the work that Matt and Fran have got in place around what are our response actions that we need to take as we see any issues with consumables.

The good news is that through March, we had no interruptions on anything in terms of supply of consumables into the business, and the outlook into the June quarter is very similar. And then in the first part, the contracts are multiyear contracts. We've got very good relationships with the with the oil companies that are the distributors for us, we would see them, as I said on the call earlier, they're fulfilling their obligations.

We're not trying to do anything outside of the contract, and that's maintaining the really good relationship to guarantee our supply.

And just a quick follow-up. Can you talk to how many months inventory you'd have at hand? And then with the stockpiles you mentioned, I mean, how -- what's the duration that, that would run for before you'd have any sort of impact to your cash flow?

Yes. Look, I mean, in terms of volumes on site, as we've said, we've got adequate volumes on-site and continued delivery to our orders. So that's not seen as an issue much relevance to say what the percentages are because they'll change today, and they'll be different again next week as we either consume or get deliveries, but we've got adequate coverage. Then if you look at it, I mean, the biggest one is at Cowal, we've got over 47 million tonnes of stockpiled ore. We run at 8.8 million tonnes per annum. So I think it gives you enough understanding of on our largest operating asset, should we not be able to have fuel on-site.

Your next question comes from Belinda Humphries with IQ Industry Queensland.

Just wanted to talk about the exploration efforts near Ernest Henry. Are you able to go into a bit more detail about what's going to happen in the June and September quarters of meters drilled budget, that sort of thing? .

I'll hand that over to Glen. I don't think he's going to talk through the meters. I think you talked more to that the programs are more important for us.

Yes. So look, what we -- the real objective of the program on not just the recent tenements, but the sort of overall package that we've been sort of building up over the last several years is to identify new production opportunities that can support filling the mill at Ernest Henry, so we have latent capacity there. .

And so we're not looking for huge deposits. But if we find one, we absolutely take it, but we're looking for probably more modest store deposits that can help achieve that goal essentially. So the drilling programs, they'll commence in the next month or 2, we've been basically waiting.

There's been a lot of weather up there, we need to wait until everything is completely drive very difficult to get any access, particularly equipment until it is dry. So as soon as it is, we'll be drilling -- we gave some examples of the types of targets that we're looking at this morning in our update that gives you a bit of a sense, 10-Ks from Ernest Henry previous drilling identifying anomalies. These -- the consolidation of the tenements up there is the really exciting thing that's happening because bringing those together means that we can explore the full opportunity rather than piecemeal it on tenement to tenement. So that's actually really helped how we're going to prioritize the drilling program over the dry season. And so I just advised to stay tuned. We would look to be talking more about what we're getting in the -- at the end of the December quarter by the time we have some results from that drilling program. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Conway for closing remarks.

Thanks, Ashley. It's pleasing to have delivered another very good quarter, and we're on track to deliver our group guidance and take full advantage of the current high metal prices. Having moved to net cash and no debt repayments to FY '29, we're certainly building the flexibility in. Upcoming, we'll release our 2025 MROR report in the next month. And then we also have an investor briefing and visits to Galen Northparkes. Thank you for your time on the call today. .

That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Evolution Mining Limited FY '26 Half Year Financial Results Call. [Operator Instructions]

I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Lawrie Conway, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Cameron, and good morning, everyone. I'm joined on the call today by Fran Summerhayes, our Financial Officer; Nancy Gee, our Chief Technical Officer; and Rocky O'Connor, our GM, Investor Relations. Today, we released our FY '26 half year financial results along with announcing the approval of 2 key projects at our Cornerstone operations being 2 at North Park and Bert at Ernest Henry. The call today will reference the presentation we released this morning. The forward-looking statement details are provided on Slide 2, and people are encouraged to take note of these.

I'll be starting on Slide 3. I personally think today is a milestone day for Evolution. The work we have done executing our strategy since we formed in 2011 has demonstrated to be the right one. Today, we have a portfolio which is of the highest quality and are embarking on the next phase of growth while at the same time, delivering high returns for our shareholders, including record dividends. We've always said that by focusing on margin, we will make sure that our shareholders benefit. We will bank the cash, invest it wisely and read you along the way through share price appreciation and dividends.

Today shows that we are meeting that commitment. The record financial performance has been built up over the past 2 years of safely and consistently delivering to plan and capturing the benefits of a rising metal price environment. The business is in great shape, probably the best it has ever been, and it is right to be reinvesting in the high-margin suite of assets that we have. As you will see shortly, the returns on these investments will generate are some of the highest in the sector.

From a portfolio perspective, our operations are set to take advantage of the current environment. Cowal continues to be a material cash generator while investing for mine life extensions via the OPC project. Mungari has successfully transitioned back to being a major cash contributor for the group. Ernest Henry and Northparkes reliable cash generators and the projects announced today will enable us to lift returns through utilization of latent processing capacity and increasing our gold and copper production. Red Lake is showing what is capable of doing, having delivered over $200 million of cash in the last 18 months. and Mt Rawdon continues to contribute while we work through the final stages of the options to move to a renewable energy project.

Moving to Slide 4. The consistent performance is delivering high returns. Our underlying profit more than doubled to $785 million, while our group cash flow was 123% better at $608 million. The benefit for our shareholders is a record dividend of $0.20 per share, up 186%. Fran is excited to be going through the full details of the financials shortly.

We have continued our discipline in terms of capital allocation and only investing in projects if they demonstrate they can generate high rates of return. It is the right time now to be investing in the projects at Northparkes and Ernest Henry. The E22 and Burt projects will utilize excess processing capacity to increase production. At Northparkes to extract maximum value from the asset, the role of the stream that triple flag had needed to be sorted.

The collaboration and positive intent of the Triple Flag team has facilitated greater flexibility in evaluating the multiple ore bodies at Northparkes. The updated agreement allows us to move forward with E22 block cave and start studies on expanding production, including the potential development of the gold-rich ore deposit. It also provides a pathway to develop additional gold-rich deposits. We will receive a payment of $120 million in December and receive a materially higher proportion of the metal from the potential E44 deposit. Full details of the updated agreement are provided in the appendix of this presentation and a separate release. I do thank [ Sheldon Vander Coy ] and [ James Dee ], who worked closely with Karen Smith and our corporate development team to finalize the amendment.

On Slide 5, you'll see a summary of our disciplined approach to capital management. We have the right mix in terms of returns for our shareholders, investing for organic growth and acquisitions and having a balance sheet that underpins our strategy. Shareholders are receiving record dividends with over $400 million to be paid in April. We have lifted our planned total capital investment for FY '27 to '30 to between $900 million and $1,100 million per year. The driver to the change in outlook is only linked to the scale and scope of the projects or the new projects such as the coarse particle flotation and the expansion study at Northparkes. It is not due to any project overruns or the like.

For FY '26, our group major capital is updated to between $500 million and $605 million associated with starting investing in the projects announced today and the fact that the Cowal OPC project is ahead of schedule. We have now commenced development of the E46 pit brought forward from FY '28, the work on the southern bund and will increase our work on the integrated waste landform given the availability of more waste material. The overall project capital at the OPC remains unchanged at $430 million. Overall, this is good capital investment, and I will show you why on the next slide.

We also announced today an expansion of our Canadian footprint with 2 quality exploration targets in British Columbia. Our discovery team believe these targets have the potential to become evolution scale projects. will be extensively drilling these over the next 12 to 15 months. Our balance sheet is in great place. We're on track to move to net cash by the end of FY '26 and the balance sheet can support all components of our strategy.

Turning to Slide 6. And to me, this is the most important slide of the whole presentation. It clearly shows the quality of our portfolio and the discipline of our investments. The projects in execution or those just approved are all going to improve the group average rate of return as these projects are all above the 18%. We significantly at conservative gold and copper prices, the range of returns are 23% to 77%. These returns improved to 38% to 128% at a gold price that is 10% below today's price.

At Northparkes, the return from E48 could be as high as 128%. When we acquired the operation, we made a deliberate decision to take advantage of the installed infrastructure at E48, which bought us time to a fully assessed E22 and the Triple Flag agreement. This is a great example of how to allocate capital. Further highlighting the benefits of our capital allocation is the Cowal OPC project. We are 1 year into the project and is tracking ahead of schedule. Cowal delivered over $130 million of operating cash flow in January alone. This is an annualized rate of $1.6 billion and was delivered while utilizing some lower-grade stockpile material and is more than enough money to fund the OPC project.

Overall, we're investing in the right projects at the right time so as to improve the returns and the quality of the portfolio.

With that, I'll now hand over to Fran.

Thank you, Lawrie, and good morning, everyone. At my first results presentation with Evolution, it is a pleasure to be talking to a set of record financial results and rewarding our shareholders while we continue to invest in our quality assets.

On Slide 8, underlying EBITDA achieved $1.6 billion, up 59%. And record underlying profit after tax at $785 million, up 104%. These financial outcomes were driven by stable and safe performance on plan and consistent production, benefiting from the higher metal prices whilst protecting our margin with strong cost control. Highlighted by our record underlying EBITDA margin, which has improved by 14% to 57%, we are banking the benefits of high gold and copper prices with our sector-leading all-in sustaining costs with record group cash flow at $608 million, up 123%. Declaring a record interim dividend, this is 3x higher than the FY '25 interim dividend of $0.20 per share fully franked. Both operating and net mine cash flow for the half were all-time records.

As the Slide 9 shows, net mine cash flow is up 151% at $1.1 billion. delivering on our operational performance where we continued investing in our long-life, high-margin operations like the open pit continuation project at Cowal that is ahead of schedule and on budget. Mungari operation net mine cash flow is up almost 240% following the successful commissioning during the period on schedule the low-budget mill expansion project. Group operational cash flows -- sorry, operating cash costs and sustaining capital spend was in line with prior periods. As our underlying EBITDA margin increased from 50% to 57%, highlighting the quality and strong operational performance.

These strong margins are expected to continue with our improved all-in sustaining cost guidance for FY '26. We continue to bank the upside from the higher prices through consistent state on plan delivery, in turn, leading to a very favorable step change in our balance sheet, which was already at investment grade before.

Our balance sheet is in great shape, as the charts show on Slide 10. Since December 23, over the last 2 years, our gearing has significantly reduced from 30% to only 6%. During the half period, we've repaid all bank term loans with the final $280 million, which was repaid during the half. Now only remaining debt is our U.S. private placement. This is long tenure and low cost with an average fixed interest rate of 4.47% with our next payment not due to FY '29.

Our cash balance is $967 million. Net debt has significantly reduced from $1.6 billion to $362 million in the last 2 years. With the revolver credit facility remaining undrawn at $525 million available. Our total liquidity is at $1.4 billion. As cash generation and balance sheet strength has improved, shareholders are seeing this reflected in higher returns without compromising high value return on investment in our quality assets or balance sheet flexibility.

As we have said before, as gearing comes down, dividends are increasing. The chart on the top right of Slide 11, clearly illustrates that. In times when gearing reduces dividend increases. Gearing peaked in FY '23 following various acquisitions to establish a high-margin asset portfolio that is now generating significant cash flow. Gearing has reduced rapidly while dividends have picked up. The chart shows what it may look like if the final FY '26 dividend was the same as the interim dividend. Bearing in mind that the current gold spot price is around 23% higher than the half average gold price achieved. This could be up to $500 million in extra cash flows in half 2.

Our dividend policy remains unchanged. We are targeting an annual average 50% payout group cash flow. Following record financial performance, with strong group cash flow with the outlook on half 2 FY '26 with expected production guidance to be achieved, continue investment in the business and improved revised all-in sustaining costs, the Board has approved a fully franked dividend of $0.20 per share. This is 186% higher than the FY '25 interim dividend.

We have been and we are disciplined through the cycle dividend payers. This is the 26th consecutive dividend. And in a 6-month period, this interim dividend of $406 million represents almost 20% of the total dividends declared over a 13-year period, clearly shows that we are honoring our commitment and rewarding our shareholders. Aligned with our shareholders' feedback, the dividend reinvestment plan will continue to be on offer with no discounts.

With current spot prices, we are on track to be net cash by the end of FY '22 and while continuing to invest in our long-life, high-margin assets, which I will hand over to Nancy to share with you Thanks, Nancy.

Thank you, Fran. Today, we are pleased to outline the significant progress we are making as we continue to advance our assets and build long-term value for shareholders. The timing is highly favorable. Metal prices are trending, and we are exceptionally well positioned to leverage our growing copper portfolio at a time when global demand for copper is accelerating.

As Lawrie highlight, the Board has approved projects, both central to our strategy of investing in high-quality assets that generate sustained value. We have the E22 blood cave at Northparkes, which will underpin production for the next decade and the Bert project at Ernest Henry is a near-surface high-grade deposit that enhance mine life, optionality and cash generation.

On Slide 13, before we move into the detail of this project, I want to briefly reaffirm that we have a clear, disciplined strategy for every asset in our portfolio, and it is an exceptional portfolio. Ernest Henry and Northparkes are to standout example of that strategy at work. We continue to operate a high-quality, well-balanced suite of assets with a defined pathway for growth. The approval of E22 and Bert reinforce our disciplined capital allocation approach and investing in the asset, we know best, increasing our copper exposure and post an evolution to capture value in this training market.

Slide 14. Northparkes' growth strategy is anchored by 3 major investment streams, each designed to unlock the long-term potential of this highly scalable or system. We are now progressing the next chapters of Northparkes with the development of E22, the next major underground production source. The project carries a capital estimate of approximately $545 million on the evolution share. Northparkes has a long successful track record in block cave development. supported by highly experienced operating teams and strong underground infrastructure. This foundation positions us extremely well to deliver E22 efficiently and with a high level of technical confidence. The E22 project is fully approved with first production planned for the end of FY sustaining mill feed at approximately 7.4 million tonnes per ounce.

Slide 15. We are also progressing with the addition of a modular coarse particle flotation, CPF, circuit to the existing mill, a low impact, high-return upgrade design to deliver a 2% increase in copper recovery. This enhancement improved overall operational expenses and strengthened our financial performance. The coarse particle flotation project is a $75 million investment evolution share.

Over the past year, we have assessed several long-term growth. The Board has now approved a full extension study with a budget of 14 million evolution share. This study will evaluate the optimal structure processing scale access mind to meal integration option and define the development sequence required to unlock the next phase of Northparkes' growth potential.

Slide 16, how clients this scope of the extension study, but more importantly, it highlights the substantial upside embedded within this world-class copper system. We see Northparkes as much larger asset than it is today. This study is a critical step towards that future. The work on the way is evaluating options to materially increase while assessing new open pit opportunities alongside the next generation. In summary, this expansion study defined a sustainable processing envelope for Northparkes and position us to quantify and ultimately capture the full potential of a copper system capable of supporting certified higher reduction for [indiscernible].

Slide 17. Turning to Ernest Henry. The Board has approved the Bert project with a capital budget of $150 million. Bert is a near surface high-grade deposits that integrates seamlessly with our existing operations. It is a well-defined and well-driven deposit advanced by our discovery team. If geometries support efficient extraction through sublevel stoping with backfill enabling us to bring the or online with minimal disruption to the current operation. Commercial production is scheduled to begin in FY '29. Bert is a meaningful addition to the Ernest Henry long-term plan, enhancing both copper and gold exposure at the time when demand and market fundamentals remain highly supportive.

In closing, it is a very exciting period for Evolution. This project enhances production visibility increase our exposure to a favorable commodity cycle and continue to build long-term value for our shareholders.

Cameron, I will hand back to you for Q&A.

Sorry, that's to me, Nancy. So Slide 18 provides a good summary of the business. There's opportunities to deliver meaningful high returning growth from Northparkes and 1 Henry which further upgrades the quality of our existing portfolio. I acknowledge we haven't spent much time on the call around the triple flag amended agreement. For the analysts, this will no doubt take a bit of time to unpack and Rocky, Fran and Karen will make themselves available to provide further details in the coming days. However, we do believe it's been a genuine win-win for Evolution and Triple Flag and I do acknowledge that both teams who work closely to achieve that.

Finally, we're proud of the results we've released today which were only made possible by the teams across all of our sites, who continue to deliver safely to our operating plan. We're banking the benefits of the high metal prices through record cash flow, which enables us to reward shareholders with record dividends de-gear the balance sheet and fund the next phase of growth. I generally believe that Evolution has not been in better shape than it is today. Thank you.

Cameron. Please open the line for questions.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question today comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs.

Lawrie, Fran, Nancy, congrats on a strong half year. First one for me, just in terms of Northparkes and the study there. I think Triple Flag highlighted sort of the study to 10, but you guys haven't put sort of a capacity number on that. I guess how should we think about sort of the sizing there in terms of the plant relative to some of the mine works that would be needed to do to get to sort of 10 or whether it's a full replication in terms of going to 14?

Yes. So Hugo, I mean the reason there's no fixed is as we previously talked about, it can be anywhere from 7.5% to a full replication to 15. What the study needs to work out is what's the right size and scale of the plant that matches the different ore bodies that will come through over the next 10 to 20 years. So our view is we think tends a minimal achievable one, but we'll go through that part esoteric Nancy, do you want to talk on the orebodies?

No, I think that's the thing we have all the ore body. So it's really a question of sequence to make sure we can fill the mill.

Got it. And just to clarify there, I mean, what's sort of the earliest you could bring deposits like MGH or things forward to then think about from our side whether that's a progressive expansion or whether that's a big expansion in one go relative to the mine sequencing?

I'll let Nancy talk to the mine sequencing. But effectively, our approach is that when the study is done, it would be a would be one upsize of the plant. We wouldn't be doing it in stages. When you look at it, you've got then E22 would come online in FY '30, '31 and ramp up. Those production sources give us enough to certainly go above the nameplate and above the permitted of 8.6%, what the scale is, is what the study needs to work through in the next 12 months. Nancy was just going to add a couple of comments.

Yes. I think the ramp-up will be done progressively. But as soon as possible to go to 10, 11, 12, but MGH will be like the same sequence that we talked initially. It's the same sequence. It's more accelerating and as some maybe other open bit stores to complete.

And that's where, Hugo, the work on E44 has a role to play. It's open pit and able to provide into the plant without the pressure on the undergrounds. .

Got it. That's helpful color. And then another one, if I could, on Cowal. I appreciate a number of projects across the portfolio progressing, but just on Cowal, you permitted there to 9.8. Obviously, you accelerate sort of the waste movements, the southern wall move, you potentially unlock a number of open pits that could potentially provide a bit more flexibility on feed. Could you just remind us what works on the plan need to be done to potentially get you to that permitted capacity and how we should think about the timing of those potential works?

So you've moved on quick Hugo. We only just said today that we're getting the Southern coming forward and E46 is ahead. I think the plant one is that's a little bit off in time frame. Our focus really is getting the 3 pits operating, the underground ramped up so that then the constraint becomes the plant. So the short answer is that's not in the horizon at the moment to go above the 8.8.

Your next question comes from Levi Spry at UBS.

Yes. Lawrie and team, so maybe sticking at Northparkes. So FID sometime FY '27, that was what I heard for the expansion?

Yes. By end of FY '27, the expansion studies will be finished. .

Yes. Got it. And then I guess just in terms of the amended agreement with triple plague over 44, how can we think about the process that would happen as part of that? What have we learned from the updated agreement today in the context of potential expansion?

What we've learned there, Levi, is that Triple Flag knew they had a role to play in unlocking all the opportunities at Northparkes because under the original agreement, E44 wouldn't have been developed in our lifetime because it was gold only. and we had to bear 100% of the cost. What it has done and what Kieran and the team have been able to work through with them is it's put a an in principle how these things can be assessed. But rightfully from triple flag site that need to know what is the ore body, what's the method of mining and everything that would be in the and the metal that would be attributable to it before they would commit to what their involvement would be.

Got it. Okay. And then just a technical question on the flotation. So good news there. Can I just confirm it's an extra 2% on what number? Is it 84 to 86? What's the absolute number now for the copper recoveries?

Yes, it's a 2% improvement from current performance. .

Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan at Barrenjoey.

First question just on the E22 project. If you look at Slide 14, and the other news you provided, you've got a twin decline configuration that comes up from E22 to surface. Just wondering what is the ore haulage capacity, which is included in the capital of the project explicitly? And then what option exists for greater numbers than that, that have been contemplated to just preserve option value at side?

So the capacity is at 6 million tonnes per annum. So the conveyor and all the system will be able to handle this 6 million tonnes per annum.

So it will be able to do 6 million tonnes per annum as in the scope of the project, but is there the potential that you could widen the belts, increase the power and get more than the 6 million tonnes under the scope?

Yes, we have. But the design right now and we have a forward tipping point as well. So that will give us more flexibility. So we think we can do more than 6. But right now, the design is for 6 million tonnes.

Yes. So in short there, Dan, one, we have allocated capital. If you look at the full $680 million, there's probably around $50 million extra optionality to go above that 6 million tonne per annum. But when we build it, the things that will go in other than as Nancy said, the tipping and the like, will work at the 6. So it's built for our option.

Yes. So I guess that takes you in principle to 12.5 of haulage from underground, if I've got the site correctly in my mind, and you could potentially do more than that if you upgraded the conveyors further. Is that accurate?

That's a good assessment. .

Okay. And then what is the potential for other gold-dominant open pits across the property to be potentially brought into that into are you going to do a body of work to explore more the open pit potential across the site? And if there are highly gold-dominant ore bodies, is that something for the future negotiations that this E44 agreement provides a pathway for?

Yes. Look, Dan, it's exactly that. So E44 is that first one that we knew based on the previous studies that we could look at now. We were never going to do any drilling on that under the previous arrangement. So that provides us. And when you look at E28 pits and up or the others that are more gold dominant, we look at drilling those, looking at the size and scale of those pits. And Glen and the team, I have no doubt now have a little bit more freedom to look at their drilling programs to say, gold dominant ones aren't excluded and if they identify any, then Kieran's going to go back to work and work out a new amendment. But I think the benefit that we've got there is by having the discussions with Triple Flag there's an understanding of how it works for both of us and the mechanics of how we can go through that have sort of been laid out now with E44.

Yes. And then if I just refer to Slide 16, where this is at Northparkes you've got a number of potential future ore sources laid out. So E22, obviously, you've got now. Well, you will be moving to execution now and that's sanctioned a bunch of PFS level studies. So it looks like major E51, 4 and MJH, I guess the most advanced things that would be sequenced. A, can I just confirm that that's accurate? And b, on MJH, is that block cave? Is that a sublevel curve? And would you just use -- can you use existing crushers capacity used to do MJH?

Yes. I'll hand that over to Nancy. But just in short, the ones that the PFS level studies are the ones that are into the expansion studies that we've approved today. So they're the ore bodies that will be assessed plant expansion, Nancy, on MJH.

Yes. MJH was looking to be a blood cape at this stage, and we are looking at different options for the crusher material handling system. But it's still open, and that's going to be a review in the next coming months.

Your next question comes from Mitch Ryan at Jefferies.

Fran, it's an impressive looking Slide 10. I hope you're not living the old CFO take any credit for that. Firstly, can you just talk to some of the metrics around that. Mining rates grade profile? Is it relatively homogenous through the planned time frame. Can we get some more metrics around it, please?

Yes. So, Mitch, I'll just get you to ask a bit on Bert again. It was very hard to hear what you were saying. .

Yes. Sorry. I'll Hopefully, this is better. I'm just hoping you can give us some more metrics around Bert, please. Can you give us mining rates, grade profile, operating costs, some of the key metrics that we should be thinking about modeling that?

Yes. Look, I'll hand that to Nancy to talk broadly around Bert and the metrics and then Rocky will certainly be able to provide more nation off-line on that.

Okay. So for Bert, we have ramping up, like we said, we start production in '29. '30 will be, I will say, full production for almost 4.5 years. So we're going to go to produce 700 million tonnes of core going from this deposit -- 700,000 of production.

And the grades are more or less double what the cave is.

Yes, 0.9%, yes, double.

So it's a 0.9% copper and gold? .

The gold is 0.82 as well.

And the operating costs, the cost per ton of mining or development meters. How should we think about some of the breakdowns there?

Yes. Look, Mitch, I'll get Rocky to follow all of those up with you. I mean that the operating costs well in line with normal stoping operations. There's nothing different at Bert to any of the others.

Okay. Yes. Perfect. And then looking forward to that information? And then secondly, exploration spend, how should we think about it now that you bought these Canadian properties into the portfolio for sort of FY '27 and beyond? Do we think that there's an increase in exploration costs or is it going to just sort of reallocation between what has been some of the spend in the other projects? Will they ramp down?

No. So these projects will be -- our assessment drilling will be done by the end of the amount of drilling going in there will be incremental to what we're doing because we're not going to redirect it away from Mungari, Cowal or any of the existing operations you're probably talking upwards of $10 million to $15 million over in those projects, depending on how successful the program goes.

Your next question comes from Matthew Frydman at MST Financial.

Sure. Can I ask a couple, please? Firstly, on Cowal, just following on from some of those earlier comments on the OPC. Obviously, a pretty reasonable driver for value in the business in the near term at least. So can you expound the fact that it's running ahead of schedule? I guess, what does that mean for timing of transition to open pit feed from E46 quantify how far ahead of schedule is looking? And also any impact or benefit not just from the open pit feed perspective, but any impact on the underground. Does that allow you to access particular underground early areas earlier than perhaps you'd planned? Yes, just wondering what the sort of quantity of that running ahead of schedule looks like.

Yes, Matt, it's only a couple of months. It's not significant in that regard. So it doesn't impact on the underground over the next couple of years. What it does do is that as the lake is drying out. As I said, we'll do the Southern end work. And then in E46, we will start to ramp up there as we finish in Stage H. The Stage H now will go out into the last quarter of this year because of weather that we've had in the last few months in the E42 pit. So that's allowing us to start work on E46. So in terms of next year, you'll still see almost the whole year on stockpile ore toward the back end of the year is when you get anything out of E46, which previously was scheduled for the start of FY '28.

Great. That's really helpful. And then secondly, in terms of the sort of incremental CapEx you've guided to, I guess, particularly over sort of FY '27 and onwards, can you kind of break down what projects or particular aspects of the projects weren't included in your sort of prior medium-term guidance around CapEx? I guess wondering where do I need to add CapEx versus what was already in that medium-term outlook, particularly given that you mentioned that the overall CapEx budget for the OPC is unchanged and actually part of the FY '26 increase is pulling that forward? So yes, just wondering outside of OPC where the CapEx is getting added versus your prior medium-term outlook. .

Yes, sure. So I mean, look, if we look at the 4 years, the main ones are at Northparkes, Ernest Henry and Cowal. And so if I look at Northparkes, E22, the scale and the future optionality that we're building in, and I mentioned to Dan, is one of them at E48, we're now getting 20% more metal. We've got 5 levels versus the study had -- we approved the coarse particle flotation and the expansion study. There's another one that's going on that -- around regrowing capacity at Northparkes.

And so when you look at all of those, you're talking in the order of $250 million to $300 million for all of those. Those items that weren't previously in there. And then similarly, when you look at Ernest Henry, Bert, as Nancy mentioned, the mining rates are going to be higher because we're basically getting about 50% more tonnes, which is then obviously doubling the metal, and we're also getting that. And we're obviously doing some studies of below the 775 that we're now bringing into plan.

So you're probably looking at around $120 million to $150 million there at Ernest Henry. That Cowal is going to go ahead of schedule, and we're doing the southern one earlier, that does open up an opportunity for us to bring mine development from FY '31 and '32 into '29 and '30. And then we have also acquired a secondhand village, which saved us about 50% on the capital cost at Cowal. So in that one, you're probably talking 20 -- sorry, $120 million to $140 million going at Cowal, and that will make up almost the major actually almost all of what we're talking about over that 4-year period.

Your next question comes from David Radclyffe with Global Mining Research. .

So if I could start on Northparkes and maybe ask Dan's question another way. On the last site visit, there was a discussion of the potential to operate E22 at up to 9 million tonnes. So just wondering what drove the decision here to keep it at the 6 and not go to the higher rate given the discussion around the mill upside does sound positive?

Yes. Look, Dave, I'll have to just go back and sort of refresh myself on the one a couple of years ago. But essentially, that was certainly predicated on the basis that you didn't have all the other ore sources that could be available to you. And so what we've looked at is what's the right size of the E22 cave. We believe that if we go, as I said, between 7.5 million to 15 million tonnes per annum, running that at anywhere between that 6 million to 7 million tonnes per annum or even a bit higher, makes the right sense for the asset and for the capital that we're going to invest into it now.

Okay. Maybe if I can follow up on the sequencing questions and just think about the open pit ore sources, given the current shaft can do 6.5%, so you're kind of limited in the near term. I'm not really clear about when you bring back open pit ore. It does sound like maybe E44 is now ahead of E51 on Major Tom. So what could the timing be on a new open pit?

Yes. Look, I wouldn't say that 844 comes ahead of the others. I mean we've got the drill results and the outcomes on major Tom and E51 and we'll advance those through the study period I think what it does do is that 44, you wouldn't be seeing that coming in until about FY'30into the plan. But what it does provide is the opportunity for us to look at the alternative ore sources that Nancy and the team are going to study through FY '27 to enable the plant expansion.

Okay. No, that's helpful. Maybe if I could just sneak one last one in. Obviously, at current gold prices Red Lake's on track to generate significant surpluses it does over the group, but it does have obviously significant optionality still. So is there any thoughts or studies underway to increase the spend at Red Lake? Or given that you've got so many projects you've talked about and just deploy the capital to those?

I think it's fair to say that the Red Lake team is starting to get a little bit of interest in asking for capital, having delivered about 6, 7 good quarters. I think the thing is that we've got a on life that's 15-plus years there. It's going to need some investment, it has to compete and I think the returns need to demonstrate that. But I think it's earning that right. We'll look at studies around tails reprocessing. We're looking at what are the options around whether that allows us to use the third plant, the [ Bateman mill ], what we do in terms of mining areas.

And certainly, when you talk to Glenn and the team there is still view that there's more to be discovered there, that will provide us opportunities to invest. I'd say it wouldn't be investing in taking the Red Lake and the Campbell mills higher, it would be -- does the Bateman mill provide optionality. So it's just getting there. I don't think they're willing to stick ahead too high up out of the trenches to ask for money, but they're certainly getting really for it as long as they keep levering quarter in, quarter out, they will enhance their chances.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Alex Barkley at RBC..

A question on the Northparkes permitting. I think I heard Nancy say E22 is fully approved. Is there already some kind of permit for the mill expansion? And a bit similar to David's question, was it always a 6 million tonne per annum E22 case that was under study work? And what exactly is the capacity that has been approved?

Yes, sure. So in terms of the permitting, yes, the permitting for E22 is all received, and we don't need anything to plant. But I mean, it's permitted to 8.6 million tonnes. So to go above that will require an approval, and that is what the study team will take into consideration during the expansion study next year. And then in terms of E22, it viewed as being 6% to 7%. And as was mentioned earlier, there was talk of the 9. I just need to go refresh in terms of what was considering -- which was the conveyor to surface, which is not what we're contemplating in this one. So it's 6 with capacity to 7 or optionality for 7 being built into the project.

Okay. Sure. And just a last one. Speaking of the 9 million tonnes that was talked about on site, you threw out a number around $120 million CapEx to get the mill to that point, say reaching 10 sort of thing. Is that CapEx number still in the ballpark? I mean that could well be what people are basing their expectations around. Just maybe a rough idea there would be helpful.

Yes. Look, I dare say that in the last 2 years, that number will have changed, and that's really what the study has got to look at in terms of the capacity -- sorry, going from 7.5% to 10% or 11% or 15%. The 120 certainly has gone up since that was done 2 years ago. And you got to remember that, that that actually when we were on site was based on a study that was done by CMO about 18 months before we took ownership around the potential expansion. So it's definitely changed since then, Alex.

Your next question comes from Adam Baker at Macquarie.

Just a follow-up on E22 CapEx of $55 million. Just wondering what the breakdown is over the next 5 years? I mean, is it a pretty even split across these years? Or will the CapEx spend be more back-end weighted? Does you accelerate the development in preparation for first production? .

Yes. Look, it will be almost smooth over the few years. We are a slow ramp-up in terms of the capital this year. And then you're probably for '27, '28 and '29, you'll see that ramp up from, say, just over -- and this is our 80% share, over $120 million in moving up to around the $150 million and then around the sort of $170 million, $180 in '29 and then it tails off in '30 as we get into it.

That's great. And just secondly, on the recovery activities at Ernest Henry following the rainfall event late in December, how things going there, you're back up and running? Or is there still a little bit of remediation to occur?

It's both. We're back up and running the shutdowns that Matt talked about in the call last month have been completed. So the sites now finishing the remediation work ramping up the mining activities. And then by the end of March, we'd be back to normal full run rate.

That does conclude our question-and-answer session. I'd like to hand the call back now to Mr. Conway for closing remarks.

Thank you, Cameron. Look, before signing off, I do want to call out a lot of people have put a lot of effort into getting all of the information out today. It's either in the finance team, investor relations, corporate development projects. studies. And of course, the teams at Northparkes and Ernest Henry to allow us to put the releases out today, and I do thank them for that. And I thank you for your time on the call today, and we'll talk soon. Thank you.

Thank you. That does conclude our call for today. Thanks for participating. You may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Evolution Mining Limited December 2025 Quarter Results Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Lawrie Conway, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Jami, and good morning, everyone. I trust you've had a good brand and wish you a very healthy and successful 2026. I'm joined on the call today by Matt O'Neill, our Chief Operating Officer; Fran Summerhayes, our Chief Financial Officer; and Peter Rocio Connor, our GM, Investor Relations. Today, we released our December quarterly report, which will be a reference point for the call. Fran and I will be back in a few weeks when we release our FY '26 half year financial results.

Before going into our quarterly results, I want to take a moment to reflect on the tragic event that happened here at Bondi on 14 December. 15 people were murdered due to races. No violence is accepted even more so violence linked to racism. This heartless and active terrorism, whilst many people and families were enjoying the Bond Eye environment, specifically the Jewish community celebrating Hanke. I know this has impacted our country, including our team members at Evolution. The attack is something that should have been avoided. The lack of action by the federal government over the past 2.5 years on racism is inexcusable. The refuse to call a Royal Commission until the overwhelming majority of Australian spoke of the need for it -- and then to try and condense the time frame for political reasons is disappointing. It lacks leadership.

On the contrary, the leadership of the New South Wales state government with quick and strong action and support was very welcome. My biggest concern is that we learned nothing from this and do not make Australia a safer and more inclusive country. Our condolences go out to the family and friends of those who were murdered. Our thoughts and prayers go out to everyone who was impacted by the attack, and we also thank all the first responder volunteered support during this incident.

Turning back to Evolution. This was another quarter and the eighth consecutive quarter where we've safely delivered to plan. We produced 191,000 ounces of gold and 18,000 tonnes of copper at a very low all-in sustaining cost of $1,275 per ounce for continuing operations. We did it safely with our TRIF remaining low at 5.8 Gold production improved by 10%, while our all-in sustaining cost improved by 26%. Importantly, the cash generation has really gained momentum as we realize the benefits of the current metal price environment. Our underlying group cash flow improved 176% to $541 million or around $2,800 per ounce when normalizing for the FY '25 annual tax payment made during the quarter.

Reported cash flow was up 110% to $412 million. The cash flow was achieved at a gold price around $800 below current spot. The group cash flow was on the back of record mine cash flows with operating cash flow up 57%, just over $1 billion, while net mine cash flow doubled to $727 million, with the operations increasing their cash flows in the range of 55% to 140%. The cash flow charts on Page 1 of the report very clearly shows our cash-generating capacity. We are on track to deliver almost $4 billion of operating cash flow. This is 40% higher than when we issued our guidance in August and is anticipated to be 25% higher than what we have delivered in the first half. Our cash balance improved to $967 million after we repaid $110 million and $116 million in net dividends. We have no debt due until FY '29.

Our gearing is now at 6% compared to 11% at September and 30% just 2 years ago. We are well on track to being net cash this year, providing further balance sheet flexibility, including returns to shareholders. We remain on track to deliver original group production guidance of 710,000 to 780,000 ounces of gold and 70,000 to 80,000 tonnes of copper. Group copper production is expected to be at the low end of guidance due to the weather event at Ernest Henry. At the end of the quarter, Ernest Henry received 300 millimeters of rain in a 24-hour period, resulting in water ingress to the underground mine and temporary suspension of the operation. All personnel were safely accounted for and no injuries reported.

Recovery activities are progressing well with only short-term operational impacts expected. It is anticipated that the impact at Ernest Henry is about 7,000 to 8,000 ounces of gold and 4,000 to 5,000 tonnes of copper for FY '26. The Group all-in sustaining cost guidance is updated to $1,640 to $1,760 per ounce and is a 6% improvement on our original guidance, reflecting continued cost control, the impacts of higher by-product credits, partially offset by the Ernest Henry weather event. The updated group guidance further entrenches...

Matt will go through the operational performance soon. However, I do want to call out a couple of key highlights. About 2.5 years ago, some analysts were calling Cowal's best days behind it. 1 even saying that the cash cow was over. Well, this quarter, it delivered $361 million of operating cash flow at $4,500 per ounce and $284 million of net cash, which equates to more than $3 million per day even after investing in the OPC project. This level of cash flow alone is better than a number of Australian multi-asset, mid-tier companies. and the operation has at least 16 more years ahead of it.

Mungari delivered record net mine cash flow of $104 million, which is 142% improvement for the quarter and represents nearly 50% of the plant expansion project capital. At Red Lake, the operation is settling into the desired rhythm of 30,000 to 40,000 ounces per quarter and positive net cash flow. That produced 33,000 ounces and doubled their net mine cash flow to $80 million. They have now delivered over $200 million of net cash flow in the past 18 months. On the projects front, Mungari successfully moved to commercial production and the establishment of the Castle Hill mining hub is now complete, following the full ceiling of the haul road during the quarter. The Cowal OPC project made solid progress this quarter and remains on plan and budget. Studies for the next key growth projects being E22 at North Park and Ernest Henry are complete, and we'll go to our board for assessment during the March quarter.

With that, I'll now hand over to Matt to take through the operational...

Thanks, Lawrie. As noted, we have successfully completed another strong quarter of safely delivering to plan, and we remain on track to meet full year guidance, allowing us to continue to benefit from the rising metal price environment. I'm pleased our safety performance remains in a healthy position with the teams at each of the operations continuing to focus heavily on this area. We did see a small increase in our total recordable injury frequency rate this quarter, which was driven by an elevated number of injuries at our Cowal and Mungari operations during the month of October. Our safety focus remains on leading indicators, and we continue to perform strongly here.

On the production front, as noted, we're on track to meet full year guidance. For me, the production highlight of the December quarter was the successful ramp-up of the Mungari operation where we achieved an annualized run rate through the mill for the quarter of 4.1 million tonnes. Throughout the quarter, the team ran the new mill through a range of operational parameters, and I'm happy to say that they're very pleased with how it has performed.

Similarly to the September quarter, we had minor interruptions to mining activities in the open pit coal due to wet weather. Again, it was pleasing to see that the work the team have done on resilience and reliability pay off as we experienced only minor variations in the plant due to these events. As noted, works continue to progress well on the APC project with the project ahead of schedule and in line with budget. The Red Lake and Mt Rawdon operations continued to deliver in line with their plans with minimal variations throughout the December quarter.

As noted earlier in the call by Lawrie, Ernest Henry experienced a significant rain event at the back end of the quarter on the 29th of December. The Cloncurry region had its average annual rainfall of 420 millimeters fall in just a 72-hour period, 300 of which fell in just 24 hours. During this event, all personnel were evacuated safely from the mine via the shaft and the multiple dewatering systems, both in the pit and underground operated as designed to reduce the impact of the rain. We diverted water away from key infrastructure areas and into the bottom of the mine, minimizing the impact on mine infrastructure.

Whilst we are dewatering and remediating the mine, we've moved forward the scheduled February plant shutdown to align with these works. The processing plant shutdown is underway now and scheduled to be completed by the end of January. Current estimates are for full year production from Ernest Henry to be lower by between 7,000 and 8,000 ounces of gold and 4,000 to 5,000 tonnes of copper. At North Parks, we achieved a significant milestone during the December quarter, with the completion of the E26 sublevel cave after 10 years of operation and the successful ramp-up of E48 sublevel cave taking its place.

In summary, we remain on track to meet the group's full year guidance and take advantage of the strong market conditions we are currently enjoying. This brings the formal part of our update to an end, and I'll now hand back to Harmony for questions.

[Operator Instructions]. Your first question comes from Levi Spry from UBS.

I mean I guess, just firstly, on the -- moving to a net cash position sometime this half. Can you just talk a little bit around how the Board might address that in February, what the competing sort of interests are in terms of CapEx and exploration, maybe what you can bring forward potentially? And specifically, I'm thinking about your projects, but also the OTC and how you're going to optimize that going forward, North Parksburg?

Thanks, Liv. Happy New Year, and I'll get Frandon a couple of comments. Our cash flow only just has increased since the day she joined. The -- look, we will move to a net cash position over the remainder of this year. And it is highlights that if you deliver a plan essentially in an unhedged environment and do that safely, you actually get the benefits. What the Board will consider our policy is percentage of cash flow, targeting 50%. We look at it on a full year outlook basis. And at the end of each financial year, we look at the policy. So we look at the policy at the end of the year. I don't expect it to change too much, but we've got certainly flexibility around the percentage that we pay -- in terms of internally, I think our discipline around capital allocation and projects will remain key. We have seen that OPC is advancing well, and I was out there last week and it's actually a lot higher than what it was 6 months ago and 3 months ago, which is good for the project and does open up some flexibility around that project and what we do.

Exploration, I think Glenn is going at tilt, but he's looking at some opportunities there. And then obviously, the Board will consider E22 and during the quarter as well. So yes, well, as I said, we'll look to make sure we continue to reward shareholders in this environment, discipline around our capital option be that in projects and exploration, but a good problem for Fran to have as to what to do. Fran, anything to add?

No, you summarized it well.

Yes. Okay. And then just to eSerimaybe for Matt, look, a pretty significant event maybe lost a little bit in an otherwise very good quarter. What's the current status? So you expect the plant to turn back on at the end of the month, but interesting in terms of the mine and dewatering.

Yes. I'll get Matt to do that. I mean, yes, Lee, I think it didn't impact on the December quarter. As Matt said, it was right at the end but it is what we're going through into this quarter. And Matt outlined a little bit on the call, but maybe just at color around the mine and the plant and the surface.

Yes. So I'll start with the surface. Things went quite well for us on the surface with that volume of water. The plant is completely fine. And so what we chose to do is instead of having that shutdown in February is that we will do it ourselves and that we would bring it forward into January, so giving us a bit of time back in that month.

In terms of the mine, the infrastructure, there's some minor flooding remediation work that we need to do in areas that were sort of pockets rather than anything else as the water sort of moved through the mine, some of the pockets filled up and so that's tail end of 2 conveyors that doesn't take much to get back and then some works around a hydraulic pack that was sort of sitting in a pit in the crusher. So there's nothing material from the infrastructure side.

Currently, we're dewatering into the existing dewatering system quite significantly. So we're sort of up around sort of 35 megaliters a day. The current status is that that's progressing ahead of plan. And like I said, we'll turn the plant back on at the end of January and then work our way back through that, bringing the mine back on through that month as well.

And just a thing to point out, Levi, versus what we experienced in March 23 that the pumping stations and the main power substations were not impacted like they weren't really impacted at all this time.

No, that's right. We kept those operational throughout. We had a period where we didn't put people into the mine because we didn't want to put anyone at risk. And so we had tripped out until we got someone back in there to fix it. But outside of that, all of the infrastructure worked exactly as planned. The size of the event was probably the issue. It's almost triple the size of anything we've seen before. The $100 million a day was about the maximum from the last couple of events. And we did see that in the lead up to this event, and then we saw the 300 millimeter, so that the systems all worked as planned. The scale of that event isn't something that we've seen in that region for quite some time. And you could see around some of the neighbors in the area as well. the past to had some pretty significant impacts that they've not seen be -- that was the issue for us, but managed well, infrastructure good, and we'll get back up and running in the short term.

Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs.

Lawrie, Matt, Fran, congrats on a fairly strong quarter. I just wanted to first question in and around sort of more strategic one. Obviously, this gold cycle has been pretty strong, if not unprecedented, with prices where they are, obviously, producer discipline has been pretty key in terms of capturing that operational leverage and not chasing low-grade ounces for the sake of volumes has been pretty has delivered a pretty good cash result. But looking at it from here, so the gold prices arguably more than double where a lot of these mine plans were set. I mean, is there room to start recutting how you look at these things to optimize value from here if this is the gold price going forward?

Yes. Look, I'll let Matt have a bit of talk about the plans and the mines the open pits and the underground. But essentially, we look at the current price environment and as we're mining in certain areas, if more material becomes economic, we're taking those, we're right into our life of mine and mineral resource or reserve review now. But we don't just let the short-term metal price drive the wrong behaviors, Matt?

Yes. We are taking advantage of that in the short term. But the discipline that I'll keep pushing with all of the operations is that any of the lower grade is not to displace any of the original plan or high-grade materials. So where that starts to help us is that when we can increase the capacity either through the plant or the materials handling systems, we can do that because most of the operations do have that capacity if we were to drop cutoff grades, we see some reasonable increases in some of those operations. And probably 1 of the key ones that sort of stands out in this environment, both copper and gold is North Park, and you'll see that that's where a lot of the work is occurring and a lot of the focus for trying to take advantage of that is sitting. So yes, we are doing it, but I don't want us to drop back to erode the margin significantly by chasing stuff that's economically viable in this market.

Got it. That's helpful. And then second one, just following on from Levi's question at Cowal on the OTC. I mean, obviously, ahead of schedule there. If you've got the team on site, how do you think about bringing forward the next stage -- or just maybe the recent rainfall we've seen maybe limit your ability to do that immediately?

Yes. Look, Hugo, I think what we're doing, the northern bond as we completed in the in the last quarter enables us to then start works around E46 and a lot of other surface infrastructure in the northern end, which is why it was scheduled first. The water in the lake is receding and receding at a good rate. And unfortunately, when I was at Cowal, they said they would have liked some of the weather that rain that Ernest Henry got because it is fairly dry out there and at North parks.

So when we look at it, it's anticipated that the late would be dry by the middle of this year. And you might recall when we approved the project this out, the south part of the late move was scheduled for FY '28 and scheduled to be dry. So it does provide an opportunity for us to consider bringing that 1 forward because you wouldn't want to be waiting a couple of years and find out that you got a wet late or a full lake again. So that's something that we're working through right now.

And then I think in terms of the other surface infrastructure and works that Joe and the team are looking at, I think, they will build that into the plan. It will allow us to look at the IWL, whether we build that up in preparation for having 2 and 3 open pits in the next couple of years do that earlier. Certainly, 1 thing that we'll look at is just anything else that can be done now in the environment that they're experiencing.

And then maybe last one, if I could, maybe 1 for Ann. Just can you remind us how the copper quotational pricing periods were just looking at the realized pricing on some of the byproducts, it looks pretty favorable versus average prices in the quarter. If you could just remind us if there's any timing or any impact there we should be considering?

Yes. Hua, it's not simple for you on your side to be able to, I guess, model them because at Ernest Henry, you've got a quotational period that gets nominated every month. At North Park, you've got a quotational period that gets nominated quarterly, and you've got 2 offtake partners in terms of Sumitomo joint venture partner and IXM as our offtake main partner. And so they have to nominate them.

And if we look at it in the -- at the end of September, we had about 8 shipments outstanding that were still open to pricing about 21,000 tonnes of copper. -- split sort of 3 at Ernest Henry and 5 at North Parks. They, at the end of September were priced around $15,000 a tonne. They then move to the December pricing, and that was around $18,500 a tonne. So that's what lifted our achieved copper price for the quarter by about $3,000 a tonne.

At the end of December, we've got about 4 shipments outstanding around 10,000 tonnes that will get finalized in this quarter. And then it depends on what each of the offtake partners nominate in the next 3 months for their pricing. So that's why it's a little bit difficult. Where we stand today, it's averaged about 19,200 month to date. That's what some of those shipments are going to get repriced at if they finalize this month. As I said, it's not easy for you. But it's really dependent on what the offtake partners or what they nominate.

Your next question comes from David Radclyffe from Global Mining Research.

So just a bit of a follow-up to Hugo's question. Because obviously, when you look at the quarter, it was really only Mungari that was setting a new record, and that obviously reflects the expanded capacity. But there is some late mill capacity across the group. So just trying to understand if there are any near-term opportunities you're considering to push throughput and take advantage of this environment -- and if not, what is the constraint there? Is it the fact that you're not prepared to budge on the current capital budget. Just trying to understand here how you could actually push the mills a bit harder.

Thanks, Dave. I'll let Matt just give a run-through on each of them. I mean -- but I will start off by saying it is not about the capital constraint. It is about making sure that if we commit the capital, we're going to get the returns. I think when we look at it, if you see the announcement today, the land around Ernest Henry, that we've now picked up that plus the previous project that we announced a while ago, that gives us a continuous footprint all the way around the plant. That's all within trucking distance. And so we've got program has already started. This 1 will be the next one. So that's giving us an opportunity because it's constrained by the mine and you obviously got birth. But we will look at all of those opportunities where we can that.

Yes. I think Ernest Henry is the main 1 for us. We do additional milling capacity available today. compared to what we bring through the mining system. So we are open to that, whether it's our own material through exploration or whether it's a toll agreement with people in the region. That's something that we're actively pursuing. Then outside of that, if I look at North Park and Cowal as the next 2, they are mill constrained. So we spent some money at Cowal on the mill setting it up for the next 20 years in the last financial year.

And -- we also spent a bit of money there on improving the recovery. So we are working on opportunities account to increase throughput through the mill, but it's something I'm certainly not wanting to rush through there. So those do essentially mill constrained with improvements and incremental improvements possible, and we can feed them from our own sources. Mungari is a similar story. So Mungari, obviously, now ramped up what we were wanting to do there. Our strategy there is to run the Castle Hill complex, which is running very well at our baseload feed and then supplement that with our underground feed, which is where the grade from grade comes from and gives us the ounces. The opportunity there is to be able to postpone or defer any of the lower-grade material from Castle Hill by putting in higher-grade product through the mill. And obviously, we run the finances on that depending on what we do.

So the exploration team, that's 1 of our key spend areas and where we do see an upside if we can get additional underground feed. We want it to come from our own material. That's where we make our best margin. That said, we do have opportunities where we will and can and have toll treated other people's product at a higher grade if the finances make sense for us from deferring that material. So those the areas outside of that Red Lake does have mill capacity. There's not a huge opportunity there for either increasing our own material, which is still the bottleneck from the mining operations. But third parties, there's not a huge amount around there, but those are things that John and the team are looking at when they come up. I think that's the run through of most of the operations.

Right. Maybe if I could just come back on Mungari there because I think on the site visit, you were still ramping it up and hadn't really tested it and it looks from the commentary that you may have sort of pushed it a little bit here with third parties. So -- are you confident -- you're obviously confident you can get to capacity. Did the engineers sort of leave anything there in terms of concern? Do you think you could run Mungari a bit higher than nameplate.

No, that's something we're investigating. At the moment, it did ramp up exactly as we wanted to. We had periods where we were above nameplate, but that was more related to the material -- or a little bit softer. So like most mills, depending on what we're putting through, it will give us a rate. But that's what I'd like us to do. At the moment, we're certainly not promising that, but that's what we're working on.

And I think if you look at it for the quarter, it annualized at a whole point -- special production.

Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan from Baron Jelly.

Lawrie, just going back to the Cal Southern bond decision. Can you just maybe expand what drives the decision to execute a bit faster on the Southern bond. Is it it's easier, costly, more productive and sort of costs? Or is it revenue items are you're going to have potentially access to more or more material, better grades and can grade sequence like what goes to the decision to execute earlier if you do so?

Yes. Dan, look, I think the primary 1 becomes where the lake is sitting at with the level of -- that it's receded as you'd recall, we've always planned to do it dry, it's more cost effective. So that's -- that is the primary decision point because it's not about what can we afford the capital as long as we're staying within the $430 million, we'll be fine. Then in terms of the second part of it is, what does it give the site in terms of flexibility. So having put all of that infrastructure around the southern area, it gets the ability to look at E41 and when we time that. But that's coming into FY '27 and beyond. And I think that's why the secondary piece is that flexibility it provides to Matt and the coal team is that for a period, we'll be on low-grade stockpile material. You're going through the cutback of Stage -- so if you can open up E46 and E41, it just derisks that operation a lot more.

Right. Another question. Just there is a footnote on Page 2 regarding North Park, where there's been some sort of a positive adjustment relating to stream deliveries, the number there is 1 mill that was an outflow. It just seems a bit lower than what I thought. Is there any -- can you just clear up what's going on there?

Yes. So during the period, there was a reconciliation of the finalized pricing and payments for the stream with Triple Flag and as the final pricing and everything that came through on that back for a number of periods resulted in a credit back to us. So that's why the $18 million, I think last quarter was about $32 million. So there was a benefit relating to the final pricing. That is one...

That's a one-off off? Or is it something that there's an annual true-up or something that we might see again in a year's time or that could be adverse or better or...

More of a one-off, Dan, is going through with triple flag about the whole mechanics of it, and we're obviously learning it in the first year. We've then done all the reconciliations with them, and that it's more of a one-off.

Okay. Very clear. Just shifting over to Red Lake. It looks in -- you've made a breakthrough at Koschner, where if I read that correctly, does that mean that you are no longer going to be using ore passes and that you're going to track down or down to the high-speed tram. And is there benefits in terms of grade and reconciliation that could come?

Yes, Dan, it's Matt. Look, we will still be using ore passes, but what it does do is derisk those -- we've got some duplication and contingency in that system given the issues we had earlier on. So we will still use all passes through that. The biggest benefit for us there will be ventilation as well. And also the mobility of some of our equipment. So it's more of an operational flexibility and reliability thing that it will give us. It doesn't necessarily impact grade and other bits and pieces at this stage. It does open up some other areas. And allow us to do things a little quicker, but that's really around operational flexibility that the benefit comes.

And just last question is mainly cost, I mean, obviously, there was a provisional pricing stuff that came through, but signs of cost control are evident as well. Just on Mungari specifically. There's obviously a bit going on with various third-party ore purchases. You had commercial declared partly through October. And so the AC number is not necessarily a completely clean as a go-forward guide. Just wondering if -- what's the latest view on what Mungari costs roughly are going to be on a clean basis?

Yes. Dan, I think when Matt talked about testing of the plant and everything the team took the opportunity around that are purchased to get that type of material through the plant earlier. So those costs and ounces are excluded. So when you look at what we've reported for Mungari for the quarter, that AISC and the costs are really about just our ore -- so it gives you a good reflection of -- so about $2,000 an ounce, you take it that most of October, there were commissioning costs. So you're going to be in the early low 2,000s -- going forward, when it hits the 50,000-ounce quarterly run rate is what you should expect to see. So we're at 1980, I think, was a quarterly cost for Mungari. As I said, some commissioning in there, but it is only on our ounces and our costs.

Your next question comes from Matthew Frydman from MST Financial.

Sure. Laurie, Happy New Year. I guess my question is a continuation of some of the earlier discussion. I'm very interested in the outcome of the 2 studies that are currently undergoing board review, and I'm sure you'll present that. And I guess I hate to sound a bit like over twist, but wondering what's next to be considered in terms of any sort of formalized growth studies out of those options that Matt discussed conceptually key growth projects that you're moving into that pipeline over time?

And I guess secondary question to that is just looking at your reserve on Marsden, obviously, a big low-grade reserve there in your numbers. I think it was last cut at $1,350 an ounce gold price. So we're only about $5,000 an ounce higher than that at the moment. So I guess at what point does that become a viable growth project -- or does that reserve need to be, I guess, reconsidered at all?

Matt, happy New Year. I definitely hope that our now nonexec chair is listening because he would love to hear about I'll start on that one. Look, I mean, for us, on Marsden, anything that we do there would have to be better than what we've got at North Park and Cowal. And so that's really what it's got to compete against at the moment. So it sort of sits there in the background. It certainly doesn't get the priority from the in the team, but it does get looked at. It's good to see that -- you talked about Burton E22 and you've moved straight on and going, okay, what's next.

I think for us, but is really important to Ernest Henry because of the capacity we've got in the plant. So that will be something that the Board will consider the studies are finished, and we'll take that to them this quarter. 22 really is what can unlock what we have at North Park in terms of increasing mining and processing capacity. We've got such a large resource there. We've got to look at how can we expand that over time because it's not going to reduce the NPV of the asset. So that's something, I think, when we take that through to the Board this quarter, it's like, okay, what does E22 give us as a -- we looked at a block cave, the sublevel hybrids tesort of the best outcome is the block cave, and we've talked about that previously. Now we've got to work out where does that fit into unlocking the rest of the operation around expanded capacity.

I think when you look at -- the other things is what's next. At Cowal, we've got the OPC going. We've got E46, E41, E42 operating, we get the undergrounded capacity. And what Matt's talked about is, okay, with all of those ore sources and the work we've done on the plant, are there ways to increase the processing and production rates at Cowal. And then I think when you look at Mungari, Matt also talked about it earlier. We've got the base feed at Castle Hill, the underground is really which is getting most of the exploration dollars is what gives us an opportunity of can we get more than 20% of our material going through that plant. And can we get the plant running at greater than nameplate.

Okay. And then maybe, I guess, the follow-up to that then is then how we think about capital allocation for the business going forward. As you just described, you're pretty advanced in terms of your capital spend across the majority of the portfolio. You've got a couple of formalized I guess, growth projects still in the pipeline in terms of burn and E22. But overall, clearly, the business is generating a lot of cash. How should we think about any kind of revision or revisiting of the capital allocation policy, I guess, in the absence of any other sort of big scale growth investments like Miles and like we just spoke about. And how does that look in the current gold and copper price environment in terms of how attractive that capital is to spend externally to the business?

Yes. Look, Matt, it's a good situation to be in. I mean, 2 years ago, we were getting asked that how can we afford these projects and now we're getting cash can we -- that discipline. I think we've outlined our capital sort of spend for the projects that are already in the pipeline. As being that $750 million to $950 million, what now with what we're seeing, the progress at Cowal and the outcomes of the studies and where the metal prices is what can we incrementally invest in, either bring projects forward, accelerate them or new projects to bring forward production growth. as long as if you look at the portfolio at the moment, the asset's average annual rate of return is sitting around that 16%. If we can generate those sorts of returns, then we would increase our capital allocation. If we were to increase that allocation by $100 million, $200 million a year, and we can generate those returns given the cash that we're generating today and where the balance sheet sits, I think that would be the best use of a part of the extra cash flow we're getting. We obviously are still remaining committed to increasing returns to shareholders through dividends, and they'll share in the increased cash flows automatically by our current policy. But if there's ways to through the second half of the year as well.

Got it. That's a sensible way to think about it, obviously. And obviously, the balance sheet has changed very quickly. So a nice position to be in. Thanks.

Your next question comes from Adam Baker from Macquarie.

And just back to Mungari. I noticed the 127,000 tonnes to 9,000 ounces gold is third-party ore process in the region. Just curious if you could touch further on that. Is this a normalized rate we could expect moving forward? I know you're looking at further opportunities. And just to give us a bit of flavor, -- are there any companies out there knocking at your door to process the material in the region? No, it's about 10% to 15% of your planned throughput capacity at the moment.

Yes. Look, Adam, I'd say, firstly, yes, there's people out there that would like for a brand new mill that's got capacity for them to put some ore through. I think as Matt outlined on the call, we used the opportunity to purchase that or to really test the plant through the commissioning rather than waiting until we get our or both the main ore out of Castle Hill and the underground through given we've got a large campaign this second half on the underground. So that was -- I would sort of almost say that's one-off. But if we've got capacity, we will take it because we believe with our mine plan, we've got 4.2 million tonnes of our ore that will go through the plant. If there is spare capacity, we would look at it. But right now, that is only really around the commissioning part of the plant that we did that purchase.

If we do, it's going to displace. I mean this 1 did -- yes, it made a profit didn't make a lot of money for us, but it allowed us to learn a lot about the plant.

Yes. And the reduction in cost guidance, I mean, that makes a lot of sense due to the stronger byproducts. Just trying to understand the 6% improvement at the midpoint -- how much of that would roughly be driven by the stronger byproducts versus it's a better-than-expected cost control from Mungari, et cetera?

Look, Adam, it's a combination of both what the split it depends on how we go through the second half. But like we're achieving $2,000, $3,000 a ton halfway through the year above what we had sort of guided at. Current price at 19 is sitting about 4.5 thousand above. So the byproduct credits are pretty important in that regard. But if you look at our gross operating and our net operating cost spend against our budget, it's pretty well in line, a little bit lower in some areas. And then when you look at our sustaining capital, we're actually tracking well against our guidance a little bit I'd say, a little bit of an opportunity for some of the sites to ask Matt for a little bit more money given the cash they're generating, but I do think the discipline around all of the capital has been very good across the business.

Your next question comes from Mitch Ryan from Jefferies.

I just wanted to sort of pick at 1 of your answers to Matt Frydman's question with regards to accelerating North Park, you sort of said you're obviously looking at E22 and accelerating that, but then also that expanding capacity. I just wanted to understand, is your thinking materially impacted by the triple flare agreement? And is there anything you're able to do around that with expanding North Park?

Yes. Look, Mitch, I mean, yes, when you look at North Parks, you've got a stream over it that we only get 40% of the gold and pay 100% of the cost. So it has an impact on what we can do in unlocking North parks. What I'd like is that we've engaged actively with them since we since we've owned the asset, they know they have a role to play, and we continue to work through what role they have in the site going forward in unlocking the value. I think because when we look at it, we've got -- it's permitted to 8.6%. It's running. It can get to 7.5 million -- we've got 600 million tonnes in resource. If you keep running at those rates, this mine is running for 75 years. So increasing processing capacity and mining capacity is the right thing to do at some point. but we've got to make sure that it's going to give us a good return, both on a pre- and post stream basis.

Okay. And then my second question relates to Ernest Henry. Just noting that you've obviously been able to pull forward some of those works. But were there any works that will be unable to be rescheduled into the shut that was bought forward? And if so, will they be deferred or completed later in the half.

The short answer probably is no. So nothing material. There were some minor tasks in the underground that we couldn't complete just based on access. So they will be completed, but they won't drive a processing plant shutdown or a material underground shutdown in the quarter. So I'd say 95% of the tasks we've been able to pull forward or deferred depending on which 1 it is.

Your next question comes from David Kurtz from Belote Securities.

Thanks for your time this morning and congratulations on a great quarter. it's a bit of a high-level question. There's been a lot of discussion and questions this morning about where you guys can value add? Is it dropping coalgate. Is it expanding plants? Is it maybe regional acquisitions. Just wondering -- and we're in this -- what's fairly unprecedented gold price environment, not just the price but still the rate that it's risen -- are there any -- out of all the sort of growth of value-adding options that you guys presumably are considering and have been discussed. What are the ones that are sort of flowing to the top as the best bank for your Bakken in this sort of environment as well at the moment? -- across the portfolio?

Yes. Lou, I'll get Matt to talk about what he sees as the opportunities at each of the assets. I mean, for us, if we can get more ounces or tonnes, copper tonnes out of any of our operations that basically improves our margin. That's really where we're going to focus. I mean I think we've always got to be conscious of is that in this current pricing environment, if you do approve a project and Cowal OPC as an example, and Mungari as an example, time to bring those to production is 2, 3 years' time. So you've got to have the real confidence in terms where the metal price will be in that time versus those short-term ones around improved marginal increases in processing capacity or recoveries or those things. They're the ones that you can certainly bring on straight away. But the others, you're going to be looking 2 to 3 years confidence that when you do bring them on, they're going to be in a good environment. And Mungari is an example, in '23, gold price was about 40% of what it was is today. and they're coming on at the right time. I've been involved in projects have gone the other way.

Matt, you want to talk about some of the things that we're looking at.

Yes. And solid from the ones that have already been spoken about of sort of if I just run through the operations quickly. The area that excites me most, if I pick Cowal is that I'm selling Glen thunder, but is the exploration and the resource potential that's there. So investing the money in the drilling, investing the money in the mining those 2 things, there's an opportunity to extend, which is not as exciting as growing, but there's also a pretty good opportunity there depending on where we see the long-term metal prices level out at, that you would grow Cowal again, that's pretty -- that's very exciting in terms of the results we're getting back through that, and Glenn will give an update next time we talk through that.

And then the other 1 there is also Mungari. In a similar vein, the margin and the value comes from the underground. So that the mill capacity is good, but if we can invest in our drilling and increase that percentage of underground through, that's where we get our growth in ounces without a material one. So they're our best bang for buck. And then like I said, earner exploration, you do have that capacity there. But the cave and whatever else is reasonably sort of restricted there. So additional ore sources around the region that we would see growth from that 1 as well.

Your next question comes from Zane Gol from JPMorgan.

Just the 1 for me today on capital management. How do you think about the dividend versus a buyback into the half?

Yes, Zane. We've talked about this previously. I mean, we -- buybacks are a part of a capital management plan that we look at I mean, for us, they need be sizable, if you're looking at 10% of the value of the organization as a benchmark. That's a large commitment over and I go back to the point of like if we've got projects that we can invest in that get a greater return for our shareholders, that will be the first priority -- the second part is that the flexibility around our dividend policy, where in this rising price environment, our shareholders will receive a greater portion of cash flow than what they have in the past. And I think that really gives the best value for our shareholders. So I don't expect that buybacks would be on the table for consideration by the Board this half year.

Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Conway for closing remarks.

Thanks, Amy, and thanks, everyone, for taking the time on the call today. We've got another safe and successful quarter. The cash flow is building the projects that we're running to are on plan and on budget, and we really look forward to updating you in a few weeks' time where Fran can tell you what we are doing with the cash as we release our half year results. Thank you.

That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

11:00, so it must be 11:00, and let's get the show on the road. Good morning, everyone. My name is Jake Klein. I'm Evolution's Chair. It is a pleasure to welcome you to Evolution Mining's Annual General Meeting. Welcome, and thank you for joining us.

Evolution acknowledges the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation as the traditional custodians of the lands and waters of the Sydney CBD and pay our respects to their Elders past and present. We recognize their strengths and ongoing connection to the land, waters and communities as the custodians of their culture. I'd also like to acknowledge our First Nation partners in Canada.

In the unlikely event of an emergency, please leave via the emergency doors on either side of you to the left and right. Go through the courtyard. Fire wardens will be in place to direct you, and make your way directly to the front of the site and out of the gates. Upon exiting, please turn left and convene in the front of Hyde Park Barracks museum at Queens Square.

I'd like to introduce our Board members who are here today. Dialing in from her hometown in Perth, having just had an operation and unable to travel is Andrea Hall. Andrea is Chair of the Audit Committee and is a member of the Risk and Sustainability Committee. Andrea is up for reelection at this meeting. To my left is the one and only Lawrie Conway, who is Evolution's Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Next to Lawrie is Peter Smith. Peter is the Lead Independent Director. Peter is also Chair of the Risk and Sustainability Committee. Next to Peter is Jason Attew. Jason is a Canadian and a member of the Audit, and Nomination and Remuneration Committees.

Next to Jason is Vicky Binns. Vicky is a member of the Audit, and Nomination and Rem Committees. Vicky is up for reelection at this meeting. And to Vicky's left is Tommy McKeith. Tommy is Chair of the Nom and Rem Committee. Next to Tommy is Fiona Hick. And yes, [ LJ ], we did get the seating right. It does match the script. Fiona is a member of the Risk and Sustainability Committee. And next to Fiona is our Company Secretary, Evan Elstein. Evan is also the VP for Information Technology, Communication and Corporate Affairs.

We have a number of people here also from Evolution. I think this side of the room is pretty much all Evolution. But we have some members of the leadership team, which I'd like to introduce to you. The newest member of the LT is Fran Summerhayes, Chief Financial Officer. Fran joined Evolution on the 15th of September 2025 after a long and distinguished career at BHP and finally saw the light and joined Evolution. This is her first AGM. Maybe just stand up, Fran. Matt O'Neill, Chief Operations Officer; Nancy Guay, Chief Technical Officer, and I'm under good authority that, that is the correct way to pronounce your name. Glen Masterman, VP, Discovery; Paul Eagle, VP, People and Culture; Fiona Murfitt, VP, Sustainability; and Kirron Schmidt, VP, Corporate Development.

We do have a number of people who I think as shareholders, really, it would be worth meeting and talking to during the break after the meeting, and that is our general managers and colleagues in the room. We do have a number of people who are here from Evolution. They're all shareholders as are you and hence, here at the AGM as both owners of the company but also representatives and I think the people, particularly the GMs of the site, who are people who are making the Australian mining industry great in Australia and in Canada. So general managers of the sites, maybe just stand up, and people can see who you are. There you go, that handsome picture.

The order of proceedings for today will be as follows. We will work through the formal business of the meeting pursuant to the agenda set out in the Notice of Meeting that was issued on the 15th of October 2025. Copies of the Notice of Meeting are available at the front door. After all the agenda items have been dealt with, the formal AGM will be closed. Lawrie Conway will then give a company update presentation, and any questions received will be addressed.

This is our 14th Annual General Meeting as Evolution Mining, and it's really good to see a number of familiar faces here as shareholders who have been here, I think, at all 14 AGMs. I thank you for joining us here today, and I'm pleased to share with you some of today's highlights just as comments from me about the year under review, which was undoubtedly a very good year for Evolution and its shareholders.

With sustainability integrated into everything we do, keeping our people safe, healthy and well is central to who we are. This is why our safety performance improvement this year was very encouraging with our total recordable injury frequency rate coming down to its lowest level yet. Whilst it is only one indicator, it should provide you, our owners, with a level of confidence in our continued and strong commitment in keeping our people safe. We will remain vigilant, recognizing that safety needs to be continually worked on and can never be taken for granted.

This year is best described as one in which we did what we said we would do and we delivered. We were, of course, fortunate to be buoyed by high gold prices. It is hard to believe that the gold price is above AUD 6,000 an ounce. It is a tailwind, and it has benefited our entire sector, including Evolution. But what has helped distinguish this year as particularly special for Evolution was our continued focus and discipline on margin over volume and ensuring we bank that upside from the higher gold price and return cash to you in dividends as our shareholders.

This year, our Board declared our 24th and 25th consecutive dividends, resulting in a full year dividend of $0.20 per share, representing $400 million in total dividends returned to shareholders in 2025. And since 2013, when we paid our first dividend, our total return to shareholders stands at more than $1.7 billion.

In what was a record year for your company, we remain true to our disciplined strategy, evidenced by our high-quality portfolio supported by an excellent team. As we continue to benefit from higher commodity prices and a sustained case for a bull market in gold, we are well positioned for the future. Evolution is now included in the S&P/ASX 50 Index and the MSCI Index, which is something we would have considered really just aspirational when we began our journey of Evolution in 2011.

We are now a well-established global gold mining company with more recently -- with the more recent addition exposure to copper, committed to delivering long-term stakeholder value through low-cost production in a safe, environmentally and socially responsible way.

We are at a positive juncture in our business, but we will never stop working to be better. We recognize this takes daily commitments, a desire to succeed and a motivated team driven to continuously evolve and improve, and as those external shareholders are not part of the business, I really respect and recognize the people in this room and the more than 3,000 people across our business who really do that every day, aspire to improve and succeed every single day.

I stand here before you today as your now Non-Executive Chair, so any difficult questions can go straight to Lawrie, having transitioned at the end of the financial year from my executive role. We started this executive transition over 2 years ago because I think it was the right time for our company, and I'm really proud how Lawrie and I have worked together to deliver this outcome seamlessly and now positions the company and the team very well for its next chapter. I am extremely confident in Lawrie's leadership as Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, supported by his experienced team.

The leadership team has been enhanced this year with the addition of Fran, who joined us as CFO from BHP. This appointment -- this follows the appointment of our Chief Operating Officer, Matt O'Neill and Nancy Guay as Chief Technical Officer just 12 months -- over 12 months ago. Evolution is in really good hands.

As I said to you a year ago, the world keeps -- the world has changed, and it keeps changing. Unfortunately, global tensions, political uncertainty and what the future holds remains a worrying constant. And this has been reflected in gold's remarkable price increase over the last year.

Our country's continued prosperity is dependent on the success of the resource sector. That really needs to be understood by the broader public. Our industry continues to play a pivotal role in Australia's economy. It contributes 57%, over half of total tax revenue and is generating nearly half of the country's income. Evolution is extremely proud to be a significant contributor to this, delivering $3.7 billion in economic value to Australia and Canada this year, which was a 16% increase over the prior year.

At last year's AGM, I also said that Australia needs to be committed to education and training, and I am proud that Evolution is playing its part. We recently announced a $1.25 million partnership with the University of Queensland to establish the Jim Askew Evolution Mining Fellowship, a 5-year initiative focused on unlocking unrealized potential in ore bodies to improve safety, efficiency and sustainability in mining. It is named in honor of Jim Askew, one of our founding directors and a well-respected leader in the resources sector. The fellowship will fund a dedicated post-doctoral research position at UQ's Sustainable Minerals Institute. It will also support additional postdoctoral researchers and higher degree research students. We're proud to partner with UQ to support research that will help shape the future of mining. We believe that innovation and sustainability go hand in hand, and this fellowship respects -- reflects our commitment, driving progress, sharing knowledge and creating value for the industry and the communities in which we operate.

In what has been a record year for Evolution, it's somewhat fitting that it also marks the final chapter for Mt Rawdon as an operating gold mine. We are well advanced in our vision to repurpose the site into pumped hydro station together with the Queensland government, and we welcome the Crisafulli Government's interest and involvement in this landmark project, which will facilitate low-cost renewable power and employment opportunities for decades to come.

But in the true spirit of our values and the essence of our culture, our Mt Rawdon team recently welcomed a very special visitor to site. Fortuitously and by coincidence, we were connected with David Muller, the person who had the vision to drill the first holes at the Mt Rawdon deposit almost 50 years ago and which led over the many years the making of a mine that has contributed so much to the region and Evolution.

David and 3 generations of the Muller family recently made their pilgrimage back to Mt Rawdon, marking a full circle and fitting final chapter for Mt Rawdon as a gold mine. I'd like to acknowledge and recognize David's vision and thank him for being one of those people in our industry that we depend on, someone with the knowledge, belief and vision to go from a few drill holes to a mine that's created value for stakeholders for almost 25 years.

At a time when mental health is increasingly important as we live in such a changing world, I was inspired by and proud of our Mungari team in Western Australia, who decided to think differently when they completed the Mungari 4.2 million tonne per annum plant expansion, and they painted one of their tanks in their expanded mill infrastructure blue, with a bright, bold and supportive mural with the words you're not alone. We hope all of our people feel that they are well supported wherever they are across our business, together with the people who live in the communities in which we operate. To my mind, this is one of the differentiating hallmarks of Evolution.

There are other fantastic examples of how we help across communities, whether it's our support for the CareFlight in Northwest Queensland or finding ways to provide medical support to regional communities where access is so limited.

For those of you who have attended previous AGMs, you may recall my enthusiasm about our graduate program. We have a bright future as a company, and it's the next generation of talent that we are attracting and retaining in our business who inspire my belief in our ability to continue to think differently, embrace AI, embed innovation and technology in our business.

We have an excellent portfolio of assets. Our Cowal Gold Operation, which recently celebrated 20 years of operations, embodies this and is a perfect example of our strategy in action. When we acquired Cowal in 2015, it was scheduled to finish mining in 2020 and process low-grade stockpiles for 4 years until closing in 2024, which was last year. But we could see the potential of its world-class orebody and under our ownership, supported and enabled by the appropriate regulatory approvals from the New South Wales and federal governments, Cowal's mine life has been extended time and time again.

Over the last 10 years, the operation produced 2.6 million ounces of gold, has paid over $200 million in royalties to the New South Wales government. And last year alone, we spent over $200 million regionally. Cowal is adding significant economic value and is creating positive social outcomes for the Central West New South Wales, and we're excited to know that this will continue at least into the 2040s with the opportunities for organic growth aplenty. As I've said many times, this embodies our strategy and our quest to secure the full potential of our portfolio, together with pursuing strategic growth opportunities that we are well known for.

Finally, on behalf of the Board, thank you for your support. You are the owners of the company, and we totally respect that. It is your belief in our vision and purpose as a company that motivates us to deliver for you. We have a bold team, a clear strategy and the absolute desire to succeed. Our future is bright, and I look forward to seeing you -- seeing what this year holds, building on the strong foundations, big tailwinds from the gold and copper price. And thank you for attending the 2025 Annual General Meeting.

So we'll now go to the formal proceedings. And before turning to these items of business, I will hand over to our Company Secretary, Evan Elstein, to note some procedural matters for today's meeting.

Thank you, Jake. This is a meeting of Evolution shareholders. As such, only shareholders, their appointed proxies or corporate representatives are entitled to make comments, ask questions or vote. All other attendees are very welcome as visitors and observers.

As the written questions received from shareholders prior to the meeting are of a general nature and not related to any specific resolution, they will be read out and addressed in the Q&A part of the meeting. You will be given the opportunity to make comments or ask questions in relation to the resolutions to be considered by the meeting. Shareholders with questions relating to specific resolutions are requested to ask them at the time the resolution is to be considered by the meeting.

At the appropriate time, the Chair will ask shareholders who wish to make a comment or to ask a question to raise their hand. Please state your name before asking your question and wait for the microphone to be provided.

The Chair has determined that we will hold a poll in relation to the items of business. The process will be that we will go through each resolution and then conduct the poll with respect to all the resolutions. After the completion of discussion and before the vote on a poll is taken for each item of business, the total number of valid proxies for that item and the manner in which they have been directed will be displayed on the screen. These numbers will be as at the closing time for receipt of proxies, which was 11:00 a.m. Australian Eastern Daylight Time on Tuesday, 18 November 2025. As noted in the Notice of Meeting, the Chair intends to vote proxies for the Chair in favor of the resolution.

For the purposes of the poll, Regi Harbron of MUFG Corporate Markets, the company's share registry, who have examined and prepared summaries of the proxy forms received, has been engaged to act as the returning officer. And Eve Argyrou of PricewaterhouseCoopers, the company's auditors, has been engaged to observe the poll and procedures before determination of the results is made.

When you registered your attendance at this meeting, voting shareholders and proxy holders were given a yellow admittance card. The card provides for the holding of a poll on any of the resolutions put to shareholders. On this card, you will find a series of boxes for voting. You must tick or mark the for or against boxes for your vote to be valid and counted for each resolution. If you wish to abstain from voting, please mark the abstain box on your voting paper next to the relevant resolution. If you are a proxy holder, you may only vote open or undirected votes allocated to you. If you wish to split these votes, you may write those open or discretionary numbers separately in the for or against box.

If you are a proxy holder and you do not lodge a vote on any of the resolutions, the votes on those resolutions will pass to the Chair of the meeting to exercise pursuant to the Corporations Act of 2001. The Chair must comply with the direction of the shareholder. Where no instructions have been given to the Chair on how to vote, as set out in the proxy form circulated to shareholders, the Chair has been expressly authorized to exercise those votes and intends to vote those shares in favor of all resolutions. If you have any questions in this regard, please make yourself known to a representative from MUFG Corporate Markets before lodging your voting paper.

Once all the resolutions have been read and questions relating thereto have been addressed and you have finished marking your card, representatives from MUFG Corporate Markets will collect your voting cards. After the votes have been counted and reviewed by the external auditor and after the company presentation, the results of the poll will be released on the ASX platform and displayed on the company's website following the conclusion of the meeting.

I'll now ask the Chair to proceed to the ordinary business of the meeting as set out in the agenda that appears in the Notice of Meeting.

Thanks, Evan. Did not read everything you've just said. I can advise that a quorum of members is present and call the meeting to order. The first item on the agenda is to receive and consider the financial statements of the company for the year ended 30 June 2025. The annual financial report of the company for the year ended 30 June 2025 together with associated reports of the directors and auditors have been made available to all shareholders electronically or in hard copy. I'll ask the Company Secretary to record that the report was tabled at the meeting. The company's auditor, PricewaterhouseCoopers, is present today and represented today by their audit partner, Brett Entwistle, if there are any questions specific to the conduct of the audit, the preparation and content of the auditor's report, the accounting policies adopted by the policy in relation to the preparation of its financial statements and the independence of the auditor in relation to the conduct of the audit.

Are there any questions related specifically to the financial statements? As there are no questions on the -- sorry, go ahead. I think we need the mic because it is being...

My name is [ Kevin Daly ]. I just got a slightly operational question as to how you respond to the high gold price. Do you try and maximize the grade of the ore you mine while the price is high? Or do you use lower grade ore, which possibly wouldn't be possible -- wouldn't be profitable when the gold price is lower and accept the lower result? Or do you do some combination of this? And of course, that depends on the extent to which you can control the grade of the ore you mine.

That's a good question, and thank you for it. But given that it's not related to financial statements, can I ask Evan to record that question, and we'll deal with it under -- once the formal meeting has closed. So we'll definitely address that. Any questions on the financial statements?

[ Steve O'Reilly ], shareholder. I'm just curious about the -- sorry, first of all, congratulations on a very successful year. I've been a shareholder for many years. It's great to see the doubling of the profit over the last few years. I'm just curious about the hedging position of the company and to what extent that may have changed as the gold price has increased substantially over the year.

So whilst it's not specifically related to the financial statements, I will answer that in saying that we have very minimal hedging in place at the moment, 50,000. So there's only 50,000 ounces left of hedging, which is rolling off in the near term. It's not our intention to put hedging in place. We used it as a tool to protect our capital investment, but it's not our intention to be a hedger of gold.

Any other questions on the financial statements? As there are no further questions on the financial statements, I will now proceed to the resolutions as set out in the Notice of the Meeting. I now go to resolution 1 of the agenda. The resolution to adopt the remuneration report is set out in full on the screen and in the Notice of Meeting. I will take the resolutions as read. Are there any questions related to this resolution?

Given there are no questions, I will go to resolution 2 of the agenda. This is a resolution to reelect Ms. Andrea Hall as a director of the company. It is set out in full on the screen and in the Notice of the Meeting. Andrea joined the Board of Evolution Mining on the 1st of October 2017. She is an experienced Non-Executive Director who currently sits on the Board of ASX-listed company, Perenti Group, where she is also Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee. Ms. Hall is also a Non-Executive Director of Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation, Western Power and Australian Naval Infrastructure. Andrea is the Chair of the Audit Committee and is a member of the Risk and Sustainability Committee. The Board, with Andrea abstaining, unanimously support her election.

I will now ask Andrea via phone from Perth to say a few words in support of her election. Andrea, are you there?

I am. Thank you, Jake. Good morning, everyone, and apologies for not being there in person. I'm excited by the opportunities that Evolution has before it, particularly the optimization, expansion and transformation of our cornerstone assets and by our talented management team and look forward to being able to contribute further to the continued realization of Evolution's strategy.

The value I bring to Evolution is that I'm an experienced Non-Executive Director and Audit Committee Chair. As a former KPMG partner and as an experienced Audit and Risk Committee Chair, I have a deep understanding of the financial and governance matters considered by our Audit Committee. Further, as a former risk consulting partner, I have a good understanding of both financial and nonfinancial risks that enable me to contribute strongly to the Risk and Sustainability Committee and more broadly to Evolution. Whilst I have worked with mining entities, I've also worked extensively with non-miners and bring those perspectives to Evolution. Once again, it is a privilege to sit on the Board of Evolution Mining, and I thank you for enabling that.

Thanks, Andrea. I will take the resolution as read. Are there any questions to Andrea?

As there are no questions, I will go to resolution 3 of the agenda. This resolution is to reelect Vicky or Victoria Binns as a Director of the company, and it's set out in full on the screen and in the Notice of the Meeting. Vicky, being a director, retires in accordance with clause 8.1(d) of the constitution of the company and being eligible for reelection is seeking reelection as a Director. Vicky joined the Evolution Mining Board on 1st April 2020 and is a member of the Audit, and Nomination, Remuneration Committees. The Board, with Vicky abstaining, unanimously support her election.

Vicky, over to you to say a few words to support your election campaign.

Many thanks, Jake, and good morning, fellow shareholders. It's a privilege to address you today to seek your support for my reelection as a Non-Executive Director of Evolution Mining. It's been a pleasure serving you and our shareholders, other key stakeholders, including our employees, our customers, our suppliers and our First Nation partners as well as the communities in which we operate.

I am a mining engineer who has spent more than 40 years in the resources, financial markets and commodity trading sectors, gaining extensive Asian and global experience in those areas. Since joining the Evolution Board 5 years ago, I focused on bringing that balance of technical understanding and financial and commercial rigor to our discussions.

The Board works closely with management to ensure that every project and investment decision reflects both strategic vision and financial discipline. Looking ahead, my priorities are clear: to uphold the Board's independence, to keep a strong focus on operational excellence and to make sure we continue creating cash and enduring value for all stakeholders in the short, medium and long term.

Evolution is a company with strong assets, strong leadership and even stronger potential. I believe I have the energy, experience and enthusiasm to continue to add value to the Board to help ensure that Evolution remains one of the most respected and trusted name in the Australian resource sector. Thank you.

Thanks, Vicky. I will take this resolution as read. Are there any questions?

As I have an interest in the outcome of the next resolution, I will hand the Chair of the meeting to the Company Secretary.

Thanks, Jake. I'll now go to resolution 4 of the agenda. The resolution to increase the maximum aggregate annual remuneration for Non-Executive Directors is set out in full on the screen and in the Notice of Meeting. Given the interest of the Non-Executive Directors in this item, the Board makes no recommendation to shareholders as to how to vote in relation to resolution 4. I'll take the resolution as read.

Are there any questions? Okay. As there are no questions, I'll hand the chair back to Jake.

There we go. Back on the long walk back to your chair. Got to start over here.

I'll now go to resolution 5 of the agenda, the resolution to issue performance rights to Mr. Lawrie Conway as set out in full on the screen and in the Notice of Meeting. The Board, with Mr. Conway abstaining, unanimously recommends that members vote to approve resolution 5. I will take the resolution as read. Are there any questions?

Steve O'Reilly again. I'm just wondering if you could just clarify something for me, Chair. Just looking at the various hurdles for the vesting and the various 25% components. I see there's like a peer group that will be compared to, and I think there's 7 companies in the peer group, and some of the actual hurdles seem to imply that there's more. So it talks about the ranking being ninth or eighth. But I think if I understand correctly, there's only 8 companies in the analysis. So I'm just curious about the ninth ranking. And even the eighth ranking, which would mean, I think, coming last in that group, would generate quite a substantial performance right.

That's not the intent. I think there's 15 peer companies that will be compared to, so eighth would be a 50 percentile comparator.

Okay. I was just looking at the notice. There seem to be 7 companies listed from AngloGold down to Westgold Resources. So if you have a look, if you got the Notice of Meeting in front of you on Page 11 -- on Page 13 of the Notice of Meeting, the peer group companies are listed there and the 14 companies plus Evolution makes 15 peer group companies.

Any other questions on that resolution?

I'll now go to resolution 6 of the agenda. This resolution is for the issue of securities under the Non-Executive Director equity plan, the NED equity plan, which is set out in full on screen and in the Notice of Meeting. I'll take the resolution as read. Are there any questions?

As there are no questions in relation to the resolutions put to the meeting, I will now open the poll. Please, can you fill out your voting cards? As a reminder, if you have any questions relating to the poll, please ask one of the representatives from MUFG Corporate Markets before lodging your voting card. Can representatives from MUFG Corporate Markets please collect the voting cards?

As the counting of the votes on these items may take some time and as previously advised, the results will be released on the ASX platform and on our website once the counting has been completed and reviewed by the external auditor and proceedings concluded. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the formal business of the meeting. I thank you all for your attendance and formally declare the meeting closed.

A presentation about the company will now be given by our Managing Director and CEO, Lawrie Conway. Following the presentation, we will open the floor for general questions and discussion with Evolution's Board and executives present.

Thank you, Jake. Good morning, everyone. Firstly, Jake, thank you for staying on as Non-Exec Chair. I think there's a lot of very happy shareholders, and I'm very happy because I get more time in my office without you in the office as previously the Executive Chair. So I do look forward to that going forward.

Prior to presenting this morning, I thought I'd just address the first question for you that you had earlier. I was going to get Matt and the general managers to explain each of their operations, but I thought Matt wasn't really up for that one. But quite simply, when -- we don't adjust our mine plans immediately just because of the changing metal price environment. We have long-term plans. We use lower metal price assumptions for those. But as we operate and we see that there is an opportunity to take advantage of the higher metal prices, we will do that.

So if we look at our large open pit operations at Cowal and at Mungari, as we're mining those, we actually will stockpile the lower grade material so that we put the higher-grade material through to maximize our margin. And across all of our operations in the underground, as we're mining those areas, we will look and see if there's economic material that we can extract and make more money in this metal price environment. So we don't really change materially our operations just purely because of a short-term change in pricing.

And I think if we look at Mt Rawdon, that is probably a very good example. So we finished mining there about 12 months ago. Ben is trying to make sure we go into FY '27 and keep operating there, Jake, not this year, because we've got very low-grade material that are on the stockpiles that we had mined over the time. And in this price environment, whilst it's a little bit higher in terms of our all-in sustaining cost, it actually makes very good money for us. So that's really what we're doing across the business. Is there anything further that you want?

[indiscernible]

Pleasure. So today, I just want to touch a little bit -- jake did speak about this in the opening speech, touch a little bit on FY '25 and then turn our attention to what we're doing as a company going forward because, effectively, delivering on the short term is what enables us to continue to execute against our strategy. And for me, what was pleasing was the work that we did through FY '24 in setting up for delivering in FY '25 certainly paid dividends for us. We got back to our mantra of we say, we do, we deliver by delivering to FY '25 guidance, both from a production and cost standpoint.

But importantly, as Jake laid out in his speech, we did that safely. We improved our total recordable injury frequency by 35% to get down to a record low 5, so it meant that we made sure that we did that safely. On that, we delivered guidance, as I said, and that delivery of guidance delivered us a record profit, which was double what it was the year before, and that is 2 years in a row that we've doubled our profit. We generated record group cash flow, just under $800 million. That was 3x what we did the year before. And it meant that the metal price environment that we're operating in flowed through to the bank account, which is important for us.

And for you, as shareholders, we're able to reward you as well. And as Jake said, we delivered a $0.20 dividend, $400 million return to our shareholders and tripling of our dividend. Importantly, though, that was done at a metal price that is well below what we're currently seeing. And so when we look at that, the foundations of FY '25 have set us up to deliver again in FY '26. We're on track to deliver that guidance, whereby we'll maintain our low-cost, high-margin position. And as I said, with a higher metal price environment for you as shareholders, that means the cash flow that we'll generate in FY '26 will be materially higher than what we delivered in FY '25.

So if we look at our strategy, the consistent execution of that strategy has significantly improved the quality of our portfolio. Firstly, all of those assets on this chart were not owned by the company when we started in 2011, and all of the assets outside of Mt Rawdon have subsequently been sold since we started.

The chart shows the quality of that portfolio. We've lifted our average mine life now to around 15 years based on reserves. And we've got an average rate of return out of those assets of 18% since we've owned them. The chart shows the reserve life and the production scale, but more importantly, I'll turn your attention to the color and the size of the bubbles, which represents the production -- sorry, the rates of return that we're getting on those assets and how much of the investment that we've made in those assets has been repaid. And a couple of things just to call out for you.

So if you look at Cowal and Ernest Henry, the yellow means that we've repaid 100% of everything we've invested in those assets. So if you consider that at Cowal, we paid just over $700 million 10 years ago, we've had that fully repaid, and we now have a life out to 2042. And for Cowal, which has been a very consistent performer for us, it delivered over $855 million of operating cash flow just in FY '25 alone.

If you turn to Ernest Henry, we acquired that in 2 parts in 2016 and 2021. We spent just on $2 billion buying that asset. It's fully repaid. It was due to finish operating in 2026 and now has a mine life out to 2042. And it's been a consistent cash generator since we've owned that in 2016.

And our most recent one is Northparkes, which we acquired in December 2023. It's been cash positive from day 1. And if you look at it, it's generated a rate of return in excess of 30% in just 2 years. So it really does demonstrate the quality of the portfolio that we've introduced at Evolution. And I'll talk a little bit about the upside that we've got.

And you will note down the bottom, I was going to talk about it later, but Mt Rawdon, as we do finish operating that, and as Jake outlined in his speech, it's a very unique way to close a mine that you can leave a long-term legacy in that community through a renewable energy project. And Jake has promised to have that done by February. Didn't say what year though, did you, Jake?

Another part of our discipline in terms of our strategy is that we do use your money very wisely. When we acquire assets, we use a combination of existing cash, debt facilities and equity. And if you look at the equity, the important thing is that we've only ever raised equity for value-accretive acquisitions. We've never asked you for your money to fix the balance sheet. We've never asked you to buy -- money to buy out hedge books or anything else. We have only used money to acquire value-accretive assets.

And so if you look at the chart there, it shows that if you participate in those equity raisings for Northparkes, Mungari, Cowal and Ernest Henry and retain that equity holding, in addition to that average 18% per annum that you're getting out of the assets that was on the previous slide, your equity has generated an average rate of return over 30%. So we do use your money wisely and we value that when we come to you to ask for an acquisition support.

So now I want to just talk a little bit about each of the assets and where we're going into the future with them. The thing that really excites me about Evolution is that every single asset in our portfolio has options for extending mine life, growing production and there's even more upside once we get into those assets. And it does demonstrate the work that we do in the due diligence when we go to look at these assets. We -- our most important part of that due diligence is what do we see as the upside that we can bring to that asset for you as our shareholders.

And first one up is Mungari. So we've just finished the expansion that Jake talked about. It was a $250 million investment that the Board just made the decision in June 2023. We delivered that under budget and ahead of schedule. It now will move Mungari back to a major cash contributor for the group with production of around 200,000 ounces per annum for at least the next 5 years and a mine life out to 2038.

Cowal, in April, the Board approved a $430 million open pit continuation project, which extends the open pit by 10 years and guarantees the operation out to at least 2042. As I said, it's been a major cash contributor since day 1. And when we look at Cowal and the investment in the open pit continuation project, Cowal will be able to fund that itself and still return cash to the group as we go through that project over the next few years. Pleasingly, at the moment, it is ahead of schedule, and it's on budget, which is great to see for Joe and the team.

Ernest Henry, as I mentioned earlier, it was due to finish in 2026. We've now got a mine life out to 2040. And the studies that we've done over the last 18 months have enabled us to not only keep the mine life out to 2040, but we're able to keep the processing capacity at the maximum of 6.8 or at its capacity all the way out to 2040. The previous pre-feasibility study had it only running to about 2033 before that production rate had to decline. In addition to that, because we've got processing capacity, we have been doing a study on a Bert orebody, which is up at the top of the pit that we can mine separate to the main orebody and therefore, increase the processing rate and production rate at Ernest Henry.

Northparkes has probably the largest sort of resource in terms of multiple orebodies, and we're working on how do we expand not only the mine life but also the production rate at that asset so that we can get greater returns than that 30% that we've been able to achieve in the first 2 years of ownership.

And at Red Lake, I think for us at Red Lake, the pleasing thing that John and the team have been able to do there over the last 18 months is get it back to being a consistent and reliable performer that's generating cash for the group. It generated $75 million of cash in FY '25, and when we get to the end of December, that will be at least 6 quarters in a row that it's been cash positive for the group. So it is starting to do exactly what we want it to do, but it's also got some low CapEx growth options that we can start to look at now that we've got a much more reliable and stable operation.

The other thing that I'd draw out is that these projects are all able to be funded over the next 5 years in our outlook that we provided in terms of our capital, but they're also going to be appropriately sequenced from not only a financial risk perspective but from an operational risk perspective.

So in summary, we're very pleased to have you as shareholders for what we see as a high-quality portfolio of assets. And as Jake said, we have a very bright future ahead of us at Evolution, whereby we will continue to safely deliver and consistently deliver the plan, bank the benefits of this high metal price environment to continue to return to you as shareholders via dividends and make sure we progress the multiple growth options that I've just walked through for you.

And with that, Jake, hand it back to you.

Thanks, Lawrie. I'll now just initially address the question that was submitted. The question reads as follows, now that Red Lake is finally showing a small positive cash flow relative to the size of the invested capital, is it time to consider gracefully exiting this poorly researched acquisition while demand for gold-producing mines is high as a result of record-high gold prices. Will the Board and management use the opportunity of record gold prices to offload the ill-advised Canadian asset? That's read verbatim.

The short answer to that shareholder is that, of course, all things will be considered in terms of maximizing the value of any asset, but we are not putting this asset up for sale. As Lawrie described, this asset has now generated 6 quarters of positive cash flow, and we feel that there is significant value to be created by operating the asset. Notwithstanding that, nothing is ever off the table if someone was to walk in and bid a price, which we thought was at least fair value or higher for the asset. But the asset is not for sale.

Any questions on -- to the floor?

My name is Craig Lee. I represent the Australian Shareholders' Association with my colleague, Julieanne Mills. And on behalf of the ASA, we'd like to congratulate yourselves on a fantastic year and particularly such a strong result. As you said, we're getting stronger by the year, and it's obviously a great demonstration of the leadership shown by this company.

I've got 2 questions. Just interested now that you've transferred to the nonexecutive position. At the ASA, we believe in moving -- it's early days, I know, but moving to Non-Independent Chairs. What are your thoughts on that into the future? Is that something that's on the horizon?

Craig, I think you -- just to paraphrase, I think you meant moving to Independent Chairs, not to Non-Independent Chairs because you have a Non-Independent Chair.

Exactly right. Exactly right.

Look, we recognize that from a governance perspective, that is a preferred position by groups like yourselves, and it's something the Board will take into account in due course. But at this stage, the general sense and feedback from shareholders is that the current position of having a Non-Independent Chair but having a lead Independent Director in Peter Smith is appropriate and suitable for the stage of the company.

Okay. That sounds great. And my other question is around Northparkes Triple Flag streaming implications. Can you quantify the impact of the Triple stream at Northparkes on the F '25 revenue, cash flow and the AISC? And explain how much further upside has effectively been sold forward through this streaming deal.

So before Lawrie scrambles to answer that question and finds the numbers, which he will know, I would have thrown it to Fran, but I think that's a bit unfair. I will just say that the streaming deal on Northparkes was done prior to our acquisition of the assets. So CMOC owned the assets, and they put the streaming deal in place. When we did our diligence on the asset, we knew that, that stream was in place, and we took it into account when we acquired the asset for AUD 550 million. Without that stream, the asset would have been significantly more valuable, and we would have had to pay a higher price. But just to clarify, it is not a stream that we put in place.

Lawrie, do you have those numbers or -- I don't think you need to press that.

Are you sure?

I don't think so. I was told before.

Good to see you listen, Jake. Look -- and Jake's right. So we had to inherit that stream. I think a couple of things to be clear on, though, that the work that we did in the acquisition, we were able to make sure that for that stream, we get the tax deductibility of delivering that metal because under the previous arrangements and the previous owners, they weren't able to have access to that. So it's not that you're losing that full impact of that stream.

So if we look at it in FY '25, it was just over $140 million that was delivered to Triple Flag. So it impacted in terms of the revenue. It didn't have an impact in terms of the all-in sustaining cost because it's on the revenue line, not the cost side. And as we go forward, essentially, when you look at it, it's -- based on the current life of mine plan, the Stage 1 of that stream will apply going forward for at least probably the next 20 years under the current operating environment that Northparkes is in, whereby they end up with 60% of gold and 90% of the silver.

[ Paul Hatfield ]. Red Lake has seen a decrease of 4.5 million ounces compared to the estimate in December 2023. Are we likely to see any more decreases there? Or is it you're fairly confident that what -- these established figures are correct?

So it did experience a decrease, and we feel that we now have the assets and the understanding of the orebodies to the point where there wouldn't be a material decrease going forward.

And am I right in saying that it's 30 grams per tonne on Red Lake? Is that...

No, that's...

I'm trying to work out from the report. I haven't had a chance to look at it.

There was an orebody that existed at Red Lake called the high-grade zone that averaged 30 to 50 grams a tonne. Regrettably, that was mined out by the previous owners, and we're left with an orebody of about 5-ish grams a tonne.

Okay. And lastly, so Red Lake at the moment isn't included in the compound annual growth rate there.

In terms of the returns on...

Yes. There -- it hasn't been going long enough to show a return.

No, it is showing a return now. It hasn't repaid fully its purchase price and investment, but in due course, assuming it continues to consistently perform, it will certainly start repaying some of its capital investment.

Yes, I'm just going by the slide. You didn't have Red Lake number.

No, it's not yet a gold color. But Lawrie and John's job is to turn that red into gold.

You'll see that Red Lake is actually just -- it's sitting behind the Evolution Group average, so it's got a similar mine life. So that's why it is identified on that chart, but it's sitting behind the Evolution Group average, and we can show you that after.

Mr. [ Good ], welcome.

Just a simple three-part question.

I need 3 parts today.

Just all on dividends. When making so much money, do you intend to increase the payout ratio or make special dividends or pay quarterly dividends?

That's 3 parts of the same question. Look, I think, [ Keith ], the reality is we're in a situation, which we didn't expect to be in. We are deleveraging materially faster than we expected to be. We are making and generating a lot of cash. Management's focus is on ensuring that, that cash gets banked. How we deploy that cash in due course will be something that the Board debates. But certainly, thinking about different ways of paying out dividends is part of that.

The one thing that I will assure you that we won't do is that we won't reduce the hurdles for investment of your money into our portfolio of assets, and we will remain disciplined. So in the event that we have excess cash, we will determine how to deploy that outside to shareholders.

Any other questions?

[ Gary Pierce ], a long-time, very happy shareholder. My question was I presume Lawrie didn't throw you under the bus when you suggested you're going to have Mt Rawdon up and running by February next year, is it?

Mt Rawdon has an option that the government of Queensland effectively own. So they have spent close on $40 million this year assessing the pumped hydro opportunity. And everything suggests that there are no fatal flaws to it and that it is the most advanced and most cost-efficient pumped hydro project to be able to be developed in Queensland. The challenges are that it is a significant investment. It's multiple billions of dollars, and the Queensland government is moving towards determining whether they want to exercise the option, which would be in the first half of next year.

It will take probably 2 years after that and some hundreds of millions of dollars to get to an FID investment decision, and then it will take billions of dollars of investment to get it to be a 1.3 gigawatt pumped hydro opportunity, which is part of the Crisafulli Government's plan. It is the best investment that they could make in renewable energy in terms of storage, but there are a number of hurdles to go through. We will not, as Evolution, be investing in a pumped hydro asset. We will be relying on the government of Queensland to be doing that for us. But it will be, in my view, one of the most unique and opportunities to showcase how mining on a disturbed land site can be converted into renewable long-term multigenerational renewable asset. So yes, I'm very excited and committed to doing that because I think it will showcase mining in a completely different way, and that's something that the mining industry needs to do to demonstrate its credentials to the larger community.

[ Sankar Krishnan ], I'm also a very long-term shareholder, happy. Just wanted to ask you whether AI technology has got any impact on the way you do business.

I would say that the mining industry, and I'd put Evolution in that category, have been slow adopters of AI, but it's something that Nancy and her team are looking at now. I think there are tremendous opportunities for embracing AI, particularly the speed at which AI is changing and the ability to implement that and introduce that to our business could have substantial and material changes. But we are early, early stage. The mining industry are late adopters, and I think it's a huge opportunity for both the industry and Evolution.

Another question about the pumped hydro. I love this concept. I think it's fantastic and they support what you're doing. And I think it will be great if it happens. But I just have a few concerns around governments not actually putting the money in. So if that doesn't happen, what is the backup plan?

Thanks. You should be concerned about the governments putting in the money. They'll put it somewhere else, but they'll definitely spend it. The backup plan is to either close the mine as contemplated, and Ben and the team and Fiona have done a lot of work in ensuring that, again, even if it didn't turn into a pumped hydro that it would be a model closure of a facility, and it's something that Evolution could be proud of.

Of course, there is the potential of the Stage 5 cutback and trying to access gold below that, which Evolution may or may not decide to do itself. But if the gold price were to remain around $6,000 an ounce, there is potential to potentially look at that. But that is not something that we would like to do ourselves at this stage.

So sorry, just to follow that up, that financially, do you have the funds there to support that remediation if that...

We do. It's accounted for in the -- in our financial statements.

Sorry, I have one more question. With respect to cash and cash equivalents you have in the balance sheet, do you hold gold also as an equivalent or...

We don't at this stage. It is something that we are contemplating. We do hold a lot of gold, but it is still in the ground and needs to be extracted. So there's multiple million ounces that we do hold, but it does need to be extracted. It is something that is on our agenda as to how do we manage our treasury given that we are in now the position where we have long-dated debt, which is -- it's low-cost debt. It's less than -- is it less than 4%? The private bonds that we placed at a very opportune time. And now that Fran is contemplating this good problem to have that she may have too much cash and what does she do with it, allocating it to gold is one thing that we are thinking about.

Any other questions?

No. Okay. Well, then we'll -- I'll just make one final comment. As I sit here listening to Lawrie's talk, I mean, this is a long document, which we have put in many, many hours to create for you. But when I was paging through it, it really does capture a year in which has been fantastic for Evolution, but it is the work not of a few people writing this report. It's the work of over 3,000 people working 24 hours a day. Our mines run 24 hours a day, 365 days a year to try and develop and create what is in this document.

So I do encourage you to read through it, at least look at the photos. They're great. And thank you for your support. But to this team over here, thank you so much for the contribution that you've made. You make Evolution the company it is today. So thank you.

We will now get to the good part of the meeting, and we'll be able to have some tea and cake, and you will be able to meet the people who are really creating the value for your company.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Evolution Mining September 2025 Quarter Results Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Lawrie Conway, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Darcy, and good morning, everyone. I'm joined on the call today by Matt O'Neill, our Chief Operating Officer; Peter O'Connor, our General Manager, Investor Relations; and Frances Summerhayes, who joined us a month ago as our CFO. It's great to have Fran on board, and she's made an impressive start in the first month. I will have Fran make a couple of introductory comments about herself soon.

Today, we released the September quarterly report, which will be the reference point for the call. There are 3 key things to take away from the call today. Firstly, we're on track to deliver on our FY '26 commitments. That is is for group guidance, production, costs and capital. Our projects are on schedule and on budget, and our 5-year capital outlook remains unchanged.

Secondly, there's been a structural shift in the sector, both for gold and copper. Gold as a financial reserve has accelerated with central banks being net buyers of gold for 27 of the last 28 months. For the first time since 1996, Central Banks are holding more gold in reserves than U.S. Treasuries. In terms of copper, short-term supply issues matched with an increasing long-term demand forecast but no clear pathway for increased supply is seeing rising near-term and long-term copper prices.

Lastly, Evolution with a long-life low-margin portfolio, including 2 high-quality copper assets and minimal hedging is able to take advantage of the current metal price environment, invest for future growth generate high-margin returns for our shareholders for the long term, not just the next few years.

The September quarter was another quarter where we safely delivered to plan and starts FY '26 very well for Evolution. On the safety front, we maintained the improving trend with our TRIF remaining below 5. Production for the quarter was 174,000 gold ounces and 18,000 copper tonnes at a very low all-in sustaining cost of $1,724 per ounce for continuing operations. This performance delivered record net mine cash flow of $366 million and our second highest operating mine cash flow of $676 million.

Net mine cash flow for the quarter was up 23% against only a 4% increase in the achieved [ go. ] The benefit of copper in the portfolio is further evidenced with the price up 15% in the quarter.

A couple of record net mine cash flows to call out include $55 million at Northparkes and $39 million at Red Lake with that operation continuing their safe and reliable delivery of positive cash. Importantly, the cash generated in the September quarter was at prices well below the current spot prices. Spot prices are $1,200 per ounce and $1,300 per tonne above what we achieved in the September quarter. The 2 cash flow charts on the first page clearly demonstrate the potential for the year should these high prices remain. It means we would generate over $3.3 billion in operating mine cash flow and around $3.1 billion in mine cash flow before major capital, an improvement of around $570 million compared to where the spot prices were when we released our FY '26 guidance in August. It would also be $1 billion more cash flow than what we generated in FY '25.

Group cash flow for the quarter was $196 million. As outlined at the June call, we expected a working capital unwind in the September quarter. In the June quarter, we had higher capital predominantly associated with the plant expansion completion at Mungari, the commencement of the OPC project at Cowal and ventilation and truck work at Ernest Henry. This resulted in $35 million in high liabilities balance at the end of June, which were paid in the September quarter. We also had $26 million in higher receivables at the end of September due to higher volumes of concentrate sales outstanding compounded by the rising copper price in the quarter. This is actually a positive, though, as we receive those proceeds in the December quarter. We now expect working capital movements to return back to a normal rhythm where on a full year basis, the movement [indiscernible] each either in an inflow or an outflow.

Our balance sheet flexibility further improved with gearing now at 11% and a cash balance of $780 million. Our disciplined capital management continued during the quarter, repaying $170 million of our term loans. Post the quarter end, we paid the remaining $110 million. These loans are now fully repaid, and we have no debt repayment commitments until FY '29.

On the projects front, Mungari has successfully completed commissioning the expanded plant and will be in commercial production this month. The final project cost is now forecast at $212 million, which is 15% below the original budget. Given the $43 million of net mine cash flow for the quarter, Mungari is well on its way back to being a material cash contributor for Evolution and quickly paying back the project investment.

At Cowal, the OPC made a solid progress during the quarter with commissioning of the open pit trucks and completion of the Northern Lake protection band. The project remains on schedule and on budget.

With that, I'll now hand over to Fran to introduce herself before Matt takes us through the operational performance.

Thanks, Lawrie. I'm delighted to have joined Evolution Mining at a pivotal time for both the business and the broader industry, especially with the structural change happening with gold and the supply disruptions in copper. With increasing metal prices and a clear strategic focus, Evolution is well placed as one of the lowest cost gold producers, consistently and safely delivering robust margins and cash flows.

In my first month, I've had the opportunity to visit 3 of the operations and participate in Board meetings. What stood out for me is the depth of the safety culture and the openness and enthusiasm people have across the business for being part of Evolution. As the CFO, my initial focus is on listening, learning and building relationships including with our current and future investors and the analysts who cover us.

I bring a disciplined, value-driven approach to capital allocation and operational efficiency. It's an exciting time to be part of the Evolution team, and I am committed, along with the management team, in elevating the business and making a meaningful contribution to Evolution.

Thank you. Over to you now, Matt.

Thanks, Fran. As Lawrie noted, the September quarter was in line with our full year plan, and we remain on track to meet full year guidance, allowing us to continue to benefit from the rising metal price environment. We produced 174,000 ounces of gold and 18,000 tonnes of copper over the quarter. And pleasingly, we did this at a lower-than-planned AISC, helping us to generate a second consecutive record net mine cash flow.

Despite these positive metrics, the area I remain most proud of is our safety performance. Happily, I'm able to repeat a message I've given a number of times in these updates, which is to report that our performance in this area continues to be strong as evidenced by our total recordable injury frequency rate for the group dropping below 5. The consistency and predictability we are seeing in the operation continues to be built on the back of teamwork and collaboration across the entire Evolution team, and it's a credit to everyone involved. Our goal remains the same. We say, we do, we deliver, and I'm very pleased to say that I think we've done that this quarter.

As I noted earlier, our operations have started the year in line with plan and remain on track to meet full year guidance. Some items for note for the quarter were Cowal and Ernest Henry completing their regular biannual shutdown activities. We also had some minor interruptions to the open pit interruptions to the open pit activities or the mining activities at Cowal due to wet weather. However, it was pleasing to see the work the team have been doing on improving resilience pay off as we were able to feed the processing plant from our mine surface stocks, ensuring no mill downtime or feeding of subgrade stocks.

Works are progressing well on the OPC project. And as Lawrie noted, the [ Lake Protection Bond ] has been completed ahead of schedule within the September quarter.

Red Lake, Northparkes and Mt Rawdon continued to deliver in line with their plans. The ramp-up of the mill at Mungari continued through the [ quarter with ] final commissioning on track to be completed this month. And I'm happy to be able to report that throughput our expectations, and the team on site are very excited to see what they can achieve with the new plant.

This brings the formal part of our update to an end. I'll now hand back to Darcy for questions.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Kate McCutcheon from Citi.

Just starting at Ernest Henry, you gave us the update. So now that shaft is full to 2040 plus, and you pushed out that $200 million of CapEx outside the next 5-year profile. So that's a great outcome. How do I think about the incremental cost of that AOF material that will be trucked because I imagine that would be higher cost. So if we looked at dollar per tonne mining cost at Ernest Henry today, say, mid-30s, in real terms, what does that look like on the revised plan? Or is there anything you can talk to about that?

Yes, I'll hand that one to Matt.

Yes. Thanks, Lawrie. So the alternate ore sources, there's a variety of places that they're coming from, Kate. So a lot of them are actually going to be used through the old materials handling system. So they're going to be through passes back to the crusher in the same way that we mine those levels initially. There are a couple that we will truck and truck a little bit further into those passes. So there's not of a material shift. We're not trucking the material out of the pit. Like when that first -- that operation first started, we were trucking all the way to the surface, which obviously almost doubles the unit cost. That's not what we're doing with the alternate ore sources. We do a bit of rehab and we'll get back to the old systems of using the passes.

Sorry, the last -- below -- below the -- sorry -- when we get below the crushing horizon, which is we're into that area now, we are going to be trucking back up to the crushing horizon, and that's got a dedicated truck loop. Again, it's only a pretty short level, like it's 25 meters between levels. So obviously, the further we go, we'll increase the number of trucks and ventilation, which we've sort of documented pretty well over time. But again, they're not going out of the pit. So it's not a material step change in unit cost.

Okay. Got it. That is helpful. And then at Cowal, now that you finished that Northern Lake protection fund, is there scope to pull forward the Southern fund and putting that together? I don't mean to put the cart before the horse, but do you see scope to reduce that open cut feed gap later this year or a risk to the upside?

Kate, spoken like a good engineer. Yes, the work is finished. The site team is looking at whether we continue and do the Southern Lake Bond. But it's not needed. But given the works and the progress we've made on the Northern, they'll have a look at it. We know and we've said this previously, if we do need to do it as a wet move on the Southern Bond, the project allowed for dry, you're talking about $40 million to $60 million of incremental capital over and above the project budget, but it does give us access to the southern area. So that's something that we'll assess over the next 3 to 6 months.

Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan from Barrenjoey.

I guess my focus is also on the bond and the OPC. What would be the benefits of bringing forward the southern access, getting access to those open pits? Can you help us think about timing of grade of magnitude? I mean I know that you've just outlined an additional cost if it's a wet move. But with gold prices where they are bringing forward, that potential production would seem to be pretty beneficial, would it not?

Yes. Look, I'll hand that to Matt, Dan. I'd say that one -- there's 2 things from an overall perspective for the operation is that when we're time to do that in a few years, if you do have a couple of wet seasons, then what does that do to the time that it takes and the cost of actually doing that bond versus now while we've got the access. It does give us greater flexibility on the site. But Matt, do you want to talk about what it does operationally with the pits?

Yes. It's really around flexibility, Dan. But you wouldn't see anything materially increase in the next 12 to 18 months. Obviously, we're trying to work towards the northern area being pulled forward. And that works that they completed in the first quarter have allowed us to go a bit further in front than we were.

The Southern one will also open up some additional -- different material opens up some oxides, which we do like treating. It does help with our throughput. So it's an option for us that we're going to be chasing. But again, it comes with that price tag. So it's a question of when the extra ounces come through to offset the stockpiles that we're planning on treating now. And at the moment, it's not within the next sort of 12 or 18 months just in terms of where you'd sit it.

So Dan, in short, for your models, as Matt said, nothing over the next couple of years. If we did make that decision and let the market know, we would sort of say what does it do in terms of years 3 to 5.

Yes. That's very clear for now. On -- just staying on Cowal and just the more immediacy. Obviously, wet weather, it looks like you had some impact from the bottom of the pit, just having access to it temporarily. Where is access at currently? And should we expect that high-grade ore to come through this quarter or perhaps in the second half of the fiscal year?

Yes. So we've got access back. We were out for between 1.5 weeks and 2 weeks of impact in the pit over the course of the quarter, mainly in September. We have got ourselves back where it's pretty tight. I think as people will most be aware of when we get to the bottom of that pit, it gets pretty tight. Normal operations have resumed. We're expecting to see a kick up in the next quarter, and then we'll continue that through until that pit is finished. There's no change to the fact that, that pit will be finished this financial year, and then we'll go to the stockpiles after that.

And then just last question on Mungari, just the latest live update of the ore sources ramping up in Sympathy with the mill expansion.

Yes. So we're in front on the ore sources. So Castle Hill has done really well. The team out there with NRW have done a fantastic job. So very happy where that is, and we've got enough stocks in front of the mill now. We're running it through its final sort of stages of commissioning almost as we speak with different types of material and hardness and locations. So everything is performing quite well, and that's -- I'm pretty comfortable that by the end of October, we're in a good position where that mill is commissioned, and we're away, and we've got enough feed to achieve what we need to achieve.

Your next question comes from Andrew Bowler from Macquarie.

Just a question for me on capital returns. I mean you outlined on the front page, and I think it's pretty clear to everyone that if gold prices continue, you'll be in a net cash position by the end of the financial year. Is the review of the capital returns policy something you consider once you get back to that net cash position? Or is there -- is it very much a reinvestment story for some other projects potentially, for example, bringing a block cave on a little bit sooner than expected at Northparkes, et cetera? Or would you look to that capital returns line item with that excess cash?

Yes. Andrew, look, it's a good problem to have with the rapid rise in the gold price. I mean we said at the August call that as we've now got to 15%, we're now touching down to 10% gearing. That means we've got to look at what we do in terms of that capital returns for shareholders. We'll be doing that at the half year when we look at the interim and also as we go into the second half of the year.

Our policy of paying out around 50% of cash flows, I think, still works very well, and that means we've got some opportunities to look at that. I mean when you talk about the capital, our 5-year capital outlook allows for a block cave at E22, moving it forward. I mean, it was due to -- for decision in FY '27. So it wouldn't really change our capital spend over the next 5 years anyway. But as I said, when we get to the half year, we'll discuss with the Board as to what we do around those returns.

Understood. And just one more from me. Obviously, it was reported by the media during the quarter, there was some continued issues with the power supply in the Kalgoorlie region. From memory, Mungari is running off that local grid out near Kalgoorlie. Can you just talk through if there was any impact from that and what sort of mitigation strategies there are? Are you looking at adding a backup plant or potentially increasing renewable penetration there to sort of help smooth out that -- those reliability issues that Kalgoorlie is seeing at the moment?

Yes, it's Matt here. Yes, we did see interruptions at Mungari with the power issues that have been occurring there. So we had a number of shutdowns, some of them planned but with relatively short notice and others load shedding events where we had to take the plant down. We do have partial backup supply there. So we've got some generators as a result of the new investment. And so we use that to keep the plant alive, but it doesn't run the mill for want of a better term. It stops the sanding and creating operational problems. So yes, it did have an impact. We lost quite a few days, almost a week, if you like, with the interruptions from the power side there as well.

In terms of options going forward, we're like everybody else in that region. We'd like the government to do something about it. But also we would -- we're looking at what options do we have. I know other companies have done things themselves. So we're looking at all our options because those interruptions, we don't see them change in the short term.

Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs.

Just first one for me on Mungari. It looks like your processing costs are still largely being capitalized. Should we expect that to normalize from this quarter forward, just given your processing rates ramped up? And where do you see those processing costs maybe on a per tonne basis normalizing to?

Yes. You want to cover that?

Yes, you will see it ramp up -- sorry, ramp up. You'll see it capitalizing, and you'll see it come up. We had a forecast of reducing AOSC by about 16%, I think, was a number, which at the moment, we see it in line with when we're looking at what we're looking at. So we'll keep running it in full mode for the next probably 2 quarters before we can give you a really good steer on where it is. But yes, it's in line with what the project expected. And at this stage, we haven't come up with any material variances in what we thought it would cost.

Got it. And then just one on cash generation. I guess understanding sort of where the costs may be normalized going forward. Just you highlighted at the start, obviously, the commodity price strength in both gold and copper. But if I look at the major cash generation before major capital, it's obviously down quarter-on-quarter. Are you able to just give us more color on the timing of those copper payments you highlighted and then where the costs may be normalize going forward from here?

Yes. So a few things there, Hugo. I mean the costs -- the only real change you'll see in the operating costs as we go forward is what Matt talked about as we ramp up production at Mungari. And so those processing costs will be sort of in the $16 to $18 a tonne in the second half of the year and the all-in sustaining cost comes down. The actual operating costs as we go forward. The other main driver will be obviously royalties on the gold and copper revenue. So we don't see a lot of change through the balance of the year. The guidance, as we've said, $1,720 to $1,880 remains in place.

In terms of then the concentrate, so it's different at each of the operations. So Ernest Henry has now reverted back to a 1-month quotational pricing period. It was -- at the end of June, it was on a 4-month. So the shipments, therefore, will be settled within basically 60 days rather than 120. So that is why that receivable balance will come down through the December quarter. Northparkes is on a 3-month pricing period. So that's not going to change too much in terms of the 10% final payments that we receive, and it is then going to be driven on shipments. So we had a big shipment quarter. We had 4 shipments this quarter at Northparkes as opposed to only -- I think it was 2 in the previous quarter. So that will sort of start to normalize, as I said, around our working capital.

And then just lastly on Cowal and the throughput there with the sort of lower throughput this quarter. Are you able to give us a steer in terms of what the profile in terms of tonnes and grade looks like for the rest of the year? And around that guidance, should we expect you to continue to process the higher-grade material off the stockpile to keep that sort of 1.3, 1.4 throughput grade?

Yes. The short answer is yes. We'll see it come back into that range a bit higher. And with where we sit in the pit and access back in the -- it will return to the normal operating range until probably quarter 4 where we see the pit completing, but we also see that being offset by the underground ore sort of ramping up through there, and that's going according to plan as well. So yes, it will kick up from first quarter, but it will sit in the normal ranges that you'd expect for the guidance.

Your next question comes from Baden Moore from CLSA.

The CapEx guide, it sounded like you're looking at bringing forward some production or at least looking at your growth options. 5-year guide at $750 million to $950 million, do you think that's still appropriate now just given where your cash flow is running to and the market seems to be signaling it's time to produce more.

And maybe just a second question. I was wondering if there's any change to how you're thinking about increasing your utilization on your Ernest Henry mill now you've got some certainty around what's happening in Isa.

Yes. So Baden, the CapEx profile, the $750 million to $950 million over the next 5 years, as we've outlined previously, and certainly, if you look at the deck that we issued at Denver, it outlines all of the projects. I mean, we've got the E22 at Northparkes, the OPC at Cowal, the Bert ore body at Ernest Henry, all of those projects are in there. So any acceleration of capital just because of the metal pricing would be incremental at this stage.

And then when you talk about the utilization at Ernest Henry, that is the study that is going on at Bert, which allows us to go in from the open pit and come out through there rather than using the materials handling system to enable us to get higher utilization of the installed capacity there.

So just to confirm, no read-through here that you'd necessarily be reviewing that $750 million to $950 million over the next 12 months?

Not unless there's other projects. And as I mentioned just earlier, if we bring forward that work on the Southern Lake Bund at Cowal, that is additional capital that we would have to bring in that's not in the 5-year outlook. And then if we make any other decisions across each of the assets, then we would update if there is a change in that capital. But the capital we've put out there for the next 5 years allows us to deliver those growth projects at each of the assets.

Your next question comes from Matthew Frydman from MST Financial.

Maybe firstly, a bit of a 2-parter on costs at Cowal. Clearly, a pretty big step-up in AISC quarter-on-quarter, running a little bit above your guidance range. Can you step us through the drivers behind that? I mean, is it purely just the shutdown activity and the rain that you alluded to? Or is there anything else that really needs to kind of normalize across the coming quarters in order to bring unit costs back into the guidance range?

And I guess the second part of the question is maybe thinking a little bit more longer term. How should we be thinking about the mining cost and the AISC as we come to the end of the year when the open pit finishes and obviously, you transition to more stockpiles? Clearly, quite a few moving parts there with the stockpile drawdown, the OPC being capitalized, et cetera. So what does that all mean for how we should think about unit costs compared to, I guess, the actual cash expenses coming out of the business into the back end of the year?

Matt, that was a lot of questions in one. I'll try and address it for you. And then if Matt wants to add anything, Matt, on our side, not you, wants to add anything, we will.

I mean the first thing I'd say is you got to look at Cowal, over the years, it has delivered to its numbers. It's on track to deliver the guidance. It was expected in the first quarter that you have the maintenance shutdown with lower production, but there the maintenance costs. So that's driven up the all-in sustaining cost. As Matt mentioned, we lost 1.5 weeks, 2 weeks on having to use stockpiles due to the wet weather. That's a noncash use of lower [ grade ] for the cost for this quarter, but the costs will come down as we mine the pit out through the rest of this year and displace that stockpile material. So if you look at it, we're going to deliver to the guidance range. We're on track for that. The costs were expected to be higher in the first quarter.

As you go into the next year, we then are processing stockpiles as we finish mining E42. That will be for about 18 months, 2 years. So therefore, your costs on an AISC basis are going to be fairly similar, if not a little bit higher because you're going down in terms of the grade of that stockpile material.

But I just bring you back to the bigger picture. I get it -- Look at Cowal, operating cash flow this quarter of $215 million. So that's an annualized rate of $860 million, which is more than what we generated last year. And if you take -- overlay it with the gold prices, for the rest of the year, you're probably looking about $250 million to $270 million extra cash flow. So it's almost like at Cowal, you buy 4 quarters and you get a fifth quarter free because it would generate over $1 billion of operating cash flow for the $100 to $200 an ounce on the noncash inventory that it does to the AISC, I'll take the operating cash flow every day.

Yes. Got it. And you sort of alluded to the fact that going into next year with the lower stockpile grade, the AISC will be broadly flat or maybe actually a little bit higher. But in terms of the actual cash generation of the business, as you're alluding to, it should actually improve materially given that you -- on a kind of expensing basis, those stockpiles are already -- you've already paid for them.

Absolutely. And being clear that next year, we do a full year on lower grade stockpiles. So production is going to be lower. Therefore, the AISC will be a bit higher on a noncash basis, but I'd expect it's going to make fairly similar cash flows before, obviously, the investment in the OP, the operating cash flows will be very solid. Yes.

Yes, exactly. Okay. That makes perfect sense. And then maybe just quickly, you alluded to in the text that the underground at Cowal ramping up to 30% of mill feed. I think previously, you said the target was 2.4 million tonnes per annum. Is that number still right? It sounds like if you're feeding -- depending on your throughput rate, if you're feeding 30% of mill feed there that maybe there's actually a little bit of upside risk to the underground. How should we, I guess, think about what your aspirations there are?

I'll hand this to Matt just to talk about where the underground will fit. We're not sort of upgrading that. That was this quarter. And so therefore, obviously, as we -- we had the mill outage for the maintenance for the quarter. Therefore, as we brought that online, the underground got priority feed over the open pit. And certainly, when we're out for the wet weather, the underground got priority feed. But Matt, do you want to talk about the big picture of the underground [ feed? ]

Yes. So we had a pretty strong quarter at the underground with the total material moved increasing to the point where we're pretty comfortable. 2.3, 2.4 is what we're going to be running at, and we've seen the team on site able to deliver that. So no plans to go further than that at this stage, obviously, investigating what can we do with where everything sits, but that's where it still sits and comfortable that, that's achieved or achievable with the team we've got.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Alex Barkley from RBC.

A question on Ernest Henry feasibility study. Just firstly confirming if that was completed and might it get released at some point? And then are you able to talk about some of the updates versus the PFS, maybe around life extensions or grade changes? Just any details.

Yes. Thanks, Alex. I'll get Matt to add to this. The feasibility study finished. And as we've said, essentially, with the amount of ore that we found below the existing [ 11 75 ] and where we're planning to put the materials handling infrastructure, it's now filled with ore. So that means that infrastructure has to go lower down in the cave, and that work will be done over the next sort of 12 to 18 months. But essentially, the outcome is that we continue mining. We mine below the 1,175 and we truck back up to the materials handling system. And as Matt said earlier, we'll also be mining additional ore sources that have been identified that we can use the existing materials handling system for.

So there's no real outcome on the study per se because essentially, all we're doing is increasing ventilation, refrigeration, adding in trucking and doing development. So it's just a continuation of the mining because we're not adding any of that infrastructure, which pushes the $200 million out of the next 5-year capital profile. And so that's really what the outcome of the study will be.

You want to talk about the mining? And one of the main things that came out of the study is that we actually keep the plant filled through to 2038, whereas the PFS had it declining from about 2033 through to 2038. So it now does keep it filled at 6.8 till 2038. You want to talk about just sort of the mining?

Yes. I mean same mining method at the moment. The mining below the crusher horizon sublevel caving truck back to the crushing horizon. Grade is not changing materially. To be honest, there's a little bit more gold in some of the places that we've seen, but you wouldn't see it as a material variance to what we've been mining so far. So all in all, the drilling that we did for that study sort of in a good way, said there's a lot more there. It's just now we got to work at where we put the infrastructure. So that work is ongoing, and it doesn't interrupt the existing operations for quite a few years yet.

Okay. That's all very helpful. Just the last one on the Mt Rawdon hydro project. You -- last quarter, you had a comment around the Queensland investment, but not this quarter. Why is that? Is it possible to get a quick update on the project and the timing there?

Yes, Alex, look, it's continuing to work to plan. I think if you look at news out of Queensland in the last sort of 4 to 6 weeks, they're doing a full relook around some older other renewable energy projects and focusing on all of that. Ours is still tracking to plan the commitment to the project. We're doing work on site that's being funded by the government and the expectations are that in the March quarter of next year, we'd get a sort of a final outcome on in terms of the government exercising that option on the project.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Ben Wood from UBS.

A few of the questions have already been asked. But I guess one from me is on the gross debt from here, noting that there are no obligations until FY '29 as sort of outlined in the release, but the continuation of the 100% pay down this quarter. How are you sort of thinking, I guess, about the gross debt pay down from here in respect to the capital allocation piece sort of asked by Dan before and just sort of noting that the gearing situation has greatly improved from even 12 months ago. So how are you thinking about that?

Yes, Ben, I mean, it's -- as I said earlier, it's a good problem to have. I mean, in terms of the gross debt, the next repayment is due in FY '29. And as it's in our U.S. private placement notes, you can't prepay those. So we won't be paying off any more gross debt between now and FY '29. That's a $273 million payment in the first half of FY '29. That would sort of be the next repayment. What we do with the cash that we're generating now is something that we will take and discuss with the Board as we come into the half year and again, as we come to the full year.

Certainly, as you would have seen over the last 2 years, as the gearing has come down, the dividends have gone up. As the cash flow has increased because of the pricing, we've also been increasing the dividend. So that's expected to continue. What we do with the extra cash is going to be discussed in the next 6 to 9 months.

Helpful to know that the early prepayment is not an option for the '29.

There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Conway for closing remarks.

Thank you, Darcy, and thanks, everyone, for your time on the call today. We've had another safe and consistent quarter, setting the foundations for FY '26 and on track to deliver guidance and certainly make sure we take advantage of the current high metal prices, be that gold, copper and silver. Thank you for your time today.

Thank you. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Evolution Mining FY '25 Full Year Financial Results. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Lawrie Conway, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Kelly, and good morning, everyone. I'm joined on the call today by Matt O'Neill, our Chief Operating Officer; and Peter O'Connor, our GM, Investor Relations. Today, we released our FY '25 full year financial results and an excellent set of results they are with many new records established and increased returns for our shareholders. These results were achieved through the efforts of our employees and contractors who I sincerely thank for their contribution during the year. To release our financial results today has also taken many long hours by the Finance and Investor Relations team, so an extra special thanks to them. I'll be talking to the presentation we released on the ASX this morning.

Slide 3 summarizes well the benefits of safely delivering to guidance, maintaining a strong cost and capital discipline and banking the cash in a high middle price environment. Our statutory profit was up 119% to $926 million, and our underlying profit doubled to $958 million. Our earnings per share of $0.46 per share was up 111%. All of these are records. EBITDA or operating cash flow was also a record at $2.2 billion at a very strong margin of 51%. Our group cash flow of nearly $800 million was a record and an improvement of 114% on last year against only a 35% increase in the gold price. With the improvement in cash flows in the balance sheet position, we have today announced a final dividend of $0.13 per share fully franked, which is about 3x last year's dividend. Therefore, our shareholders are benefiting for the quality of our portfolio, including the successful progressing of key projects at Mungari and Cowal, which enable us to sustain these types of returns. I'll remind you that these record results have been delivered at an achieved gold price that was $800 per ounce below the spot price, which is very promising for FY '26.

Moving to Slide 4. We've said this for many years now that sustainability is integrated into everything we do, and the results in FY '25 show that this work is paying off. Our TRIF of 5 improved 35% over the prior year and reached its lowest point, meaning we delivered our plan with a strong focus on safety. We are tracking well on our net zero commitment. We are now over halfway towards our 30% reduction by 2030 at 16%. We're also making sure that the communities where we operate are benefiting from our presence and our success through the delivery of at least 6 high-impact community projects over the last year.

Turning to Slide 5. And this is probably the -- one of the best slides in the deck. We're continuing to demonstrate that our margin over ounces approach is working with high margins at all levels, be that EBITDA, operating mine cash flow, net mine cash flow and group cash flow. The chart on the top right shows that we are banking the upside of the high price achieved last year with a margin ranging from $1,050 to $3,050 per ounce. As I said earlier, these were all delivered at an achieved price that was $800 per ounce below the current spot. Every $100 per ounce equates to $70 million to $80 million additional cash flow and remember that 50% of this goes to shareholders per our dividend policy. Importantly, our portfolio is delivering great cash margins with an EBITDA margin ranging from 37% to 64% and the group average of 51%. Some highlights for the year included our cash Cowal operation generating $885 million. Northparkes has delivered $182 million of net cash in the first 18 months of ownership, while Red Lake had a full year net positive cash flow of $74 million. Most importantly, with an average mine life of 18 years and a sector-leading cost position we can sustain these margins and cash flows over the long term.

To Slide 6. We said last year as our gearing improved from 33% to 25% and we would start increasing our returns to shareholders. We have met that commitment. Our 25th consecutive dividend of $0.13 per share fully franked is a record as is the full year dividend of $0.20 per share. Both are about 3x last year's dividend. It equates to about $400 million, which is approximately 32% of the total of all dividends up to 2024 being paid in 1 year. The DRP will be available for this dividend. Our balance sheet is in excellent shape with our investment-grade rating reaffirmed last month in the normal annual review process. Our record financial performance improved our gearing to 15%, and we are back into the normal operating gearing range. We should remember that our gearing was 25% at the start of the year, which means we have improved by 10 percentage points or reduced it by 40%. We are basically unhedged, meaning we benefit from the current spot price, and then with our low-cost position, we can adequately withstand a drop in the gold price.

Moving to guidance on Slide 7. Our group guidance was previously announced last month. Today, we have provided detailed guidance by operations, and this is contained in the appendix of the presentation pack. As I said last month, FY '26 is expected to be similar to FY '25 and where we are planning to safely deliver high margin, significant cash flow. I'm not going to go through the details again, but do want to reiterate a few things. Our all-in sustaining cost will see us remain as one of the lowest cost producers in the sector, and we continue to control our costs. Our group capital investment will be around $200 million and $100 million lower than our FY '25 investment at the midpoint and top end of guidance, respectively. We continue to have discipline in sequencing our capital projects. Our 5-year planned total capital investment remains unchanged at $750 million to $950 million per annum. However, the most important thing I want to highlight on this slide is the cash flow opportunity. At the midpoint of guidance and at the current spot price, we would generate over $2.75 billion and $2.5 billion of operating mine cash flow and mine cash flow before major capital, respectively. This is about 20% higher than FY '25. And remember, our shareholders would receive half of that extra $500 million cash flow in dividends over and above the $400 million that we declared for FY '25. I think it is very clear that we are ensuring our shareholders are going to benefit from this cycle.

Finally, on Slide 8. I just talked about the rewards we're able to provide for our shareholders. This is because of our continued focus on safe and reliable delivery to plan margin over ounces and making sure the cash from the higher metal prices hit the bank account. By doing that, we've declared dividend that is 3x last year's dividend. We have a balance sheet with far greater flexibility but with the overarching discipline of sequencing the notable growth projects appropriately. Lastly, though we are going to be able to sustain this for many years, given we have an 18-year mine life from a high-margin portfolio of assets.

With that, Kelly, please open the line for questions.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Kate McCutcheon with Citi.

Congrats on the results. And we like a concise lot of opening comments. Can I just narrow in on FY '26 guidance at Northparkes, please. Can you just talk through the moving pieces for the lower gold production. You've got the open cuts that ended E48 sub-level cave coming this half. Is the lower gold to function of deliberate mine scheduling to maximize copper? And how do we think about that profile looking ahead?

Thanks, Kate. I'll give Matt the opportunity to speak on the call, but I'll just open it by saying that the lower gold production is linked predominantly to E31 and that is that there were 2 pits there. The gold dominant one was mainly processed in '25. And then the stockpiles, which will be the lower grade will come through in '26 and it won't be for the full year. Matt, do you want to just talk about the other mining areas going forward?

Yes. I mean like you said, that's the driver of the gold production. We still finishing off the E26 area and the E48 sub-level cave comes online. So the gold production is just really a sequence in that mining operation. It's not a conscious process at this stage in terms of trying to do that, but that's what where it sits and then we'll work out what goes forward from there.

Okay. Cool. And then a similar question on Ernest Henry, I guess. Is that production lower a function of tonnes because of where you are in the K this year? Or is it grade? Or I guess, how much ore do you expect to pull out from the 6.5 million tonne per annum shaft this year?

Yes. You want me to cover that one off, Lawrie?

Yes, Matt.

Yes. So the rate, not volume. The driver there is there's a section of the cave that we're working through that's got a barren part in it. And obviously, as a cave, you need to pull all of that. So it's just purely grade that's driving that variance at this stage. And it comes back as we come back over the next couple of years as well. It's not a permanent thing. It's just that when we work through those levels, we pull that through.

Okay. And just finally, so just the debt, the $280 million term debt that you've got left, what's the appetite to repay that early given the free cash flow? How do you think about that?

I'll take that one, Matt. Kate, the appetite there is strong. I mean, we've demonstrated that we're balancing investing in the business, paying down debt and increasing dividends. So you should expect that we'll continue to reduce that.

Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci with Goldman Sachs.

Congrats on a strong FY '25 and all the records that you set. First one for me, just the major project spend you've outlined for tailings storage facilities, vent raises and that sort of thing maybe just across the group, can you call out which of those major projects wrap up in FY '26? And what we should expect continues on into FY '27 and beyond?

Yes. Hugo, if I look at it, those ones, the Northparkes one will be over a couple of years. Ernest Henry will also be over a couple of years. And the metals work and tailings at Red Lake are more in FY '26 and a little bit in FY '27.

Got it. That's helpful, Lawrie. And then just one on exploration. I think you noted at the site visit Mungari is getting the largest share, but what is the group exploration budget for FY '26?

I'll come back to you through Rocky, but my view remembrance is that it's around $75 million for the year.

Got it. And do you expect that to sort of stay at that level going forward as you sort of drill out some more of these projects and some up studies and things?

Yes. I think if we look at it at Mungari -- and from the previous site visits, people would understand the underground, you've got to keep reinvesting every year to have that incremental growth. So I think you won't see much of a change there. When we look at similarly at Red Lake, similar, it's very much like Mungari, where you've got to keep that drilling going. And at Cowal and Ernest Henry, it's really going to be based on where we are in the mines, particularly the underground where is it Northparkes, I think it will just be constant every year there.

Got it. And if I can squeeze in one more. So a similar line of question to Kate around early debt repayments. You've also got the stream there. Is that something you'd consider consolidating back in as well and simplifying that arrangement at Northparkes?

No, I think if you look at it for triple flag, it's one of their most valuable streams. And so it's not something that we'd look to bring into there. I think we'll continue to work as we have with them collaboratively about what role the stream has in what we do with that operation and where we mine and what role they've got to play.

Your next question comes from Al Harvey with JPMorgan.

Another one on Northparkes. I suppose we are heading towards completion of the hybrid study in the coming months. Are you guys able to put a time frame on that. And I suppose how you're thinking about the gold copper trade-off from going for a block versus sublevel cave. And then just a bit of a refresh on if -- how much of either scenario is incorporated into your $750 million to $950 million CapEx guidance over the next 5 years?

Thanks, Al. Good to see we've moved to looking forward in the financial results. So E22, look, the study is finished. We're discussing that with the Board now in the coming months and when we've made a decision or anything on that, we'll let the market know. In terms of our capital guidance of the $750 million to $950 million, we've allowed for that to be as a block cave for the feasibility study that finished last year, and that hasn't changed at this point. And that is because it allows for the higher capital intensity into our forecasting.

Great. Thanks, Lawrie. And apologies then. Another forward-looking line. Just with Mt Rawdon, low-grade stocks. Any help here on the throughput rate. Is it front-end loaded? And also if you've got any guide on when the ounces that might come out of a pump hydro cut back would flow through. I mean it's a fair bit longer dated, but just trying to get a steer here.

Yes, Jake, I'll be very glad that you asked about pumped hydro. So the second one, that is that's a few years off and it really relates to the work that Jake and the team are doing with the Queensland government around the solution for that project, which is advancing well with the government, and we expect that to sort of come to fruition in this financial year in terms of an outcome. In terms of this year, I mean, as you see in the guidance range, it's not a lot of production, that will run through probably until Q3, and it will just be consistent rates through until Q3.

Your next question comes from Matthew Frydman with MST Financial.

A couple of questions. I might firstly continue on Al's question on Mt Rawdon. Can you give us a bit more of a steer on I guess what the all-in sustaining cost for that asset looks like through FY '26, I guess, given that it's excluded from FY '26 guidance and maybe making a comment on -- obviously, all-in sustaining cost is one thing, but presumably, there's a lot of inventory charge in there. So what the actual sort of cash cost might look like? And then maybe also on timing, I mean, is there kind of an end date for the operation there and then sort of any care and maintenance costs that we should consider beyond that?

Yes, Matt. Look, firstly, the Mt Rawdon is not going to be deemed as a continuing operation for us. So we're not actually reporting the all-in sustaining cost because it's going to be extremely high, and it should not impact on the group AISC because it's using low-grade stockpiles and then your asset in one year. So I'm not going to give you a number on that because we won't be reporting it. What I can say is that the cash contribution out of it, given it is all noncash on 15,000 to 20,000 ounces, you should expect that it will probably make about $1,000 an ounce based on our guidance assumption price and that will be pretty steady throughout the year.

In terms of closure and rehab, we'll do a little bit in the back end of this year, but not a lot, and it will be in the future years in terms of that. But what I would say around that is that is very much linked to the pump hydro because as a part of the agreement we're working with the government, those closure and rehab costs would be covered by the proceeds we receive for selling the pump hydro project.

Yes, I understand. Okay. And thanks for the sort of steer on the cash margins there. Obviously, the risk is that analysts put the revenues from your production guidance in there, but not put any sort of cash costs associated with that production as well. So that's quite helpful. .

The second question and maybe looking at Slide 7. So obviously, a big kind of kind of seen in the presentation today, which is understandable the cash generation that you're expecting in FY '26? And clearly, on Slide 7 here, even if we back out growth CapEx and the corporate and central costs that aren't necessarily included in those bars, clearly, very significant cash generation to expect in FY '26 and no debt repayments. But I guess the question is that even if you return half of that through a dividend, the cash position is still going to clearly increase significantly. So I'm really trying to understand the rationale that drives the capital management decisions in the business. So firstly, where do you see cash as being accessed to your reinvestment needs given the context of that cash generation that you're expecting? And then how do you weigh up the attractiveness of using that excess cash to repay debt, relatively low cost debt, which you've highlighted as a priority compared to doing a buyback. Why isn't a buyback attractive but a discounted DRP and repaying relatively low-cost debt is attractive?

Yes, Matt. So question in short was what's our capital management plan. Is that what you're saying?

Yes. But more -- I understand that clearly, you're saying that you're going to prioritize repaying debt and that a 50% dividend is attractive. But I'm just trying to understand you see that cash as being accessed to needs and why other options aren't more attractive than repaying that debt.

Sorry, Matt, I should have kept going, it was with [indiscernible]. The -- the focus is on that term debt facilities because it is our highest cost debt. So we'll continue to pay that. Then when we look at it as the USPPs come in and you can't prepay those. We've got one large lump sum that's due in FY '28. So we've got to make sure that no matter what the gold price is, we meet that repayment. So we always take that into consideration. We then also make sure that we've got adequate cash for if we have any issues similar to the Ernest Henry outage we had a couple of years ago. So that's why we always want to make sure we've got that buffer. And we also want to make sure that we don't have to hold any of these projects as they get approved to go into execution because -- we want to make sure that CLPC $430 million over the next 7 years, it's actually able to run unhindered by what's going on with the balance sheet. So therefore, we still believe that 50% of our cash flow back to shareholders is well liked by the shareholders. And as I said earlier on the call, we want to make sure that through this high-price cycle, that, that cash does flow back to them. we're able to invest in the business at the same time that the shareholders are going to see that this is sustainable through our 18-year mine life. And then as -- if the gold price stays at $5,100 for the next 12 months, it's a good problem for us to have when we're sitting down with the board in 6 and 12 months' time to say, what's the next thing we do in terms of our capital management. But right now, we're not changing from that position of reinvest for the growth, pay off the debt and return 50% to shareholders.

Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan with Barrenjoey.

Lawrie, Mt. Rocky. My question relates to Cowal and guidance. Might seem small, but I think Cowal is a little bit better on the production and the guidance and I think many had thought maybe perhaps yourself a few months ago. Can we just talk about what you're seeing at Cowal regarding the Stage H cutback, how that interplays with grade sequencing through the year? And is it slightly better than your expectations maybe a few months ago?

Thanks, Dan. I will hand to Matt other than to say that it's not really on the grade expectations. I think as we finished the year, we did well both from the open pit and the underground, and that gave us a good outcome. And then I think as we go into this year, we expect the Stage H into the into the March quarter, so probably a little bit longer. But Matt, do you want to maybe talk through Stage H into the cut back to Stage I stockpiles and the underground?

Yes. No, that's fine. I think what Lawrie just noted there, Dan, compared to maybe some of the early conversations stage is performing a little better for us. And so it will run through into that quarter, and you'll see a little bit extra above on that. The other items in terms of stockpile when we start to draw down on that after Stage H and then the underground are all pretty much in line, I think, with where we thought they'd be. underground has come up well and continues to do that. It's going to be a focus for us this year and over the future. It's where I think we can see some growth. So that's probably the key focus for us there. But in terms of variance to where you thought it might be, that's probably the only one is the Stage H has performed a little better over the back half of '25, and we expect that, like we said, to run through until March quarter.

So just drawing a little bit more on that. I imagine that you'll be mining more than you can process on stage edge during the first 9 months of this year, and so you'll have some high-grade stockpiles generated during that period, which you'll unwind in perhaps the next couple of quarters after that? Is that a fair summation?

It is. A lot of the high-grade stockpiles again in relative terms, but we do put the high grade through first and then the -- we'll work through the stockpiles after that. But yes, we we'll have -- we'll be working through those stockpiles. And look, you'll see you'll run those for 3 quarters, maybe a bit longer actually after that.

Yes, Dan, I mean, the short answer there is that highest grade material will go through the plant this year. We are not going to leave it on the ground as we finish Stage H and draw down the stockpiles, whatever comes out of Stage H, we'll end up predominantly through the plant this year. The highest grade will go first. And that's what's driving the all-in sustaining costs for the year.

And last question, just anything lumpy to note in your guidance through the year. I mean, obviously, you had a major shut at Cowal last year, which was sort of struggled that March, April period. Is there anything material that you'd like to call out that maybe people should think about on just sequencing grade or shots or anything through the year. Matt, do you want to just touch on the key shutdowns because I don't think there's anything material other than that. Have lost you, Matt?

My apologies Yes. No, I have still had my button pressed on mute in front of me. No, there's nothing that's materially lumpy as the normal shutdown processes every couple of months at the different plants probably one of the bigger items might be the Red Lake tails treatment plan, but -- and that was largely in the first quarter of this year. Outside of that, there's nothing that stands out. OPC will continue as per normal through the course of the year. Northparkes, we've got a couple of tailings lift in terms of the infill. But again, it should be relatively steady. And then Mungari would be the same Castle Hill and the normal bits and pieces. So no, nothing hugely lumpy then.

The only thing just to take there, Dan, is the second half of the year. Mungari is when it ramps to the $200 million. So you see a pickup there. And then you obviously see some slightly lower at, say, Cowal and certainly at Northparkes as they finish processing the E31 material. So that's the only sort of thing you'd see second half versus first half. But when we look at a quarter-on-quarter at a group level, there's not going to be a lot of variability.

So our next question comes from Andrew Bowler with Macquarie.

I think you've answered most of the operational questions I had. So maybe just moving to some financial ones and not that you might have to take some notice. But just sort of looking at your guidance for D&A for FY '26 up a little bit on a per ounce basis from last year. Can you just give us a bit of an indication as to where that will be for the next few years? Is that something you expect to be up at around $1,000 an ounce for the next few years? Or is there a roll-off expected to take place in terms of D&A, please?

Thanks, Andrew. The -- my answer to that is it would be good that we can continue to grow the resource base and therefore, you amortize it over a longer period. So that will be the one key driver to it. I think what you're seeing there is you've got the higher rates at Red Lake and Northparkes. But I think as we can grow the resource base, it will come down. I don't see it changing until that's in place. There's nothing else that's going to drive the D&A profile more than that.

Your question comes from Baden Moore with CLSA.

Thanks for the great results. I just noticed a lot of questions from the sector around -- or investors on cost inflation. And you've highlighted you've managed to control costs to sort of 4%. I was wondering if you had any comments on how you see costs moving more broadly in the global sector, whether you're sort of -- how much do you think you're outperforming or what are the key drivers from that perspective? And then just a second one would be just around your growth CapEx pipeline. I mean, you've got a lot of cash coming in. Do you think your plate is full in terms of your CapEx pipeline from an organic perspective at this point?

Thanks, Baden. In terms of cost inflation, I think when we look at it, labor is 50% of our cost base. We've got assets on the East Coast of Australia, West Coast and Canada. And they are a little bit different in terms of what's happening in the market. But overall, we'll see that moving 3.5%, 4.5% and it's 50% of our cost base. What will happen in the next 1 to 2 years after this year is going to depend on where inflation is in each of the economies and what is happening in terms of demand in the industry. So we believe that, that is about right. I mean our focus is heavily on the variable component. So we're able to keep it within a tight band that's linked to the inflation rates. There are other costs. We've seen some costs coming down in the last few months, but we're certainly seeing other costs keeping at or below CPI. So our expectations 4% this year, it was 5% last year on our operating costs, we would see it's probably going to be around the 3% to 4% for the next couple of years. And our focus is more around productivity. In terms of the CapEx, yes, we've got the capacity, yes, the prices are holding up. But I think our projects are well sequenced and that $750 million to $950 million isn't change as Mungari is just finished coal will ramp up then next year, we've got a decision on Northparkes. So those projects are more around when we need to do them, not just because we've got the money, and that's going to be the discipline we keep applying to it.

Your next question comes from David Coates with Bell Potter Securities.

Congrats on our record results and expansion. Speaking of capital management, it's a bit of a so question, but maybe an opportunity to, I guess, reinforce that message of it. But we've seen some of your peers increasing -- sorry, lowering cutoff grades to extend mine lives increased production, the potential sacrificing margins. How have you guys kind of consider that sort of temptation, I guess, in the higher gold price environment?

Yes. Look, for us, that's not something that we heavily focus on, Dave. I mean we've lifted our MROR pricing this year in line with what's happened with inflation and the capital that's needed to bring those ounces on. But other than that, or $2,500 an ounce and spots $5,000 plus we're not doing that. Now as we mine out areas, certainly, we'll take material that if it's economic right now and put that through, but we're not really changing dramatically our mine plans just because of where the price is today.

Cool. And is that really just sort of that focus on maintaining margins as you sort of talked about a couple of times or quite a bit on the call?

Yes, I think that's right, Dave. If we look at it over the last 10 years, we've been able to outperform our peers in terms of margin year in, year out, and that's going to be maintained going forward.

There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Conway for closing remarks.

Thank you, Kelly, and thank you for everyone for joining us on the call today. We're very pleased to have delivered an excellent set of results for FY '25 instead of out doing the same but at a higher gold price, delivering more cash this year and doing it safely. So thank you for your time.

That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Evolution Mining June 2025 Quarter Results. [Operator Instructions]

I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Lawrie Conway, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Mel, and good morning, everyone. I'm joined today on the call by Matt O'Neill, our Chief Operating Officer; Glen Masterman, our VP, Discovery; and Peter Rocio O'Connor, our GM, Investor Relations.

Today, we released our June quarterly report and an exploration update, which will be the reference point for the call. Glen will take you through the great exploration results we've seen at Mungari and Northparkes, which is providing us with confidence about further resource growth at both operations a little bit later.

The June quarter has been another busy and successful quarter at Evolution. It rounded out what has been an excellent year for us. Upfront, I want to thank all of our employees and contractors who have enabled us to safely deliver on our plan in a much more consistent and reliable way.

The 3 charts on the first page of the report and the sustainability chart on Page 2 perfectly depict the year's performance, including the consistency quarter-on-quarter. With our TRIF improving 35% over the prior year and reaching its lowest point at just under 5%, it does mean that we have delivered our plan with a strong focus on safety. We have met our original group guidance, generating record cash flow, which has hit the bank account to further improve the balance sheet flexibility.

We produced 182,000 ounces of gold and 19,000 tonnes of copper at an all-in sustaining cost of $1,562 per ounce. For the year, we produced 751,000 ounces of gold, 76,000 tonnes of copper at an all-in sustaining cost of $15.72 per ounce for continuing operations. It is to be noted that the all-in sustaining cost included an additional $40 to $45 per ounce for royalties that were due to the higher-than-planned gold price. However, we will take the net additional revenue of $950 per ounce any day. You'll see the word record multiple times in the report. This is because we have broken many, be they safety, operational and financial.

Our group cash flow for the quarter was $308 million at a margin of over $1,700 per ounce. For the year, we generated just shy of $800 million of cash at an achieved gold price that is $800 per ounce below the current spot. The group cash flow was underpinned by the $2.3 billion of operating cash flow generated during the year.

I want to call out Cowal in terms of the operational cash flow. Ten years ago, tomorrow, we received New South Wales government consent to acquire Cowal and a week later, we took ownership. We paid just over $700 million to acquire the operation. This investment and all subsequent investment has been repaid. Last year, several people said that the best days of Cowal may be behind it. While in FY '25, it delivered $855 million in operating cash flow, more than we paid for the asset and $600 million of net mine cash flow. Having approved the OPC project in April with a 35% to 70% rate of return, it is abundantly clear that Cowal has many more decades of significant contribution to Evolution.

We ended the year with $760 million in the bank. To evidence our continued discipline to capital management, we repaid all of our FY '26 debt commitments of $145 million on top of the $75 million FY '25 commitments. We also paid our 24th consecutive dividend during the quarter. This financial performance resulted in our gearing improving to 15%, and we are now back in the normal operating gearing range. We should remember that our gearing was 25% at the start of the year which means we have improved by 10 percentage points or a 40% reduction. We successfully renewed our $525 million revolver facility through until August 2028 and this facility remains undrawn.

A couple of highlights during the quarter included the early commencement of commissioning of the plant expansion at Mungari, the approval of the Cowal OPC project and the appointment of [ Fran Summerhayes ] as our CFO. I'm looking forward to Fran joining us in September.

Turning to our FY '26 group guidance. We have released our key group metrics today and will provide full details with our financial results next month. In short, the way I would describe the FY '26 group guidance is a rent and repeat of what we did in FY '25 to safely deliver high-margin significant cash flow. Our group production is guided at 710,000 to 780,000 ounces of gold and 70,000 to 80,000 tonnes of copper, which is the same as last year. The difference will be in where the production comes from this year.

In Mungari, we'll be ramping up to the 200,000 ounce rate, while Cowal will be completing the mining of the ore in Stage H, Northparkes completed mining of E31 open pits in FY '25, and Ernest Henry will see planned lower grades. We have continued our focus on costs and expect to see about a 4% inflation impact, which equates to between $105 and $125 per ounce.

Cowal and Northparkes will be utilizing a larger proportion of stockpile ore during FY '26 that was predominantly built up during FY '25. Due to the completion of Stage 8 and the E31 pits. This will result in a higher noncash cost component of the all-in sustaining cost in the order of $75 to $90 per ounce. These 2 items are the drivers to the movement from the FY '25 all-in sustaining cost to FY '26, which is guided at $17.20 to $18.80 per ounce.

I note that a number of analysts are quoting a 15% increase in our all-in sustaining cost. However, our all-in sustaining cost is reported on a by-product basis. These 2 changes I just spoke about are the main drivers to the FY '26 all-in sustaining cost change, of which the cash component is increasing due to inflation by 4%. This equates to $85 million to $95 million cash impact on our operating spend of around $2.1 billion. It is not a 15% change.

The movement in our operating cost equates to $130 to $140 per ounce change in the gold price. And remember that the spot price is $800 per ounce higher than what we achieved last year. Therefore, we could make up the operating cost increase in the first quarter of FY '26 if the gold price holds at the current levels for this quarter.

Our FY '26 all-in sustaining cost guidance will still see us as one of the lowest cost producers in the sector. Our group capital investment is guided at $780 million to $980 million, which at the midpoint will be around $200 million lower than our FY '25 investment. As we head into FY '26 with a continued focus on safe, consistent and reliable delivery, achieving our plan will result in another year of significant with material upside at the spot gold price.

With that, I'll now hand over to Matt to take you through the operational performance.

Thank you, Lawrie. As noted, the final quarter of financial year '25 capped off a great year for our operations, with all sites safely delivering to plan. Over the 2025 financial year, as noted earlier, we set a number of new records for safety, production and financial outcomes. As I talked to at the last quarterly update, the consistency and predictability we are seeing in the operations now is built on the back of teamwork and collaboration, not just at the operations, but more broadly across the wider Evolution team. and is a credit to everyone involved.

Our goal remains the same. We say, we do, we deliver, and I'm very pleased to say that I think the Evolution team has done that this year. We placed a strong focus on safety and sustainability over the course of the year. And pleasingly, this effort has shown in the results we have achieved with the headline number being the 35% improvement in our TRIF. And pleasingly, all of our operations contributed to this. The rigorous and disciplined approach to safety from everyone is evident across both the leading and lagging indicators. The TRIF noted before is our key lagging indicator. And one of the key leading indicators that we use is outstanding material risk actions, and I'm happy to be able to say that this set at 0 outstanding actions as of the end of the financial year.

We also achieved a number of operational milestones during the quarter. Most pleasingly, in the year where we saw a rising gold price, we achieved our full year guidance for production, ensuring we bank the benefits of the high gold price as evidenced in the financial results. Mungari 4.2 commissioning continued with ramp-up to full production well advanced, and we commenced the OPC project at Cowal post Board approval in the March quarter.

There are a few items that are worth calling out in our group production numbers for the June quarter, and these are: the mill shutdown at Cowal, which saw the reduced output from the operation over that quarter; the commissioning of the new mill at Mungari, which as you can see in the quarterly numbers for that operation is starting to show the benefit; the continued consistent performance at Red Lake, which this year had its best year under Evolution ownership and set a number of records, including net mine cash flow ore mined and processed and gold produced. Also worthy of a call out is the continued cash generation from Mt Rawdon, which continues to contribute to the group.

Moving into the financial year '26, we're in a good position to repeat financial year '25. And the operational focus remains the same, continued safe delivery to plan. We have exciting long-life operations, each with opportunities to grow or extend as evidenced by the exploration announcements Glen will talk to next. and also the project pipeline noted in our quarterly announcement. We will continue to do the work required to ensure we achieve the full potential of each of our operations.

I'll now hand over to Glen to walk through the exploration updates.

Thank you, Matt, and good morning, everyone. I'd like to turn your attention to our exploration announcement, which was released this morning in addition to the June quarterly report. Firstly, I want to take you back to August 2023 when we first introduced the Genesis discovery at our Mungari site visit during diggers and dealers that year. A few of you will remember the revealing of the gold-rich stockworks land along the wall of the ore drive, which signified the very top of the newly discovered Genesis pain.

Since then, our drilling has also discovered the Solomon vein shown in Figure 1 of this morning's release, which is parallel to and in the hang wall of the Genesis orebody. Together, we had reported a mineral resource of over 300,000 ounces of gold at an average grade of 10 grams per tonne contained in both vein [indiscernible]. The resource and growth potential are situated entirely on our 100% owned tenements at Mungari. We remain very excited about the potential to extend these vein systems along strike and at depth.as we're convinced we have unearthed the new mineralized corridor, which we expect should continue along strike towards the historically mined Barkers ore body shown in Figure 1.

This new search space spans a large volume of prospective geology which had never been effectively tested by previous drilling. We will continue to aggressively explore this area to expand the mineral resource into the untested gap towards markers with the aim of extending high-grade production well into the future. Positive results were also received underneath the Arctic pit, North of Millennium, also shown in Figure 1. The results are significant because we believe we have picked up the very well indebted stretch-like line of load under the pit with lots of room to grow it.

At Northparkes, we have been exploring along the stock margin contact represented by the pink unit in Figure 2. This contact is important because it is a localized in placement of copper-rich porphyries which are preserved at depths very close to surface. Our geological model is predicting the potential for the discovery of additional porphyry targets to be preserved at similar depths to major Tom and E51 in the vastly drilled areas highlighted by the red shapes in Figure 2. The Major Tom and E51 results confirm continuity of grade and volume geometries of copper mineralization at both prospects drilling programs have been extended into the September quarter to ensure the full extent of mineralization will be delineated at both targets before we commence resource modeling and optimization studies.

Elsewhere across the portfolio, Drilling has recommenced at the [ Concare ] North project near Ernest Henry in Queensland. Work is progressing on the recently acquired [ Corella ] project also adjacent to Ernest Henry. We are aiming to develop open pit copper gold drill targets on both projects within haulage distance from Ernest Henry with potential to utilize latent capacity in the processing -- Drilling also commenced in the June quarter on our slate Bay target near Red Lake. Slate Bay is hosted in rocks of similar age to Kinross great Bar deposit which were typically never previously considered to be prospective for gold until the discovery operate there. We have developed a sizable and strong [indiscernible] in this very underexplored rock package only 15 kilometers north of Red Lake.

Key points I want you to take away from the results released this morning are: firstly, that the high grades in drilling at Mungari increase our confidence of being able to sustain for longer the high-grade underground production at current rates or better. And secondly, we have confirmed the geological model at Northparkes that will lead to a potential pipeline of new copper-rich near-surface open pit targets with the ability to offer future operational flexibility and incremental production growth.

And with that, Mel, would you please open the line to questions?

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Kate McCutcheon with Citi.

Good morning, Lawrie and Matt. Congrats on the strong safe results. I guess, across the portfolio, there's organic growth options across each of them. You've guided us to $750 million to $950 million CapEx spend over the next 5 years. And we've got 2. Can you talk through the staging of that CapEx, they start at a high level over that period, what that profile looks like and what projects come in and out or how the priority?

Looks like you want more than just the FY '26 guidance there, Kate. Look, I think our view there is the projects as they go through feasibility and then into execution, they're going to change. So that's why where we stand. Cowal is the main one. It's $430 million over the next 7 years. you'll see a fair portion of that come through over the next, I would say, 2 to 3 years as we do the bond at the north and then this other surface infrastructure and go to the south.

Then the next decision point comes into the Ernest Henry extension and then E22. As you know, we've got the hybrid study, which is -- and that will then be something the Board will consider in the first half of this year and similarly with the extension at Ernest Henry. I think the -- what the study team has been doing at Ernest Henry is working out -- it will now be more trucking -- it's down below the existing 1,200 level. So the capital pushes out a few years, but we need to get that final feasibility study.

So it's a long way of saying, at the moment, that $750 million to $950 million is going to be the average over the next 5 years. As these projects advance, we will be updating on that spend. But I would be taking that as sort of the average over the next 5 years.

And then at Cowal and Northparkes, that noncash component in all-in sustaining class I assume it's larger how that number? Is there anything you can say about that? Or can you talk to tons of stockpiles we should expect for the mills need at Northparkes and Cowal in terms of forecasting next year?

Yes. The short answer to that, Kate, is that it will be at Cowal. When you look at it, we got 1.5 million tonnes of ore at Northparkes from the E31 that will feed through over the course of the year, but the value of that are in terms of the overall production, considering you got 6.5 million tonnes, and most of it coming from the underground on a per ounce basis. I think the -- the only difference you have there is they produce less ounces than Cowal. So on a per ounce basis, it will be a relatively larger amount.

Then if you look at Cowal, we'll be into the third quarter is when we start to move into ore -- sorry, in the stockpile ore only, and that becomes the majority of the feed for the -- basically almost the second half of the year. So that's why it will be the largest proportion of that in to at $70 to $80 an ounce will be at Cowal.

Okay. Got it. But I have to wait until the full year before I will get the numbers by that. Is that right? .

Absolutely, you will. So it's $75 to $90 an ounce. But yes. If you look at it, Kate produces over 300,000 ounces out of 750. So on a per ounce basis in the group impact, it will be the larger portion.

Your next question comes from Daniel Morgan with Barrenjoey.

First question is just on Ernest Henry. I know the extension study is complete did not release to us. And there's a PFS [indiscernible] but for the end of this year. And Lawrie, you just also intimated that there might be a bit more trucking in the near term, which -- if I put all of that together, does that -- is the crusher chamber and associated infrastructure, is that going to be deeper in the mine and therefore, longer life proposition. Is that what we're looking at here?

Thanks, Dan. I'll hand this over to Matt, but just briefly, yes, we will be tracking below and therefore, we have to introduce trucks -- more trucks into Ernest Henry that will look at their capital in FY '26. And that is the reason why the study went for a bit longer is to look at how we can best optimize the orebody and the reason it finishes in the June quarter, but the next board meeting is later in this quarter, and therefore, the Board needs to see the outcomes before the market.

Yes. And without going into all of the detail, thanks Lawrie. But the study, I suppose, high level, and Glen has talked about it as we've gone through, is that there's been more mineralization at Ernest Henry come in. And so that study has included some of that. and that has an impact on what we do there to make sure that we maximize it. So the trucking does buy us a little bit of time. It does obviously tend to lend itself towards what you indicated, where does the crusher go. And that's really the key point of what we're talking about.

But going through the economics, the trucking works quite efficiently because it's not trucking to surface, it's only tracking back to the crushing horizon. I think that's an important point to note of what we're talking about there. But you will see some of that come through and study when it gets released.

And just at Mungari, is there a live update of how well the mill commissioning is going when can we -- when might you expect it to be running at the 4.2 million tonnes in the ramp-up?

Yes, I'll cover that one. It's going pretty well. We had a really good start and sort of a honeymoon period for a commissioning of a mill. Last month, we had a really strong month in terms of throughput. So there's been no major concerns that have come up. I would expect us to start seeing everything come to fruition sometime in the next quarter. But we've been able to achieve throughput and we've been able to achieve recoveries is just sort of betting in some of the things that you find as you commission a plant like that. So no material items that are slowing us down at this stage, which is really good.

And just last question is that Mt Rawdon -- and I appreciate a small asset in the portfolio now, but it looks like you're going to be doing some processing of stockpiles into FY '26. When do you expect last gold production to be? How material is this? And you have provided group guidance for FY '26. I presume it's either a minor contribution to it or it's excluded from cost calculations, et cetera. Can you just outline that?

Yes. Sure, Dan. So what we've seen with where the gold price is sitting there is economic, very low grade material on the ground there at Mt Rawdon, we were able to process that through the last part of FY '25, and we'll go through the first part. So it won't -- it will be very minimal contribution in terms of that $710 million to $780 million. And then in terms of the all-in sustaining costs, we've quoted, that is on the ounces and costs for the continuing operations, so excluding Mt Rawdon.

Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci with Goldman Sachs.

Congrats on the full year results. First one on Northparkes, maybe for Glen, just noting the open pit there is stopped and you got the stockpile material to process this year. Could you just give us a little bit an update on how you're thinking about when the next open pit developed. Is that something for FY '27 or more FY '28 as you chose between sort of E51 and Major Tom or E27?

Sorry, got my mic on now. Yes. Look, I think that's probably a fair timing for the next open pit delivery, and that would be and the E28 Northeast pit. And what we're looking at trying to do with the exploration drilling and subsequent studies is to build this pipeline of open pit targets that we can for the most part, switch on and off when we need them to -- from a sort of flexibility operational standpoint. And if there's opportunities to introduce some production growth, we'll look at that as well.

Great. And that's helpful color. And then maybe just one on cash flow given the focus there, some observations in terms of the quarter, looking like your corporate costs and D&A has stepped up significantly in the fourth quarter. I appreciate you're setting up a Brisbane office, you've got a number of studies running. How much of that step-up is sort of the underlying corporate versus the studies? And what do you think your corporate cost should be on an underlying basis going forward?

Yes. A couple of things in there driving that Hugo is there's some studies work and that we've done that are not being deemed as capital, so they fall into the corporate costs. And then as we get into June, you have a lot of true-ups across all of the departments. And so that's why that was higher in the quarter. And then in the D&A, you've got to take into consideration that we put out the MROR and therefore, you update your DNA for the whole 6 months based on the latest. And so with some of the changes in the MRR, the depreciation per ounce will look a lot higher than normal but the full year D&A gives a fair indication of what they are starting as the base going into '26.

Got it. And then just if I can on the cash flow piece, it looks like your cash tax in the second half was a fair bit lower than what would have been implied by your first half reporting. Do you expect any catch-up there? And then also on working capital, the $100 million build in the quarter. What are the moving pieces in that? And do you expect that to unwind?

Yes. So tax quite simply is that we make our installment payments monthly. and then we make our final payments in the December quarter. So that's why you'll see the second half is generally lower than the first half because you have that final payment for the prior year tax returns in the December quarter. In terms of the working capital, I look at it from an annual basis to start to try and keep it simple. And what we really have is our working capital movement in the year is $25 million, $35 million either inflow or outflow.

But it's heavily impacted on concentrate sales at Ernest Henry and Northparkes nowadays. And when you see in the June quarter, we had a Northparkes shipment that fell from the last week of June into the first week of July. And therefore, the sales, as you'll see for Northparkes for the year were less than the production for the year, and therefore, our receivables were lower. And Ernest Henry, we received a settlement in June that was actually expected in July. So the combination of those reduced our receivables by about $40 million to $60 million, and that would have brought us back into the normal range just in that perspective.

But in addition to the receivables, the June quarter, you'll see that our -- we had a higher major capital spend in the quarter, and that was really related to projects finishing and new projects starting and we've got project client progress claims and deposit requests coming through in the back end of June resulting in higher payables. So you'll see that -- those 2 combined to drive the working capital movement in the June quarter. But as I've said, those concentrate sales are the ones that really drive it on the annual basis.

But as we look forward in the unwind, you'll see we received the payment for that Northparkes shipment in this quarter. and that for that will offset some of the payables that would go out. So you won't see the full $98 million in the September quarter. and concentrate shipments really and the timing of them are the ones that drive our working capital movements quarter-on-quarter.

Your next question comes from Paul Kaner with Ord Minnett.

Firstly, just on Cowal, I think there was an underground roof collapse there back in March. Just sort of want to know what the ground conditions are like there as you continue to ramp up the underground operations? And I guess any learnings or changes in procedures following that incident?

Thanks, Paul. Matt will take that.

Yes. No problems. So yes, without going into a huge amount of detail on the incident, we're still -- it's under investigation at the moment, and then you'll have seen the department notices on that. The -- what we've done in the short term, we did take some actions to stop some of the areas until we finish our investigation around the geotech. Once we've completed that, we changed some standards on ground control in some of the drives depending on the orientation.

But at this stage, that's probably all I can really talk about there. It wasn't -- we haven't seen anything majorly different across the whole operation, if you I mean we did have that as an isolated event, but we have done -- taken steps to make sure we put probably more conservative back into some areas short term.

Yes. No, understood. And then just another 1 just there on the stockpile adjustments for 2016 at both Cowal and Northparkes, just double checking that, that $75 to $90 an ounce that's included in your all-in sustaining cost guidance for '26?

Yes, it is.

Your next question comes from Ben Lyons with Jarden.

Just one further one on the cash flow statement, please. Noting the early repayment of $145 million just given the very attractive structure and cost to offer a lot of your facilities. Just wondering what your intentions may be what you intend on making sure the early debt retirements or possibly just growing the cash balance going forward?

Sorry, Ben, it was just a little bit hard to get that last part of the question.

Just around whether you intend on making further early debt retirements or growing the cash balance.

Yes. Thanks, Ben. No, look, our view is that we'll continue to balance out between the capital investment, the debt repayments and dividends. We don't see a lot of value in building up a large cash balance. As I said, we're back at 15% gearing well into the range that we see as our normal operating. I would expect that we'll continue on reducing those debt term lines earlier.

Your next question comes from Al Harvey with JPMorgan.

Just on FY '26 guidance. Wondering if you could just step us through the downside and upside scenarios that would take you the ends of the 710,000 to 780,000 ounce range. Is it primarily around the speed of the Mungari ramp-up or something else in the portfolio?

Al, I am going to not deflect that one to Matt because I think give you all the downsides and not the upsides. But look, I think we can talk about that in August when we go asset by asset. But our position is that we want to continue what we've done over the last 12 months and really the last 18 months, which is deliver consistently quarter in, quarter out. There are things that can be the downside, but our focus is on just delivery each quarter safely getting those ounces and copper tonnes out.

Sure. And maybe are you able to share the FY '26 copper price and Australian dollar assumptions?

Yes, it's in the report. AUD 4,400 an ounce for the gold royalty price assumption and AUD 14,500 a tonne for our copper byproduct credit.

Your next question comes from Mitch Ryan with Jefferies.

First question. Obviously, the 2 key studies completed during the quarter, still need to go to the Board. So I'm assuming that those -- the CapEx associated with those is excluded from the FY '26 guidance at this point in time. Is that correct?

In terms of studies and the like, they are included is the trucking requirements that we have for Ernest Henry. In terms of E22, nothing material in the guidance and in terms of -- but we're not expecting any execution in FY '26.

Okay. Perfect. And then obviously, the OPC project commenced in the quarter. Have you commenced the bundle will move as part of that? And can you progress in the stage without the bundle or move? .

So the second part, yes, Stage I progresses without the need for the bundle to be a place. And in the first part, we were fortunate we had the Board out there in the last week of June as part of their annual visit. And a few days afterwards when the works on the bundle will commence. So they actually saw the contract of mobilizing the site while we were there in the last week of June.

Okay. I guess we've sort of been given capital numbers, if I recall correctly, around it happening in the dry conditions being conditions. Have we got that sits inside that $430 million.

Yes. So the $430 million allows for the Northern Lake production but to be done as a wet move and the southern that's intended as a dry move, but that's a few years away. And based on where it is, we'd expect the water to have receded enough.

Your next question comes from Andrew Bowler with Macquarie.

Apologies if you've already answered this. I got booted during Dan's questions. The first one for me, you provided some broad color from the major operations into next year. Just wondering if you can provide similar commentary on Red Lake. I mean I think comments in the past is that asset long-term potential of roughly 140,000 ounces per annum. Is that still where the thinking is? And is that the sort of run rate you expect to achieve in '26?

Thanks, Andrew. Sorry, that Dan kicked you off the line. In terms of Red Lake, I'll hand to Matt to talk about the operation and where it's going. I was there a couple of weeks ago and just seeing that they're definitely getting more resilience into the operation and being able to get more consistency. What we want and it hasn't changed for the last 18 months. We want 30,000 to 40,000 ounces quarter in quarter and safely delivered and generating positive cash. We saw that through last year. And Matt, do you just want to talk about then what that does going forward?

Yes. I think you covered it off in terms of -- the real key for Red Lake is about making money. And so that continues to be the focus rather than chasing a target is probably the message to keep giving the team at that operation. And they've been able to do that this year. So the 30 to 40 in each quarter, obviously, you do the math on that and you get your range, but that's still the thinking. It's still probably an exciting asset.

And I know Glen would be pretty keen in terms of geology and what we still see available there, for me, I still look at that as one of the exciting ones. We've got to earn the right and have consistent delivery and making some money to be able to go and chase that. So that's kind of the process for at least the next 12 or 18 months to be at Red Lake.

And on to Mt Rawdon, I mean, last quarter, you commented that you were going to see stockpile production in the fourth quarter of FY '25, you're doing a final tails dam lift and it seems to be an implication that -- sorry, an inference that production will continue into '26. I assume that's the material and is that included in the overall group production number for FY '26?

Yes. Andrew, that was a question of Dan's. So Mt Rawdon, based on the metal prices, will continue to process some low grade material through the plant because it does make money as a quarter. We'll see that tail off through the next couple of quarters. The ounces are included in the 710,000 to 780,000. They're not material ounces in terms of a group perspective. It will be a lot less than what we did the 35,000 ounces last year. And in terms of our all-in sustaining cost, the ounces and costs of the other assets are the only ones that are included in terms of the AISC.

Your next question comes from Alex Barkley with RBC.

Lawrie and team, just a quick follow-up question on Red Lake around the reserve rate to line. Are we able to give some breakdown of which mine areas that go at and why was -- why did the update is there now?

Yes. So Alex, you're referring to the MRL reserve grade at Red Lake, just to...

That's right. Apologies. I don't think we've got a call since then. So just interested on the guidance going forward.

Yes. So there's a couple of things to on the reserve grade. And I think what we've done in the underground is really to sort of fully understand the full potential of the resource and how that's going to convert to a reserve. So a couple of the drivers there that have really sort of driven will affect impacted cutoff grades. So we've seen inflation come in.

But also as we've started to open up in the underground, we've seen that we've had swings and roundabouts, and we're not seeing the type of continuity that we had assumed in the drilling space at the time. So these have driven -- these have driven changes to both the resource and the reserve. And so what we've done on the reserve is to look at the resource to sort of maximize the full reserve potential.

Now in fact, what that enables us to do is then to expand that we're currently mining to. And as Lawrie mentioned earlier, in terms of what we've been doing in the last 18 months, it's really to start to look at how we -- how to generate cash flow and that is what that is switching us to is mining at a higher cutoff grade, mining it more selectively as we sort of progress at Red Lake.and mining to a grade that's in the plan is going to be higher than the reserve.

Now what enables us to do that in the plan is that we do have a resource that sits there at higher grade. We need to upgrade the drilling classification on that. So we've doubled the drilling budget in FY '26 to enable us to do that. That will convert to reserve and allow us to then sort of narrow that gap between what we see in the reserve grade, which is lower than what we had in the plan.

Your next question comes from Matthew Frydman with MST Financial.

Sure. Lawrie and team, I might continue with Glen while he's got the mic. And can I ask on Mungari in the context of some of your commentary already this morning and also the recent MROR update. Obviously, you're finding more high-grade underground material from Genesis continuing to add tonnes to the reserve there. So I guess, looking forward and now that the mill project is largely completed, how do you think about the splits in terms of feed between underground, open pits from Castle Hill and other areas?

Does that change going forward now that you've got more confidence in the underground. I think previously, you said you expect it to be about an 80-20 split between open pit and underground. As I said, does that change now going forward? Is there any consideration in that of feeding 100% evolution owned dirt versus EKJV dirt into the mill. And I guess bigger picture is the near-term target still that sort of circa 200,000 ounces? Or as you suggest, Glen, does this discovery more kind of add to the runway or add to the length of time that you can operate at that level in the future? Does it sustain that production level for longer?

Yes, Matt, Glen will talk about the exploration potential. I think in terms of an operating standpoint, the 80-20 is still the expectations in the plan of the split between the open pit and the underground. Glen's role is to get the 20% to 30%, and therefore, we get more production out of Mungari. In terms of the joint venture, I mean, our EKJV, operates, it's operating well. We do the campaign processing of that material, that will continue as we go forward even under the expanded plant. Do you want to talk about that ground?

Yes. And I think in terms of what we saw, Matt, you referenced the sort of the growth in the resource and the reserve in our MROR statement. A lot of that was driven in the open pits we have captured some of the resource growth that I spoke about in the underground this morning. That is included, but most of that growth was driven the open pits, and that was with the drill bit and metal prices has also helped increase there. I think from what we're seeing at the moment in the extension of these veins is and continuing to delineate and grow the resource is really, really important to us.

And as Lawrie alluded to, I think the first trick that we want to be able to succeed at is actually extending that 20% contribution for as long as we can into the future. And what we're doing with the results at the moment is confirming we can. So we want to be able to get that underground production to match the open pit production in terms of its ultimate mine life so that we always have that 80-20 contribution.

Now assuming we're good enough, and we make more discoveries in the underground, which we believe we will then there's the opportunity to think about how we all increase the underground production rate. And I think what the result both from Genesis and its extension towards Barkers and then at Arctic, which is further north of Millennium. We're starting to see that we have that opportunity to deliver on both fronts.

Yes, understand. Glen, that's pretty clear. Can I ask just a quick one while we're on Mungari. The processing cost and all-in sustaining cost of $91 an ounce. I'm assuming that, that largely represents the capitalization of most of the processing costs, while obviously, the mill expansion is ramping up, and you've alluded to commercial production in the first half. So should we expect that processing costs as a function of all in sustaining cost will lift once you declare commercial production, but obviously offset by the growth CapEx rolling off? I hope that all made sense, but I'm just wondering what the $91 an ounce relates to?

Short answer there, Matt, is no. It isn't the capital for the plant is in the major capital section of the cost per ounce. The higher cost per ounce at Mungari is on 2 things. You're putting -- you are in a commissioning phase and you're putting through lower grade material through that phase. And then we also have toll treated some material that was of our old low-grade stockpile material that will come through into a processing cost as well. But what you'll see in FY '26 as we move to the 4.2 million tonne rate, the cost per ounce will reduce, particularly in the processing area. That's where we'll get the economies of scar.

Yes. Okay. I understand, Lawrie. Perhaps I didn't express it clearly. But in the quarter, you declared that your processing cost per ounce at Mungari was $91 an ounce, which seems artificially low. So I'm just trying to understand what drove that, whether that was recognizing revenue.

In that regard, yes, some of those commissioning costs get backed out and capitalized. So though you meant the actual construction costs.

So yes, that Yes. No. Sorry, I mean -- I meant the impact to all-in sustaining costs. So I assume partly that capitalization continues until you declare commercial production?

Correct.

Okay. I understand. And then maybe just lastly, I suppose, on capital management and capital returns. Obviously, you've mentioned on the call that you're quite comfortable with the balance sheet flexibility. Obviously, the gearings come right back into the range. Just thinking about how that translates to capital returns at the end of the financial year. Obviously, you enjoy a tax shield benefit on some of those cash flows that you generate, particularly out of Northparkes. I guess wondering whether, in your view, the franking balance and generation support continuing to pay out 50% of cash flow as the policy sort of dictates? Or are there other options? Remind us of where buybacks sit in terms of the capital return framework. And is that something the Board might consider?

Yes. A short answer to that, Matt, is we -- each time we sit down with the board and look at our policy. We'll do that in August. I think the last couple of halves, we've made the call that our policy, we think, is working well, where 50% of our cash flows are going back to our shareholders, and we use the balance for the reinvestment in the business. reducing our gross debt levels. I don't think you're going to see much of a change.

Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Conway for closing remarks.

Thank you, Mel, and thank you, everyone, for taking the time to join us on the call today. We certainly had a great quarter to finish the successful year, which improved in not only the safety and the consistency but also in the exploration and projects areas and generating significant cash flow as we've seen today. We'll continue to apply that cost and capital discipline, and we'll see that flow through into FY '26 and look forward to updating you next month on our full year financial results. Thank you.

That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.