I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Graham Kerr, Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining us today. On the call with me is our Chief Financial Officer, Sandy Sibenaler, and our Chief Operating Officers, Vanessa Torres and Noel Pillay. Before I give a summary of our financial results for FY25, I'd like to acknowledge the tragic loss of our colleague, José Luis Pérez, who was fatally injured at Cerro Matoso in September. Our thoughts remain with Mr. Pérez's family, friends, and colleagues. An investigation into the incident was completed, and we shared learnings across our business with actions taken to prevent a similar incident from happening again. During the year, we continued to implement our Safety Improvement Program, which is supporting measurable improvements in our safety performance. While it is encouraging to see a positive shift in our leading and lagging safety indicators, we remain focused on continuously improving and embedding safety leadership across our organization.
Nothing is more important than our people going home safely at the end of every shift. Turning to FY25 results, we increased our production of minerals and metals critical to the global energy transition, delivering annual production growth of 20% in copper and 6% in aluminium. Our strong operating performance enabled the group to capitalize on improved commodity prices, with underlying EBITDA increasing by 7% to $1.9 billion and underlying earnings increasing to $666 million. Operating free cash flow increased by $272 million, and we improved our net cash position by $895 million to $123 million, supported by proceeds from the sale of Illawarra Metallurgical Coal. At the same time, we invested $517 million to grow our future-based metals production at Hermosa and returned $350 million to shareholders.
Reflecting our strong financial performance today, we have announced a $0.40 ordinary dividend of $117 million, or $2.60 per share in respect to the June 2025 half year, and a 12-month extension of our capital management program with $144 million remaining to return to shareholders. We are focused on maintaining our positive operating momentum into FY26. We are developing new bauxite mining areas at Worsley Alumina after securing primary state and federal government approvals to extend the operation's mine life earlier in the year. Improved bauxite availability is expected to support a 4% increase in production in FY27 and improved operating unit costs as the refinery turns towards nameplate capacity. Brazil Alumina is expected to operate near nameplate capacity in FY26, and unit costs are expected to trend lower due to a reduction in plant maintenance and lower bauxite prices from MRN.
In aluminium, Hillside continues to test its maximum technical capacity, and in Brazil, volumes are expected to increase by 16% in FY26 and a further 3% in FY27 as the smelter continues to ramp up. As announced earlier this month, due to the uncertainty of electricity supply, we have stopped pot relighting at Mozal Aluminium and currently expect that the smelter will be placed on care and maintenance in March 2026 when the current agreement expires. Turning to our base metals operations, FY26 production guidance at Sierra Gorda is unchanged, and we expect 5% production growth in FY27 due to higher copper grades. Sierra Gorda continues to progress brownfield growth options to increase future volumes and unlock the exploration potential of the Catabela Northeast prospect. At Cannington, we have completed our mine plan review designed to manage more complex underground conditions and deliver reliable mining rates.
We are working to embed further cost savings as we optimize contractor and equipment requirements and advancing options to extend the current reserve life of six years with the remaining underground resource and open pit opportunity providing significant potential. At Australia Manganese, we completed the operational recovery plan following the impacts of Tropical Cyclone Megan, with export shipments on track to reach full capacity this quarter. With the recovery plan now complete, work is underway on options to extend GEMCO's mine life. We continued our portfolio transformation in FY25, realizing significant value through the sale of Illawarra Metallurgical Coal and exiting lower returning businesses. This has further streamlined our portfolio towards higher margin businesses, reduced complexity, and unlocked capital to invest in our higher returning growth options in base metals.
At our regional scale Hermosa project in Arizona, we achieved key construction and permitting milestones for the Taylor zinc-lead-silver project in FY25, and construction activity for the shafts and surface infrastructure is set to increase in FY26. Costs for packages of water to date for Taylor have been within expectations. While we have not seen material direct impacts from U.S. tariffs, we continue to monitor potential inflationary pressures as we progress the remaining packages. We are progressing work to unlock value across Hermosa's highly prospective land package, and today announced an upgraded mineral resource for the Peak Deposit. Exploration results from Peak support the potential for a copper-dominant mineralized system, and we are continuing study work on the potential to add copper production from Peak, leveraging the infrastructure established for Taylor. In closing, we have simplified and improved our portfolio.
Our operations are performing well, our balance sheet is strong, our pipeline of base metals options has the potential to underpin significant growth, and our unchanged capital management framework is designed to reward shareholders as we capitalize on increasing demand for the minerals and metals needed for the global energy transition. I'm happy to take questions from here.
Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please take off the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from a line of Rahul Anand with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Can I press star eight?
Hi, Rahul. How are you going? Hello? Looks like we might have lost our first question, so we might go to the next one. Maybe, operator, can we go to the second question, please?
Second question comes from a line of Paul Young with Goldman Sachs. Please proceed with your question.
Thanks. Morning, Graham. Hello, Sandy, Vanessa, and Noel. Graham, I hope you can hear me.
Yep, can hear you loud and clear, Paul.
Excellent. Thank you. Graham, first question is on Mozal. Obviously, a pretty tough situation over in Mozambique. Not easy conversations, just wanted to dig into that. There's no sort of firm update with this release. I know you've already written down the asset and you've sort of reached a bit of a stalemate, it appears. Just curious around how wide the spread is between the demands on that power contract. If you can just flesh that out a little bit. Also, more so, what power increase can you absorb at that smelter if you can guide to, you know, a megawatt hour, a dollar per megawatt hour, or a dollar million, or like what are we talking as far as the spread here between your demands and the government's demands?
Yeah, thanks, Paul. Obviously, a question on lots of people's minds. I'd start by saying, look, we're proud o`f our 26+ years of Mozal in Mozambique. Indirectly, directly, it's over 5,000 jobs. It's about 3.5% of the GDP. We believe it's a big contributor to the economy and the social fabric around the pool and the broader Mozambique. It's tough for our people, obviously, managing their way through this indecision or, if you like, the stalemate we're at. To put it in perspective, we use about 950 MW that come from the Cahora Bassa effectively. Of that 950 MW, traditionally, we obviously have an agreement around price and quantity. The current contract expires in March next year. Up to probably four or five months ago, we thought we only had one challenge, and that challenge was around agreeing a price for the contract extension to 2030.
What has developed late in the end of last financial year is the Cahora Bassa has had a severe drought and is probably running at some of the lowest levels ever when it comes to the water levels, probably about 20% of capacity. As a consequence, we not only have a price, we have a volume challenge. Coming out of the Cahora Bassa, we're being told that we could secure about 350 MW of the 950 MW that we need, with the balance having to come from probably the South African grid. You've got the complexity of two different sources and then pricing. What do we think is a reasonable power contract that allows you to get a return? It's probably something similar around, you know, like a Hillside kind of rate. What do we think is unfathomable?
Put it this way, I think if you look at the Wood Mackenzie CIU cost curve, any smelter that probably has a power contract in excess of $50 a MWh is not making any kind of money, and at the moment, the government request is in excess of that. There's quite a large gap on price, and also we've got to secure volume not only via HCB but also Eskom. We've got the complexity of that. That's the reason we're in the stalemate. That's the reason we're starting to prepare for care and maintenance of the smelter, which is not the outcome we're looking for, but there is actually a lot of challenge in front of us to resolve this.
Yep. Okay. Thanks, Graham. Good detail. Maybe switching to Hermosa. I know you've provided an update on just construction progress and some of the awarding of some of the contracts. There's been a bit of a discussion around projects similar to this in the U.S. experiencing cost increase due to tariff-related issues with underground mining equipment and cabling and other processing equipment, et cetera. Can you maybe just provide some comfort as to where contingencies are at and also the progress of the project from a contract award and what gives you the comfort that the budget is intact or is it more the fact that, as we stand today, there are risks with that CapEx?
Look, I think, Paul, if you're going to be absolutely open, I think any project that runs over three or four years, you know, you have the risk of things shifting over time. Have we seen any of that to date? No. If we think about the progress of where we are, we still have a number of contracts to be awarded on the surface and lateral development. Obviously, what we have got to focus on in execution is both shafts, and we started the foundations or the first piece of package on the actual surface work. Those to date, the surface work that was done on foundations in phase one have come well within the bid estimates, so we're comfortable on that side. A shaft, to me, is always having enough experience with shafts.
I never get too excited until we get to the bottom of a shaft and we make lots of progress. We've got a fair bit to go on that yet before we call success. What I can say is the positives, the ground conditions at the moment are holding up as we expected. The water has become a non-issue. The bench shaft is probably about 370 m complete of the 824 m, and the main shaft is about 70 m of the 898 m. That's 47% of the shaft for the bench shaft and 7% of the main shaft. Still a long way to go on that piece. To date, we haven't seen anything that's giving us concerns, and we feel like we've got enough contingency and escalation to cover this. I think what I would take away is the other positives that are easily forgotten.
You're right around capital increase across North American projects, but I think the positives for us is, you know, we remain on schedule to meet the FAST- 41 milestone. The draft EIS was published in quarter four, FY25. The final EIS is expected in H2 FY26, and we expect after that that, you know, we'll quickly get our federal approval. We have all our state approvals now, and we're obviously in construction. I think the other advantage for us, as you saw with Peak, we had a substantial increase in the resource. We've got more drilling to be done on Peak by the end of the year to understand the size of that and now how it fits in the mine plan sequence. Clark itself was ahead of schedule. The decline is about 71% complete, and obviously, we continue to get some funding assistance from the DOD on that.
Unlike everything in the U.S., we're going back through the DOE funding, but we expect to keep that at the same time. I think if I sit back and say one of the things that I watch with the project with interest, great people there, I think making great progress with the community. That's not an issue. To me, it's going to be the shafts because there's still a long way to go. The other one for me is while the direct impact on tariffs has not seemed material at this stage, there is a lot of uncertainty around them. The one thing we're watching with interest are some of the early indicators around steel, concrete, and labor rates. While we haven't seen that dramatically shift yet in terms of unit costs, we have seen some of the windows start to push out on steel considerably.
We secured all our steel for obviously the shafts because they're up and running, and the first piece of the processing facility. Obviously, watching steel, cement, labor rates, I think is going to be the bigger driver for us if there is inflation that takes off in the U.S. driven by tariffs. Does that help, Paul?
Yes, it does, Graham. Thank you. Conscious of time for everyone, I'll pass it on.
Your next question comes from Rahul Anand with Morgan Stanley. Please.
Take two, guys. Can you hear me now?
Can you hear me now, Rahul? Thanks.
Brilliant. Okay. Thanks. Thanks for the call, Graham and team. Look, two questions from me. Perhaps we start with Worsley. Last, I guess the first half financials, you did talk about how FY26 was going to be a transition year for the asset, obviously given the mining challenges that you've had there. FY27 should see improvements. If I go back a bit in time, I think you added about $5 a tonne to your previous guidances for the asset, and I think you landed up at Worsley for 2025 to 2028, averaging around $275- $295. Given where we sit for 2026, how should we think about that medium-term range? Is this a good time to kind of be revising that a bit, or do you think it's a bit early to do that today?
Yeah. Maybe if we go through a couple of things, I think first and foremost, it was great to get the approvals for the Wisconsin, giving another reserve life of 11+ years, keeping in mind the complex has 50+ years in resource. We started mining in the new areas in the fourth quarter of FY25, so that's nulliger. We've got, we expect to get that all from that area more around FY27. As a consequence, we'll see volumes increase in FY27 to sort of talk about that. The number that we gave around $275- $295 was real U.S. dollars at that time. Obviously, there's a little bit of inflation. There's obviously a little bit of exchange movement.
If I sort of take that back and focus on what would be the key messages I'll give you, you know, this year's guidance versus last year, we've seen about a $10 increase, of which three is FX and six is gas prices in WA . I do expect in, you know, FY27, we expect a benefit in costs from obviously the increasing production that will come through, which I think will sort of push that price back, the costs back down again.
Got it. Okay. Still healthy, that guidance range, I guess, within the bounds of inflation and gas prices, of course. Okay, great. The second one was Sierra Gorda. Obviously, we're getting close to that FID expected this half now. I guess two things to touch upon there from my end would be if you can help us with any sort of latest update in terms of obviously that detailed engineering and study work on the tailing thickener and how that performance has gone. Obviously, that was the key bottleneck there. Anything on the capital side as well in terms of any sort of changes. Thanks.
Yeah, look, I would say when you think about the fit, obviously, the first piece we've always spoken about is getting the CPs of all three thickeners up to the required level that we need. We are seeing improvements in that. In the newly installed one, we've seen it hit the target on a regular basis. Of the older two, one's sort of been floating around. There is a bit of work we're doing on repowering to sort of get that up to where we need it to actually be. We expect to start seeing those results flow through this second half, which leads us into a decision on the fit towards the back end of this calendar year. It is very dependent, obviously, on the economics, which we think should stack up strongly, but very dependent on achieving the CPs that we need there.
Obviously, you know, it's going to take two for Tango. We need our partner to also agree to support this project. Nothing tells me that they're not going to, my last discussion with the CEO, but obviously, we're still going to have that discussion when they bring the case forward. The guidance we've given in the past, you know, is that generally you'd expect a project like that, and keeping in mind it's not finalized yet, the study, it would have about a three-year construction phase. Typically, the CapEx, if you escalate about what you're seeing in the current marketplace, you're probably looking at somewhere in 100% terms around $700 million. I think what I'd keep in mind, you know, that capital intensity is still very low compared to what you're seeing in that region with other projects.
We'll continue to progress that work, and we're certainly expecting to try and have it finished by the end of this calendar year, but noting it is dependent on our JV partner being on the same page, but also obviously getting the thickeners and the CP out where we need it to be. I think the other positive from Sierra Gorda is, you know, you did see in FY25 an improvement in the moly, which allowed us to lift grades and recoveries. Particularly as we get into FY27, we expect to see a jump in grade at Sierra Gorda. Some of the work we're doing on Catabela Northeast, you know, continues to sort of indicate this strong ability there to continue to grow that business.
Got it. Okay. All right. No, that's my two. Thank you very much. I'll pass it on.
Thanks, Rahul.
Your next question comes from the line of Kaan Peker with RBC. Please go ahead.
Good day, Graham and Sandy. Thanks for taking my questions. One's on Cannington. I know you've given FY26 cost guidance, but just wondering, given the age of the asset and the ore body, should we assume that unit costs continue to sort of structurally shift higher? Will there be additional lumpy CapEx required to ensure reserve life is achieved?
Yeah, look, maybe if we take one step back and certainly recognize your point that, you know, Cannington itself was probably 27 years now in operation. It's certainly got more complex as time's gone by, but it's certainly got a very healthy EBITDA margin still and cash flow strong generator. In terms of CapEx, you know, there are some normal structural integrity CapEx we continue to spend because it has gone past its useful life, but I wouldn't say that's material. I think what we are going to still see month on month, quarter on quarter is variabilities because the stope sequence we have going forward, you know, is going to pretty much be what it is. In that stope sequence, we see strong variability in grade from individual stope to stope.
I think a couple of positives I would sort of add is, I for one, I'd start by saying, look, I do think there is potential to take more costs out of the actual business. You know, we've been very much focused to date on what do we think is an achievable mine plan, turnaround of stopes, pace, et cetera. The team now is just starting to look at that cost base. I think the other thing I'd say is, look, the reserve life for the underground, you know, we were talking this time last year about five years. You've actually gone by a year, and we're now telling you it's six years. We've also done some work on some other areas in the mine, and we'll finalize that over the next 6 months- 12 months.
There is a potential, I think, to squeeze another couple of years on top of that six out of the underground. We've also been doing some work on, you know, some lower grade material that sits in stockpiles and various parts of the open pit and underground shelves. We think we can actually, we've done some work that we think will potentially allow us to extract that lower grade material, whereas previously that's been challenging. I think there's actually probably more hope in the open pit than I thought there was probably 12 months- 18 months ago. It's still very dependent on silver price, and we don't take today's spot silver price and take it forward to sort of make our economic justification.
I would expect, you know, more costs to come out of the business, an extension of the underground, maybe another couple of years on top of the six, and a bit more potential on the open pit than I would have said maybe 12 months- 18 months ago with some of the metallurgical work we've been doing.
Sure. No, thank you. Maybe a second one on the dividend. I know without earnings from GEMCO, the franked credit generation wasn't as significant this year. How much did that play into the thinking around the dividend and the buyback trade-off, especially given that the buyback has been going slow this year?
Sandy, CFO, you want to take that one?
Absolutely. From a franking balance perspective, we're still carrying a very, very positive position. It didn't feed into the decision at all around where we sat with capital management. Obviously, we have the same position we've always had with that 40% underlying payout ratio, and we're complementing that with the buyback, which we've extended as was expected, I think. At this point in time, in terms of our franking balance, we do expect to have that sort of capable for franking out to the end of this decade for sure.
Thank you.
Your next question comes from the line of Rob Stein with Macquarie. Please go ahead.
Hi, team. Just a quick one on Cannington. Some increased sort of disclosure and optionality around what you're looking to do there. Is this part of trying to increase the life of the asset to potentially sell the asset or demerge it or something along those lines, sweeping it up for sale? Or is this something that you're critically focused on given that it's been a core asset in the portfolio for quite some time and you'd like to see it extended? Thank you.
Yeah, look, I think it's more the latter. It's a core asset in the portfolio. It has a high margin. You know, this has been, if you think about the transition in Cannington over the last couple of years, we've gone from the shafts to trucking, and then we've gone to far more stopes. I think this is a natural evolution of that work plan that's been in place for a period of time. I would certainly say we see it as an attractive asset, but I'll be open, like everything else in the portfolio, from Taylor to Hillside to Worsley to Cannington, everything's for sale at the right price. If someone's willing to pay us more than we think it's worth, absolutely, we'll sell it.
Just similarly on GEMCO, I guess the talking up the resource beyond the existing mining leases and the southern area and the northern area, that looks to extend the life there, noting the six-year reserve life. Is that an asset that you see having a life beyond the mid-2030s, 2040s? How was the recent shut? How did that change perceptions in the local community and the importance of mining in the area?
Yeah, look, I mean, that's a good question. For us, GEMCO is one of the tier one assets in that industry. Gibbons, the other one, obviously, they're a med owner. High quality, you know, very low, if you like, materials that have an impact on processing close to the customer, low cost base, etc. For us, it's always been about how do you add more areas. The western areas and the eastern areas have always been in the plans. The southern areas are something that we had to seek and get approval from the traditional landowners. It's their decision if we want to mine it or not. We've been given, if you like, a portion to access there. We've been doing some work on that.
Between that and what we believe we have in the rest of the eastern leases, so the eastern leases, north and the southern areas, on top of the six that's currently in the reserve, we probably think there's another two and a half that will come through on the study. I think for us, the northern leases have been in moratorium for a number of years, which means that we're not actually even allowed to talk about it with anyone. That came out of the moratorium recently. Obviously, as soon as it did, we wanted to engage the TOs on this because it's been a land that's never been explored or looked at before. We'd like to do some exploration to understand the potential there.
Obviously, we've received permission to actually do that, not for all the northern areas, but a portion of the northern areas, which I think is a good starting point. Look at our relationship with the ALC and TOs. I think it continues to be strong. Obviously, we work together closely, recovering from the cyclone and supporting each other through that process. In the end, it's their land. They make decisions about what we can and can't do. It's important we keep that positive engagement. No doubt fiscally, they would have felt like we did the pain of Cyclone Tracy over the last 12 months and not producing. I think, you know, for us, it's more alignment on the potential we can grow there. If we can add five to ten years at GEMCO, I think it continues then to be one of the world's leading manganese suppliers.
That's our focus on trying to do that.
Thank you.
Your next question comes from the line of Lachlan Shaw with UBS. Please go ahead.
Yeah, good morning, Graham and Sandy. Thanks for your time. A couple from me. Firstly, I just wanted to reflect, you know, pleasing free cash generation in the year, which is good to see. I wanted to test your thinking here about next year. Obviously, CapEx is stepping up, but you've got Cannington, the downgrade there, Mozal going into care and maintenance, and obviously, GEMCO is back for a full-year contribution. Can you just sort of help us think about what you're thinking or how you're targeting or what you're thinking you can manage in terms of free cash generation for 2026? I'll come back with my second.
Yeah, and I'll get Sandy to talk a little bit about that, knowing obviously your view on price. Obviously, it's a big driver of that, knowing the prices, if you like, are probably being so volatile with what's going on, some of the tariffs and other movements at the moment. I would say, first and foremost, without a doubt, we see this year and next year, as was put out in the big case for Taylor, these are the two peak CapEx periods, and there's even a step up this year. Maybe, Sandy, you can go into the rest of it.
Yeah, I mean, we're looking forward to a positive outlook on cash working profit. We've got strong operating momentum going into the year. We expect both refineries, aluminum refineries, to be operating near their nameplate capacity. We've got aluminium ramp up on Brazil. We expect that to be close to break-even or at break-even. Hillside maintain their strong performance. Sierra Gorda obviously maintained their discipline there in operations and expect sort of grade to be elevated as it was in 2025. GEMCO, we do expect to see returning to normalized production rates. We won't have that CapEx draw, and we are anticipating a settlement on insurance during the FY26 year, which will be a pleasing outcome there.
Of course, as you touched on, Cannington, we'll have that revised mine plan, but we do expect to be cash flow generative for the group, and we'll have that ongoing optimization of cost, as Graham touched on. We do anticipate some really good positives coming through there into the cash flow. Obviously, we do see that peak capital period now in Taylor, but we have set ourselves well with the balance sheet where it's positioned, and obviously, we are confident in our operations through the year as well.
I think the other thing I'd add is obviously we're still a while out of the portfolio, and also Cerro Matoso is on track to be out by the end of this calendar year. You continue to see simplification of the group in terms of how we are. You have to go back to FY16 when we effectively started. We've gone from 16 to 9 operating sites. We've gone from over 14,000 employees down to 8,000. Our margins have increased and also our ROIC has increased. I think our ability to sort of take out those low value-add businesses that were higher capital intensity will all set us in good position around free cash flow generation going forward. There are some uncertainties around obviously the key ones being commodity prices, but also what happens at Mozal.
That's great. Helpful. Thank you. Second question is, I guess, a bit of a question on the alumina markets. We're seeing sort of signs, you know, increased supply ramping up out of Indonesia. Guinea is taking a lift out of the Indonesian strategy there, and China is issuing new bauxite mine licenses in Shanxi and Henan. I suppose my question is, how are you guys seeing the alumina market on a short to medium term? Do you think, you know, are you sort of alert to the possibility of cost curve flattening there? Thanks very much.
Yeah, look, maybe a couple of things we'd say is we obviously sit down every couple of years and we sort of put together what we think the price forecasts are going to be for our key commodities. I should say every couple of years. What I was going to say is that if you want, alumina probably has remained unchanged for a number of years. That has, you know, what you're talking about, the movement of refineries from inland to the coast, the ramp-up of production and bauxite out of Guinea. I think in particular, the developments that we're seeing in Indonesia are probably going at the pace that we expected them to go. We haven't shifted our medium long-term view on alumina. We do have a belief that historically we showed it on slot 33 in our pack.
You do actually see alumina price can be highly volatile depending on supply disruptions, which we have seen in 2021, which we've seen in 2024. I think the market, while there is some new production coming, I would say look today, it just takes one of those projects to fall out or to have a supply disruption and you actually see quite a spike in price. To your point in Guinea, absolutely, you're seeing some new licenses being put out there, but some of them are revoked licenses from people like EGA. It's forcing, while only a small amount, they are forcing some further processing in country. Not material will probably shift the needle. I would say our long-term view on alumina probably hasn't changed in the last five or so years. It is kind of playing out how we expect.
I guess the one that I will watch probably most closely will be more around developments in Indonesia. You know, the challenge we have ourselves is can they do in alumina what they've done in nickel? We think they'll get obviously more developments in Indonesia. We think there'll be some capital compression, not the same as you see in China, but some capital compression. I think compared to nickel, it's quite different in terms of they don't have the ability because of how you mine. It's like large-scale gardening. You don't have the same capability to build large industrial parks. Plus, you have to deal with the BRDA slash the red mud. I think there are some complexities which will limit scale in Indonesia as well.
Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from the line of Glyn Lawcock with Barrenjoey. Please go ahead.
Morning, Graham. I know you've given us a lot of detail around Mozal and the numbers and everything, but I know it's only been a matter of weeks since you put out your announcement and made all the disclosure. Has that forced or changed discussions you're now having with the government or too early to say?
Look, I think it's, you know, as you'd expect, it's ramped up the discussions and a bit of rhetoric on both sides. Obviously, our job is to sort of keep that in check. We understand in the end, the government of Mozambique needs to make a decision about what it wants to do with its power. I also think the South African government with their connections into Mozambique, one of the largest trading partners, but also there's over 209 + companies that sort of provide services to Mozal, so there's a lot of connection. There's a number of parties involved in this place. We obviously have ongoing discussions with the government of Mozambique. We also know now there's some work going on between the government of Mozambique and the government of South Africa centering on Mozal. There is some catalyst, if you like, for discussions and movement.
How that plays out, Glyn will have to continue to watch and see. Things don't particularly move at a fast pace. When we talk about a contract expiring in March next year, that feels like a long way away if you're dealing with short-term issues and coming out of civil unrest and a challenged fiscal. We continue to work with the government, but certainly not making material progress at the moment.
All right. Good luck there. I know Sandy talked a lot about operating cash flow, but I look at working capital. You unwound a lot of it in the second half, but still ended up overall negative for the year, negative the year before. Are we at a balanced state of working capital now, do you think, or is there more you can do over the course of 2026? Will we see that typical build first half, unwind second half again? Thanks.
Yeah, I don't think other than the GEMCO finish, but the Australia Manganese finish, but inventories, we are at normalized levels, Glyn. Good question. Definitely seeing that normalizing this half. We do expect GEMCO to unwind though. Obviously now we've got that warm up and operational, and we are putting all those volumes to market. We do expect to see that unwind in the half. Not anticipating a particular trend line around sort of material shifts in what we're holding. As you know, that is quite variable, just basis the trade flows that we have in the business and just the nature of aluminium in particular, which is just high cost inventory. When it clears, you can see quite a bit of volatility in the working cap over time.
All right.
Technically, one of the most congested ports in the world is Richards Bay. We continue to sort of watch that with interest.
All right. Any comments, Graham, you'd like to share? I mean, you talked in detail about alumina, but you know, there's the rest of the business at aluminium level. You know, does that view change there?
Look, again, I wouldn't see we'd have a dramatic change in our long-term price. I think the thesis that we still talk about, obviously, is that cap coming into place in China, which we continue to see. If you think back over the previous couple of decades, ex-China's growth has been something like 20%, where the vast majority of growth has come out of China. If you look forward and you sort of take it out another 10 years the other way, it's switched now where you probably need ex-China supply to grow about 90%. The challenge of the aluminium has never been about demand. It's always been a bit cheap, low cost, subsidized smelters in China. That dynamic we feel is shifting, which provides price support.
All right, thanks again.
There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand the call back to Mr. Kerr for closing remarks.
Thanks everyone. I appreciate you taking the time today. We know it's a busy day. In closing, we've continued to simplify and improve our portfolio. Our operations are performing really well. Our balance sheet is strong. We have a pipeline of base metal options that have the potential to underpin significant growth. Our unchanged capital management framework is designed to reward shareholders as we capitalize on increasing demand for the minerals and metals needed for the global energy transition. Again, thanks everyone for your time today and look forward to seeing you on the road.
That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.