Good morning. I'd like to welcome everyone to the 2025 Annual General Meeting of Alkane Resources Limited. My name's Andy Quinn, and I'm the Chair of the company. I'm joined at today's meeting by our Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Nic Earner, and non-executive directors, Ian Gandel, Brad Mills, and Frazer Bourchier. As we announced to the market yesterday, Denise McComish is joining us as a new non-executive director, joining our board on the 1st of December 2025. Unfortunately, Denise was unable to make the meeting today, and she sends her apologies. I'm also joined by members of the executive management team, including our Chief Financial Officer, James Carter, General Counsel, Jenna Mazer, and Joint Company Secretary, Julia Beckett. Also present today is Mr. Ian Campbell, a partner of PricewaterhouseCoopers, the company's auditor, and Tim Hewen from the company's share registry, Computershare.
Tim is a returning officer for this meeting. I've been advised that a quorum of shareholders is present, and I now declare the meeting and poll open. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you all for taking the time to attend today's meeting. Today's meeting is being held at the InterContinental in Melbourne, as well as online, to ensure that all our shareholders, proxies, and guests can attend either in person or virtually. Your support and interest in the company's affairs are appreciated by the board. For shareholders attending in person, please ensure you have registered with Computershare at the entrance desk. Shareholders and validly appointed proxies, corporate representatives, and attorneys attending in person will have received a green admission card, which is also your voting form.
If you've previously lodged a proxy and are happy with that vote to remain, then you would not have received a green admission card, and no further action is required. If you have not received a green card and believe you're entitled to vote, please see the Computershare staff. For shareholders attending online, if you're eligible to vote at this meeting, once voting opens, press the vote icon, and all resolutions will be activated with voting options. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. There's no need to hit a submit or enter button, as your vote will automatically be recorded. You'll receive a vote confirmation notification on your screen. You can change your vote up until the time I declare voting closed. Online questions can be submitted via the Computershare meeting platform at any time until we commence question time.
If you'd like to ask a question, select the Q&A icon and type your question in the text box. Once you finish typing, press the send button. Please note questions submitted online may be moderated, and where we receive a number of questions on the same topic, they may be amalgamated. In circumstances where a question has already been addressed in response to an earlier question or otherwise previously addressed in the meeting, moderation may result in the question not being put, or we may decline to address the point further. Statements rather than questions will not be addressed. Online attendees may also ask a question verbally. To do this, please follow the instructions written below the broadcast. If online attendees experience technical difficulties with the platform during the meeting, please refer to the online meeting guide, which is available on the platform.
The notice of meeting was released through the ASX and TSX platforms in October 2025 and made available to all shareholders. If there is no objection, the notice of the meeting will be taken as read. As there are no objections, let's move on to the proceedings for today. The formalities of today will follow the common format of AGMs. Voting for all items of business will be conducted by a poll. Instructions regarding the poll will be given prior to the commencement of the poll, of which I will declare open shortly. The results will be tallied and announced through the ASX and TSX platforms as soon as practicable, after the results have become available. After the poll is closed, shareholders will have an opportunity to ask questions or make comments about the management of the company.
After each item of business has been introduced, there will be an opportunity for shareholders to ask questions of the board in relation to that item of business before shareholders cast their vote for that resolution. If you do ask a question, please state your name and limit your questions to the item of business being considered. There'll be time for general questions at the conclusion of the meeting. For those physically in attendance with voting cards, when called upon to vote, please do so by marking your voting card either for, against, or abstain. Your voting cards will be collected prior to the end of this meeting. For those voting online, simply press the vote icon, and all resolutions will be activated with voting options. To cast your vote, select one of the options.
Before we move to the formal business of the meeting, I'd like to advise everyone that I am holding undirected proxies in my capacity as Chair, and it is my intention to vote all such proxies in favor of all resolutions. Any directed proxies that are not voted at the meeting will automatically default to me as Chair of the meeting, and I am required to vote those proxies as directed. The proxies received for each item of business are now displayed on the screen. I'll now move to the business of today's meeting. The first item of business is consideration of the financial report for the year ended June 30, 2025, which is now tabled. The company auditor, Ian Campbell of PricewaterhouseCoopers, will be available to respond to any questions on the financial statements or on the conduct of the audit during question time.
For those attending in person, please address your questions to me as the Chair. Are there any questions or comments from shareholders in the audience today on the financial reports? Julia, are there any online questions or any shareholders online with a verbal question regarding this item?
I confirm that there's no questions online.
Thank you. As there are no further questions, we'll now move on to the formal resolutions. Under the Corporations Act, listed companies are required to include as part of their director's report a remuneration report which includes specified information. The Corporations Act also requires that companies put to shareholders a resolution that the remuneration report be adopted. The directors have prepared a remuneration report for financial year 2025, and it is included on pages 75 to 86 of the 2025 annual report. The next item of business asks shareholders to adopt the company's remuneration report for financial year 2025. The first resolution is the adoption of the remuneration report. This resolution is as set out in the notice of meeting and as displayed on the screen, along with the proxy votes received on this resolution. The board recommends that shareholders vote in favor of this resolution.
I invite any questions or comments from shareholders regarding this resolution. I will start with any questions from the floor to give our shareholders online a moment to submit any questions on this. Julia, are there any online questions or any shareholders online with a verbal question regarding this item?
I have a question online from shareholder Stephen Mayne. Thank you for offering a hybrid AGM, but has anyone turned up in person for the 8:00 A.M. start? Also, thank you for disclosing the proxy votes early last night. What caused the 12.4% protest vote on the remuneration report? When disclosing the poll results, please voluntarily do what Computershare and many others now do at their AGMs and disclose the headcount data, revealing how many of our 10,347 shareholders voted for and against this item. This will encourage future retail shareholders voting and reveal how few retail shareholders bother to vote. Did even 2% vote by proxy?
I'm not quite sure how to answer that question, Stephen. Thank you for the question. Julia, could you break it down into pieces, please, because I can't see the question myself?
How many people have turned up in person?
That's the start.
That's four. Four shareholders have turned up. What caused the 12.4% protest vote on the remuneration report?
What caused the...
Andy, it's Nic speaking.
Yes, Nic, thank you.
The main reason that we understand that there is a protest vote is due to proxy advisors suggesting that the... or recommending against the Remuneration Report due to the note that the short-term incentives for FY 2025 and FY 2024 and subsequently have been issued in arrears, meaning that the results in the short-term incentives in FY 2024 appear in this Remuneration Report. That's something we'll look at going forward. We've certainly released those elsewhere, but not within the Remuneration Report due to the different timeframes. That's certainly something we can address, but that is the main reason we understand for the protest vote against the Remuneration Report.
Thank you, Nic. Julia, was there anything else in the question from Stephen that we should answer?
He just has requested that voluntarily we could do what Computershare does and disclose the headcount of the number of shareholders that have actually voted by proxy when we lodge the proxy vote count. We will take that on notice.
I'm sure we can look at that.
Thank you. That's all.
Okay, Julia, thank you. As there are no further questions, I draw your attention to the resolution and the proxies received on the screen, and I now put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't done so already, please now cast your vote on this item. I'll now move to the next item of business. The next item of business that requires voting is the re-election of Mr. Ian Gandel as a director. The board, excluding Ian, recommends that shareholders vote in favor of this resolution. This resolution is as set out in the notice of meeting and as displayed on the screen, along with the proxy votes received on this resolution. I invite any questions or comments from shareholders regarding this resolution. I'll again start with any questions from the floor to give our shareholders online a moment to submit any questions on this.
Julia, are there any online questions or any shareholders online with a verbal question regarding this item?
Yes, Chair. We have another question from Stephen Mayne. Having served on the board for 19 years, the last eight years as Chair, I'm puzzled why Ian Gandel was nominated again for another three-year term. Is he expected to serve a full three-year term, and could he recontest again in 2028? Also, what caused the 15% protest vote against Ian on the proxies? Did a proxy advisor recommend against Ian, and if so, what reason did they give?
Thank you, Stephen. The board recommends the re-election of Ian Gandel because of the significant value he continues to bring through his deep knowledge of the company, its operations, and its strategic direction, which are ever more important given the merger with Mandalay. Although he's not regarded as an independent director, the board considers his ongoing contribution to be highly beneficial to shareholders. His insights, long-term perspective, and understanding of the company's markets and stakeholders strengthen board discussions and decision-making. Obviously, the board continues to review the balance of independent and non-independent directors and believes that Ian's re-election will support effective governance and continuity as the company executes its strategic plan. I have no reason to assume that he would not be prepared to stand for a full three-year term and possibly re-stand in 2028, which I think would be his next.
He is completely entitled to do so unless the board decides that he should no longer stand, but I can't imagine that happening. Julia, are there any further questions?
Sorry, Andy, it's Nic speaking. The second part of that question I can address, which is around proxies and voting suggestions of voting against Mr. Gandel.
Oh, yes, please do.
Yeah, so the proxy reports stated that some supported the, well, two, one supported the re-election of Mr. Gandel, one did not, but the commentary was not around Ian's fitness, capability, or addition to the board. It was noted that they were protesting against a lack of diversity on the board. Note there that all of those proxy reports were created prior to the appointment of Denise to the board. They were not to know that that was coming. Were our board to be more diverse, potentially they would reconsider their position on Mr. Gandel, but we will not know that until he stands again if he chooses to do so, and we do, as you note, Andy.
Thank you, Nic. I'd also say that the board will consider the issue of diversity on the board and independence of its members during the next 12 months, which will be the first 12 months of the new merged entity. Julia, are there any other further questions online?
No other questions on this resolution. Thanks.
Thank you. As there are no further questions, I draw your attention to the resolution and the proxies received on the screen. I now put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote on this item. I'll now move to the next item of business. The next item of business that requires voting is the approval of the grant of performance rights to Mr. Nic Earner. The board, excluding Nic, of course, recommends that shareholders vote in favor of this resolution. This resolution is as set out in the notice of meeting and as displayed on the screen, along with the proxy votes received on this resolution. I invite any questions or comments from shareholders regarding this resolution. I would again start with any questions from the floor to give our shareholders online a moment to submit any questions on this.
Julia, are there any online questions or any shareholders online with a verbal question regarding this item?
No, I confirm there are no questions on this resolution.
As there are no questions, I now draw your attention to the resolution and the proxies received on the screen. I now put the resolution.
Sorry, anyone of our people here is asking a question? Sorry, go ahead.
Yeah, hello. Andrew Clarkson from Holding and Company Name in St. Norsk. Could you just go through what the performance rights are and how they vest?
Can I leave that answer to you, please, Nic, at your end?
Certainly can. The performance rights are the right to an ordinary share in three years' time. It is set out in the annual report to specifically check. For myself and key management personnel, we measure ourselves against the All Gold Index, the Australian All Gold Index. In the event that our total shareholder return is greater than 10% above the All Gold Index over the three-year period, which is from audit to audit, so it is basically August to September, in three years' time, then all of those LTIs would be awarded. There is a sliding scale set out within the annual report. That is what the performance rights are. They are ordinary shares on total shareholder return to exceed that index. The question was, do they vest after the three-year period? Yes. No, there is no escrow contained within that period.
There is not a partial award of those during the period. At the three-year period, it is assessed, and then they are granted then.
Thank you, Nic. Are there any further questions? I draw your attention to the resolution and the proxies received on the screen, and I put the resolution to the meeting. If you have not already done so, please now cast your vote on this item. I will now move to the next item of business. The next item of business that requires voting is the appointment of KPMG as the company auditor. The board recommends that shareholders vote in favor of this resolution. This resolution is as set out in the notice of meeting and as displayed on the screen, along with the proxies, the proxy votes received on this resolution. I invite any questions or comments from shareholders regarding this resolution. I would again start with any questions from the floor to give our shareholders online a moment to submit any questions on this.
Julia, are there any online questions or any shareholders online with a verbal question regarding this item?
Yes, Chair, we have another question from Stephen Mayne. It is split up. There are a few questions within it. Nic, would you like to answer these questions?
Absolutely. Certainly. Fire away.
How many bids did we receive for the external audit gig, and how many of them were from the Big Four firms?
Nic, I could answer that first part. We did not actually go out; we did not put out the tender on this. We took a view that as Mandalay had had KPMG as an auditor and we had had PwC as an auditor, we being Alkane, it was incumbent upon the new board to decide whether one or both of the auditors should proceed. It was not a question of us being unhappy with PwC. We were very satisfied with PwC. However, we needed to make that decision, and the Audit and Risk Committee conducted a review of the external audit engagement and took views from both those sides. Following completion of the process, the company decided to select KPMG.
Okay, second part of the question is, are we expecting KPMG to be more expensive than their predecessor, PwC, and who will be their signing partner for the next five years?
No, we're not expecting them to be more expensive. Rob Gambitta will be the signing partner.
Thank you. The last part of the question is, under the engagement contract, have we promised KPMG a minimum number of years before we would potentially be open to tender for the job again?
No.
Thank you. There are no other questions.
Okay, thank you. As there are no further questions, I'll now draw your attention to the resolution and the proxies received on the screen. I now put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote on this item. I'll now move to the next item of business. The next item of business that requires voting is the renewal of proportional takeover provisions. The board recommends that shareholders vote in favor of this resolution. This resolution is as set out in the notice of meeting and as displayed on the screen, along with the proxy votes received on this resolution. I invite any questions or comments from shareholders regarding this resolution. I will again start with any questions from the floor to give our shareholders a moment to submit any questions on this.
Julia, you have a question from the floor.
Yeah, Andrew Clarkson from shareholding in Alkane Resources. Could you just explain a bit about this resolution five and how it sort of fits in with your strategy and thinking?
Yes, Nic, would you like to handle that at your end?
Yeah, certainly I can. What we're doing here is giving ourselves maximum flexibility to be able to respond basically to any situation that arises. We do not have a particular ulterior motive or objective that currently sits within us, but it is very standard for companies of our size to refresh this as it approaches each annual general meeting. We are really looking to make sure that we have maximum flexibility in any situation that might arise for us.
Were you advised to put this resolution?
Yes, we have for quite some time, yeah. Yes, this resolution has appeared in our annual general meetings on previous occasions as well. Yes.
Thank you. Are there any further questions on the subject?
No, Chair, there's nothing online. Thanks.
As there are no further questions, I now draw your attention to the resolution and the proxies received on the screen. I now put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote on this item. There are no other items of business. I will now conclude our discussion on the items of business before this annual general meeting. I'll shortly close the voting. Please ensure that you've cast your vote on all the resolutions, and I will pause to allow you time to finalize those votes. During this time, and as advised in the notice of meeting, I will vote all available undirected proxies in favor of all resolutions. I now declare the poll closed and ask all shareholders attending in person to place their voting papers in the ballot box being circulated by our representative from Computershare.
Now, at an AGM, shareholders may ask questions about or make comments on the management of the company. Before calling this meeting to a close, I'd like to provide shareholders with an opportunity to ask any questions that you may not have been able to ask earlier. You should note that following the close of this meeting, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer Nic Earner will be providing an update on the company's results for the year and an insight into what we can expect in the year to come. At the conclusion of Nic's presentation, there will be a further opportunity to ask more questions. As before, I'll start with any questions from the floor to give our shareholders online a moment to submit any questions. Julia?
Yes.
Are there any online questions?
Yes, we have two further questions. Sorry. Another question from Stephen Mayne. After the Queensland government introduced a progressive new coal royalties regime three years ago, which peaks at 40% when the coal price tops $300 a ton, they pocketed more than $10 billion from the coal industry in the first full year of the new regime. Meanwhile, in WA, the gold industry is enjoying boom times, and there are no signs of any changes to the ridiculously low 2.5% gold royalty rate after the first $12 million in gold sales at each WA mine, which are only royalty-free. How does the gold royalty regime on our Victorian and New South Wales operations compare with the amazingly generous WA system? Are the first 2,500 ounces of production also royalty-free like in WA?
I can answer that. The royalty regimes in New South Wales are 4% royalty regime, less final treatment and refinery costs with no pre-deduction for any ounces. Julia, another question?
Yes.
Yeah, Victoria is similar. Yes, and pretty much exactly identical, yeah. Yeah, that's correct.
Although it would be inappropriate for us to comment on the level of royalties charged by our fellow gold producers in WA. Julia, any other questions?
One more question from Stephen Mayne. Why did we only announce the appointment of new Director Denise McComish last night rather than put her up for election at today's AGM? Which recruitment firm did we use to assist with the recruitment process, and did any of our directors know Denise before the recruitment process commenced? Having taken a stand on governance and resigned from the Mineral Resources Board in April, I'm pleased she has been able to join another ASX 200 mining board.
Thank you for the question, Stephen. I don't think you're as pleased that she's joined our board as we are. We are delighted. We didn't use a search firm. We used our contacts to ask around and for recommendations of people who are respected advisors and colleagues could recommend as a person who would meet our criteria. We're absolutely delighted to have Denise McComish join us. As to the timing, we've only just completed agreeing that she would join only a matter of a couple of days ago, and that would not have given us time to put her forward for election at this AGM. She will, of course, be going forward for re-election at the next AGM next year.
Thank you. There are no other questions.
Julia, are there any further questions?
No further questions. Thanks.
Okay, thank you, everybody, for your questions. Thank you all for your attendance at this meeting and your interest in the company. On behalf of the board, we look forward to your continued support. As no other business has been notified to shareholders in accordance with the company's constitution, this now concludes the business to be dealt with at today's meeting, and I declare the meeting closed. I would now like to invite Nic to provide an update on the company's results for the year and an insight into what we can expect in the year to come. As I mentioned earlier, there will be a further opportunity to ask Nic questions at the conclusion of his presentation. Thank you.
Thanks, Andy, and good day, everybody here in the room, and of course, many more people online. Let's look at the company as it stands today post the merger with Mandalay. I draw your attention to a number of different aspects on this screen that I talk about with investors both here and overseas that attract attention. First, let's talk about our assets. We now have two assets in Australia: the Tomingley Mine in New South Wales, in central New South Wales, about a four-and-a-half-hour drive from Sydney, right near the town of Dubbo, and the Costerfield Mine in central Victoria near Bendigo. In addition, we have the Björkdal Mine near Skellefteå, just below the Arctic Circle in Sweden. All three of these mines are wholly owned by the company.
None of these mines have a third-party royalty on top of them, and all three mines are owner-operator, meaning that we own our equipment and operate it accordingly. Let's talk about Tomingley. It has guidance of 75,000-80,000 ounces for this coming year, and last year did just below 70,000 ounces, so the financial year FY 2025. It produces doré, and that goes to ABC Refinery in Sydney, which is then sold to predominantly banks or ABC as a third party on the spot market. Costerfield, the guidance for this year is 45,000-51,000 ounce equivalent, and the ounce equivalent comes because part of that production, which we'll see on the next slide, comes from antimony contained with the antimony concentrate. We convert that as if it was gold based on money, and then we call that a gold equivalent.
That produces a high percentage gold, approximately 40% by mass, which is sent to Melbourne here in Melbourne to be refined, and it produces an antimony gold concentrate, which is sold overseas, predominantly into China is the large tonnage majority of those sales. We can talk more about that as people are interested. At Björkdal, we produce three concentrates. We produce an approximately 50% by mass gravity concentrate, which then goes to smelter within Europe. We produce another many thousands of grams per ton concentrate, which also goes to smelter within Europe. We produce a flotation gold concentrate, a couple of ounces per ton, which is shipped to Boliden Smelter immediately next door in Sweden. There are the three assets.
As of right now, at close yesterday, our share price was AUD 1, which makes the math very easy because we have post-merger at 1.365 billion shares on issue. That is our market cap. We are in a very strong financial position. We had AUD 174 million in cash in Paulian at the end of September. We are at the stage now where post-growth, post-tax, post all our expenses, we should be adding approximately AUD 40+ million to our bank balance every quarter going forward. We are debt-free apart from the equipment financing that we have for equipment, which is across all of our mines, and we have quite a large coverage universe.
We're trading nearly 8 million shares a day on the ASX, so we'll call that AUD 8 million worth of shares a day on the ASX, and we're trading about CAD 1 million worth a day on the TSX. Quite high liquidity for the company, which is one of the key objectives that we had for the merger. If we look at what we're looking to do this year, we're going to do somewhere in that 160,000-175,000 ounce run rate combined across the company. Just under half of that is going to come from Tomingley, and then across the other two assets, we're going to get similar. You can see that similar when we combine them. You can see there on the screen, I note the 800-900 tons of antimony. That's the antimony that's recovered and paid for in the concentrate.
I think I want to draw people's attention particularly to the antimony, and we discuss it momentarily. There is absolutely no doubt that it's a critical mineral, and it's got a lot of attention globally and within the state. From a revenue perspective, note that it is only a couple of single-digit percent revenue of the entire company. It's exciting. It's great to see. It's a dynamic part of the market. It attracts investor interest, as it should, but we are much more susceptible to moves in the gold price than we are in moves in the antimony price. Our all-in sustaining cost is approximately $1,650 in both Tomingley and Costerfield, and it's higher in Björkdal, and I'll talk about our plans to bring that down in Björkdal and point to why that is.
The growth CapEx at Tomingley, predominant growth CapEx is moving the Newell Highway to enable the new open cut to come online. At Costerfield and Björkdal, the vast majority of that growth CapEx is in our exploration funds. I'll talk a bit about that going forward, but if we want to look at if we want to look out the next three years, next financial year we'll see similar but a bit less at Tomingley because we'll be finishing the Newell Highway move, but at the same time, we're ramping up exploration. You can see why when we come to those slides. At Costerfield, we have a new mining area, potentially True Blue that we want to develop across to, that will see that CapEx stay high.
At Björkdal, I'll talk about that, but we should see that rise both through drilling and capital expenditure to open up a new mining area there. We are unlikely to remain in the 80-90 for a sustained period, but we are very much likely to be around the AUD 60 million mark for quite some time going forward. Australian, sorry, Australian for those listening overseas. Let's talk a little more about Tomingley, and I'll go through each of the assets in turn. I'm going to talk a bit about the asset, and we can come back to any of these and answer questions. I'm going to talk about the upside of each asset, and I'll talk more strategically about where we want to go as a business.
At the moment, our processing plant here at Tomingley is running between 1.2 and 1.3 million tons per annum. We have approval to go higher than that. We had a plan to actually install capital to go to 1.5 million tons per annum, but we're finding with the circuit that we've commissioned and some modifications in the crushing circuit that we've lifted that processing rate. At this stage, that's where we're intending to flatline at around that 1.3 million tons per annum. Our mining rate from underground is approximately 1.2 million- 1.3 million tons per annum as well, so we have a very slight stockpile build. We're diverting the Newell Highway, which lies over the top of the Roswell and San Antonio deposits. The highway portion of that is AUD 55 million, but there are other aspects and parts of that as well.
That remains on track and on budget. The thing that's a 14-month program, the only thing that will affect that program is going to be weather events if it is very high rainfall next winter, as is traditionally the case, more than we forecast. This asset is performing well, steady state. I'll touch briefly on the recovery. We put a whole fine grind circuit in to get higher recoveries at Roswell. That's performing well. We are seeing excessive wear inside the Isomill that we're working with the vendor on, which is just grinding to 14 micron rather than 12, which has the recovery down, but we've made responses for that, and we expect this quarter's recovery to be higher, closer to 90%. Within this ore body, there are different areas that have different recovery regimes. We're still very glad that we put this in.
Otherwise, our recovery would be 5% or 6% lower. Where are we going with Tomingley? We know that we have seven years at this 75-odd thousand ounce run rate. This is our exploration focus for Tomingley. In no particular order, I'll comment on each one, just working from north to south. The first is we're going back and drilling underneath the Wyoming 3 underground, which has been partially backfilled and is a water storage. We are looking for further extensions there that have become more valid as the gold price has moved by several thousand dollars per ounce since we last evaluated that resource. We're going back in there. We hope to find additional ounces underneath Wyoming 3, and we could extend across to that from the Wyoming 1 deposit. We're looking to the north of Coloma.
What we have is Coloma is on the eastern side of the highway, and we've been mining under Coloma and Coloma 2 to the south, but we have mineralization to the north of that. We quite like the look of that. We've put announcements out about that in the past, so we want to consolidate that and see if we can turn that into its own mining area. At McLean's, which is directly related to infrastructure near the Roswell pit, we have some very encouraging results and a whole new geological structure in there that we found. We're working up, can we add that into the mining routine and inventory over the next one to two years? That's very, very exciting. That's our most immediately prospective addition of resources should we want them. Second, the Roswell Western Monzodioite, we've been infilling that. That's an inferred resource.
If people can imagine the Roswell resource, an underground mine, orogenic gold deposits, vein structures that we are mining north to south. To the west of that, we have a whole separate mineralized structure, which has been an inferred resource that we're looking to turn into an indicated resource and put into our mine plans. It stands effectively 50 m-70 m off all the infrastructure that we have. That is something that we've been working very hard to convert. It's an interesting structure. It's a chute-like system, so some areas are economic, some areas aren't economic, and that's what we're balancing up as we infer it. All these things give us confidence, obviously, of extending the mine life further. Down south at El Paso, which is an area that we've chased for quite a bit of time, I'm looking at number five on people's screens.
We'd originally hoped that we could do an open cut there. That doesn't look like it's the case. It looks much more like an underground resource. We've got some excellent intercepts there, and we're trying to work out what's the geological structure of that. It's a bit more complex. It's not quite the straight vein system that we'd previously imagined. The jury's out there a bit for us, but it is quite prospective. What people should note is when we planned the mining lease applications, when we planned the Newell Highway diversion, when we planned our property purchases there, it all goes around El Paso in advance. We are anticipating that one day we will mine that. We would need to extend the ML, but that is it. The infrastructure has already been moved in anticipation of El Paso coming online in the future.
Another interesting thing down at number six, Peak Hill, where Alkane ran a gold mine in the mid-1990s to the early 2000s. There is a gold resource there. It is 100,000 ounces. It is a refractory gold resource, so we continue to evaluate when and how we should mine that and bring that into the system. Typically, it extends further down our plans. However, we are doing some deep drilling underneath Peak Hill coming up to test what might be the copper-gold porphyry that feeds that system. We are really trying to understand, is there something a little more interesting of a different mineralization type to Tomingley underneath Peak Hill? That is quite genuine exploration down there. We are continuing to evaluate Glen Isla, which is a really interesting epithermal prospect to the east of Tomingley that we have not been able to determine its value at present.
That's the upcoming 12 months, and a couple of those months have passed, but that's what we're doing through FY 2026. That's what we like about Tomingley. That's why Tomingley has been running now for 11 to 12 years, and we've got seven years planned already, and we obviously hope that we can extend that beyond with some of this exploration success. If I move on to Costerfield, Costerfield is a narrow, high-grade mine. It's been running under Mandalay's ownership and now Alkane's since 2009. People should note that particularly there, the processing rate is 140,000 tons per annum. That's very small by Tomingley comparison. Obviously, it's nearly 10% of that, and it is 10% of Björkdal, but it's very high grade. It typically runs at 12 grams equivalent, and often it looks a lot higher than that within the veins.
The grades that I'm describing are diluted grades out at 1.8 m mining width. We do single boom jumbo, and we mine narrow vein mining. If we look at the schematic that we have there, at Augusta on the left and Brunswick on the right, that is where we have two portals. We have a portal, one in each of those, and then with a processing plant at Brunswick. What we have found there periodically under Mandalay's ownership has been larger systems that contain 300,000, 400,000, 500,000 ounces. In particular, Yule Mine has been the most recent of those, and that has been mined since 2019. We have also extended those. Each year that you add 50,000 ounce equivalent, obviously you add another year, but we also chase these larger systems of Yule and Sheppard.
That is what our focus is with exploration at the moment. There are several areas where we think we're onto a few things there. The first of those is True Blue, which we've reported numerous times and numerous results on. It is a structure to the west. If you look, the yellow ringed structure in the middle is the existing mine, what we call our central corridor. To the west is the True Blue corridor. There were shallow workings that existed from the turn of the century, and I'm talking now the turn of last century that existed, and we have been drilling underneath those with great success. What we're doing is step-out testing to the north and south of that discovery.
We've already identified ounces within that, and they've been published in our resources and reserves, but we want to step out and determine, okay, how might this extend? It's particularly relevant because when we put a drive across there, we want to know where's the sort of central location that we should be putting it in. We've submitted our applications to extend the mining lease to cover that area, and now we're doing drilling to determine where we should develop to whilst we wait for that approval to come in. That's typically a 1.5-year approval pathway. If you look at number three, we're doing extension drilling of the Kendall resources, which is immediately above the Yule and Sheppard mining fronts. I'm just going to go back here.
You can see Yule and Sheppard, and we have Kendall just above and to the side of that. That is extensional additional drilling. We're not expecting a whole new area there, but we're looking at extensional. Another interesting thing is at Brunswick South, which is number four on the screen. I'm going to go back and show you that. You can see Brunswick there right in the center. To the left of that on your screen is what we call Brunswick South and below. You can see we have a horizontal drive going across there at Brunswick South. Right near there, we have discovered above and below the RL of that drive, we have hit ore that is the same or double the grade of the existing area. That is a new area we want to pull in.
We're chasing 50,000-100,000 ounces in that zone, and that stands about 300 m off our existing infrastructure. That is an area that we hope will hold together to extend into within the next 12 months. Deep below Cuffley, and I take you back again. If you look on the left-hand side of the picture, we have Cuffley Deeps and Sub KC. To give you an idea, the existing RL of the mine is down to around 650 m below surface, so I am now talking down a kilometer, 1.2 km underground. What we are looking at there is we have resources near very high grade, but one of the things that we are chasing is, is there a Fosterville-style intersection that we can chase of substantially higher grade? That is part of the rationale around this. It is understanding the geological structure. It is understanding the potential.
That's why we're drilling down there at depth. Last but not least, up to the north, and this should be very late in the financial year, so middle of next year, we do have an area where we get that potentially like a Sunday Creek style mineralization. What I mean is not a continual long vein system like we see at Costerfield as it stands, but more the veins that are running subparallel to each other. There is a target up there that we'll be looking to drill from surface in the middle of next year. The interesting thing that I want to wrap around all of that is down very deep, we get higher gold grades, hence chasing a Fosterville type thing. Closer to surface, we have higher antimony grades, True Blue, etc.
The shift in balance, we do not see that changing beyond a Bonanza discovery. We do not see that changing around this sort of 45,000-50,000-55,000 ounce run rate, but the shift between gold and antimony will depend on what mining area that we are mining in. Very prospective. Our target here is to move from beyond the rolling three-odd year of reserve, three-odd year of resource, and try and push that into being five to seven of reserve, plus at least three of resource on top of that. Part of that is all about the long-term planning for the area, capital allocation, properties, do we need new tailings dams? It is really trying to get a much longer view on the asset, but very, very encouraging for us, particularly some of the high-grade hits that we have had.
We look forward to bringing more exploration results on that over this coming year. Björkdal in Sweden, this is a very large mineralized system. The mill here runs at 1.4 million tons per annum, and the mine is based around it was an open-cut mine for many years. It stopped in 2019, but before that, it ran an underground and an open-cut in parallel, and we are now just underground at the moment. We have a large shallowish dipping 30-odd degree marble structure that has acted as conduit for fluids, then we have had a tension vein system. It is not fracture veins that give a long continuity. It is an area with veins that have opened up under tension, filled with fluids, mineralized, and then they are not necessarily continuous.
There are + 1,200 mapped veins in this system, and we can be following on a development, and then that can move into other areas of the drive. The team there does a fantastic job of trying to understand this mineralization and maximize what's the grade that can be done from mining underground. The thing is we mine here typically around 950,000 tons per year, and then the difference, 400,000-450,000 tons, we've milled low-grade surface stockpiles that were built through the years and years of running an open-cut mine. What we want to do here, because this is 40,000 - 45,000 ounces, to lower the all-in sustaining costs, we're looking for new ore sources and lifting the mining rate just to add 10,000 ounces and make that a 50,000-55,000 ounce, and then drive the all-in sustaining costs down.
We have exploration to assist in that, and we have other aspects which I'm going to talk about. That is the core purpose of what we're doing here. We're looking to increase our development rate, open up new mining areas, and lift the grade to the mill because this is a 1.3 g per ton ore body, underground mined grade, diluted mined grade. Often the veins can be just like Costerfield. We can get veins with an ounce, two ounces per ton. You can get visible gold, but this is what we see. If we look at this, you can see in the left-hand side of the picture to the bottom of your screen, you can see the old open-cut and then the underground workings plunging away on the marble above and below the marble up towards the left-hand side of the screen.
Number one is we are drilling within the north zone. Imagine the plunge up to the north, and we're drilling in and around there to get a new mining area which extends the existing underground. That's number one. That's promising. We have a new mining area that forms at present the large future of the mine. Number two, we have a separate plunge, so it's almost like the resource is splitting. We have a separate mining area, a continuation of what exists, plunging away to the northeast within the main zone. We're drilling around that. Both of those are extending our existing mine.
The recently modeled Storheden resource is an area that we're hoping we can open up as a new mining area sometime in the next year or two that allows us to lift the underground mining rate much closer above the million tons per annum because we'd have a new mining fleet, a new mining front. We're doing the early stage evaluation of the engineering. How might that fit into the schedule? Where might the decline come out? Should it be event-wise? What should we do? We want to do that to lift the underground mining rate. Approximately 5 km away, we have the Norberget resource, which is a potential open-cut on our land, but we have a lease. We'd have to obviously get that permitted and truck it. That is a higher grade, sort of three-odd grams type deposit.
Nominally, at the moment, we want to drill that out and understand where it is. If I talk about the next 12 months, we want to get a very clear picture on Storeheaden and the mine plan. We want to look at there's a small open-cut that we're looking to develop from the surface with a higher grade. It is approximately 1.5-2 million tons we want to bring online. We look at other technologies, ore sorting, etc., of waste to see if we can lift the rate from that. We are quite encouraged about this asset and lifting it towards + 50,000 ounces and therefore driving the all-in sustaining cost down. Other things to note about Sweden, incredibly competent workforce with a century-long mining history in the region, very low cost of power, hydropower running at a couple of cents per kilowatt hour.
Certainly very encouraging as an Australian to look at it and think, "Oh, that could have been us." Yes, it's a fantastic jurisdiction to be mining in. I want to talk briefly about Boda Kaiser because this draws ever closer to execution for us. Boda Kaiser was a discovery made in 2019, and we released this scoping study in the middle of 2024. The numbers that you see on this screen are capital costs from the middle of 2024, and this is AUD 4,600 per ounce gold, AUD 15,000 per ton copper, which is around $3,050-$3,100 gold. You can see there's plenty of headroom above that, up to the current gold price, which significantly lifts these economics. These are executable economics as it stands already. The picture on the right you can see is there's more than 260 km of drilling.
That's the indicated and inferred drilling all there, all collapsed into one plane. We have approximately 10 million ounce equivalent, approximately 15 in indicated, approximately 15 million ounces overall in indicated than inferred. This is a substantial resource, and this scoping study was done on two open-cuts running for 14-15 years, but then milling out to 17 years back on a different price. There are two things I want to talk about: the prospects within the region and our pathway to execution here because there is, I think, and I'll talk more about it, more substantial uplift that can come from turning this into an approved project. Right now, this is a scoping study project, and obviously, we would firm the cost up with pre-feasibility and bankable feasibility before you did FID.
In terms of to us as shareholders, reflection in our share price, once we move this to being approved and executable, logically, 20%-25% of MPV should start reflecting the share price because it would be an approved project as distinct from an executable project. Because that MPV could be billions of dollars, we see significant leverage on just a few million dollars we're spending here at present carrying it forward. First, looking at the exploration focus, it's a very low-cost program that you can see. You can see that we're looking to the south. We're working from the bottom to the top of this picture, and that is orientated north at the top of the screen, south at the bottom of the screen. Number one down the bottom of the screen is Boda 4.
We're looking, are there further extensions down below Boda 2, 3? We're drill testing between Boda and Kaiser. We continue to update our structural thinking around that. We're testing, is there something in that saddle area, which we haven't previously been able to define? If I go back, you can see Kaiser and Boda. We're talking in that middle area that's appeared barren. We're trying to ascertain, could there be something in there that we've missed? We have targets through Drill Creek, Glen Hollow, and Haddington. You can see some of the different mineralization there. We know there's mineralization there. We're just wondering, is there economic mineralization there, and how can we zero in on that? The reason why that's relevant is obviously more is better, but there are other things as you zero in on.
What if the center of gravity for processing should be further to the north? That's the big question to ask ourselves there. Last but not least, across the rest of the ports that we're doing a magnetotelluric survey. We're really using all the knowledge that we've gathered over the years to continue to look for further porphyries within the system. I just take people back to Acadia and the multiple years of discovery that it took there to discover the different deposits over time. These porphyries often appear in clusters of five, seven-type intrusives. We don't know if we've got that, but we think we may well have that. We're continuing to look in this area from an exploration perspective. Behind all the scenes of that, we are taking this through to approval.
It is clearly complex and time-consuming and involves a whole heap of different stakeholders. We're doing the two-year baseline studies that you must do within New South Wales to apply. We're doing negotiations with property owners, engaging with them around where might we build. That also shapes our thoughts on where we could place infrastructure. As well as that, there's a nominal paper road, but paper railway that runs through there that was part of a, remember in the Great Depression, there was the Keynesian economics had people building stuff that didn't need to be built in order to stimulate the economy. One of those things is a railway track through there that hasn't ever been used and will never be used, but we need to come up with some alternative for that and talk about that with the government.
We've got to look at the road network into it and talk about that with the Dubbo Council, who manage the Dubbo and Wellington District. There are some wind turbines that we need to. We've got a very good relationship with Iberdrola that run the wind turbine, but we have to talk about how might that be located in five years' time. There are all sorts of interactions that we need to do, not also excluding the need for water and power sourcing for the project. They are the things that we're running to ground across this next two-year period. We intend to submit, do our environmental impact statement. Obviously, there's negotiation with the government up to there and submit for project approval in 2027 and then have that considered.
If that was a two-year approval and timing the extension for us was a 14-month approval process, we would be refreshing the BFS and going for FID across that 2029 to 2031 period. It draws ever closer, and we continue to work on that in the background. The reason we're chasing it is obviously for the big value uplift that I described that we think could certainly come from having it approved. If I look at this next year, let's never forget that we're an operational company. The exploration stuff's exciting. Boda's exciting. The M&A that I'm going to talk about at the bottom of this slide is interesting and exciting, but we are, above all things, a production company.
Of our 800+ employees, we have an exploration team of approximately 20 - 30 people across all our sites and regionally in New South Wales exploring. We have a couple of people doing BD, but everybody else is focused on delivering the plan and meeting our costs and keeping the costs constrained. That is our number one goal. We want to expand the mineral sources, and it is pretty prospective, I think. Timingly, we just want to get that highway done. We want to get it behind us and start to open up the open-cut. There are 250,000 ounces in that San Antonio open-cut and it gives us alternative ore sources. We are very keen to get that done.
Costerfield, we want to get the permitting done and move through to True Blue because once that's away, then we can say, "Okay, exactly how does this fit into our schedule?" Björkdal, I've described, we want to open a new mining area and lift the mining rate. Boda-Kaiser, let me talk briefly about what we'd like to do corporately. The board, and you can see from the board composition and the things that we've spoken about, we very much want to continue to grow the company further. Boda is a long-term growth prospect for us. We can grow our sites to 180,000-200,000 ounces over the next few years.
In order to move to the next level of value accretion, and I'll explain why that is for people listening, the value accretion that we see is you can see the uplift that we got from moving to the ASX 300. In liquidity and valuation attraction ETFs, we'd very much like to be in the ASX 200. That would double our liquidity further. We would get further index ratings. Most importantly, if you look at the price to NAV of different companies that are smaller versus companies in the 250,000-300,000 ounce range, you move from being 0.6, 0.7, 0.8 up to being 1, 1.1 in this gold market. We want that uplift across all of our assets. We want the significant cash flow generation that can come. We're chasing another asset. We're looking in Australia, New Zealand, U.S., Canada, and Scandinavia.
We're looking at assets in the 70,000-110,000 ounce range, slightly too big for a small developer, slightly too small for a company like, say, Remilius, unless it's a satellite feed. It's a whole standalone Greenfields area. We want assets that already produce or an asset that could be producing within two years so we could be commissioned it by 2027 because then that fits into the timeline to continue to grow through to Boda Kaiser. That is what we're looking at. We continue to go into data rooms, evaluate, take calls, all of that kind of stuff. We put a lot of attention in all to add value and all understanding our own value as well because we obviously have an asset that we think is undervalued in the marketplace. We need to demonstrate the cash flow from that.
Very happy to take any questions on that. True to the fact, I've got investor presentations here in Melbourne and Sydney over the next two days in the evening. It'll be one of the things that no doubt we're discussing over drinks and snacks at that period of time as well. Here we are. We're growing this mid-tier company. We're an established producer. Last year, if you just said, "Hey, all these three assets were already outcome," it would have been 160,000 ounces. This year, we want to incrementally add on to that. We're generating a lot of cash, particularly in this gold price environment. We do have antimony exposure, and it is well worth remembering we are the largest antimony producer as it stands in the Western world at present.
We are looking to grow and extend our mine lives, and we're progressing Boda and Kaiser. With that, I'll throw to the room. I don't know if people online can ask questions, but I'll throw to the room for any questions and then throw back briefly to Andy for some closing comments, and then we'll wrap up the formal proceedings. Here in Melbourne, we'll chew the fat on a few things. Anyone got any questions here? Sorry. Wait, just wait. You go. You go. Yep.
In terms of speed to market, in terms of producing as quickly as possible from an acquisition, wouldn't Western Australia be the fastest route to that?
Absolutely. There are some great assets in Western Australia. It's just the price point of those assets versus the risk that the assets genuinely contain.
Yeah, absolutely, we are very engaged in Western Australia as well. We have some existing relationships that we're following. There's some people that are releasing pre-feasibility studies and stuff that we'll finalize, and we're watching those very closely. Absolutely. The thing is, if you look at the relative value against the risk and the MPV of those assets at different price points, there are better value assets currently in some jurisdictions like North America and Canada, materially tens of percent different to that. Whether the current vagaries of the gold market washes some of that value out and brings everything a little more level, I don't know. Certainly, the access to capital at the moment is filling some West Australian people with a great deal of enthusiasm about developing themselves and becoming a single mine producer.
Not that I'd necessarily recommend they do that, but that's for their own boards to decide. Absolutely, yeah, we're heavily engaged with them.
Yeah. Another question. The ore from Costerfield or Mandalay, you say you process it in Melbourne?
No, no, no. We produce a gravity gold concentrate. That's correct. 50% that gets processed in Melbourne at CPG.
You've got some processing of the antimony in Costerfield?
Yeah. We create a flotation concentrate that gets predominantly dewatered and bagged and then put in the shipping containers, and then that's shipped out of the port overseas.
To China, yeah.
Predominantly China, yes. They are the largest refiner of antimony by far.
The Melbourne company that processes the gold component from Costerfield?
Oh, yeah. It's CPG in Melbourne. Yeah.
Where are they based?
I'm not a Melbourne local, so I can't really tell you the suburb, but it's on the east side. They do a lot of recycling of jewelry and other things and take prospector stuff. Very professional outfit, NADA certified, all the usual things that you would expect here. Yeah. Paul?
Thanks, Nic. In terms of the gap, Boda Kaiser, when can we expect drill results for that and any deep drill results for Costerfield?
Yeah. Boda Kaiser would be a couple of months away from collating those results and understand. We try and contextualize our results. As you'll see from all of our announcements, we really try and contextualize results. Obviously, if we thought something was incredibly material that we hit another hole for Boda, then of course we'd release those. We try and contextualize those for a couple of months away.
At Costerfield deep drilling, I also don't expect that for a couple of months. We will have more results from around Brunswick and True Blue before we have that. We have four rigs running there. Probably every two months, we'll be putting out an announcement on Costerfield. Yeah.
Peak Hill?
Peak Hill, we are only just scheduling that hole. I'm going to guess April type of thing. Yeah. Yeah. Any other questions?
There's no questions online.
There's no questions online. Andy, I'll throw back to you. Thank you. Thank you, everybody, for persisting and listening, and I'll look forward to seeing you at one of the different investor things or obviously sending questions through to the info line in Alkane. Thanks again.
Thanks, Nic. Thank you for an exposition of our outstanding portfolio of projects and operations.
I hope that everybody online and in the room can see why we, as a board, are really excited about the prospects for your company going forward. We look forward to talking to you again at the same time next year with another hybrid AGM. Thank you very much for joining us today. That concludes the annual general meeting of Alkane Resources Limited. As Nic said, he is conducting investor presentations in Melbourne later this afternoon and in Sydney on Thursday. You're very welcome to join those meetings in person where you'll have the opportunity to ask questions, of course. I wish I was with you there in Melbourne, but please join Nic and the team for light refreshments. Thank you to everybody online. We've appreciated your attendance and really value your input. Thank you very much.
Sorry. Excuse me, Andy.
We have just received a question from Stephen Mayne online. I'll read it out now. Having driven the Newell 30+ times as a kid, I'm amazed to hear you're relocating it near Dubbo. How hard was it to get approval to do this? How will the disruption be managed? Can you cite a bigger road relocation associated with a gold mine in Australian history?
That is a question for Nic to answer.
Yeah, I can certainly answer that, of course. The first thing for people to be aware of is that this is the gold mine. Whilst we refer to Dubbo, like so many Australians, when we say near, we mean a fair way. We're talking 50 km south of Dubbo, south of the township of Tomingley, so in between Tomingley and Peak Hill. The Newell Highway runs north-south over the deposits.
What we're doing is a kilometer to the west, we're building a whole new highway which mimics the existing structure. That has an overtaking lane in each direction and aqueducts underneath. It will actually be better because the road standards have changed since that was moved with the way the verges and the center lines are done. That gets built in parallel completely, and then it gets cut in at each end with corners. That is similar to what you see, all of us see as Australians in so many roadworks about cutting stuff in. Disruption will be quite minimal, certainly compared to, you know, roadworks that we can all think of. That is it. The main thing about locating that highway is it's outside any blast exclusion zones or anything like that pertaining to the open cut.
I can't really think of larger road diversions unless we talk about some of the coal mining that's occurred over the years. It wasn't particularly arduous to have that approved compared to the broad range of things that you normally get approved. The New South Wales government is flexible and open provided that you show an alternative that won't impact on the public. In this case, we are effectively putting two very slow bends in a road and then a parallel section. Yeah, that's it. While I'm on, Andy, I just have one clarification that my CFO texted me while I was talking to say that I had the Victorian royalty regime wrong. It is 2.75% of gold and antimony revenue, but not less costs. It washes out just a tiny bit less than New South Wales.
Sweden, for anyone that's interested, it's 0.2% of revenue. Also, the corporate tax is lower in Sweden as well. Thanks, Andy. Back to you, mate.
I will just finally say that I think our road is going to be better than the one it's replacing. Is that not right?
Yes. Not that there's anything wrong with the one it's replacing. No.