Boss Energy Limited

Thanks, Val. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining the Boss Energy June quarterly conference call. Joining me on the call is Justin Laird, our CFO. I'll provide an overview of the quarter and the full year results. And at the end of the call, we'll be happy to take questions. Turning to slide two. The June quarter was a strong finish to FY26. We delivered our revised production and cost guidance. We continue to strengthen our financial position. and we further established the operating platform required to support growth. Honeymoon production recovered strongly from the rain affected March quarter with drum production of 362,000 pounds up 79% from the prior quarter. For the full year, production was 1.41 million pounds of uranium up 61% on FY25 and within our revised guidance range. Cost performance was also within revised guidance with full year C1 costs of $39 per pound and all in sustaining cost of $61 per pound. During the quarter, the company completed and commissioned key operating infrastructure, including NIM6 columns four and five, the associated pumping systems and the East Katharoo trunk line. Together with six wellfields now in production, this infrastructure is supporting record flow through the operation. Despite FY26 being a capital intensive year, the company generated positive cash flow. Cash increased by 13.1 million over the year while uranium inventory grew by 172,000 pounds to 1.58 million pounds at the 30th of June. We therefore closed FY26 with $207 million in cash and liquid asset and no debt. We continue to make meaningful progress on our strategic programs of work aimed at unlocking the value of our assets. This included bringing forward the new feasibility study to the end of August as we continue to build confidence in our wide space wellfield design and advancing the permitting pathway for Goulds and Jasons. I'd like to take the opportunity to thank the entire BOSS team for their commitment and hard work throughout the year. FY26 presented a number of challenges, but the team remained focused on safely delivering the operation. strengthening our understanding of the honeymoon deposit and establishing a clear pathway forward. Turning to slide three, and I'll provide some further detail on the honeymoon operation. Production recovered strongly during the June quarter. We increased by 79% to 362,000 pounds following the rain affected March quarter. This brought full-year production to 1.41 million pounds, up 61% on FY25. The quarter also marked an important step in strengthening our operational platform at Honeymoon. We commissioned NIM6 columns 4 and 5, bringing the total number of operating columns to 5. A capital decision on the sixth column is expected in the first quarter of FY27. We also commissioned the East Kalkaroo trunk line and additional pumping infrastructure. Together, this infrastructure supported record solution flow of 3.5 million cubic metres during the quarter, an increase of 83% on Q3. We continue to work through the commissioning of new primary pumps and look at optimising our performance across the circuit. Looking ahead to September quarter, we expect a modest reduction in feed grade at similar flows. Turning to slide four, During the quarter, it brought online wellfield B6, which is the first production from Far East Kalkaroo. B6 is performing as expected. This is on the closest spacing wellfield design of 30 metres from injector to extractor. Our first wide-space wellfields are now being constructed. EKT1, which is a 16 five-spot pattern with injector to extractor spacings of 60 metres. is scheduled to commence flushing this month with leaching data expected in Q2 FY27. Construction has also commenced on EKT2, which is again a 16 spot pattern with injector to extractor spacing of 50 metres with flushing and data anticipated in Q3 and leaching in Q4 FY27. All five existing honeymoon wellfields, B1 through B5, continue to perform in line with our expectations. We've recently applied more proactive management techniques to some of the older wellfields and they continue to demonstrate strong flow and performance. This provides further confidence in our underlying quality and longevity of our wellfield network. Turning to slide five and our cost performance. Honeymoon's C1 cost for the June quarter was $45 per pound, down from $60 per pound in the March quarter. All in sustaining costs were $70 per pound compared with $93 per pound in the prior quarter. This substantial reduction primarily reflects the return to uninterrupted operations following the significant rainfall event and associated constraints during the March quarter. For full year, CE1 costs were $39 per pound and all in sustaining costs were $61 per pound, both within our revised FY26 guidance ranges. Total capital expenditure for FY26 was $66 million, in line with the upper end of our revised guidance range. Within this project and supporting infrastructure expenditure was $42 million, above guidance of $30 to $33 million, associated with completion of NIM6 columns. At the average realised price for the quarter, Honeymoon generated an all-in sustaining margin of approximately $37 per pound, demonstrating the operational capacity to generate positive operating cash flow. Turning to slide six and our sales and financial position. BOSS became cash flow positive in FY26. Cash increased by $13.1 million during this period, which was a capital intensive period for BOSS. Our balance sheet remains a key strength. We closed the year with $207 million in cash and liquid assets and no debt. At the same time, we grew our drummed uranium inventory by £172,000 through operating activities. Inventory on hand at 30 June totaled £1.58 million, providing substantial flexibility for sales activities in FY27 and exposed to an increased positive uranium market. During the June quarter, BOSS recorded sales revenues of $34.8 million, from the sales of the £325,000. The average realised price was Australian $107 per pound, equivalent to US $75 per pound. Looking ahead, we expect to realise an average sales price of approximately $80 to $82 US per pound in the first quarter of FY27. This includes contracted sales of approximately £300,000 to two utilities under existing sales contracts. Turning to slide 7, the cash flow bridge summarises the cash key cash movements during the quarter and across FY26. During the quarter, BOSS generated a net cash increase of $11.6 million, with cash increasing from $38 million to $49.7 million. Customer restraints were strong. at $45.2 million, including collection of $11.1 million of trade receivables. We also continue to invest in the operating platform, with capital expenditure including $6.9 million on sustaining welfare development and approximately $8 million on project and supporting infrastructure. For the full year, cash increased by $13.1 million. BOSS was cash flow positive in FY26, despite investing approximately $57 million in sustaining capital and project-supporting infrastructure. We closed FY26 with cash of $49.7 million. Together with the value of our uranium inventory, this contributed to total cash and liquid assets of that $207 million, providing a strong financial platform for BOSS. Turning to slide eight and our 30% interest in the Ultimisa joint venture operated by Encore Energy. Ultimisa produced 45,000 pounds during the June quarter with BOSS receiving 13,000 pounds. Quarterly production was impacted by delays in securing state level regulatory approvals. These permitting delays defer the commencement of production from new wellfields being PAA3 and PAA8, with declining production from the current existing wellfield, PAA7. For the full year, Altamesa produced 491,000 pounds on a 100% basis, with BOSS receiving 161,000 pounds. The operational priority remains on permitting and advancement of Altamesa East, with promising mineralisation identified as an extension to known mineralisation at Altamesa. Turning to slide nine and the new feasibility study. The new feasibility study update to life of mine and mineral resource for honeymoon will be delivered at the end of August, one month earlier than originally planned. Bringing this work forward reflects the significant technical progress made and the encouraging results emerging from the Widespace Oilfield Program. The study draws on a substantial body of evidence combining current operational performance, historic production data and the technical work completed since the end of 2025. This work has strengthened our understanding of the deposit and the optimal approach to oilfield design and development. Based on the maturity of this work, we determined that the most effective approach was to proceed directly to a feasibility level outcome rather than release two studies within a relatively short period. The study will set out the updated life and mind plan, including production profiles, capital requirement and operating cost associated with the wide space wellfield design. We look forward to presenting the results and a clear pathway forward for Honeymoon at the end of August. Turning to slide 10 and our satellite deposits at Goulds Dam and Jasons. We continue to advance the development and permitting pathways for both deposits during the quarter. Importantly, the technical findings and operating experience from Honeymoon are now being incorporated into the evaluations of these assets. Our improved understanding of the deposit behaviour and wide space wellfield design could unlock significant value. Both deposits have the potential to leverage Honeymoon's existing processing infrastructure, operating capacity and establishing permitted pathways, providing a low capital cost development opportunity. During the quarter, we completed the preliminary design and proposed trunkline connections to adjacent to Honeymoon processing plant. We advanced ecological, groundwater and radiological baseline studies. We're progressing the underground water modelling and initial impacts assessments and also have commenced stakeholder engagements. These activities are now well progressed and we will support the next stages of the environmental assessment and permitting. Looking ahead, the first of the resource delineation drilling programs at Jason's is scheduled to commence during this quarter. The program is intended to improve resource confidence and provide further technical support in the evaluation and development of these deposits. Turning to site 11. Before I close, I'll just talk a little bit about changes to the board. We are pleased to welcome Peter Botton as our incoming chair, effective of 30th of September. Peter brings more than 45 years of experience across the energy and resources sector, including leading oil search through the development of the P&G L&G project. His appointment adds significant development, operational leadership experience to the board, and I'm looking forward to working closely with Peter to drive long-term value to shareholders. In summary, FY26 was a year of meaningful progress for BOSS. We delivered record solution flow through June quarter, supported by a strong finish to the year and delivered within our revised production and cost guidance. We became cash flow positive, increasing our uranium inventory, closed FY26 with $207 million in cash and liquid assets and no debt. This provides us with the financial capacity to fund our plans and pursue opportunities across our asset base. At Honeymoon, the key operating infrastructure is now in place and we have commenced the transition to wide-space well-filled design, informed by a growing body of operating and technical data. The new feasibility study will be released at the end of August. It will set out the updated life and mine plan and provide a clear pathway forward for Honeymoon. We are also advancing the development of permit pathways for Gould's Dam and Jason's. which provides further long-term growth potential by leveraging Honeymoon's existing infrastructure and operating platform. With the uranium market fundamentals continuing to strengthen, BOSS is well positioned to produce uranium into a market facing growing long-term demand. We look forward to presenting the new feasibility study in our update pathway forward at Honeymoon at the end of August. With that, I'll hand back to the operator to take questions.

Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. A reminder, participants are requested to limit the number of questions to two per turn. If you have additional questions, you are welcome to rejoin the queue. Your first question comes from Alistair Rankin with RBC. Please go ahead.

Thanks, Matt and Justin. Appreciate you taking my questions. Just the first one on the delineation drilling. Congrats on completing that program. Can I just ask, I guess, what you've learned so far and how your understanding of the ore body has changed as a result of the drilling program so far?

Yeah, so that provides... Alistair, thanks for the question. So that provides us with more confidence on what we're seeing. In terms of our understanding of the ore body... What we've seen and what we've articulated prior is that at higher cut-offs, we don't see the same level of continuity. When you look at lower cut-off grades, the ore body hangs together very well. And it's just a matter of finding the right mining method and the cost structure to exploit that significant resource. And that's what we're pursuing as part of that wide space wellfield design.

So it sort of confirms your prior views about the come-up grades and the continuity.

Correct. And then with that, we'll update that with the August update, including an updated mineral resource estimate.

Okay, that's good. And then just secondly on honeymoon, I know you've got a couple of wellfields that you're bringing on next year, EKT1 and EKT2. They're on in the second quarter and the fourth quarter respectively. Are those the only two oil fields you're planning to bring online next year?

No, that's just in the immediate construction pipeline.

Okay, understood. Thanks, guys.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Daniel Roden with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking my question. Just wanted to just build on, I guess, the wellfields, the PT1 and 2 that we're bringing on next year. How should we think about, I guess, the change in residence time as we're going to those wide space wellfields, kind of noting that we're going from a 30 metre spacing to, I think you mentioned 60, the last kind of data point we have, but I guess the residence time in those wider space patterns has a longer residence time. I guess, should we expect a bit of a lag in production mid-year as we kind of do transition into those patterns as well? Or how do you, I guess, bridge that, if at all?

Yeah, it's a very good question there. And it's about how we sequence and change from those existing well-filled designs into these larger space ones. And I think I can't – I won't talk to this in detail because I won't actually do it justice, and the idea about when we talk to it in August is provide all that clarity. But there has been a bit of a challenge for us too because we've been very reluctant to spend capital in old well-filled designs that don't give us a good return. So we're going to have – we have to manage that transition, and that's part of what we'll talk to in August, and then how we build that profile back up. Okay, so you're not spending on old wellfields and you've got the two new... No, we stopped spending on that existing wellfield design as soon as we worked through that review. It made no sense to continue putting capital into something that wasn't going to give us a good return.

Okay, thank you. As you bring EKT1 online in the next month or two and start going into that, maybe can you remind us, what are some of the key indicators you're looking for? I suppose myself, I'm really interested in understanding the sweep efficiency of the wellfields and how that's going to be measured and I guess just noting that a wider space drilling, you're potentially going to have, I think we spoke about this before, but channeling into, I guess, barren parts of your body or potential acid consumption on organics. How are you going to measure that? And what are some of the performance indicators you're looking for?

Yeah. And a lot of what you were talking about has been very significantly de-risked through all of this work we've done. and including modelling historic production because we're not in actually a greenfield site, we're in an operating site. And that's largely addressed through these reactive transport models where we're modelling specifically each well filled and well at a time, including all the chemistry in the plume and the acid consumption and how that acids will perform. When we're looking at continuing to refine that, and we'll always have an opportunity through that, including when we bring on EKT1. In terms of what that would deliver to us, some of those measures, some of those criteria will be things like flushing time. Typically, we'll do a first flush just to get rid of chlorides and calcium. That provides a very good indication of permeability and flow. That's a relatively early thing. We can get that understanding pretty quick. And then you've got continued performance of well fields associated with leaching and performance. But we feel comfortable with all the work we've done to date that it will just be a continued refinement rather than any sort of major material deviation. Perfect. Thanks, Matt.

I appreciate your questions. I'll hand it over.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Branko Skosik with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

Yeah, morning, guys. The first question on the grade or tenor decline which you flagged in the release, I was wanting to understand what's driving the additional decline into the first quarter of FY27 and also what tenor was assumed when you provided those indicative production numbers, FY27, I think it was in December last year, and just how that compares to what you're seeing in the first quarter.

Yeah, okay, Branko. A lot's happened since we provided those last numbers. I think it was about this time last year, so I won't go back to that one. In terms of what we tried to do there is because we didn't issue FY27 guidance, we just tried to provide a little bit of direction of what next quarter will be. We'll issue FY27 guidance with the August release of the new feasibility study. So tenor in ISRs will fluctuate, and why they fluctuate is because of timing on wellfields. So when you bring new wellfields in, you'll basically get higher wellfield performance and higher tenor, and then they'll typically have a tail. So it all depends on the sequencing of wellfields and where you are sequencing new wellfields, bringing in new wellfields versus existing operations from older wellfields. And that tenor is just associated with all that sequencing. But it gives you a bit of a guide for what that production profile will be for Q1 next financial year.

I appreciate that. And then just looking to ultimate, I was just hoping to understand the permitting delays a little bit better and I guess the timeline to resolve. So I look at the production profile from that asset. It has been declining for us a couple of quarters. So I'm just thinking into FY27 what we should be modelling here.

Yep, it's a good question. And I won't, I don't want to, look, I can't talk too much forward-looking statements because it's actually under a joint venture. But it's fair to say, look, it is disappointing, that quarter of production. Largely dictated by timing. So as PAA7, which has been the main producing wealth field at Multimesa, is depleted and coming off similar to what we just talked about then, but only having one well filled in production. They haven't been able to bring in PAA8 and PAA3, which is ready to go because of permanent delays. In conversations with the team, they expect to have that resolved shortly. shortly. We continue to engage with the management team at Encore. There's a new management team there, Rich. We've got a good relationship with Rich and we continue to try and work through some of the challenges that we've seen in Ultimisa this quarter.

I appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Hugo Nicoletti with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Oh, hi, mate. Justin, thanks for the update this morning. Pivoting to pricing, if I look at your realized price for the quarter and sort of back out some of the contracts you've got in there, it looks like you realized roughly 85% to 90% of the spot price on your unallocated volumes. Can you just remind us what goes into that discount and if that's the right realization on your spot sales going forward?

Yeah, I'll let Justin answer that one.

Yeah, hi, Hugo. So as you know, Sue, in terms of our sales composition, we do have that legacy contract, which typically achieves 65% to 70% of the spot price during the quarter. Yeah, we did have that £125,000 delivery into that legacy contract. At current pricing, we do at current spot pricing, the remainder of our contract book achieves a realised price of around that 90% to 95% of the market price. Once we deliver into the remaining 300,000 pounds for Q1 FY27, Our remaining total contract book, including the legacy contract, will be £2.5 million.

That's helpful. And then if I look to financial result, is there anything to highlight at the corporate level, like DNA or one-offs, and going forward at the corporate level, is $10 million to $15 million a year of spend still the right amount?

Yeah, at the corporate level, there won't be any material changes next year. There were some feasibility study costs that we incurred this financial year that did go through the corporate level that we don't expect to continue through to next year. But overall, there won't be any material changes at the corporate level for next year. Got it. Thanks. I'll rejoin the queue.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Glenn Moorcock with Baron Joey. Please go ahead.

Morning, Matt. Good to see everything moving to the left and coming forward. Just wanted to understand, I mean, I know we'll get the full study, but that's the theoretical study we'll get at the end of August. It looks like now first white space wellfield flush in August, leach in the second quarter. Is that first well-filled sufficient to give you then your confidence that your theoretical model that we'll get next month works practically? And should we know that in the second quarter then once you start leaching or is it more into calendar 27 where you'll be able to sort of say to us the physicals match the theoreticals? Thanks.

Yeah. Hey, Glenn. Look, I can only go back to say we are – it's not a greenfield site. You know, we've been in production – In production, we're getting a really good handle on the geology. We're doing that through the resource and the drilling. So we've got that. We also have a very good handle on wellfield performance on acid consumption, consumables and cost structures. So effectively, what we're actually just doing is increasing our well spacing, given the permeability and what we see with our existing data. So it's... So there will always be learnings, and we know in any mining environment you can continue to optimise and change things. I don't expect to see anything that's going to be fundamentally different to what will come out in the feasibility study. And because of all of that data and the work we've done – Now we'll take some of those learnings into it. Probably one of the bigger ones which we'll talk to you is a little bit about this pore volume and our flushing because if we can flush the well fields quicker, then we can actually get production profiles higher as well. So there's a little bit of information that we can help refine our production profiles but won't materially change.

Yeah, I mean, maybe I'm not. Fully understanding, though. But, I mean, we understand the back-end works. We can produce uranium. It's the economics at the front of CAPEX and OPEX to get the liquid to the plant that we can then process. You've got to get enough flow out of the well fields to be able to produce sufficient volume. So it's about the economics, isn't it? Right now, the economics that you're running on for the last 12 months makes very little free cash flow at current prices. So I guess it must be an element of we have to physically demonstrate that the theoreticals work. And I was just wondering, when can you demonstrate the full physical economics? Will that be before Christmas because you'll be leeching from the new wellfield? Or am I misunderstanding?

Yeah, you... In terms of EKT1, we'll have leaching, we'll have first flush data, you mean early Q1, and then that leaching data will come in terms of Q2 FY27. That will provide a level of support in terms of that production profile out of that wellfield. Yes. Correct. You mean so, yes, we've got processing, processing plant, fine. But we also have got wellfields out. And we also have got performance out of those wellfields. What we're having to do is because of the resource is change our approach to the resource. So it's not like we also don't have wellfield and wellfield performance data.

Yeah. Just one final question just to clarify that as well. Because I thought you said it would be something like plus or minus 30%. when you give us the study at the end of August, is that if you refine that to be closer than plus or minus 30? Because, I mean, if the theory is plus or minus 30, I guess the practicals will hopefully tighten it up. And I guess I'm trying to get to that point.

Yeah, so you're trying to understand the error and what will provide?

Yeah, is it still going to be plus or minus 30? So that way the practical will hopefully tighten it. And I guess I'm trying to understand, you know, if it is plus or minus 30, when will the practical tighten that to something, you know, tighter than plus or minus 30.

Yeah. I mean, I suppose it will continue to tighten as you go through. I mean, that's the value of give you a life of mine profile, but that's why you issue guidance on a year-by-year basis. Year-by-year basis, and we'll continue to inform the market on performance of these wealth fields as we progress.

All right, cool. I mean, I look forward to it in August, and I guess we'll...

So do we, Glenn.

Thanks, man.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolese with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Thanks for the follow-up. Just more strategically on your growing US inventories there, In the backdrop of rising prices and potentially the upcoming capital commitments post the updated study in August, do you think about selling some of those volumes near term?

Yeah. It depends ultimately on the value and realisation of what we see in the market, but we're still very strong in terms of expectation of rising uranium markets. And with Honeymoon able to generate free cash flow and continue to generate free cash flow, it really depends on our capital requirement rather than a strategic decision on sales. Got it.

Thanks. That's helpful. I'll pop it on. Cheers, guys. Thanks, Yara.

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

Thank you, Mel, and thanks, everyone, for joining the call. We look forward to talking again at the end of August when we present the new feasibility study, life of mine plan and updated cost structure for the honeyman acid.

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