Thank you. Welcome, everyone. I'm Lucas Dow, Managing Director and CEO at Elevra Lithium, and I'm pleased to present the financial year 2026 half year results. I'm joined today by Christian Cortes, Chief Financial Officer, Sylvain Collard, Chief Operating Officer and President, Canada, and Andrew Barber, Chief Development and Investor Relations Officer. Our agenda for today's call is described on slide two. Specifically, we will cover our operational and financial results, provide an update on the achievements since closing the merger between Sayona Mining and Piedmont Lithium, and provide a market update. I'd also like to mention that unless otherwise stated, all references to dollar amounts today are in U.S. dollars. We'll begin by providing an overview of the first half results for FY 2026, which can be found on slide four.
We produced approximately 96,000 tons of spodumene concentrate during the first half of the fiscal year and sold approximately 92,000 tons. Our financial position has improved, with revenue increasing by 8% to $86 million, and we ended December with $81 million in cash. This was the first half year operating as Elevra Lithium, following the closure of the merger between Sayona and Piedmont, and we've made significant advancements in growing our resource base and positioning the company for near-term growth through an expansion of production at NAL, or North American Lithium. Christian will provide more detail, but we generated $5 million in synergies over the four months post-merger completion and remain on track to achieve our stated goal of more than $15 million in annual recurring savings. Moving now to slide six.
North American Lithium, NAL, produced 96,156 dry metric tons of spodumene concentrate during the first half year, reflecting continued stable operations, with production 7% lower than the prior corresponding period. Ore availability was below expectations in the areas immediately adjacent to historical underground workings at NAL, which drove the need to supplement ore delivered to the mill with a higher percentage of volcanic rock, which contains lower lithium content and higher iron content than anticipated. This, in turn, reduced lithium recoveries during the December quarter. We're implementing specific actions in the pit and on our stockpiles to minimize the impact of future production. It is important to note that the ore availability challenges are of a temporary nature and not reflective of the NAL ore body. That is to say, these impacts were temporary rather than structural issues.
Despite the reduced concentrate output, NAL generated $5 million in operating cash flow, we are pleased to report that this was the best safety performance delivered to date. Moving to slide seven. We were pleased to report an increase in the mineral resource and ore reserve estimates at NAL and Moblan during the half year. At NAL, we saw a 124% increase in the reserves, this formed the basis for the evaluation of increased annual production in the NAL brownfield expansion scoping study, which was released in mid-September. Moblan continues to show that the asset is a large, high-grade resource and now stands as one of North America's largest single lithium deposits.
After incorporating the final results from our 2024 drill program, we were pleased to report a 30% increase in the mineral resource estimate to 120 million tons with a grade of 1.19%. A significant majority of the resource is included in the indicated category, which generally provides for a high rate of conversion to reserves. Back now to NAL. On slide eight, we provide more information about the proposed NAL brownfield expansion. Consolidating the ownership of NAL under one company to allow for increased annual production was a key driver of the merger between Sayona and Piedmont. We believe that a brownfield expansion is one of the most attractive lithium development projects across the industry.
We released a scoping study for the expansion on the 15th of September, which contemplated increasing the life of mine annual production to 315,000 tons of concentrate per year at a reduced C1 unit cost of $630 per ton, with an estimated capital cost of $270 million. The increased production and reduced unit costs create a compelling financial case to move forward with the expansion. New permitting information received since the completion of the scoping study has informed an accelerated approach to the expansion. Our accelerated approach will yield incremental production sooner, with an estimated 15%-20% increase in annual production delivered in the first stage, prior to reaching expanded nameplate capacity of 315,000 tons of concentrate per year.
This approach should also reduce the upfront capital intensity due to the staged nature of the expansion, and we will provide more detailed operational and financial benefits when we finalize the updated scoping study next quarter. Turning to the merger of Sayona and Piedmont on slide 10, I'd like to provide a brief update on the major milestones which were accomplished over the six-month period. We received strong shareholder support and completed the transaction, while also completing a placement with Resource Capital Funds, RCF, to provide additional financial flexibility. On the corporate side, we established a unified board and management team, completed our name and ticker transition, listed American depository shares, and executed a share consolidation. Operationally, we aligned functions across the organization, identified meaningful synergies, and prioritized our broader project pipeline to focus on capital efficiency.
Overall, the merger has positioned Elevra Lithium with stronger foundations, improved financial flexibility, and a clear pathway to execute on our operational and growth strategies. I'll now pass over to Christian Cortes.
Thank you, Lucas. Good morning to all. A few items to highlight before I take you through the financial performance of Elevra's first half year. The operational and financial results reported in the December 2025 half year include four months of Legacy Piedmont and six months of Sayona, following the completion of the merger at the end of August 2025. Elevra elected to change its reporting currency from Australian dollars to U.S. dollars during the half year. As such, prior corresponding period, amounts have been restated to U.S. dollars for comparative purposes. The amounts shown in the presentation have been rounded to the nearest million. Moving to Slide 12, to expand on the half year's operational and financial overview.
As mentioned by Lucas, NAL's half-year production of 96,156 dry metric tons was a 7% decrease compared to the prior half year, which was negatively impacted by temporary mine-related performance during the December quarter. Sales volume in concentrate totaled 91,991 dry metric tons, with three parcels delivered to customers. A 20% decrease from the prior corresponding period due to changes in shipping, scheduling, and lower inventory levels. Despite the reduction in sales volume, revenue increased to $86 million over the period. This was a function of a 34% increase in the average realized selling price to $937 per dry metric ton on an FOB basis, as the company benefit from significant improvement in market conditions as lithium prices climbed to a multi-year highs.
Unit operating costs per ton sold were $814 per dry metric ton during the half year, which was a 6% decrease from the prior corresponding period. Excluding impact from inventory movements, unit costs per ton produced were $831 per dry metric ton, which was a 14% increase, driven by lower production and increased stripping and processing costs. At group level, Elevra Lithium delivered its meeting underlying EBITDA profit of $1 million, compared to a prior period loss of $25 million. The group used cash in operating activities of $28 million during the period, which included $5 million of cash flows generated by NAL, offset by cash outflows of $24 million, associated with combined merger transaction costs of Elevra Lithium and Legacy Piedmont. Piedmont merger costs were accrued prior to completion date, $14 million were subsequently paid by Elevra Lithium.
Cash balance at the end of the period increased to $81 million from $69 million in the prior comparable period, mainly due to the receipt of proceeds from capital raise completed in the half year, partially offset by cash outflows from operations and capital expenditure. I will address in further detail EBITDA performance and cash flow movements in the following slides. Moving to Slide 13. NAL delivered an $11 million underlying EBITDA profit in the half year, compared to a $19 million loss in the prior comparable period. The removal of the legacy offtake agreement post-merger has further improved Elevra Lithium's ability to capture the market-aligned pricing and realize logistic cost synergies of $1 million, which were reflected in NAL's underlying profit.
Corporate expenditure of $9 million includes four months of Legacy Piedmont, and on a restated basis, is $4 million lower than the prior comparable period, combining legacy companies' overheads due to strong realization of synergies. Annualized synergies remain on track, with target in the range of $15 million-$20 million, most of which are expected to be reductions in corporate costs. The group profit after income tax of $74 million for the half year reflected a material $116 million increase from the prior comparable period, due to the improved underlying EBITDA and net benefits from extraordinary items associated with $156 million of NAL's impairment reversal and a write-up of inventory of $9 million, which was partially offset by a net $74 million cost related to Piedmont's acquisition accounting. Moving to Slide 14.
Prior year underlying EBITDA loss of $25 million has been adjusted in this slide to include Legacy Piedmont's standalone costs of $8 million for the four-month comparable period. Underlying EBITDA of $1 million profit in the half year ended 31st December 2025, was a significant improvement compared to a prior period adjusted loss of $33 million. largely due to the recovery in lithium prices, boosting profits by $22 million, and an improvement in unit costs of spodumene sold of $6 million. Elevra delivered a reduction in costs of $5 million related to synergies achieved in the four-month period as a merged company. The improvement in profit associated with volume in the half year relates to a reduction of volume sold when compared to prior comparable period, which reported higher volume sold at a loss. Moving to slide 15.
Opening cash balance of $47 million increased by 72% during the half year period to $81 million. NAL's net operating cash flows were $5 million, as the operation turned into profit during the half year. Outside of NAL, operating cash flows included $9 million outflow related to corporate activities and $24 million outflow attributable to merger-related costs, of which $10 million were attributable to Elevra, inclusive of accrued $2 million at 30 June 2025, and $14 million of Piedmont merger-related costs, which were accounted for prior to merger completion and subsequently paid by Elevra. Investing net cash inflows were $20 million for the period, mainly due to the cash balance contributed by Piedmont on merger completion date of $34 million and $2 million inflow for sale of land from Legacy Piedmont. This was partially offset by NAL's capital expenditure of $16 million.
The group received proceeds of $44 million from an equity placement completed in September 2025. Moving to slide 16. Elevra's net asset position was significantly bolstered during the half year period, increasing by 82% from $311 million at the end of June 2025 to $565 million at the end of December 2025. The significantly improved balance sheet is a result of the benefits of the merger, which resulted in Piedmont contributing $58 million of net assets to Elevra, an equity placement of $44 million, which was conditional upon merger completion, and the reversal of impairment at NAL of $156 million, which reflects higher future sales prices expected from the elimination of the legacy offtake agreement with Piedmont. Elevra is well positioned into the future with a stronger balance sheet at the end of the half year. I'll hand back to Lucas.
Thanks, Christian. I'd like to provide some commentary on the market. On slide 18, you will see that spodumene concentrate prices rose sharply over the period, and this had a positive impact on the business. Pricing troughed in the middle of 2025, but strong demand heading into calendar year 2027 led to a stronger rebound. The demand outlook remains strong, with expectations that lithium demand will double over the remainder of the decade, and lithium pricing will be a factor we consider when developing our growth projects. Lithium remains a relatively small and immature market, and we expect to see further volatility in lithium prices. Pricing can change quickly, and this is why we believe it is important to remain disciplined in our execution and continue producing throughout periods of low pricing to capitalize on positive pricing momentum. I'd like to end my remarks on slide 19.
As we look to the second half of FY 2026, we remain on track to deliver within the guidance ranges we presented as part of our December quarterly results. We will now take questions.
If you wish to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. That is star one if you wish to ask a question. Your first question comes on line of Austin Yun from Macquarie. Your line is open.
Morning, Lucas and team. Just a question on the reversal of the impairment of $150 million in the half. Just can't understand what are the underlying assets being impacted. Did you reverse the value for the downstream calciners at North American Lithium? Any comment will be appreciated. Thank you.
Thanks, Austin. I'll pass it across to Christian. He can walk you through exactly what was the underlying, the underlying elements in relation to the impairment reversal. Christian, over to you.
Thanks, Lucas. Hi, Austin. Thanks for the question. The reversal excludes effectively any individual assets that we have impaired. Coming back to your question, any downstream assets that effectively came through had already been impaired. There is effectively no reversal associated with those items. The $156 million that we're reporting is effectively the assets that are effectively being used at operations, and that is effectively net of the associated depreciation that these assets would have effectively reflected in the P&L if they had been at that gross stock value for the half year.
Okay, thank you. Just a quick follow-up. How should we think about the depreciation charges going forward? Should we anticipate a step up on the D&A side going forward?
I mean, obviously the, you know, the carrying value of the assets at NAL, a portion of those are depreciated based on life of mine. Other assets that are specifically expected to be replaced, at a shorter period, they have a shorter depreciation use life. You know, when we talk about expansion in the event of some of that equipment being replaced sooner in the future, we'll obviously have to assess change in the depreciation useful life of those specific assets.
Thank you. That's clear. The second question is on the company growth outlook, like, yeah, we're going to be waiting for this brownfield expansion study. Outside of the North America, I'm keen to understand the update on your Ewoyaa project. Has there been any update? Understanding that the project is still waiting for the government approval. Yeah, any update on that front?
Thanks, Austin. You will have seen that Atlantic Lithium provided an update to the market in recent days, indicating that, they've got no additional news on the ratification process. Commentary is consistent with what we've provided. Really nothing to report at this stage, Austin, in terms of progress at Ewoyaa.
Understood. Lastly, just a question on the operational front. It's coming to a spring for the northern hemisphere, any color you could provide on the mining condition? I know usually this period is a bit muddy, and it could hinder the material movements. I'm not sure if there's anything that doesn't can provide. Thank you.
Thanks, Austin. I can certainly tell you that Sylvain continues to send me photos of him shoveling snow off his roof, so we've had plenty of snow this winter. Encouragingly, the mitigation actions that Sylvain and the team put in place last winter have worked well, and we haven't seen any impact. We're still really in the throes of winter on site, Austin, so we really haven't seen any melting as yet. Sylvain and the team are really well set up to be able to manage it, so we're not expecting any impact, and we've had a strong start to this quarter.
Thank you. I'll pass that.
Thanks, Austin.
Your next question comes from the line of Reg Spencer from Canaccord Genuity. Your line is open.
Thank you. Morning, Lucas and Christian. Austin beat me to the punch on the Ewoyaa questions and status there. My remaining question, I guess, is a little bit bigger picture. Rio Tinto have opted to invest further in Bécancour in Nebraska. What might that mean for your offtake and product marketing strategy in the medium to longer term? You know, clearly, there's a plan from Rio Tinto to integrate with Whabouchi. You know, having an operating conversion facility, I'm not going to say down the road, but certainly within relatively close proximity, could have some benefits for you guys. Are you in a position to say whether you've had conversations with them around product marketing?
Reg, I'll pass to Christian. Christian's since moving in, has taken ownership of the marketing book as well as obviously as part of his CFO duty. Christian, you might want to provide some color in response to Reg's question.
Thanks, Lucas. Hi, Reg. I mean, that was a very recent announcement from Rio. If you look closely at that announcement, Reg, Rio is effectively suggesting that first production coming out of Bécancour is estimated to be in 2028. We obviously don't have insight to understand in detail what does that mean, but if that is their plan and expectation, obviously there's no short-term opportunities to supply them with products. In the event of that changing, you know, it would make sense for both companies to look at a way in which we can effectively support them with feedstock before they integrate their offstream. You know, I guess we'll have to wait and see what additional details they provide in the next six months.
Understood. Thanks, Christian. Do you have any idea what the status of Whabouchi is at the moment? Because there seem to be commentary around Elk Creek, but nothing on Whabouchi itself.
No, Reg, I really have no insight as to, you know, what they're deciding to do with either of those two upstream assets, the Galaxy asset and the Whabouchi asset. I believe they've indicated that they were gonna come back with further details as to how they see Canada developing overall later this year, but that's the best of my understanding to date.
Excellent. That's great. Look, thanks very much, Christian, and thanks, Lucas, and team.
Thanks, Reg.
Thanks, Reg.
Reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from the line of Noel Parks from Tuohy Brothers Investment Research. Your line is open.
Hello, good morning. I just wondered if you had any thoughts on Albemarle's recent comments about Kings Mountain and restarting there. It sounds like despite a good bit of rationalization of where they're putting capital, that has moved a little higher up their list and, you know, with some deployment of resources there. Just any thoughts on whether there might be any read-through for Carolina Lithium?
I think, Noel, in terms of Carolina Lithium, probably just to restate a leverage strategy, we're very much a hard rock spodumene concentrate producer. You know, we're good at exploring, developing, and operating hard rock spodumene mines. Our Carolina project contemplates at being an integrated facility, just given the nature of the size of the ore body and the grade of the ore body, for it to be competitive, it really needs a lithium hydroxide facility or a lithium carbonate plant in close proximity to it to effectively vertically integrate and make it cost competitive.
Given our expertise is not in that space, for us to be able to advance Carolina in a meaningful manner, we are engaging in and seeking out technical partners. That technical partner will need to be able to bring operating capability and also an appropriate balance sheet. There's clearly good support from the U.S. government in terms of bringing downstream processing onshore and into the U.S. We'd expect that good government support would be there. The key to the puzzle is finding that technical partner. Until we've done that, you know, it's really a case of us just pushing Carolina along in terms of permitting and rezoning and those sort of enabling activities. Probably not a great deal for us to take from Albemarle's musings in that space, Noel.
Carolina remains a strategically important project within our portfolio. Having said that, our immediate focus is very much around the NAL brownfield expansion.
Great. Thanks a lot.
Thanks, Noel.
Currently, there are no further questions on the phone lines. I'd like to hand back for written questions.
Thank you. I do have a question, which you partly answered, Lucas, about providing an update on the assets other than NAL and your thoughts about how they contribute to the overall portfolio valuation.
Thanks, Andrew. I think just to reiterate, NAL is our immediate focus. We've got near-term brownfield expansion capability, and Sylvain and the team are already working through that work. Effectively, we'll break that down into three phases, with the first phase being very much focused on debottlenecking and being able to bring that incremental 15%-20% of volume to life during the course of calendar year 2027, with the ensuing stages the following calendar years 2028 and 2029. As we mentioned with Authier, we obviously like that project. Technically, it's great. A few challenges around the JV structure that we picked up as part of the merger. We're working with Atlantic in a constructive way on that, but it's gonna be difficult for us to motivate capital under the terms of the existing JV structure.
That's an area that we continue to work with Atlantic on. The other areas, our other projects, Moblan, in the sequencing, environmental baselining and study work has commenced. Historically, greenfield projects of the size of Moblan will require at least five years of permitting. Prime Minister Carney has made reference to endeavoring to want to shorten that. We'll clearly take advantage of that if that is the case, but we're, at this stage, our baseline or base plan is on historical performance around that five years. The team in Quebec is working through diligently around the environmental studies. We will also provide an economic study based on the increased resource base. We expect to undertake that during the second half of this calendar year. Finally, I've touched briefly on Carolina.
As I said, very strategically important project. It's got value in our portfolio, but it's really the key to unlocking the value there is being able to find a partner that can bring the expertise to be able to build and operate a downstream lithium chemical conversion facility, and in addition to that, would be likely government support and funding that would enable that to occur. That's a quick snapshot, Andrew, of the status of the projects in the portfolio.
All right, thanks. Next question is, what's the current cash margin at prevailing spot prices, and what floor price would ensure NAL remains cash flow positive?
Yeah, I'll just provide a couple of initial comments. Obviously, the cost guidance that we provided will give people an indication of where floor price needs to be to be operating cash flow positive at NAL, and also providing an indication of where our corporate costs are. I think folks can read through and work those out for themselves. Similarly, you'll be able to extract the margins based on the prevailing price. We're shipping concentrate in the order of sort of 5.2%- 5% concentrate grade, so you've obviously got a great adjusted SC6 prices in line with those elements. Christian, anything else that you wanted to add there?
I guess, Lucas, we put out guidance right recently about what we expect, exactly cost of goods sold to come out on a, on a dry metric ton in the range of $860-$880. As, as you explained already, you know, it's a calculation of effectively estimating, you know, at 5% of spodumene concentrate that we're putting in the market. If we are receiving market price, you know, anyone can effectively try to work out what's the price that we're expecting to receive based on current price indexes and as they move through the rest of the six-month period. With the cost of goods sold that we provided, I think that's a pretty good estimate of what the cash margins will come at in the remaining period of the FY 2026 fiscal year.
Thanks, Christian.
Thanks, Christian. just can you comment, beyond Mangrove Lithium, are there any other discussions around offtake or around hydroxide conversion?
We've seen, we've been approached, and there's ongoing conversations in relation to potential offtakes, but, obviously, they're confidential in nature. If there's anything to update in line with our continuous disclosure obligations, we'll be sure to inform the market.
Great, thanks. Just a further question on the NAL expansion. Just can it be accelerated any further than what we've outlined? Has there been any change in supplier behavior in terms of bringing new supply in, onto the market?
Short answer, I think, the excellent work that Sylvain and the team have done around improving the schedule for bringing the brownfield expansion online and in a staged approach, it's unlikely that we'll be able to accelerate that significantly further than what we had done since September. I think it's, it actually is a really great result from the work of Sylvain and the team. Sorry, Andrew, on the second component was, there was a second component there on that question?
It was with regard to supplier behavior, bringing new production into the market. Has there been any change?
Yeah
in what you've seen?
Yeah, I think the short answer is, not to date. The reality is, and if the question is framed in the context of the brownfield expansion, whilst the volume will be meaningful for us at Elevra Lithium, in the scheme of the market, it's not going to disturb or distort pricing. None of those sort of indications have had a direct impact. Obviously, there's been some suggested potential restarts, capacity or idle capacity in Western Australia. Obviously, they're now priced into the market, I think, you know, people should take what they're seeing in terms of spot prices as a decent read-through of a fully informed market at this point.
Thanks. There are no further questions from the webcast, but I think there might be one more from the call.
Your next question comes line of Andrew Harrington from Petra Capital. Your line is open.
Thank you, Lucas, Christian, Andrew. Question about offtake. Where is the top three destinations? Is everything still going to China? Where is Tesla in your, you know, figuring? Sort of what's the, what's the sort of view for the next, you know, let's say 2030, of how you'd like your offtake to shape up in terms of destinations?
Christian. Thanks, Andrew. Christian, over to you.
Hi, Andrew. Thanks for your question. With regards to the half year, we reported out of the three parcels that we effectively delivered, one of those went to the U.S., the remaining went to China. As we look forward for what will be the remaining of this financial year, I would expect a similar split, i.e., one shipment or one delivery to the U.S. and the remaining to China. I mean, more importantly, your question on how do we see this developing in the next years, it really is a function as to how the supply chain develops in the region. Ideally, you know, we would obviously like to support customers that are based in the Americas region, but the reality is, you know, there is very little conversion capacity at the moment.
As that effectively changes over time and that grows, we believe that we'll be well-placed to serve that part of the world. Until that happens, unfortunately, you know, the majority or most of the entire conversion capacity is in China.
Great. Thank you. What's, besides Corpus Christi, where else, is on the horizon, in North America and Bécancour?
Yeah. The question was asked about Bécancour, which has guided that they'll likely continue with progressing that project this year. Again, first production expected in 2028. That leaves obviously, a gap as to when those requirements will come through, and if they do, whether it's gonna be effectively serviced by their integrated supply, i.e., their upstream coming online. As we announced, Mangrove has the ambition to effectively build conversion capacity in the region. Assuming that is successful, you know, we'll be well-placed with that non-binding MOU that we already announced a month ago or so.
Okay, cheers. Thank you.
Thank you.
There are no further questions on the phone lines. I'm going to hand back.
Thank you. I just want to say thank you, everyone, for joining the call, and we look forward to speaking to you at our next quarterly update. Thank you.