Boss Energy (ASX:BOE) Q1 2027 Earnings Call

0:00 Thank you Darcy. Good morning everyone and thank you for joining the BOSS Energy September quarterly results call. Joining me on the call this morning is Justin Laird, our CFO. I'll take you through our first quarter performance, the transition underway at Honeymoon and the work progressing across our regional growth projects and we'll take questions at the end of the call. Turning to slide two. The September quarter was pivotal for BOSS. We delivered the new feasibility study and updated the honeymoon mineral resource and established the foundation for the operation's future. We also set out our ambition to build a larger, low-cost, longer-life uranium business through a regional production hub.

0:46 Delivered ahead of schedule, the new feasibility study confirms the viability of the wide-space wellfield design. Thank you very much. At our September market day, we outloaned our aspiration to bring Honeymoon, Jason's Deposit and Gould's Dam together through one processing plant, making greater use of the infrastructure we've already built. Our aspiration is to produce 2.5 million pounds annually at an all-in sustaining cost of around $65 per pound by early 2030s.

1:37 Achieving this will materially increase production, reduce unit cost and extend operating life. We also began the transition to wide space wellfield design. Flushing commenced on EKT1, our first wide space wellfield and early performance has supported confidence in the design. The first leaking results were expected in the December quarter and will provide the next operating evidence against our study assumptions. Alongside these strategic milestones, Honeymoon delivered 359,000 pounds of drum uranium supported by a record flow despite rainfall contributing to 19 days of lost production. Production and costs were consistent with expectations and FY27 guidance remains unchanged.

2:28 We finished the September quarter with approximately $195 million in cash Investments and Uranium Inventory and No Debt, supporting our capacity to fund the transition. The quarter established a clear direction for BOSS. Our task now is to turn that technical foundation into consistent operating performance, round-up our production and advance the regional opportunities that can build the long-term shareholder value. Turning to slide three and honeymoon production. Drummed production was £359,000, broadly consistent with the June quarter. On-exchange production was £337,000.

3:15 Record flow helped offset the expected decline in average tenner as existing wellfields mature. Heavy rain in August contributed to 19 days of lost production across the quarter. We brought forward some planned shutdown activities during this period. We have several programs of work to build our operational resilience. B6 completed its first full quarter of production. This is the first well field at East Kalkaroo and its performance has been encouraging. It has achieved recovery of approximately half of the resource after 12 poor volumes exchanges with an average leaching solution tenor of 102 ppm.

4:00 Flushing required only 0.6 pore volumes with low calcium levels and acid consumption. For the December quarter we expect production to be broadly consistent with September with higher flows offsetting declining tenor. Full year production guidance remains at 1.25 to 1.3 million pounds. Turning to slide four, we're now implementing the wide space well-filled design as set out in the new feasibility study. Honeymoon's high permeability, hydraulic connectivity, effective confinement, and low acid consumption provides the technical basis for this approach. Wider spacing allows the leaching solution more time to interact with the mineralization and assess a larger Thank you for joining us.

5:21 The NFS assumes a 49-metre injector to extractor spacing. EKT1 is testing 58-metre injector to extractor spacing, while HMT1 will test 70-metre injector to extractor spacing, allowing us to assess the performance of these wider space wellfields against the study assumptions. Construction continues at HMT1, EKT2 and EKT3. The encouraging leaching performance at B6 together with initial flushing response at EKT1 reinforces our confidence in the technical work underpinning the new feasibility study. Turning to slide 5. The water treatment plant upgrades are a key enabler of the production ramp-up outlined in the new feasibility study. Both stages remain on track.

6:13 Before a new wellfield starts leaching, we use treated water to condition and flush the wellfield. This manages calcium and chlorides. The water treatment plant supplies the RO permeate water required for wellfield flushing while also meeting ongoing plant requirements. Water treatment capacity therefore governs how quickly we can bring a new wellfield into production. The NFS assumes approximately 8 new wellfields each year and each preconditioning and flushing takes approximately about 45 days. The staged water treatment upgrades are built into the development schedule and the resulting production profile as outlined in the new feasibility study. Stage 1 improves the capacity and availability of the existing plant and we expect to complete this work in June quarter of FY27.

7:04 The work addresses known deep bottlenecks, improves our cleaning requirements, softening settling performance and hydraulic constraints. Stage 2 provides major capital expansion required for the lifelong mine schedule, with completion expected in March quarter of FY28. This is targeting approximately 300 cubic metres per hour of RO feed. We also see opportunities to improve the ramp-up by reducing the water requirements for first flushing and well-filled conditioning. The NFS assumes one pore volume of flushing compared with historic operating averages around about 0.7. We have also commenced studies to better understand calcium distribution and behaviour and to assess alternative approaches to acidification and preconditioning.

7:53 The aim is to reduce our permeate demand and potentially decouple water wellfield conditioning from water treatment plant circuit, providing greater flexibility in bringing on new wellfields online. Turning to slide six and cost. C1 cost for the quarter was $47 per pound compared with $45 in June. All in sustaining costs was $79 per pound compared with $70 in June. Both measures are below the four-year guidance range. We expect unit cost to increase as average tenant declines through the year. We are on track to remain within our FY27 guidance range for cost. Total capital expenditure was $13 million.

8:40 This comprised $9 million of sustaining expenditure, primarily EKT1 first field costs and construction activities across the new wellfields, and $4 million on processing facilities. Sustaining expenditure was slightly below expectation because rain temporarily interrupted drilling and construction. Process facility expenditure was in line with expectations and remains weighted towards the second half of FY27. Four-year capital guidance remains at $58 to $65 million, comprising $33 to $37 million of sustaining capital and $25 to $28 million for process facilities. As outlined in August, FY27 is a transactional year.

9:30 Turning to slide seven. Our balance sheet supports the transition while retaining exposure to uranium price. We sold 301,000 pounds of uranium during the quarter, generating sale revenues around about $35.2 million. The average realized price was 117 Australian dollars per pound or 81.8 US dollars per pound, up approximately 9% from the June quarter. We expect stronger realized pricing in the December quarter at approximately 87 to 89 US dollars per pound. At the end of September, We held $39.2 million in cash, $31.4 million in investments and other liquid assets, and uranium inventory carried at $124 million.

10:21 Together, these totaled $194.9 million with no debt. Cash decreased by $10.5 million during the quarter as we continued the fund operations and capital investment. At the same time, uranium inventory increased by approximately 60,000 pounds to 1.641 million pounds. The chart illustrates the potential market value of the uranium inventory. At a uranium price of US $90 per pound and exchange rate of 70 US cents, the inventory would be valued at approximately Australian $211 million dollars. The accounting carry value remains the lower of the cost and net realised value.

11:12 Our un-contracted position and uranium inventory provides commercial flexibility and exposure to stronger uranium prices. Our balance sheet supports funding the transition to wide space well-filled spacing from existing resources and ongoing sales. Turning to slide eight. As we outlined at our market day, our regional hub strategy aims to build a longer life, low cost operation by bringing three deposits together through the existing processing plant at Honeymoon. The NFS provides the foundation for this strategy, which just covers the Honeymoon deposit. Jason's deposit and Gould's Dam contains a further £45.1 million of reported mining mineral resources, bringing the total combined resources across three deposits to £65.9 million.

12:13 We are assessing how Jason's and Gould's Dam could utilise the infrastructure and processing capacity already established at Honeymoon, reducing the capital investment required to develop these deposits. The studies include a trunk line connecting Jason's to Honeymoon and a satellite loaded resident facility at Goulds Dam for transport to the existing plant. This would allow uranium recovery at both deposits to be processed through Honeymoon's downstream facility. The potential benefits include lower capital requirements through the use of existing infrastructure, staged investment at each of the deposits as they advance, and greater operational flexibility.

12:58 Increasing production through a shared plant would also spread our fixed cost over more pounds, supporting lower unit cost. Our aspiration is to increase production to 2.5 million pounds per annum at an all-in sustaining cost of approximately Australian $65 per pound by the early 2030s, while extending the operation life into the 2040s. Turning to slide 9, we progress the approvals and technical work required to define the development pathways for each deposit. For the Honeymoon Mine Extension, we have submitted the EPBC referral and expect a referral decision in the December quarter. Preparation of the mining lease application continues.

13:47 At Jason's deposit, technical work required for the referral stage is complete. Environmental studies are nearing completion and the EPBC referral documentation is well advanced. Diamond core drilling has commenced with 15 holes planned for approximately 1,900 metres to improve our understanding of hydrogeology, mineralogy and mineralisation. A resource delineation program comprising of about 137 drill holes for approximately 15,600 metres is scheduled to commence in the December quarter. The program aims to improve confidence in the existing resource and increase the resource through testing known mineralisation extensions. At Goulds Dam, studies are underway to access the preferred processing configuration, including the opportunity to load uranium onto resin on site and transport it back to Honeymoon for processing.

14:46 Turning to slide 10. At Altamisa, where BOSS holds a 30% interest with Encore Energy being the operator. Altamisa produced 10,000 pounds during the quarter on a 100% basis, compared with 45,000 pounds in the June quarter. BOSS received no product during the quarter. State permitting delays prevented new wellfields from coming online in time to replace declining production from existing wellfields. Plant production has now stopped pending the availability of new wellfields. PAA3 is expected to commence production in December quarter followed by PAA in the March quarter, both subject to permitting. Securing these approvals and bringing the new wellfields online remains the immediate priorities for Encore.

15:37 Turning to slide 11. This was a significant quarter for BOSS. We delivered production and cost consistent with our expectations and completed the new feasibility study for honeymoon. Drawing on historic operating data and detailed technical analysis, the new feasibility study established the foundation for the next phase of development. At our market day, we also outlined our ambition to build a longer life, lower cost operation through a regional processing hub. We're now putting that work into practice through the transition to wide space wellfield spacing. Flushing commenced at EKT1, construction progressed across the new wellfields and both stages of water treatment upgrades remain on track.

16:27 These activities advance the production ramp up as outlined in the new feasibility study. FY27 production guidance remains unchanged at 1.25 to 1.3 million pounds with C1 costs of $51 to $56 per pound and all in sustaining cost of $83 to $92 per pound. Our debt-free balance sheet supports this work while our uncontracted position retains exposure to stronger uranium pricing. In parallel, we are advancing studies to improve and approvals for the regional hub, taking a distant approach to capital as each opportunity develops. I would also like to welcome Peter Botton, who commenced as chair on the 30th of September, and thank Wyatt Buck for his contribution as chair and his continued service to the board.

17:20 This quarter established a clear pathway forward. We recognise that confidence we will build through consistent delivery, operating safely, delivering the transition reliably and progressively improving our cost structure and production profile. This is our focus for the quarters ahead. Thank you. And with that, I'll hand you back to Darcy for questions. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Hugo Nicolacci with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

18:05 Morning Matt and team. Thanks for the update this morning. Maybe just firstly on Honeymoon, your production in the quarter for 1Q is sort of well above your implied guidance range for the full year just by bringing some of that maintenance forward and you're guiding to a consistent IX production next quarter which would then imply obviously a step down in the second half. Can you just walk us through how much of that conservatism versus uncertainty around the grade into that second half outlook?

18:34 Yeah, good question there, Hugo. Look, we provided that guidance, the 1.25 to 1.3, but ultimately we're always trying to do better. And when we've outlined the new feasibility study, we've also outlined opportunities to accelerate that ramp-up profile. So what we'll see for FY27 is we'll see the grade decline slightly as we transition to these wider space wellfields. So trying to get that transition right is quite important for us. But ultimately, too, if we can start to drive some of the optimisation work programs we're doing on top of what we delivered at the new feasibility study, then I'm hopeful some of that may come into the back end of FY27.

19:25 That's helpful. And then for the second one, just on your contract book, you've guided to realising $87 to $89 a pound next quarter, and then the $124,000 a quarter for the legacy contract in the second half. Can you just confirm that's essentially 100% of that legacy contract for FY27 gets delivered in the second half, so that December quarter realisation is essentially entirely at spot?

19:49 Hi, Hugo, Justin here. Yeah, so you're right. For the legacy contract deliveries in 27, that represents 100% of the legacy contract deliveries for calendar year 2027. Got it.

20:03 So then for calendar year 2026, does that mean you've met your contract deliveries already at the September quarter and then the December quarter is all spot pricing?

20:20 yeah for the Ford calendar year 2026 our contract book is mostly full so we currently have executed Fords pre-executed Ford sales for the Q4 calendar year 2026 got it that's helpful and then just last one if I can on Ultimessa production they're halted can you just talk us through what your understanding of the timeline is from here and

20:49 Does this potentially add additional costs when you start to add wells back in and bring the plant back online versus if production was just continued rather than stopped?

21:01 Yeah, I'll answer some of that question. So final permitting on PAA3 extension and PAA8, they're expected in December and March quarters respectively. As those permits come in place, production profiles would ramp up. it would be fair to think that cost structures while you're in this intermediate phase of not producing plus ramping up would be impacted.

21:28 That's helpful. I'll pass it on. Thanks, guys.

21:32 Sorry, Hugo? Thank you. Okay, thanks. Your next question comes from Alastair Rankin with RBC. Please go ahead.

21:40 Oh, thanks. Good morning, Matt and Justin. Just the first one about EKT1 well-filled. You said that the early flushing has supported confidence in the new feasibility study design. I respect that you're going to give a bit more detail next quarter, but so far, can you just talk through what you've actually observed so far that has allowed you to make that statement about supporting confidence?

22:07 Yeah. Hi, Alastair. Yeah, so commentary in the quarter was we've got confidence on the initial results of what we're seeing out of flushing. We haven't completed all the flushing, but we expect to be in a position to do that shortly and bring NKT1 online and producing again shortly. Why we say there's confidence? And there's a couple of things that drive that language and why. Results today, we see contact between injector and extractor wells. So we know we've got hydraulic connectivity on that spacing because we've seen the contact between those. What we've also seen is pH come down and sulfates increase. And most importantly, we've seen that over the expected timeframes and pore volumes that we've seen.

23:00 We've assumed. So with pH coming down, contact between injector and extractors, pH of the wellfield now sitting about two and achieving those over the right times and pore volumes leads us to say that statement that we've got confidence given initial data of what we have at the moment. In terms of what we'll do is we'll provide more data in the next quarter because by that time we'll have initial leaching data come through.

23:33 that's really helpful, appreciate that and look forward to next quarter just also on Wellfield B6 I think you mentioned it recovered about half its resource after 12 PBE for volume exchanges which looks like a pretty good result and then also low asset consumption as well so I guess how does that compare with the model how does that compare with what your model was predicting and

24:01 I guess what does that tell you about East Kalkaroo relative to the Honeymoon domain because that's where the upcoming EKT well build has been built Yeah, it's roughly similar to the model similar to the model but slightly better than what we've assumed under the model while we have that commentary in there is there's always this uncertainty whether East Kalkaroo is different to Honeymoon how it will perform and the result to that is look We think East Kalkaroo will perform as well or if not better than natural honeymoon domain. Honeymoon domain from a system and mineralisation perspective is probably the most complicated part of honeymoon, although it's the highest grade.

24:46 But from a leaching characteristic perspective, it's probably the most complex of the full honeymoon deposit.

24:55 Gotcha. That's really helpful. Thanks. Thank you. Your next question comes from Branko Skocic with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

25:08 Yeah, morning guys. Just on honeymoon, I was keen to understand your views around recoveries and how you expect these to trend as the lower-grade material comes through the plant over the coming quarters. I've noted that recoveries have been stepping down only marginally just as the tenders have been declining over the last six to nine months.

25:26 Yeah, it's roughly in line with expectation at the processing plant. We have been doing a little bit of trials on our elution and elution circuits and sequencing. So what that has done is led to some variability and a little bit of recovery associated with the front end of the process plant as we continue to optimize because we also brought in all those additional columns. It's important to note that the front end of the plant, that recovery just gets recirculated. The key recovery element where you lose metal is in the precip circuit and that's holding good.

26:11 That makes sense. And yeah, second question for me, it was just on Ultamesa and I'm really just trying to get a sense for your go-forward strategy here and whether you'd be open to putting the asset under strategic review.

26:25 As we talked in the market day, our immediate focus for myself and Justin and the team has really been on honeymoon. But now that we've got that feasibility behind us, it's something that we would consider associated with Altamisa. One element I'm keen to ensure that we always do is as a business, we remain disciplined on capital. We need to generate shareholder returns on our capital investment and make sure that that's part of us as an organisation, us as a culture and us as a business. So it's fair to say if we're not seeing capital returns or expected capital returns for shareholders, then as a business, we've got to make decisions.

27:15 That would definitely make sense. If I could just stay on that point just for a second. I'm just getting a sense for, I guess, your quarterly cash contributions towards that JV, which is a little bit difficult to see in the accounts. I'm sure it's in there.

27:27 Hi, Franco. Justin here. Thanks for the question. So you're right. So not much cash contributed to the joint venture. We do have a, you would have seen in the June 26 accounts that there's a payable recorded to the joint venture. So that payable has grown a little bit during the quarter, but largely remains consistent with what was in the June accounts. Makes sense. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Daniel Roden with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

28:07 Hey guys, thanks for taking the question. I just wanted to ask on, I guess, your cash and inventory balance, kind of going back to your strategy day and your strategic outlook, you have a target to be at a minimum $50 million of cash, which we're under at the moment. And I guess noting that there's a bit of capital commitments going into Honeymoon Widespace and ultimately send in a bit of capital as well. How do you think about buffering your liquidity and your cash balance from a capital management perspective?

28:49 Hi Daniel, Justin here. Thanks for your question. Our capital priorities will remain consistent with that market day. you would have seen that during the quarter cash balance reduced to $40 million and we accumulated that additional 60,000 pounds of inventory. We try to balance that cash requirement and sales as needed. So as an example for the quarter, had we sold those 60,000 pounds during the quarter, we would have achieved a realized price around that 82 US a pound. By accumulating that 60,000 pounds, it would probably mean that we'll achieve if we sell those pounds in either Q4 calendar year 26 or Q1 calendar year 27, will probably receive a realised price in the low 90s.

29:53 So we continue to expect that uranium price to increase and therefore we balance that sales book to match our cash flow profile. So to the extent that capital is lumpy, then we will balance that sales profile to meet that lumpy capital requirement.

30:19 While as part of that strategy, we're trying to keep that 40 to 60 US capital, Australian capital.

30:29 Yes, I appreciate the comment, guys. and maybe just on the, I guess, cash operating costs for the quarter was a bit of a, you know, on a cash dollar millions basis was a bit of a step up. You know, Was there, I guess, the payables, timing, royalties, you know, pull forward of shutdown work? Like, can you maybe pick a little bit of, you know, what that, you know, step up from, you know, I think last quarter was about 15 and we've stepped up to about 22 million dollars on cash operating costs. You know, what's there? How do we bridge that?

31:02 Yeah, yeah. So if you look at the C1 cash cost and then the variance in terms of that cash operating cost, there's a difference of about $5.4 million. That $5.4 million was comprised of $2.2 million of royalties, which is included in that cash operating cost line, but not in the C1 cash cost. There was an additional $1.2 million in consumables, which was mainly purchases of resin for the iron exchange columns. And then there was some additional working capital movement. So there was about a million in trade payables, $0.7 million in prepayments and $0.2 million in selling costs.

31:58 Yep. Okay. Thanks for that, Paul. I'll hand it over. Thanks, guys. Thank you. Your next question comes from Mark Wiseman with Macquarie. Please go ahead.

32:11 Good day, Matt and Justin. Thanks for the update here today. My first question is just on the resilience of the operations there at Honeymoon. The rainfall impact, if you hadn't drawn down metal from the circuit, maybe would have been a little bit soft. I'm just wondering, you know, these rain impacts that tend to be recurring, Is there anything you can do to build more resilience? Is it about roads or reagent inventory at the site? Is it something you're thinking about?

32:43 Yeah, thanks, Mark. Yeah, good question. So in August, we had two rainfall events totaling 100 mil. So you can imagine 100mm events, that sort of rainfall does have a significant impact on site and we have seen more rainfall events having impacts. There's a couple of elements to that on how we actually build business resilience and now that we're building out a long life, now we've got this plan of building out a long life, low cost operation, then we can actually really get... do some of these programs of work to drive that resilience as a good operation would.

33:28 When you talk about rate and business, resilience is not just associated with rain, but other elements that we can continue to drive improvement, and that's across the business. From a rain perspective, there's a couple of elements that have impact. One is site access, including getting reagents to site. Second element is our reagent storage and in how much reagents we store on site. And then the third element is associated with access to wellfields. So how do we access the wellfields, ensure that we don't have to turn wellfields off just because it's wet. And there's programs at work associated with each three elements of what I just described to build that resilience through adverse rain events and some other events.

34:22 Okay, that's great. Would any of those have a material impact on reagent inventories or sustaining capex to address some of these items or is it all smaller ticket sort of things?

34:36 Smaller ticket things.

34:40 Okay. I just had one other question on Ultamesa following on from the other discussions. Is there a scenario where you're going to have to inject more funds into that JV in any material way, particularly if you weren't going to be willing to do that? It seems like without any production coming in, there's probably going to be some cash calls there to prepare for the next phase.

35:10 Yeah, that would be a fair assumption, but it's a little bit too early for us to comment.

35:18 Okay, thanks. Thank you. Your next question comes from Glyn Lawcock with Baron Joey. Please go ahead.

35:29 Good morning, Matt, Justin. Matt, can I just ask on that question on Altamisa then, can you give us a sense of what the balance sheet at Altamisa looks like at the moment, like how much cash they've got? Is there anything you can help us understand?

35:43 Yeah, I can't comment on that, Glenn. You know we're working under a joint venture and a joint venture structure. All right.

35:52 So we just have to wait. But I guess you'll tell us if and when you had to put cash

35:57 in. Yeah, exactly. And just as a business, we want to drive shareholder value. So we recognise that Altamisa – with that production ramped down. Having said that, Encore's working hard to get that production up. They're working closely with regulations to get those additional well fields up and running. You can imagine that's a priority for them as a business as well.

36:31 Maybe if you could just help us understand the options then. If it needs additional funding, does it necessarily have to be a cash injection from the two owners or are there other options you're contemplating as well?

36:44 Again, too early for us to comment. Glenn?

36:50 Cool. And then maybe just on your aspirational target next decade, the 2.5 million pounds per annum, at all interest, any cost you gave us. I mean, I believe from memory you're permitted to 3.3. Is that still correct? And so is 2.5 just your early estimate at the moment or what's your confidence level around 2.5? Could you push the envelope and push us towards the permit?

37:16 Thanks. Yep. Yeah, so the 2.5 is really what the back end of the plant could do. It will require a little bit of capital injection in the precip and probably some, again, it's business resilient slash run time improvements. So under the 2.5, that's the lightest capital scenario. Once you've delivered that light capital scenario, then you'd be looking at what additional capital you would need and the return on that capital to get production rates beyond the 2.5, which would mean further capital in the back end of the processing plant.

38:01 The honeymoon permit from an export perspective is at that 3.3.

38:06 Okay, so this is really like a phase one... of maybe what could be a couple of phases if you wanted to. If it all went to plan, you could maybe look at phase one, phase two, and ultimately, if the economic stack are pushed towards 3.3, there's nothing outside of the economics that you would see if it's 3.3?

38:28 Exactly. So the 2.5 is quite a simple stage because that's the least capital required.

38:39 and that's just really the pipeline from one and the trucking road from the other really. Correct. All right. Thanks a lot. Thank you. Your next question comes from Alastair Rankin with RBC. Please go ahead.

38:58 Hello guys. Just further to the regional hub and around Jason's deposit, I understand that you're advancing that EPB referral documentation and commented that the technical work is completed, which is good. But I just wanted to, I'm wondering if you could remind us, you know, what additional testing you're going to do at Jason's. I think you've got some upcoming drilling going on as well, some delineation drilling. But just what additional work you need to do there and to build your confidence about committing to that satellite deposit.

39:37 So a good question. So we and specifically on Jason's, there's a series of programs that were to get that into a financial investment decision. And that would be that would be at feasibility, bus feasibility level. So we are undertaking that work. The first part of that work is this delineation drilling that we're committing to. That drill rig's about to go out next swing, and I'll complete that over the next two or three months of that delineation drilling. That will feed into a new resource model. We'll do the reactive transport, well-filled simulations. We'll make sure all the permeability modelling's complete.

40:25 and ultimately to do some additional leaching characteristics which have been preliminarily done. That will all feed to a feasibility study and into a FID. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Matt Hope with Ord Minute. Please go ahead.

40:46 I was just interested in B6. You said you used the old wellfield spacing at 30 by 30 and you seem to have had strong recoveries. Does that suggest that potentially moving to the wide space model was premature and the old spacing would work across East Kalkaroo or is there something different about B6?

41:09 No, it just means it just means that under the leaching and this is leaching so leaching characteristics we're seeing strong leaching characteristics that are positive leaching characteristics at Kalparoo, Far East Kalparoo and as a result of having evidence on good leaching characteristics it's fair to say that those characteristics would also apply to the wide space well field design.

41:38 Would the tight space on what you've seen so far, would the tight space have worked anyway and recovered what you originally had in the enhanced feasibility study from just what you've seen on B6 so far?

41:53 Yeah, but remember the wide spacing provides better optimisation than the close spacing under hydraulic conditions, permeability and also leaching characteristics. So although we're seeing good leaching characteristics out of the closed spacing, which is a positive, will still be the optimized route is still this wide space wellfield design. And that's again to drive cost and cost structure.

42:21 Okay, thanks very much. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Dusci for closing remarks.

42:32 Thanks Darcy and thank you everyone for joining us today on the call. this quarter really established the technical foundation through the new feasibility and set our ambition for what we want to do with the operations and that's ultimately to develop a long life low cost operation for us and the team our focus really is on consistent delivery progressing that wellfield transition and delivery against FY27 plans and look at how we continue to improve and strengthen the business so we look forward to updating you on the progress next quarter. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.