G Mining Ventures Corp.

Hello and good morning everyone. If you've dialed in by phone, you can follow along with the presentation slides by joining the webcast. All participants are currently in listen-only mode to prevent any background noise. Following the speakers' remarks, there will be a question and answer session. To ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. Webcast participants may submit questions at any time using the Q&A function on the webcast platform. I will now turn the call over to G Mining Ventures. Please go ahead.

Good morning and welcome to G Mining Ventures' first quarter 2025 results conference call. I'm Dusan Petkovich, Senior Vice President of Corporate Strategy. Joining me today are Louis Pierre-Zinniac, President and CEO, and Julie Lafleur, CFO. This call is being recorded and will be available on our website. All figures are in US dollars unless otherwise stated. Please refer to slide 2 for our cautionary language regarding forward-looking statements. We'll start with Q1 performance followed by an update on OCO West and conclude with key 2025 catalysts before opening the line for questions. With that, I'll turn it over to LP. Thanks, Dusan.

Q1 marked our second full quarter of production and continued strong execution. Our -build-operate model remains our edge, driving disciplined execution, capital efficiency, and cash flow generation. At PV, we operated closely to plan despite challenging weather, maintaining first-quarter cost performance. At OCO West, we've kicked off early works and remained on track for a construction decision in the second half. We produced 35,578 ounces at a cash cost of $689 per ounce and ASIC of $960 per ounce, reinforcing our first quartile position. Adjusted EBITDA was $69 million and free cash flow came in $36 million. We ended the quarter with $149 million in cash. We remain on track to deliver $175,000 to $200,000 ounces at ASIC between $995 and $1125 per ounce, with over 56% of production expected in the second half as grades and throughput increase. In Q1, we secured our interim environmental permits at OCO West, enabling us to commence early works activities. Published resource and reserve updates showing material increases year over year in all categories. Indicated resources now total 9.4 million ounces. Inferred resources now total 1.2 million ounces. And most importantly, global reserves now total 6.7 million ounces, a 4.6 million ounce increase year over year. This quarter, we initiated early works construction activities at OCO West and announced a robust feasibility study confirming OCO West's Pier 1 potential. Q1 saw steady performance at TV despite heavy rainfall impacting access to higher grade benches. We drew from our substantial surface stockpiles, which remained robust at 5.5 million tons, creating 0.8 grams per ton, representing over 12 months of mill feed. We processed 904,000 tons at 1.4 grams per ton, with 88% recovery, producing 35,578 ounces. Throughput averaged just over 10,000 tons per day, or 78% of nameplate capacity, reflecting unscheduled downtime largely related to the damaged side mill poly-mit liners. The side mill liner upgraded was completed in April and will help support greater than 90% availability going forward. We expect grades and tonnage to increase in the second half, driving stronger production. I'm also proud to report zero lost time injuries in the quarter, underscoring the strength of our safety culture and the discipline of our team. TV is built to generate free cash flow across all phases of the commodity cycle. Despite lower throughput, unit costs were well managed. Cash costs were $689 per ounce, and ASIC was $960 per ounce, below our full year of guidance midpoint. As production scales, we expect further efficiencies, especially in G&A, as fixed costs are spread over higher volumes. The ASIC of $960 per ounce is well below the 2025 guidance and is largely driven by deferral of sustaining capital expenditures from Q1 into Q2. Sustaining capital for the quarter totals $5 million, including $2 million in capitalized waste stripping. Approximately $25 million of $40 million in sustaining capital. It's important to note that these investments are largely one time in nature. Key items include $20 million to complete the mine fleet expansion, $10 million for major mobile equipment components, and $5 million for construction of the second and final CIL tailing storage pond. Looking ahead, sustaining capital for the second half of the year is expected to total $22 million, of which 70% is capitalized waste stripping. This sets up a lower and more normalized spend profile in the second half of the year. PV remains firmly in the first quartile of the global cost curve, a competitive advantage as we ramp up and fund growth internally. With that, I'll hand the call over to Julie for walking through our financial results for the quarter.

Thank you, Louis-Pierre, and good morning everyone. Revenue was $98 million at an average realized goal price of $2,766 per ounce. Income from mining operation was $60 million, a 61% margin. Adjusted EBITDA was $69 million, and adjusted net income was $35 million, or $0.16 per share. The consolidated effective tax rate for the quarter was 48%, compared to Brazil's statutory rate of 34%. The higher rate primarily reflects pre-tax losses in our non-Basilian subsidiaries, where no deferred tax assets were recognized. As a result, the tax benefit on those losses wasn't reflected in our consolidated tax expense, driving the effective rate higher at the group level. Importantly, we expect a significant reduction in our Brazilian tax rate once the SUDAM incentive is approved, lowering it to 15.25%. This approval is expected in the coming months, and crucially, it is anticipated to apply retroactively to the beginning of 2025, which would further reduce our full year effective tax rate. Pre-cash flow generated by TZ will be the primary source of capital to form future discipline growth at GMIN development projects. It is defined by the corporation as cash flow from operating activities adjusted for investment in long-term inventories, which represents our mine and stockpile that will not be produced in the following 12-month period. Less changes in non-cash working capital, less sustaining capital expenditures, inclusive of capitalized shipping. In Q1, free cash flow came in at $36 million. We ended Q1 with $149 million in cash and an $8 million increase from Q4. The key drivers were $36 million in free cash flow, $10 million investment in long-term inventories, $17 million directed toward advancing the OCOES project, which is $10 million in long-term deposits and $7 million in early works, $3 million in exploration expenditures, and remaining $2 million net inflow reflects a combination of financing outflows and favorable ethics adjustment. With $149 million in cash, we have ample liquidity to support early works at OCOES and strategic growth initiatives simultaneously. With that, I would like to turn the call over to Dushan for an update on our growth strategy.

Thanks, Julie. OCOES is rapidly establishing itself as one of the premier development stage gold projects in the Americas. The April feasibility study confirmed tier one production potential and

was

closely aligned with the PA released just seven months prior, which is a strong validation of the quality and thoughts we put into our technical work. It is engineered to have a 12-year mine life with average annual gold production of 850,000 ounces per year and a first quartile ASIC of just $11,123 per ounce. With an initial capex of $972 million, the project delivers an after-tax NPV-5 of $2.2 billion and a robust 27% IRR, using a gold price of $2,500 per ounce. Every $100 per ounce increase change in the gold price adds roughly $200 million in after-tax NPV, giving it a lot of leverage to the gold price. At a spot price of $3,200, the NPV reaches $3.6 billion and an IRR of 38%. The April feasibility study also validated the quality of the deposit. We completed an additional 46,000 meters of billing that resulted in 76% conversion of internal resources, raising the indicated resource of 5.4 million gold ounces while also improving the average gold grade to 2.1 grams per ton. Inaugural reserve estimate came in at 4.6 million ounces and average gold greater 1.9 grams per ton. Demonstrating our commitment to discipline evaluation, we applied a gold price of only $1,950 per ounce for resource estimation and $1,800 per ounce for reserve calculation, making sure robust project economics even under lower price scenarios. Ocrowesk distinguishes itself through its combination of scale and grade, a rare pairing among development stage projects in the Americas. There are few assets of comparable size and resource quality at a similar stage of development. Additionally, Ocrowesk is one of the few development stage projects in the Americas with a production profile exceeding 300,000 ounces per year and one of even fewer that has reached the feasibility stage. It is truly a rare American asset whose closest comparison in our view is Kinross's Great Bear project, another large scale open pit and underground operation. We remained on track to advance Ocrowesk's formal construction decision in H2 less than a year after acquiring the project. This rapid progression reflects the same discipline execution applied at TV. In December, we submitted the environmental impact assessment to Guyana's EPA and in January received an infant permit enabling us to begin early works construction on an accelerated schedule. This year's 200 million dollar capex includes infrastructure such as roads, barge landing, airstrip, camp, utilities, and power. Earthworks are advancing well with concrete work set to begin shortly. Our goal is to substantially complete these year end to support a seamless workforce ramp up. Worker training programs began in January and the headcount reached 200 by the end of March. We expect capacities of 350 by May. To de-risk the schedule, we've committed or negotiated approximately 150 million in long-lead items including mobile and marine equipment, grinding mills, primary crusher, and the power plant. Work deliveries of equipment are expected in June allowing us to begin self-performing earthworks on site. The final permitting milestone is receipt of the full environmental permit. Public consultations concluded in February and feedback has been integrated into our regional ESG programs. Final responses are being submitted by May with full permit approval expected in Q2. In parallel, we're advancing financing discussions with lenders and strategic partners with a package expected this summer ahead of a formal construction decision in the second half. Our approach remains disciplined and focused on preserving shareholder value with no equity dilution anticipated. Assuming execution continues on schedule, we anticipate first gold in late 2027 and full transition to intermediate producer status surpassing 500,000 ounces annually by year end 2028. With that, I hand it over to LP for closing remarks.

To summarize, Q1 marked a good start to the year. We delivered solid financial results while using the early stages of operations to optimize performance. With those initial adjustments now behind us, we're positioned to meet our guidance for the remainder of the year. Looking ahead, key catalysts include receipt of OCOES final environmental permit, a construction decision in the second half, and continued progress on our exploration efforts. We've built GMIN to be a disciplined, self-funded, growth-oriented producer. With the first quartile cost profile, a clean balance sheet, and world-class development project in OCOES, we are well positioned to create lasting shareholder value. Thank you to our employees, partners, and shareholders for your continued

support. With that,

I'll turn the call back to the moderator to begin the Q&A.

Before we begin the floor for questions, a quick reminder. Phone participants can dial star 1 to ask a question, and webcast viewers can continue submitting their questions via the Q&A call. Your line is open.

Thanks very much for taking my questions. LP, you mentioned this was the second quarter of commercial production. In the context of that and the unplanned downtime, the weather issues in the quarter, can I ask you to put the ramp up to date in context? Are you seeing any surprises, any areas of concern so far? Have you made any adjustments to the maintenance schedule or anything like that in the flow sheet after what you've seen, say, in the first couple of quarters here?

Yeah, I think obviously we continue to make improvements in the process plans. I'd say, like we mentioned, the big downtime for us was the mill liners, which we've changed at the end of April. What we've seen since is really keeping the running time high without having any issues to have to stop the mills to do inspections and do essentially unscheduled replacements of liners. What we've seen is really the plant running at really high ton per hour throughputs in line with expectations. It's really been getting the running time uptime to where it is. That's why with the changes that we've made, we've seen really great progress and good results since the change out. That's very encouraging.

In terms of the mining, it is Brazil. There's always going to be weather. It shouldn't be a surprise there. Any adjustments that you think you need to make there or is, again, everything in line with expectations, in line with what you expected during the ramp up?

Yeah, in terms of the pit is really the mining operations that are impacted by rain. Like we said, we had normally high rain, but we've been able to keep the mine running quite well. We always have access to ore on surface and stockpiles to feed the plant. The plant never is unfilled due to weather, given the large stockpiles that we have. Some of the adjustments that we're making are just adding to our pumping capacity to deal with the rainy season, which is typically high in the first quarter.

Okay, great. Maybe just a question on AquaWest. Obviously, we have the game plan from the feasibility study, which was released not too long ago. Can you talk about any potential upside versus the study or the resource over the next three years of construction here? Is there any exploration you're particularly focused on that could positively impact the mine plan or anything additional that you're looking in terms of the engineering that could see a change before we get production?

Yeah, absolutely. We're actively exploring as we speak with the $8 million budget that we have this year. We expect to be adding to resources and updating our resource models on an annual basis. That's a few more iterations in front of us before we even start commercial production. We do expect to find additional resources. The other aspect that will be improved from the feasibility study is some of the geotech parameters, where we've added some additional geotech holes and investigations to support some more steepened slopes where we had some pretty conservative recommendations in the feasibility study. So that's part of some of the ongoing optimization work that's going to be taking place as part of

the feasibility study. One of the changes in the feasibility versus the PEA was a shallower pit leaving more for the underground. As far as I understand, most of the upside is at that. Is it fair to say that exploration could change the mix of underground versus open pit? Is that the way to think about it? Or are you looking maybe more to optimize the mine plan in terms of bringing higher grade forward?

Yeah, a lot of the exploration that we're doing now is more near surface. So results that would be impacting the open pit portion of the project. So that's more near term in terms of its impact on the life of mine plan. Currently we're not drilling at depth which would essentially extend underground mine life at this point. So that's where we're really focusing. So we're actually drilling some splays that are within the ore body, within the pit, and extensions that go beyond the current pit limits. So that's where we expect some additional resources and improvements in the open pit portion of the life of mine plan.

Okay, thanks. Okay, maybe one last one on Garupi. After the resource earlier this year, could you maybe map out the next key steps or the timeline for the project as you build Ako West? What should we be expecting over 25 and I suppose into 26?

Yeah, so I mean what we've done at this point is, you know, engage with a lot of the stakeholders in the region. So we're in the process of re-establishing permits to restart exploration. So that's really the next step. In the meantime, we've done a lot of surface oil sampling, some trenching, and we've done a lot of compilation work which is really going to support, you know, exploration efforts as we move forward. So that's currently what we're doing. So we do expect that based on the feedback that we've had that we'll likely be increasing our exploration budget for Garupi in the coming years and even maybe in the second half this year. So that's the objective. We'll obviously be looking to do more internal studies on how we can see the developments based on the existing resources. So we'll make that decision when we feel it's appropriate to start essentially producing a PA type study on that project. So likely more into next year.

Is it fair to say that the next step might be an updated resource sometime in 2026 before a public study? Is that the way to look at how you're approaching it?

Well, with the resource that we've completed so far this year, you know, there's sufficient resources to support a PA where you can use inferred resources, but really our objective is to restart exploration, see if we can grow it first before we undertake technical studies and, you know, a PA at that point. So yeah, the point would be is with exploration we would likely do a resource update that would lead into a PA next year.

Okay, great. Thanks very much. I'll pass it on.

Your

next question comes from the line of Anita Soni with CIBC. Your line is open.

Hi, good morning LP and thanks for taking my question. So firstly, I just want to double check on a couple things. On the nameplate capacity, I think it's 12.8 K tons per day. Does that include like the 90% availability that you would have at nameplate or is that we have to apply the 90% on top of that?

Yeah, that includes it. So it's a nominal rate. So you're

trying to move the 78 to the 90 at this point, but that includes. Okay, got it. And then just in terms of the grades as they evolve over the course of the year, what are you trying to aim towards by year end in terms of grades?

We'll be in the 160 range in the second half and we do expect to see grades up to 1.8. So yeah, we do expect some higher grades in the second half.

All right. And then just in terms of the stripping, I'm not sure if this is correct, but my assumption was something along the lines of four to one strip ratio, 4.5. And I think it was much lower this quarter. So I'm just wondering what the stripping, what the intentional stripping ratio is this year. And if that's the case, I think I, there was a bit of underspend on the stripping and will that like, how, when, which quarters will that catch up?

Yeah. So I mean, this quarter we had a strip ratio of 145. For the year, our guidance is 2.5. So yeah, the strip ratio will start coming up in the second half of the year. And that's kind of in line with the additional shovel that we're bringing in, increase our mining rates. But the other thing is we've had essentially positive reconciliation where some of the material that we expect to be waste ends up being mineralized and typically in lower grade material that we stockpile. So that's been lowering our strip ratio on, you know, on our actuals so far.

Okay. And what's the guide for the amount of stripping? I think was, I'm just taking a look here. It's a little north of 20 million. Is that still the expectation? Like in terms of capitalizer?

Yeah, that's in terms of cost.

Yeah. All right. That's it for my questions. I'll get back in the queue. Thanks.

Again, if you would like to ask a question, press star one on your telephone keypad and webcast viewers can continue submitting their questions via the Q&A function. And your next question comes from the line of Andrew Nikicuk with BMO Capital Markets. Your line is open.

Thank you. Okay. Maybe we can just quickly go back to this segment liner. Can you give us a sense of, I don't know, how many days you guys lost in Q1 and how much of that would have extended into Q2? Like, or did you really have to kind of give us a sense of what we should expect on a Q2 impact, if any?

Yeah. So Q2, I mean, it's been April where we had some continued impacts from that. And then we had obviously the scheduled shutdown to do the replacement, which we kept within our schedule, the shutdown time. So basically in April, I mean, it was about five days that were downtime just related to the liners. And since we started back up with the liner replacement, the throughput has been excellent and the uptime has been equally very good. So that's why it feels like we've really turned the corner with this issue and look to have Q2 be a better quarter for us.

Okay. And then just going to Oco West, I think it was Duchenne who was quoting the workers were yourself. I don't remember. Anyway, apparently there's, I think I wrote down 200 workers by the end of March that you're expecting another increase by the end of May. Can you give us a sense what the kind of full manpower total should be just so we have an idea or maybe by the end of the year, just so we have any idea how that should expand, how that should progress?

Yeah. So the 350 that we refer to is based on the expansion of the existing exploration camp. So that'll give us 350 beds soon by the end of May, basically. And basically the team on site is focused on constructing our permanent camp. So as we have units that are constructed, we'll be able to add beds on site and have that continue to wrap up. So by the end of the year, we're thinking anywhere between 750 to a thousand is what we'll be able to accommodate on site. And obviously everything else needs to follow with that. So kitchen, sewage, water, the facilities to support that number of people. So yeah, that's really the push in terms of our early works program right now.

Okay. And then my last question is on the financing facility being considered here. I think even in the press release, you used the words that, you know, you're not expecting equity dilution, but on the debt side, are you looking at just kind of plain vanilla commercial loans or other options available or more advantageous? What's the permutation of availability or what should we be expecting?

Yeah. So we've had a lot of in-bounds and we have a lot of options in front of us. So, I mean, the thinking at this point is we have equipment financing that is available to us with the equipment that we're purchasing. So we'll likely be having a component that's tied to that. The other piece that we'll figure in our financing package will be essentially a corporate revolver with Canadian banks. And the balance from there is likely very limited in terms of our requirements. And like we mentioned, I mean, this is tied to the cash flow generation from TC. So those are the various parts. But to your point, at the moment, we're looking to keep it quite vanilla. But we have other very interesting proposals that we're evaluating.

Okay. Well, that's great. I will sign off and let others ask questions.

And your next question comes from the line of Anita Sony with CIBC. Your line is open.

Yeah, I just wanted to get a little bit more color on the amounts of you said the throughput rates have been excellent. Could you, you know, basically, have you gotten to then basically the nameplate subsequent and subsequent to the liner replacement? And how is I mean, it's been almost half the quarter at this point. So can you just tell us how it's going? I guess in terms of numbers.

Yeah.

So I mean, for example, May to date, we're at like 108% of nameplate. So that's, you know, that's showing a continuous run since the liner change.

All right. And then I think Mike asked this a little bit, but I just know the liner replacement, is that going to necessitate, you know, an accelerated maintenance schedule or any implications sort of longer term and in what the you know, that 90% availability if you're driving to take more downtime than you had previously forecasted? Or are there other offsets? Or, you know, is the mill performing, you know, as you mentioned, 108%, is that better than your budgeted expectations on that? That'll offset any other additional downtime?

Yeah. So, so yeah, so far, this is, you know, if we can maintain that, that'll offset some of the downtime we had in April as part of this quarter. And then, you know, typically the liners we change, the schedule changes is anywhere from six to nine months on the sag mill. So that's part of our scheduled downtime. When you get a typical performance that you expect.

All right. And so then the unplanned portion of what happened in Q1 was that you didn't have the replacement liner. Is that what happened? Or I'm just wondering why there was unplanned downtime in Q1?

Yeah, yeah, because we had to replace polymet liners that were damaged with additional polymet liners. So it was a question of receiving the steel sets so we could make the full change. That was the reason for the period of running with the polymet liners.

And then going forward, you'll have more bare polymet liners on site so that you don't have the unplanned downtime? Is that

the question? Well, at this point, we're always going to be using steel set liners. So when we change the liners come six months from now, it'll be another set of steel set liners.

Okay. But yeah, I guess I'm more referencing the availability of the parts for the replacement.

Yeah, no, we had the parts. It's just the question of you need to shut everything down to go in and change them out.

So. All right. Okay. Thank you. That's the first question.

Again,

if you would like to

ask a question, press star one on your telephone keypad, and Webcast viewers can continue submitting their questions via the Q&A function. Your next question is from Webcast. It is from Steven Therrien with 3L Capital. Do you still plan to spend 41% of total growth capital at Oco West in H1, meaning approximately 65 to 75 M spend in Q2?

Well, it'll likely be a little less and pushed to the second half. And the reason being is it's just a timing thing where we order equipment and materials and by the time we need to make payments. So yeah, that'll likely be a little pushed to the second half. Given like we, for example, we spent 17 this quarter, we'll likely be going up second quarter, but not hitting that amount.

So it's really just tied to timing.

Thank you. And we do have one more question. One moment, please.

Question from Samir Mohammed. Why was the gold recovery rate with 88% lower in Q1

than in Q4?

There's

no particular reason. The recovery is a bit lower when we have soft oxide material in our no feed mix. So that's been typically the reason for some of the lower recoveries that we get. But generally the plant has been

having a good recovery.

Thank you. I'm not showing any further questions

in the queue. With that, ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.