Koryx Announces Updated PEA Results for the Haib Copper Project, Southern Namibia 92,000MT Annual Payable Cu Production (1st 10 Years) $1.81/lb C1 Cost and $2.05/lb AISC (1st 10 Years) US$1.351bn After-Tax NPV8% 20.1% After-Tax IRR
Koryx Copper Inc.
Suite 888, 700 West Georgia Street, Vancouver. BC, V7Y 1G5 Canada
KORYX ANNOUNCES UPDATED PEA RESULTS FOR THE HAIB COPPER PROJECT, SOUTHERN NAMIBIA 92,000MT ANNUAL PAYABLE CU PRODUCTION (1st 10 Years) $1.81/lb C1 COST and $2.05/lb AISC (1st 10 Years)
US$1.351bn AFTER-TAX NPV8% 20.1% AFTER-TAX IRR 23 YEAR MINE LIFE PEA Context
The Haib project is a simple, scalable, advanced-stage, open pit sulphide Cu/Mo project located at low altitude in an ideal, infrastructure-rich area of southern Namibia close to the South African border. It was formerly owned by Rio Tinto and Teck, and since the end of 2024 is under credible, new Namibian leadership & management with (i) the stated aim of optimizing, right-sizing and derisking the project towards an investment decision and/or asset/equity sale, and (ii) a fifteen (15) year track record of successful Namibian mine development and project exits.
The preliminary economic assessment (“PEA”) objective is to reset the project scope & reposition Haib as a credible, large-scale, long-life, low-risk and low-cost open pit milling & flotation mine plus supplemental heap leach production. The PEA is based on the 2024 Mineral Resource Estimate (“MRE”) block model that was used to report the 31 August 2024 MRE, with none of the drilling since then included in this PEA. All additional drilling and extensive geological re-modelling will be reflected in an updated MRE and technical study to be published in the second half 2026.
Significant further upside to be unlocked through ongoing drilling (potential size and grade improvements) and metallurgical and sorting testwork (scalability and potential cost reductions) which will be reflected in the next technical study.
PEA Highlights
- NPV8% of US$1.351bn (after-tax) and US$2.358bn (pre-tax) at LT analyst consensus Cu price
of US$4.31/lb and realistic technical assumptions.
- US$1.559bn (incl. 10% contingency) upfront construction capital.
- US$543m LOM sustaining capital (including US$149m in HL construction capital in year 1
and 2 of production).
- 20.1% IRR (post-tax) and 25.2% IRR (pre-tax) with 3.9 year payback.
- 23 years Life of Mine with 92ktpa of annual payable Cu production (Average Years 1-10)
- US$1.81/lb C1 cash costs and US$2.05/lb AISC (Average Years 1 – 10).
- US$2.21/lb C1 cash costs and US$2.47/lb AISC (Average Life-of-Mine).
- Capital intensity of US$16,871/t of annual payable Cu production (Average Years 1 – 10).
- Capital intensity of US$17,702/t of annual payable Cu production (Average Life-of-Mine).
- Production of Cu/Mo concentrate via a 28mtpa conventional crushing/milling/flotation
(MF) process. Limited additional Cu cathode via 7mtpa of heap leaching (HL) and solvent extraction/electrowinning (SX/EW). There will also be Au credits in the Cu concentrate.
- 89% average recovery from Mill/Float (MF) and 74% recovery from Heap Leach (HL).
- 150MW of maximum power demand to be sourced through nearby Namibian grid, plus
supplementary hybrid renewable power and battery energy storage.
- 20m m3 of process water per year from a hybrid solution of Orange river water (30km
distance) and potentially piped from Namibia’s Neckartal storage dam (260km distance).
- Permitting process underway with Namibian mining license application submitted and
environmental & social impact assessment (ESIA) processes proceeding.
- Specialist environmental and social studies and public consultation process advancing with
positive results. Public perception generally positive with interest in job creation, broader economic development opportunities and community and infrastructure development.
- All study and technical work directed by Koryx’s highly experienced in-house team working
with world-class specialists, lead by DRA Global Limited (“DRA”) (overall co-ordinating consultant), Knight Piésold (“KP”), Qubeka Mining Consultants (“Qubeka”), the MSA Group (“MSA”), SRK Consulting (“SRK”) and MJO Ingeniería y Consultores en Metalurgia (“MJOI”).
- Live webinar to discuss the PEA results. Participants must register for the event beforehand
using the link below. Date & Time: Friday, September 5, 2025 at 10:00am EST Register: https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_qUZaHmJdTTyMb21V_tNvlw Please join the Koryx team for the discussion & presentation followed by Q&A.
Vancouver, B.C., Canada – September 04, 2025 – Koryx Copper Inc. (“Koryx” or the "Company") (TSX-V: KRY) is pleased to announce the results of the recently completed Preliminary Economic Assessment (“PEA”) of the Company’s 100%-owned, flagship Haib Copper Project (“Haib” or the “Project”) in southern Namibia.
Heye Daun, Koryx Copper’s President and CEO commented as follows: "We are highly encouraged with the very good results of this PEA, notwithstanding the fact that it is still based on the 2024 Mineral Resource model and does NOT yet reflect all of the excellent drill results produced since late 2024. The objective of this PEA was
(i) to right-size and optimize the Haib project and reposition it as a credible, low-risk, large-scale, low-cost, high-return, open pit milling & flotation operation, and (ii) to demonstrate Koryx’s material undervaluation when compared to other Cu development equities.”
“With a Cu production rate of 92,000 tonnes per annum, a post-tax NPV8% of +US$1.35n, upfront capital cost of US$1.56bn, low C1 cash cost of US$1.81/lb of Cu (AISC of US$2.05/lb of Cu during the first 10 years of production and a long mine life of 23 years, Haib stands out as an emerging, top-quality, near-term African copper development project.”
“What makes this project truly unique however are a few of its key attributes, namely its simplicity, scalability, low risk, ideal location at low altitude, close to water and power infrastructure, with low capital intensity, low operating costs, a predictable permitting environment and lack of any technical, environmental or social fatal flaws. This suggests that this project could be rendered shovel-ready, with an advanced feasibility study, secure water and power supply and most major permits in place within just a few years.
”Lead by a strong and motivated technical team that has the drive and in-country experience of having recently advanced and permitted a major gold mine development in Namibia (Osino Resources’ Twin Hills gold project which is presently in construction), we look forward to successfully delivering another excellent large-scale mine development project in Namibia (now our 3rd one in the past 15 years).”
- 2 -
Property Description and Ownership
Haib is a porphyry copper exploration project located in the Karas Region of southern Namibia approximately six kilometres north of the border with South Africa and between 12km and 15km east of the tarred B1 highway that connects Namibia with South Africa. Koryx Copper Inc. has a 100% interest in Deep South Mining Company (Pty) Ltd., a Namibian subsidiary which in turn has a 100% interest in Haib Minerals (Pty) Ltd (“Haib Minerals”) which holds the exploration rights to the Haib Project. Exclusive Prospecting Licence 3140 (“EPL 3140”) allows for the exploration of base, rare and precious metals over an area of 36,589 hectares.
Results of PEA Financial Evaluation
A PEA financial model was developed from the updated studies with the following techno-economic results.
Table 1: PEA Financial Valuation Results
| US$9,500/t | US$10,000/t | |||||||
| Units | Pre-Tax | Post-Tax | Pre-Tax | Post-Tax | ||||
| NPV 8% IRR Payback Period LOM Cashflow | US$m % years US$m | 2,358 1,351 25.2% 20.1% 3.8 3.9 6,557 4,084 | 2,986 1,742 28.9% 23.0% 3.4 3.6 7,948 4,944 | |||||
| Upfront Capex 3 Sustaining Capex 4 Ave Annual Payable Cu Production C1 Cash Costs (Avg Years 1-10) 1 AISC Costs (Avg Years 1-10) 2 | US$m US$m ktpa US$/lb US$/lb | 1,557 543 88 1.81 2.05 | LOM Years 1 - 10 Years 1 - 10 | |||||
| Capital Intensity Capital Intensity | US$/t US$/t | 16,057 16,740 | Years 1 - 10 LOM |
| Table 2: Key Assumptions & Parameters | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mill/Float | Heap Leach | ||||||||
| Item | Units | Total | M/F | H/L | |||||
| Life of Mine Copper price (base case) Copper Recovery total Copper Recovery M/F Copper Recovery H/L Government Royalty (tax-deductable) Export Levy | Years US$/t % % % % % | 23 | 88.8% | 77.7% | |||||
| 9,500 84.2% 88.8% 77.7% 3.0% 1.0% |
| Table 3: LOM Production Parameters | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | M/F | H/L | ||||||
| Mineralised Material Tonnes Mined Mineralised Material Cu Grade Mined Contained Copper Metal Waste Tonnes Mined Strip Ratio Concentrate grade LOM Copper in conc (Mill float) LOM Copper cathode (Heap Leach) | Mt % Cu kt Mt x % Cu kt kt | 779 0.309% 2,405 1,400 1.80 21% 1,842 257 | 1,842 | 257 | ||||
| LOM Payable Copper Production total Avg payable Cu Production pa (first 10 years) Avg payable Cu Production pa (LOM) | kt ktpa ktpa | 2,026 92 88 | Years 1 - 10 LOM |
- 3 -
| Table 4: Capital Cost Estimates | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capital Costs | Total | M/F | H/L | |||||
| Construction Capital (DRA Estimate) 3 Capitalised Pre-strip Rail siding Mining capex Owners cost Surface infrastructure Site infrastructure Contingency | US$m US$m US$m US$m US$m US$m US$m US$m | 968 33 4 29 31 | 808 | 159 | ||||
| 301 | ||||||||
| 52 139 | ||||||||
| Total Project Capital (incl. contingency) | US$m | 1,557 | ||||||
| Sustaining Capital (LOM) 4 | US$m | 543 | 362 | 181 | ||||
| Table 5: Unit Costs | ||||||||
| Unit Costs per Tonne Mined/Processed | Total | M/F | H/L | |||||
| Mining Cost (per tonne mined) Variable Processing Cost (per t processed) Fixed Processing Cost (G&A) | US$/t US$/t US$m | 2.15 5.85 9.55 | 2.15 6.14 6.21 | 2.15 4.64 3.34 | ||||
| Unit Costs per ton Payable Cu Produced | Total | M/F | H/L | |||||
| C1 Cash Costs (Avg Years 1-10) 1 C1 Cash Costs (Avg LOM) 1 All-in Sustaining Costs (Avg Years 1-10) 2 All-in Sustaining Costs (Avg LOM) 2 | US$/t US$/t US$/t US$/t | 3,980 4,841 4,519 5,415 | 4,161 5,045 4,708 5,629 | 2,843 3,438 3,332 3,944 | ||||
| Unit Costs per lb Payable Cu Produced | Total | M/F | H/L | |||||
| C1 Cash Costs (Avg Years 1-10) 1 C1 Cash Costs (Avg LOM) 1 All-in Sustaining Cost (Avg Years 1-10) 2 All-in Sustaining Costs (Avg LOM) 2 | US$/lb US$/lb US$/lb US$/lb | 1.81 2.20 2.05 2.46 | 1.89 2.29 2.14 2.55 | 1.29 1.56 1.51 1.79 |
Notes:
1. C1 = Mining, processing plus on-site G&A and selling costs less by-product credits
2. AISC = C1 costs plus royalties & levies and sustaining capex (excluding closure costs & reclamation value)
3. Project Capital includes US$126m of EPCM costs
4. Sustaining capital includes deferred capital for the TSF and HL/SX/EW plant, plus 0.75% of other project capital costs + US$50m in estimated closure costs - estimated salvage value
- 4 -
| Cash Flow | 252 264 362 249 312 326 475 283 561 523 495 501 430 347 264 (1,557) 122 472 533 297 177 (1,557) 122 472 533 498 327 310 313 269 217 165 158 165 227 155 195 204 |
| Net Free Cash Flow before Tax US$m 6,557 4,084 Net Free Cash Flow after Tax US$m |
- 5 -
Capital and Operating Cost Estimates
The capital cost estimate for the project was compiled by DRA, with inputs from Koryx and supporting specialist consultants KP and Qubeka.
The estimate for the main crushing, milling and flotation plant for higher grade (“HG”) mineralization was developed by DRA for a plant designed to process 28 Mtpa of ROM, with about 4 Mtpa of >150µm barren coarse particle flotation tailings being rejected ahead of conventional flotation of 24 Mtpa at a target grind of about 80% < 150µm.
The capital cost estimate for the 7 Mtpa low grade (“LG”) heap leach, copper solvent extraction and electrowinning and iron removal circuit was based on the estimates prepared by METS for the previous PEA of this project, updated by Koryx with input from DRA.
KP developed the capital cost estimates for the Tailings Storage Facility (“TSF”), access roads, water and bulk power supply, stormwater management, housing and site accommodation. DRA and Qubeka prepared estimates for infrastructure directly associated respectively with the process plants and contract mining area.
Each consultant submitted estimates of engineering, project and construction management (“EPCM”) services costs associated with their scope of work. This was supplemented by a detailed estimate by Koryx of Owner’s costs during project implementation.
The cost estimate for pre-strip of waste rock before commencing production mining operations was an outcome of Qubeka’s detailed mining schedules.
Significant portions of the heap leach/SX/EW, TSF and other infrastructure costs will only be incurred in the first or second year of operation, hence these were recorded as sustaining capital in the table below. Other sustaining capital costs in subsequent years of operation were estimated by DRA and KP.
Table 6: Project Capital Cost Breakdown (US$m)
Upfront Heap Leach Sustaining Total Capex
| Construction | Capex | Capex | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Item Description | Capex | (Y1 + Y2) | ||
| Mill float capital cost estimate | 737 | 0 | 89 | 826 |
| HL/SX/EW capital cost estimate Y1 | 145 | 137 | 31 | 313 |
| Tailings Facility | 30 | 0 | 200 | 230 |
| Mining capex | 29 | 0 | 11 | 41 |
| Owners cost | 31 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| Surface Infrastructure | 246 | 0 | 32 | 278 |
| Site infrastructure | 50 | 0 | 0 | 50 |
| EPCM Costs | 116 | 14 | 30 | 159 |
| Total Capital Cost (excl. Contingency) | 1,385 | 151 | 393 | 1,929 |
| Estimated 10% Contingency | 139 | 0 | 0 | 139 |
| Capitalized Pre strip Mining | 35 | 0 | 0 | 35 |
| Capex Total | 1,559 | 151 | 393 | 2,102 |
Process plant operating cost estimates for the 28 Mtpa HG and 7 Mtpa LG plants were developed by DRA and Koryx, with associated labour rates and complements being prepared by Koryx. KP provided minor operating cost estimates for the related infrastructure. The process plants are expected to operate for 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.
- 6 -
Table 7: Project Operating Costs (US$/t processed)
| Cost Centre | 28 Mtpa High Grade Milling and Flotation Plant | 7 Mtpa Low Grade | ||||
| Heap Leach / SX EW Plant | ||||||
| US$/t | US$m | US$/t | US$m | |||
| processed | /year | processed | /year | |||
| Material Handling Including Grade Control | 0.45 | 12.6 | 0.95 | 6.65 | ||
| Operating and Maintenance Labor | 0.44 | 12.32 | 0.53 | 3.71 | ||
| Power | 2.33 | 65.24 | 1.49 | 10.43 | ||
| Consumables and Reagents Including Water | 1.96 | 54.88 | 1.29 | 9.03 | ||
| Maintenance | 0.66 | 18.48 | 0.33 | 2.31 | ||
| Laboratory Analyses | 0.11 | 3.08 | 0.05 | 0.35 | ||
| Tailings Storage Facility | 0.19 | 5.32 | ||||
| MF Plant G&A Expenses | 0.22 | 6.16 | 0.48 | 3.34 | ||
| Total Variable and Fixed Processing Costs | 6.36 | 178.08 | 5.12 | 35.82 |
Mining operating costs were estimated by Qubeka based on the envisaged mining contractor’s selected equipment fleet and organisational structure. The estimate was done from first principles, using the original equipment manufacturers (“OEM”) hourly life cycle cost estimates with the simulated production rates for the primary mining equipment.
Site administration (G&A) costs were estimated by Koryx, based on other similar sized copper operations. The unit operating cost estimates thus derived are summarized in the table below:
Table 8: Total Operating Cost Estimate
| Cost Centre (average costs over life of mine) | Unit | Unit Cost | US$m /year | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Waste Rock Mining | US$/t mined | 2.25 | 140.00 | ||||
| Mineralized Mining | US$/t mined | 2.25 | 79.93 | ||||
| MF Processing Plant | US$/t processed | 6.36 | 178.08 | ||||
| HL Processing Plant | US$/t processed | 5.12 | 35.82 | ||||
| Infrastructure Variable Costs | US$m/year | 8.52 | |||||
| Non Process G&A Costs | US$m/year | 3.13 | |||||
| Total Variable and Fixed Operating Costs | 445.48 | ||||||
| Total Unit Operating Cost | US$/lb Cu | 2.26 |
Financial Sensitivity Analysis
Figure 1: Financial Sensitivity Spider Diagram
- 7 -
Table 9: IRR Sensitivity to Copper Price (Post-Tax) Copper Price (US$/t)
| 8,550 9,025 9,500 9,975 10,450 | |
|---|---|
| 8% |
Table 10: NPV8% Sensitivity Table (Post-Tax)
Copper Price (US$/t)
| 8,550 9,025 9,500 9,975 10,450 | |
|---|---|
| 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% | |
| 8.0% | |
| 9.0% 10.0% |
Copper Price (US$/t)
| 8,550 9,025 9,500 9,975 10,450 | |
|---|---|
| 0.28% 0.29% | |
| 0.31% | |
| 0.32% 0.34% |
Copper Price (US$/t)
| 8,550 9,025 9,500 9,975 10,450 | |
|---|---|
| 1.94 2.04 | |
| 2.15 | |
| 2.26 2.37 |
Copper Price (US$/t)
| 8,550 9,025 9,500 9,975 10,450 | |
|---|---|
| 5.26 5.55 | |
| 5.85 | |
| 6.14 6.43 |
Copper Price (US$/t)
| 8,550 9,025 9,500 9,975 10,450 | |
|---|---|
| 1,401 1,479 | |
| 1,557 | |
| 1,635 1,713 |
- 8 -
Geology and Mineralization
Haib is hosted within the coeval, Paleoproterozoic Orange River Group volcanic and Vioolsdrif Intrusive Suite of plutonic rocks of the Richtersveld Sub province of the Namaqua-Natal Province. The Orange River Group consists of several northwest trending felsic to mafic volcanic belts. The Vioolsdrif Intrusive Suite intrudes the Orange River Group and is composed of felsic to mafic batholiths dominantly composed of granodiorite.
At Haib the Vioolsdrif Intrusive Suite is made up of several phases of porphyritic intrusive rocks, including the main mineralized host rocks, termed the Quartz Feldspar Porphyry (QFP) and the Feldspar Porphyry (FP).
Figure 2: Haib Cu Project Geology & Drill Plan
The entire region has undergone two phases of greenschist facies metamorphism, which have mainly produced a metamorphic assemblage of chlorite-calcite-epidote-green biotite without significant deformation. Most of the rock exhibits typical porphyry copper type alteration zones associated with mineralization.
The higher-grade copper mineralization is controlled by a fracture / vein set that parallels a regional structural trend and strikes approximately northwest and dips steeply (-70°) to the southwest. This high-grade zone also appears to plunge at 30° to 40° towards the south-east.
Broad zones of copper mineralization occur over a strike length of approximately two kilometers that are commonly several hundreds of meters wide. Mineralization has been intersected by diamond drilling to a maximum depth of 790 m below the topographic surface. Copper mineralization is predominantly as
- 9 -
chalcopyrite in both disseminated and vein form, however pyrite, minor bornite, chalcocite and molybdenite also occur.
Mineral Resource Estimate
The Haib Mineral Resource estimate included information obtained from diamond drillholes completed between 1963 and 2024 with drilling comprising a total length of 78,934 m. In addition, one underground adit was channel sampled over a length of 126 m. The historical data was extensively validated, and all data collected by Rio Tinto Zinc (120 drillholes from 1972 to 1975), Great Fitzroy Mines (13 drillholes from 1995 to 1999) and Teck (32 drillholes in 2010) were accepted for use in the Mineral Resource estimate.
A summary of the Mineral Resource estimate is presented in the Table below.
Table 11: Mineral Resource Estimate for Haib (as at 01 September 2025 at a 0.15% Cu cut-off)
| Tonnes | Cu Grade | Mo | Cu | Mo | Cu | Mo | ||
| Category | Type | Grade | Content | Content | Content | Content | ||
| (Mt) | (%) | (ppm) | (Mlbs) | (Mlbs) | (kt) | (kt) | ||
| Oxide & Transitional (>0.15% Cu) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Low Grade (0.15 to 0.225% Cu) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Measured High grade (>0.225 % Cu) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | ||||||||
| Oxide & Transitional (>0.15% Cu) 23.5 0.31 16 159 0.8 72 0.4 Low Grade (0.15 to 0.225 % Cu) 45.3 0.21 46 211 4.6 96 2.1 Indicated High grade (>0.225 % Cu) 442.3 0.34 53 3307 51.7 1500 23.5 Total 511.0 0.33 51 3678 57.1 1668 25.9 | ||||||||
| Oxide & Transitional (>0.15% Cu) 23.5 0.31 16 159 0.8 72 0.4 Measured & Low Grade (0.15 to 0.225 % Cu) 45.3 0.21 46 211 4.6 96 2.1 Indicated High grade (>0.225 % Cu) 442.3 0.34 53 3307 51.7 1500 23.5 Total 511.0 0.33 51 3678 57.1 1668 25.9 | ||||||||
| Oxide & Transitional (>0.15% Cu) 16.3 0.28 16 102 0.6 46 0.3 Low Grade (0.15 to 0.225 % Cu) 37.7 0.21 45 175 3.8 79 1.7 Inferred High grade (>0.225 % Cu) 254.8 0.32 41 1816 23.0 824 10.5 Total 308.9 0.31 40 2093 27.4 949 12.4 |
Notes:
1. All tabulated data have been rounded and as a result minor computational errors may occur.
2. Mineral Resources, which are not Mineral Reserves, have no demonstrated economic viability. There is no guarantee that that all or any part of the Mineral Resource will be converted into a Mineral Reserve. The estimate of Mineral Resources may be materially affected by geology, environment, permitting, legal title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant issues.
3. Mt = Million tonnes, kt = thousand tonnes, Mlbs = Million pounds
4. The Mineral Resource Statement for Haib as of 01 September 2025 is reported at a cut-off grade of 0.15% Cu within a conceptual pit shell using the following assumed parameters:
- Base Copper Price USD/lb Cu: 4.20, Base Molybdenum price: USD/lb Cu: 20
- Royalty and Export Levy: 4%, Copper metal credit (payability): 97.5%, Molybdenum metal credit = USD/lb Cu: 0.17
- Mining dilution: 5%, Mining recovery: 95%, overall slope angle: 55°
- Sulphide recovery flotation: 89%, Heap Leach recovery 74%
- Mining Cost at pit rim USD/tonne: 2.07 (additional 0.008 USD/tonne per metre depth from pit rim)
- Stockpile and site-transport costs USD/tonne: 0.30
- Processing Cost USD/tonne mineralized material processed: 5.85 Flotation, 4.49 Heap Leach, solvent extraction and electro winning (SX-EW).
- SG&A Overheads USD/tonne mineralized material processed: 0.88 Flotation, 1.07 Heap Leach SX-EW
- Selling Cost Transport, smelting and refining of Concentrate USD/lb Cu: 0.30
5. Low Grade zone refers to the portion of the block model within the modelled 0.2% Cu grade shells that is targeted to follow a leaching SX-EW process similarly to the oxide and transitional mineralization.
- 10 -
Samples from two drilling campaigns (King Resources and Falconbridge) comprising a total of 29 drillholes completed during the period 1963 to1969 were excluded from grade estimation as MSA was unable to satisfactorily validate these data. Koryx drilled 45 NQ size holes from 2021 to 2024, which verified the nature of the mineralisation in the historical database and infilled the drilling grid along the main mineralisation trend.
The pre-Teck and Koryx holes were largely drilled vertically and at a grid spacing of approximately 150 m. Teck and Koryx drilled angled holes, in some cases from the same location, to more optimally intersect the dipping mineralisation. Given the more targeted infill nature of the drilling and the challenging topography, the resultant grid is irregular.
Three-dimensional copper and molybdenum mineralisation models were created, and grades were estimated using the accepted historical and all Koryx data. Grade estimation of a three-dimensional block model was performed by ordinary kriging of two metre composite sample grades using Leapfrog Edge software. An average in-situ dry bulk density value of 2.78 t/m3 was assigned to all blocks.
This updated Mineral Resource Statement, with an effective date of 01 September 2025, represents rereporting of the 2024 Mineral Resource model based on a revised optimised pit shell using parameters aligned with the 2025 Preliminary Economic Assessment. Molybdenum has been included in this update following metallurgical test-work allowing for assumed recovery to be applied.
The Mineral Resource was estimated using the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Best Practice Guidelines and is reported in accordance with the 2014 CIM Definition Standards, which have been incorporated by reference into National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (NI 43-101).
Pit Optimization and Mine Planning
The PEA envisages an open-pit mining operation with flotation of sulphide mineralization with a grade of greater than 0.225% copper, and heap leach with solvent extraction electro winning (SX-EW) of oxide and transitional mineralization with a grade greater than 0.15% Cu and low grade (0.15% Cu to 0.225% Cu) sulphide mineralization.
The optimised pit shell only considered mineralization contained within the modelled 0.20% Cu grade shell. While it is recognised that significant quantities of generally lower grade material exist outside the grade shell, this is for the time being not being included in the PEA mine schedule and has not been included in this Mineral Resource statement.
From the assumed parameters, a 0.1% Cu in-situ cut-off grade was calculated, which, together with the optimised pit shell demonstrates reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction (RPEEE) for the Mineral Resource. The assessment to satisfy the criteria of RPEEE is a high-level estimate and is not an attempt to estimate Mineral Reserves. The Haib RPEEE pit shell is illustrated together with the block model in the Figures below.
An optimisation and mining study was completed by Qubeka and notes that the PEA is preliminary in nature and is based on Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorised as Mineral Reserves. Inferred Mineral Resources were included in the pit optimisation runs and also classified as mineralized material during the LOM production schedule runs.
The deposit is a large copper-molybdenum porphyry deposit in southern Namibia amenable to open-pit mining. The mineralization will be mined as a conventional shovel and truck operation, with bulk mining augmented by more selective mining in areas with narrow mineralized material zones.
- 11 -
Figure 3: Haib resource pit shell and block model – plan view
Figure 4: Haib resource pit shell and block model –oblique view to the north
- 12 -