Earnings call transcript: Bos Energy targets uranium production growth in FY 2025

Bos Energy (market cap: $654.7 million), a uranium production company, recently held its earnings call for fiscal year 2025, announcing significant developments in its operations and future outlook. According to InvestingPro data, the company’s stock has shown strong momentum with a 12.3% year-to-date return, despite recent market volatility. The company reported robust production numbers and a strategic focus on expanding its uranium output, despite facing some operational challenges.

Key Takeaways

• Bos Energy produced 872,000 pounds of uranium in FY 2025.
• The company maintains a strong balance sheet with $224 million in cash and no debt.
• Future production is targeted at 1.6 million pounds for FY 2026.
• Potential challenges in resource continuity are being investigated.

Company Performance

Bos Energy’s performance in FY 2025 was marked by the production of 872,000 pounds of uranium, reflecting its operational capabilities and strategic focus on increasing output. The company has successfully commissioned three Nim6 columns, with additional installations underway, aiming to boost production to 1.6 million pounds in FY 2026. Despite operational challenges, such as potential issues with resource continuity, Bos Energy remains strategically positioned to capitalize on the anticipated rise in uranium demand.

Financial Highlights

• Uranium production: 872,000 pounds
• C1 cost: AUD 35/US$23 per pound
• Cash and liquid assets: $224 million
• Inventory sales: 100,000 pounds at US$71.15 per pound

Outlook & Guidance

Bos Energy has set ambitious targets for FY 2026, with production guidance of 1.6 million pounds and C1 cost guidance between US$27-29 per pound. The company projects an all-in sustaining cost of US$64-70 per pound. InvestingPro data reveals that analysts maintain a positive outlook, with expectations for profitability this year. Discover 10+ additional exclusive ProTips and comprehensive analysis with an InvestingPro subscription. Despite potential challenges in resource continuity, the management remains confident in achieving these production targets for FY 2026 and early FY 2027.

Executive Commentary

Duncan Graft, Managing Director, highlighted the company’s achievements, stating, "We’ve produced over 1,000,000 pounds of uranium to date." He also addressed potential operational challenges, noting, "We’re yet to deplete a well field. We want to reassess how our initial well fields are performing." These comments underscore the company’s proactive approach to addressing operational hurdles while maintaining its growth trajectory.

Risks and Challenges

• Resource continuity issues could impact production targets.
• Market volatility in uranium prices may affect profitability.
• Operational challenges in achieving nameplate capacity.
• Potential deviations from feasibility studies in well field development.

Bos Energy’s earnings call provided insights into its strategic direction and operational focus for the coming year. With a strong financial position and a clear production target, the company is well-positioned to navigate the challenges ahead and capitalize on opportunities in the uranium market. For deeper insights into Bos Energy’s financial health, valuation metrics, and growth potential, access the comprehensive Pro Research Report available exclusively on InvestingPro, covering this and 1,400+ other top stocks with expert analysis and actionable intelligence.

Full transcript - Boss Resources Ltd (BOE) Q4 2025:

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for dialing into BOS Energy’s June 25 quarterly conference call. Joining me on today’s call is Justin Laird, our CFO and Matt Ducey, our COO, who will also be available during the Q and A session at the end. So there’s a lot of content in the release, and I’ve taken quite a few phone calls already this morning. But in essence, what I’ll talk through is the strong performance we delivered during the fourth quarter and for FY 2025, our current FY 2026 guidance being on set to deliver GBP 1,600,000.0, what we are facing in FY 2027 and to round out the talk just regarding management changes.

And at the end of that, we’ll have q and a. But before commencing, it’s worth reflecting on the past year, which was our first year of production at Honeymoon, and it really has been a tremendous achievement that since the start of commissioning in April, we’ve produced over 1,000,000 pounds of uranium to date. And if you compare that back to the previous operations under uranium one, we achieved 640,000 pounds in nearly a two and a half year operation. So to technically beat our first year of production cost guidance then hit a million pound milestone, a really big achievement, and full credit to the team on the ground at Honeymoon. And again, I’d like to thank them for their commitment and hard work.

Our margins are strong. If you compare our costs to globally production, we really are in an enviable position. And as demand rises for uranium, we’re in a good position to capitalize upon it. With production on track, we’re still on target to ramp up significantly over FY ’26. We’re seeing that in our results to date for July of over a 130,000 pounds being produced, which annualized already, if we keep going as we are in July, we’ll hit the 1,600,000 pounds.

We’re driving our exploration program forward. We’re updating our resource estimates for Goldstam and Jason’s satellite deposits, and there’s a lot more work to be done with greenfield targets. So in all, a very promising start for a new mining operation. Turning to slide three of the presentation, key ramp up milestones. I’ll start with our fourth quarter and FY 2025 result.

We’re delighted to announce that Honeymoon exceeded FY 2025 production cost guidance with 872,000 pounds of uranium produced that strung and a C1 cost of AUD35 or US23 dollars per pound, again reflective of the hard work and commitment of our team on-site. From a processing plant perspective, we successfully dealt with the small challenges encountered with the drying and packing area during the quarter, and that has led to a consistent performance since. The commissioning of Nim6 columns one to three are all operating in design in line with design and in terms of flow capacity and loading and unloading of resin beads. And we’ve also pleasingly seen positive progress for our 30% joint venture relationship in Ultomisa managed by Encore Energy with over 200,000 pounds of uranium produced, an increase of 98,000 pounds in the prior quarter. So it’s terrific to see Ultomisa’s turnaround.

From a financial position, we remain strong with a strong balance sheet, dollars $224,000,000 in cash and liquid assets, no debt. And during the quarter, we sold 100,000 pounds of inventory at a price of US71.15 dollars BOS was able to achieve a relatively high realized price during the quarter due to being strategically under contracted, which really enables us to sort of step away from the market when we believe the market price isn’t representing fundamental long term value. And that is one of our core strategies going forward. As mentioned, we also exceeded our C1 cost guidance recording US23 dollars or AUD36 per pound, which is a terrific result. In addition, which I’ll expand upon during the presentation, we’re also going to provide 26 guidance, which will go for GBP 1,600,000.0 uranium drum this financial year with a C1 cost guidance of up to US27 dollars to US29 dollars or US41 dollars to US45 dollars and an all in sustaining cost of US64 dollars to US70 dollars or US41 dollars to US45 dollars Looking at further ramp up and growth initiatives that are underway, our ramp up continues with the construction of future wellfields and completion of Nim6 Columns 4 to six.

All of those columns, four, five and six, have been installed and currently undergoing commissioning with Column 4 also having completed its hydro testing. We’ve also increased our investment in Laramind resources from 19.7% to 19.9%. And after several years of submission and government application, it was terrific news received in the last week or two with Laramide receiving a mineral development license for their Westmoreland uranium project in Queensland, which is a hugely positive milestone for the company. Turning to the following slide, Slide four, Honeymoon’s production results. BOSS continues to ramp up production at Honeymoon, delivering 349,000 pounds of uranium and 396,000 pounds of IX production, and that represents a growth of 18% or 60%, respectively.

The accumulation of inventory in the circuit during the quarter has also put BOSS in a strong position to start this current financial year. In fact, as mentioned, during the July month to date this month to date, drum production of 138,000 pounds which annualized surpasses our ’26 guidance of 1,600,000 pounds And as mentioned, those challenges we had with drying and packing, which was previously disclosed to the market have been resolved and we’re seeing consistent performance since. So the key activities for this current quarter is to focus on the ramp up plan and commission those NIM six columns four to six, bring wellfields four to five online and continuing to build out wellfields six to nine to support future production. Turning to the following slide on Altamisa. With regards to our 30% stake, we’ve seen positive operational results as that operation turns the corner and improves their efficiencies.

So their production for the quarter of £200,000 is up from £94,000 in quarter three. And as such, we received £44,000 reflecting our pro rata share of production, which is also up from 29,000 pounds in the prior quarter. On the July 4, we also announced the market that we had entered into an amendment to the existing uranium loan agreement with Encore, pursuant to which BOSS extended the repayment date of the existing loan. So providing it so basically US10.4 million outstanding at the time of the announcement, December 7, and providing an additional cash facility of US3.6 million dollars We really do look forward to working continually with our joint venture partner, Encore, and ramping up Altamesa. And we’ve, you know, knowing their great operational team and seeing how well Al’s work together has been terrific sharing some of our ideas and looking at our progress to date on the various operations and how we can share best knowledge to guide both companies through to achieving higher production results.

For the following slide, Slide six, it sets out our results against guidance. So as you’ll recall, BOSS provided guidance for the second half of FY 2025 only, and that was given that we’re only in the early stages of ramp up at the beginning of FY 2025. And pleasingly, BOSS exceeded its that second half guidance. So again, repeating, C1 cost for the half was AUD35 per pound, which was below the guidance range of AUD37 to AUD41. And that underspend was due to provisions, we sort of provided as best we could, putting contingencies in place for unexpected ramp up costs that weren’t realized.

So in terms of quarter on quarter results, the C1N34 was an increase of $3 per pound and that increase in C1 cost was flagged in our previous quarterly announcement, which was mainly a result of a decline in average PLS or pregnant leach solution tenor as forecasted previously in our feasibility study. CapEx for the year was $25,000,000 which was below the guidance range of 38 to $43,000,000 The underspend represents a deferral of around $15,000,000 in CapEx rather than realized savings. That plan has underpinned the CapEx spend, which represented an internal accelerated plan and a shift to the right that is not expected to impact the FY 2026 guidance. Looking at Slide seven, the financial position at thirty June, and please note, these numbers are not currently unaudited. You’ll see our annual report at the August, but we’re pretty confident that this is they won’t be changed.

This slide really does provide additional detail on the key balance sheet movements during the quarter. And as mentioned, we’ve got a very, very strong financial position, $224,000,000 in cash and liquid assets and no debt. We’ve got a honeymoon project that’s net positive cash flow producing and we expect during the course of this year that the company itself will be in a net positive cash flow position. Cash did however decline during the quarter from $34,000,000 to $37,000,000 and that was mainly due to BOSS producing via Honeymoon and Ultomesa, pounds 294,000 more than it sold. So effectively, we increased our inventory levels up to around 1,400,000 pounds During the quarter, the market price for uranium, as we know, fell below a price, target price really that we believe represents fundamental value.

But by being strategically under contracted and having that strong balance sheet, we’re able to sort of step away from the market in times like this and achieve a stronger realized price for the pounds that we did sell. So recall please recall that our inventory is valued at the lower of cost and net realizable value. So when inventory is accumulated, the full market value of that inventory is not reflected in the inventory value valuation. Following slide, Slide nine, we are continuing to pursue additional growth opportunities while remaining disciplined on capital. In terms of opportunities around Honeymoon, we’re on track to deliver Gould’s and Jason’s mineral resource.

I’ve seen the initial flash results on Jason’s. We’re waiting on Gould’s, and we need to double check that and review. And we’re also having that assessed as we did with our mineral resource initially by AMC consultants as our competent persons. We’re also utilizing low cost and innovative drilling for prospects around Honeymoon with the more recent being drilling at Lake Constance and further targets will continue to be identified. We also, as mentioned, increased our shareholding in Laramite resources to 19.9%.

As mentioned, Laramite has just announced receiving that mineral development license for the Westmoreland project in Queensland, giving it a strong foundation to advance the project. The following slide, market update. Well, there’s so much commentary out there on the market, and everyone’s quite well versed. So Slide 10, please. The uranium I think the slide is stuck, but if we can move to Slide 10.

Thank you. With the uranium market forecasted to continue towards a more structurally undersupplied position, Honeymoon remains in a very strong position to capitalize on an upswing. The long term fundamentals of the market remain robust with long term price holding firm at around US80 dollars per pound. And as mentioned previously, it’s one of the highest prices ever at the start of a new cycle. And as mentioned as well, 95 percent of our costs are in Australian dollars.

There have been several positive catalysts during the quarter, particularly coming from The US to reinvigorate nuclear as a source of clean energy, and we can see that in some of The U. S. Stocks and how their equity prices are responding. If we turn now to the next slide, Slide 12, FY 2026 guidance. Basically, this slide sets out our guidance for FY 2026.

Production guidance, as mentioned, pounds 1,600,000.0, which is consistent with what was set out in the 2021 enhanced feasibility study. The cash cost is AUD 41 to 45 per pound, which is an increase of AUD 4 per pound as compared to the second half twenty twenty five guidance. This increase in cash cost is primarily attributed to the expected decline in grade as we move out into the expanded resource away from the honeymoon domain. So that increase in cash cost is with the declining grade, And that’s what we had previously flagged. As a result, that we need to offset that by optimizing the lixibian.

So lixibian being the fluid that we inject through the ore body combination of ferric and acid, we’re tinkering with those components to optimize what we can actually leach. And the current work underway indicates that that optimized Libsivient will rather deliver value through improved recoveries that actually result in higher reagent consumption in the short term. The benefit and cost of the optimized Lexivion has been reflected in our FY 2026 guidance. The sustaining CapEx is AUD 29,000,000 to 32,000,000, which reflects the capital to build four to five wellfields and bring the total number of wellfields built to nine, which is required to deliver the FY 2026 production guidance. And in addition, that built infrastructure also provides an additional 900,000 pounds of production for FY 2027.

And for good reference, we believe the FY 2027 guidance will be a lot higher than that 900,000 pounds As noted in the quarterly results from the initial drilling for Wellfield 6 To 9 has shown less continuity of mineralized horizons as what was assumed in the enhanced feasibility study. And the result of that potentially means that additional injection and extraction wells will need to be installed, which is what’s driving that increase in sustaining CapEx per pound as again compared to the enhanced feasibility study. So again, this has been reflected in the FY 2026 guidance. The projects in supporting infrastructure capital guidance is around $27,000,000 to $30,000,000 As noted, dollars 15,000,000 is a carryover from FY 2025. The remaining of the cost is mostly well field supporting capital, which is the cost to build the trunk line and high voltage extensions as we extend into the ore body into Enes Kalpuru.

The small amount of remaining spend is really plant improvement capital as one would ordinarily expect. So if we turn to the following slide, it provides a good visual really of where these costs are being incurred. So for Slide 13, you can see, basically, this is the in the in the purple box outline is the mining license. Brooksdam is one domain to our West. The Honeymoon Domain’s in the central component central part.

And then to the East, you’ve got East Kakaroo. So the Honeymoon Domains, where our processing plant’s located, that’s where we’ve been focusing initial well field construction efforts and where we’ve been deriving the initial supply of pregnant leach solution. And we did that because a lot of the infrastructure was already in place from the predecessors uranium swine operations. The black line that you can see extending to the Far East Of East Kakaroo is the trunk line, and then we’ve started our well field constructions of Well Field 6 To 9, which is providing that infrastructure for FY ’26. Then the plan is to work back through that trunk line back to the honeymoon domain.

So there’s a there’s a plan underway. And, yeah, in this slide, you can really see those initial B 1 To B 9 Wellfields being constructed. Slide 15 is the one that we’ve had a few calls or I’ve had a few calls on this morning. But, essentially, what’s come about of this CY guidance review and having been able to assess the numbers and look at estimated costs that we need to work through, that looking at our initial twelve months of actual performance and design for wellfields one to five, and now we’re assessing the recent delineation drill results for wellfield development at East Kalkuru, we have identified potential challenges that may arise in achieving nameplate capacity as outlined in the EFS. This is largely due to that potential for less continuity of mineralization and leachability.

As always, we keep the market informed. We did so when we encountered challenges with the performance of the kilns in the drying and packing area, and we thought it prudent to sort of flag this as a potential issue that we’re working through now. We do, as mentioned, we’ve got infrastructures already supporting 900,000 pounds in FY twenty seven. And as a continuation as we expand with in situ recovery mining, we bring new oil fields on at least sort of six months in advance of when we actually need them. So we’re already ahead of the curve.

We’ve got the next eighteen months of production accounted for, and it’s now a matter of just doing this work and comparing and reanalyzing our assumptions and prudently looking at our cost basis. So to do that and to assist us with that process, we are doing an independent review. We’re bringing back subject matter experts to help compile the feasibility study as well as looking at some international expertise in Australian on operating ISR and wellfields to determine the extent of how this may differ to the EFS. But as we stand, we’re ahead of the curve. We’ve got time.

We’ve got a strong balance sheet, and we’re working through these issues. The following slide on Slide 17, really management transition. While on the June 2, we announced the appointment of two highly experienced directors to help bolster our board capability, further enhance the company’s overall investment credentials. Miss Joanne Palmer was appointed nonexec director and chair of the audit committee. Miss Palmer is a former partner at the international accounting firm, Ernest Young, and a former executive director of Pitcher Partners.

She led financial accounting advisory services team in Perth with a very strong focus on the resources sector. Also, Ms. Carolyn Keats was appointed Non Exec Director. Ms. Keats has twenty years of strong corporate and commercial experience and has served in various executive roles.

For nearly fifteen years, she worked in the mining industry in Australia and foreign jurisdictions. The company has also announced the retirement of long serving non exec director, Bryn Jones, who was previously a technical director of the company. I have also informed the Board that I’ll step down as managing director and CEO as of thirty September. The board has requested that I remain in the company as a nonexec director, which I’ve, of course, agreed to do so. So from 01/1926, I’ll serve that role as a net nonexec director.

And, you know, I do wanna take the opportunity to thank all our supporters, shareholders, stakeholders for their support to date. It’s been a long and very challenging but fruitful journey over the last eight and a half years, and I’ve been discussing for a number of months now with the chairman as to an appropriate transition point. But it was decided having built a strong executive team over the past twelve to eighteen months with the likes of Justin Ladd, Matt Doocy, Andy Wilde as chief geologist, and Laura as our HR manager that with a strong team in focus to afford afford some time off. The COO, Matt Ducey, will be appointed managing director and CEO as of January, subject to the company green terms, which is well underway and benchmarked according to current data. And I’ll continue closely working with mister Doocy and the whole team during the intervening period and going forward as this company really means a great deal to me.

So, Matt, any comments from

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: you to round out the call? No. Thanks. Thanks, Duncan. And as an introduction, my name is Matt Doocy, if you don’t know who I am.

Been working closely with Duncan over the last ten months since joining BOSS in the COO capacity. And during that time, I’ve got a good understanding of what the of the operation and also the uranium market as I’m building that understanding. A little bit about my background, twenty five years experience in the resource sector in a number of number of executive roles. Prior to joining BOSS, I was with IGI for the last ten years in multiple roles, including the COO and acting CEO position. I’ll hand back to Duncan.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: No. Matt, thanks very much. But with that, we’re happy to go into Q and A. Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank Your first question comes from Alastair Rankin from RBC. Please go ahead.

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: Good morning, Duncan, Justin and Matt. Thanks for taking my questions. Just firstly on the independent review that you’re conducting. What’s the specific challenges that you’ve seen so far that’s led to led you to start this process?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Really, it’s it’s thanks, Alastair. It’s going back to that continuity of resource. So a nice way to describe it is when we’re developing the wellfields in East Kakaroo in the feasibility study, predominantly, we’d we’d assume that one well would intersect sort of three horizons, so the lower, the middle, and the upper. And that one well would would start actually extracting resource from the lower horizon, and then you grout or concrete that up to the middle horizon. At the middle horizon, you then mine that area grouted up to the upper horizon.

So what we’re saying is that we actually, in some areas, need to put in, say, two wells, one to intersect the upper, one to intersect the lower horizon. So in essence, what that means is that we need to reassess some of that continuity. And I think, really, that comes from a lot of the feasibility studies we went out into the inferred indicated area was sort of at a sixty, seventy meter drill spacing. Now we’re going into more delineated drilling looking at sort of 15 to 20 meter spacing, and and that’s where we’re seeing some of these challenges. So, yeah, it’s really now going back to assess the deviation or deviation from EFS and how widespread spread that is.

But, yeah, that’s something that we’ll keep the market informed with.

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: Right. So it sounds like the additional wells that you mentioned actually during your comments, Duncan, that you needed some additional injection and extraction wells in the well fill configurations. Is that mineralization continuity issues that driving those additional wells as well?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Yes.

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: Okay, cool. I’ll leave it at that.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from Daniel Roden from Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: Thanks, Frank and Justin and Matt for taking my questions. Just following up on that. I assume that, I guess, the impacts of that continuity and leachability are nonlinear with grade. And I guess the financial impacts of that. So I just wanted to when are you starting to expect those impacts?

Is that from ’27? And I guess, you just elaborate on, I guess, the life of mine impacts going forward? It sounds like you know, you’re potentially gonna have a big hit to or potentially to, I guess, mine life and life of the asset as well as sustaining CapEx over the profile. Is that the right way to think about it?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Yeah. Well, I mean, it really is too early to clearly understand and quantify those impacts, and that’s why we’ve commissioned this review. So, you know, if you look back at where we are as a as an as a operating asset, we’re yet to deplete one wellfield. You know. Wellfields one to three are working very well.

Wellfield four’s just come into production. We’re yet to actually lay down the infrastructures for common for wellfield six to nine. So there’s a lot of work to be done. So you’re not we’re not really in a position currently to comment on the life of mine, but we we need to do this work. And I guess, you know, continuous disclosure and and being transparent as a as a company, we just wanna flag that this is an area that we’re now working down on.

We’ve got you know, we’ve locked down our guidance for FY ’26. We’re confident we’re going to replicate that in ’27, but we do want to do more work understanding our resource. And I think, as I mentioned, it’s it’s prudent to assess our actual results against what we did as a feasibility study and challenge those assumptions as any mining operation would, and that that’s really where we stand. So, yeah, a lot of work to be done before we can come out with sort of statements such as such as that.

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. And I just wanted to touch on, I guess, the you know, you I guess, undersold relative to production in the in the June. I just wanted to touch on what the strength of the spot market has been over that time. And you’d note that you’re selling or unwilling to sell at lower prices, but we are reverting back into a lower price environment. So I guess looking forward over the short term, the next three months, I think it’s widely expected that the spot market liquidity is not going to meaningfully improve until later in the year.

What liquidity do you see over the next three months? And is that going to be sufficient? And just as a follow-up to that as well, I note that you’re marking to market your inventory at $85 a pound. If you were to mark that at spot, I’m calculating that at $100,000,000 Do you think that’s a fair assessment of your near term liquidity, given if you try to liquidate the GBP 1,400,000.0 over the next month or two, assume that’s transacting at a pretty hefty discount even to the $72 a pound spot price now.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: I’ll ask Justin to respond to this. But I think what I will just before we start, we when we say strategically how we manage our inventory and our sales, we really look at a combination of factors. So, you know, at one one element, you have the spot market. We’re yet to trade in the spot market. What we do is really focus on carry trades, so selling strategically three to six months in advance and also our contracted volumes.

So we do have, as you know, what’s publicly known, the three contracts that are in existence. They do provide a floor and a ceiling and provide us with some with understanding that we’re the sustainable mining operation. But, Justin, do you want to allude on or expand on some of those comments?

Justin Laird, CFO, BOS Energy: Yeah. Hi, Daniel. So so in terms of the liquidity of spot, we don’t see any issues with liquidity in terms of spot market or the forward market as Duncan described. During the quarter, particularly the first part of the quarter, the spot price drifted down to the low sixties. If you kind of calculate what the forward price would be factoring in cost of capital and holding costs, that’s kind of substantially below where the term price is.

So we didn’t believe that that that price represented fundamental long term value. So we do believe that there is a lot of liquidity in the market at the moment and more than enough liquidity for us to achieve our sales objectives. And in terms of your point around, you know, liquidation or discount to market price, we don’t see any of that. We believe that our value our inventory can be sold at a market price when we choose to.

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: Thanks, guys. I’ll hand it over. Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from Regan Burrows from Bell Potter. Please go ahead.

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: Hi, Duncan and team. Thanks for taking my questions. Just back on that independent review. Is that going to focus on all deposits, I guess, between East Kalkuru back to Honeymoon? Is it going to sort of expand from there after those satellite deposits?

Like, how do where do we sort of draw this line of of sort of question marks around the resource continuity? And also, you have sort of a rough timeline as to when that independent review will be finalized?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Yeah. Thanks, Reagan. No. It will. It’ll be all encompassing.

I think we need to look at the resource and satellite deposits as a whole. So, yeah, it’s it’s really testing our assumptions and what we’ve made really in well field design. We do have a mineral resource that was independently assessed by a competent person at, say, you know, £36,000,000 on the mining license in addition to £36,000,000 at Goulds and Jason. So the mineral resources there, it’s just looking at the continuity and welfare placement over it. So, yes, it will be all encompassing.

In terms of when that study will get underway, you know, shortly, we’re sort of yeah. Just there’s a couple more members of the team to pull in. But, yeah, in terms of the timing, we’ll give updates during the course of the year as we progress it, really. I mean, the nice the good thing is we’ve got line of sight for for our production this year and going into really until now until Christmas next year, which is already under infrastructure. The resource is there for remaining.

We just need to prove it up. But it yeah. It’s been quite hard to give guidance FY ’27 beyond other than what we can point to in the feasibility study.

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: Thanks. And I guess sort of going on from that, I mean, if you take that GBP 1,600,000.0 guidance for FY 2026, I guess you’re assuming rough capacity across all six NIM six columns of 57% at a fifty milligram per liter leach tenor. So I guess you’re basically assuming that the leach tenor is going to come down quite drastically from that 88 that you experienced in 4Q. Is that how we interpret that?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: The leach tenor like, we’ve given I’ve I’ve got what the average grade of leach tenor is of the life of mine, but the leach tenor hasn’t changed. Sorry, Jess.

Justin Laird, CFO, BOS Energy: Yeah. So I’ll just I’ll just quickly jump in there. So in terms of FY ’26, we expect leach tenant to be around 55 to 60 milligrams per liter as an average across the year.

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: Okay. So that assumes that you’re running, I guess, the additional columns at a lower capacity initially or a slower ramp up then?

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: Yeah. So column column four will will come in sometime over the next three months, and then column five will come in back December, and then we may not need to bring column six into that production profile in FY twenty twenty six.

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: So that’s a big change there.

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: All right. Thanks, guys. I’ll rejoin the queue.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from Rahul Anand from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Rahul Anand, Analyst, Morgan Stanley: Yes. Hi, Duncan, Matt and team. Thanks for the opportunity. Look, I’ve got two questions. I’ll start with the first.

The continuity issue, what in your opinion in hindsight has led to this? I mean, it lack of drilling and testing? Is it a lack of drilling at depth? Is it drill spacing? Like what is what in your opinion is the driver for this?

When is the independent report due by?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Thanks, Rahul. So that’s where no. So we haven’t actually set time frame. It’s really one that we’ll work through to the best of our abilities as quickly as we can during this year. But in terms of yeah, I guess it is it’s probably closer drill spacing or delineation drilling.

I mean, you know, when you when we started we did an extensive drill program back in twenty eighteen, nineteen, basically encompassing the whole of the resource. We had that independently reviewed as mentioned. We had block modeling done. We did we looked at our lift model, strap model. A lot of work went into it, and it’s now just marrying up how those assumptions compared to what we’re actually saying.

So probably, yeah, in hindsight, I mean, it’s just not practically feasible to drill it fifteen, twenty meter space across a whole resource when you start a project. But now that we’re getting into these outer regions, sort of the inferred material indicator, we’re just seeing a bit of discontinuity. So, yeah, it’s just a matter now of looking at it, the resources there. It’s just how leachable it is and how one can look at constructing wellfields across it and the economics that are associated with that. Matt, do you

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: have Yeah. And I think it also it comes down to when you’re doing the detailed design of the wellfields too that you recognize some of that continuity. And that’s what we’re seeing at the

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: far end.

Rahul Anand, Analyst, Morgan Stanley: So just a quick follow-up there, perhaps for Matt. Matt, this kind of reminds me of Nova in a way. And I think what was done at Nova post having resource that wasn’t continuing was that it was heavily drilled and the entire reserve life was drilled out. So is that something that you guys are going to consider to actually have tighter drill spacing and try to define and spend a bit more on exploration and basically get a bit more confidence in what you’ve got in the ground?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Yes. Yeah. I think that’s prudent. But particularly now that you’ve got, as mentioned, the the mine is net positive cash flow producing. Mean, we do have the self finances.

There’s no debt. But, yeah, I think I think greater greater yeah. Greater understanding of resource, push pull tests, testing the porosity of the actual basal sands, you know, it may even lead to a few more field leach trials. But, yeah, certainly, all those aspects will be considered as part of this review. You know, and it’s it’s what we’re really saying, and and please don’t lose sight of this, is the actual excipient that we’re using now and what we you know, the technical success of that’s proven to show great results as to introduction of ion exchange in our resin loading and capability.

So, you know, the mine itself is off to a flying start. We’re probably being a bit prudent and conservative giving comments FY ’27 and beyond, but the the our thought process was that, yes, seeing an increase sustaining capital in FY twenty six, the natural question one would have is how would this extend further? So to respond to that and preempt that, we are now flagging to the market continuous disclosure that that is an area that we’ll be looking at.

Rahul Anand, Analyst, Morgan Stanley: Sure. Look, for the second one, just a continuation of the first, guess. What are some of the critical factors that you need to determine really to know whether you get to that nameplate in the medium term beyond FY 2027? I mean, I guess you’d be looking to run equipment and plant at basically capacity in order to minimize costs. But are there some other limiting factors that are not making the outcome as linear as it should be?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: It’s probably probably a bit early to tell. But, Matt, do you Yeah. It’s a little

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: bit early to tell, and that’s we’ll have to come out of the program at work. But then you you may you may look at trying to reoptimize your reoptimize Wellfield to on margins, not just flow as well. So it’s it’s it’s a little bit too early to tell, but given given we’re seeing changes in mineralization to EFS with less continuity, we just gotta go back and work through that.

Rahul Anand, Analyst, Morgan Stanley: Okay. Sure. So that would basically mean a lower amount of reserve and then if you if you so choose that path. Okay. That’s well understood.

Thank you.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Yeah. We don’t know that yet. We’ve got to work through it.

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: Yeah. And then also, it’s about getting that cost structure right for Wellfields so that we can actually to to do that, and that’s where Duncan was talking about continuity of realization stack. So there’s a bit of work to also look at cost structure for wellfields to ensure that we can get those cutoff grades right.

Rahul Anand, Analyst, Morgan Stanley: Sure. No, that makes sense. Thank you, gentlemen. I’ll pass it on.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from George Ross from Argonaut. Please go ahead.

George Ross, Analyst, Argonaut: Good morning, guys. Thanks for taking the call. Most of my questions have been answered. Guess just in regards to Goulds Dam and Jason’s drill out areas, are we going to see any infill or sort of I guess spatial variability infill drilling completed on those in the near term, like prior to, I guess, publishing the new resources so that we, I guess, have confidence on the continuity of realized zones?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: So we we did complete our first major stage of infill drilling in the last calendar year, I think in November, December last year. So then we handed that body of drill results across to our competent person, AMC consultants who have then done some of the block modeling work. And then we’ve handed that across to hydrogeologists with well field design to see what the mineable resource could be. But, yeah, we’ve only that work I mean, it’s nearing completion but haven’t yet quite finished. But, yeah, the infill drilling has been done.

We did that last year.

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: Yeah. And, Joel, I think the the difference here is that we’ll also try and provide some form of outline of what wellfields would look like over that total resource, and that’s that second part of this work stream.

George Ross, Analyst, Argonaut: Okay. Cheers. And I guess from an overall recovery perspective with Kalkari, for example, are we expecting a fairly significant hit from overall recoveries of uranium from the well field? Or do you feel comfortable doing drilling at a, I guess, a denser spread will enable you to sort of maintain those overall recoveries?

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: Yes. I’ll try and answer that one. Recovery the recovery, the variance may be between EFS and what’s planned as a well field. Generally, the recovery, once we’ve got planned to to plant, which is the 70% recovery over 70 pour volumes, will still probably remain true. But we’ll we’ll retext that.

And then that’s why that’s why, ultimately, we have confidence on that 1.6 as part of that FY twenty six guidance, which is still Far East Kakaroo.

George Ross, Analyst, Argonaut: Great. Okay. Thanks. Thank

Conference Operator: you. Your next question comes from Glen Lawcock from Baron Joey. Please go ahead.

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: Good morning, Duncan. Duncan, I’m

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: still a little bit confused.

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: So you say you’ve identified challenges that may arise in achieving nameplate capacity, which is the 2.45. And you talk about continuity of the resource. So is that leading to less volume coming out or less grade or less recovery? What is the one of those three that must be causing you to make that statement?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Volume. It’s it’s a bit of a volume aspect like pounds under leach. So, you know, we have to look at the well field design and the pounds under leach. And what you want is continuity and results to give you that that sort of confidence in your well field design. And, you know, what we’re saying now is the resources there, additional wells are required, that’s leading to an increase in sustained capital that we’re seeing in our all in sustaining cost for FY ’26.

But, yeah, the challenge there could lead to volume underlege. So,

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: yeah Is because you have you maxed out what you can put down the pipe back to the plant? I just I mean, if you just if it’s more CapEx for more well fields and you didn’t have you need more well fields to get the volume ultimately once, doesn’t that still get you the nameplate? What else is missing?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Yes. Do you

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: ever make the statement that you can’t get there?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: You’re right. It can. And that’s where that can still get you to nameplate, but that’s where we wanna do this assessment and just say, you know, what that economic cost outlay is and the capital costs around the world field infrastructure. So the resource is there. It’s just a question of, as you say, the cost to do so.

You know, at the moment, the margins are still healthy for 1.6. Going to FY ’27, we’re confident that we’ll get at least 1,600,000 pounds. It’s just a question now of how we how we go about that. So, yeah, it’s just I guess, yeah, we just wanted to flag that that we need to do a review and and assess against our enhanced feasibility study assumptions.

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: So this is an assessment of the economics then more or less, like a, more well fields, more CapEx, more OpEx, can you still then make an economic model? But I would have thought with an $80 a pound uranium price and even with the cost and CapEx you’re now incurring for 1,600,000, surely it would be economic or do you think there’s going to be even more cost to come?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: No, Glenn. Certainly, that can be the case. Absolutely. I mean, we

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: Matt? No. That is that is that could that would likely be the case. What the challenge there is still a deviation of the EFS plan is what from what we’re seeing now, and we’ve got to go back and rechallenge ourselves on cutoff grades and how we apply that and and how that production profile would look.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: But, yeah, clearly, if the uranium price rose as well, that would be of benefit.

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: So it may be a little bit premature to say you can’t get to nameplate then. If the economics stack up, you could still get there?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: I think it’s it it feels premature, but it also we just I don’t know. Under advice, we have a a feasibility study that’s out there with the life of mine. We are seeing deviation to that feasibility study, and it warrants further investigation. But we are looking further ahead. So in terms of well field construction, as mentioned, we’ve basically got well fields under construction that takes us through to at least Christmas next year.

And, you know, we wanna be ahead of the curve. You can look around at sort of North American operations, etcetera, and some of the challenges they’ve faced is not being in front of their well field development plans and sort of falling behind. We are in front of it and we’re just picking up that there’s a bit of there’s some deviation to the feasibility study and more work is required and we want to go back and test those retest those assumptions and really apply best talents to do so. So, yeah, you’re not wrong. It’s just a question of us getting a firmer understanding as we go forward.

But certainly, we’ve got line of sight this current year, very comfortable with the costs. They’ve been conservatively put forward. As mentioned, this current month of July, we’re already at 138,000 pounds strung to uranium, which if you annualize that over twelve months, it surpasses the 1,600,000. So, yeah, that’s that’s the frustrating thing. No.

We’re yet to deplete a well field. Know, well field one’s still functioning and well till December. So what we wanna do is really also not only look at the delineation draw results, but also reassess how our initial well fields performing against what was planned, really, and just make those assessments. So it’s it’s a continuation of learning and as we go forward.

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: And sorry, Duncan, just looking at Jason’s And Gould’s Dam, your future prospects, resources. Outside of closer spaced drilling, is there anything you can glean from what’s transpired in getting us to this point that you can say whether or not Jason and Gould’s dam will have issues? Or is it we won’t know until you’ve done the close spaced drilling in all your resource?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: I think closed space drilling is really important. We have done infill drilling as mentioned on Goulds and Jasons, and we’ve block modeled that. And now it’s a question of putting well field designs over those over that sort of that block model taking into account, of course, lithology and stratigraphy. So we’re doing all the steps we can. It’s yeah.

It’s it’s just one of proving it up, really.

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: And sorry. Just last one then. Any early signs of issues at Jason’s or Gould’s Dam?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: No. We’ve only just got the first report through on Jason’s, but no no issues as such. We’re just yet to properly assess it. It came in a week ago. We’re yet to get gold stand.

But again, we want to apply our learnings from what we’re currently encountering and just really test those assumptions, but there is economic resource there.

Glen Lawcock, Analyst, Baron Joey: All right. Thanks very much.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from Alastair Rankin from RBC. Please go ahead.

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: Thanks guys for the follow-up question. Just further on that satellite deposit, so assuming the mineral resource update is favorable enough to pursue developments. What are the next steps there for taking it through development? I guess, what are your ambitions around timeline on getting a mining license?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: With regard to mining license, I flagged before you’re really looking at a sort of a three year period, which is largely predicated on environmental approvals with your flora and fauna and groundwater study, and that’s not dissimilar to any other mining operation in Australia. We’re already at least one year into assessing the groundwater component, which is the large sort of time delay, really. We’re involving government, both state and federal government. We’ve had visitations to the Honeymoon site, so they’re ahead of ahead of the curve. In terms of the other work, well, the drilling infill drilling’s been completed.

We’re now looking at well field design. The the next component is then just looking at the feasibility study around that in terms of trucking or trunking that resource back to the Honeymoon site. So, yeah, the the the steps are in place. The the study teams do that works in place, and we’re just walking through it. So, yeah, we’re we’re confident that those resources can be brought to line, you know, in the near term once we go through this work.

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: Yep. Okay. Got I think I think

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: it won’t

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: whether it be August or September, we’ll be coming out with results on Goulds and Jason. So it’s not far off. We just need to do a proper internal review of what we’ve seen.

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: Sure. Sure. Okay. And then just one more, just on the well field development costs. I mean, you got the sustaining cost of 29,000,000 to $32,000,000 for FY 2026.

So let’s call it anywhere from 6,000,000 to $8,000,000 per well field. Is that include does that 6 to 8 mil assume you’re trying to keep recoveries in line with your EFS targets? So that includes the additional injection and extraction wells?

Justin Laird, CFO, BOS Energy: Yes. Alex, so those the it’s a little bit tricky to just perfectly marry up the sustaining capital per wellfield, but we’re currently seeing a little bit lower than the numbers. We’re probably closer to around 4 and a half to 6,000,000 per wellfield. And the cost per wellfield is a little bit higher than what was in the EFS given inflation and then a small amount of scope changes. But really, the the cost per well field isn’t really a driving factor for that comparison to the EFS.

It’s more the pounds under leach per well field and the ability to rescreen those wells to access the kind of stacked horizons.

Alastair Rankin, Analyst, RBC: All right. Okay. Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from Regan Burrows from Bell Potter. Please go ahead.

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: Hi, Duncan guys. Yes, just following up. Just on that inventory on hand question that was asked earlier. So how do we read into that I mean, are we is that a working capital timing issue?

Are we going to see additional sales come through this quarter? How do we sort of think marry up, I guess, that production level versus the the actual sales?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Sure. Over to Justin, Harin. Yes. I think

Justin Laird, CFO, BOS Energy: we will probably end up while the market is, you know, assuming it’s supportive in FY twenty six, I assume that we’ll probably sell more more than we produce in FY twenty six as as a bit of a catch up on that working capital drawdown in FY twenty five.

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: Okay. And and then just looking at Ultomesa as well, I mean, looks like you received less than the pro rata share there, £43,000 and 203. Just curious, is is that a timing issue as well?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: It’s just yeah. Regular, it’s just a timing issue. We do true ups regularly. It’s just a timing issue.

Regan Burrows, Analyst, Bell Potter: Great. I’ll leave it there. Thank you very much.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Thanks.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from Daniel Roden from Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: Hey, guys. Just a quick follow-up on the Ultimesa. Are you providing guidance for 05/26 for Ultimesa as well as part of the JV? No.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: That’s no. Daniel, that’s really their prerogative. Altamesa are the managers of the project, and and it’s up to them to provide guidance. And then we’ll incorporate that, but it’s not something we can engineer or drive from our side, unfortunately.

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. And probably just a follow-up on that then. You know, not noting that the asset I guess, if you take the June, you know, production and actuals out of that is, you know, loss making at at current production rates and and pricing. If you fast forward into December, you’re potentially in a position to become, I guess, the the JV managers of the asset. I guess, how do you think about that?

Like, you know, you do see that scenario or eventually, know, clearly something’s going wrong with the asset and you’re, you know, infect effectively inheriting a liability at that point in time. I guess, how do you how do you kind of balance that and would you not prefer to take, I guess, the the loan repayable at a $100 a pound?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Yeah. I think jumping to conclusions a bit there. Really, what we’re saying is a is a real uptick in actual production with Alta Mesa. So the guys are performing. They did have a hiccup in the start.

In essence, they ran into a difficulty that that they weren’t getting well fields online quick enough due due to lack of drill rig availability. I think they’ve now focused on the management insight and restructuring some of their operational teams. So what we have seen is a real uplift in production. So, no, we think that they’re on the right track, really, to increase their production. So yeah.

In light of our loan, we feel very comfortable with our loan. I mean, Encore’s a well you know, it’s a it’s a mid cap, well financed, a lot of backing in the market. So we’ve got no no problems with security over our loan.

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. And I I guess probably just on the sales element, is the potential that Altamisa has contracts that might not be delivered into that you could potentially bend into as well and kind of almost do a swap on contract for swap?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: No. We I mean, I guess you could we could consider that. But where we stand really is that we have we’re independent. You know, the 30% that we get pro rata from production, can sell into our own sales mix and we’ve operated very independently on all our sales to date. So that’s not going to change.

In in the near term, we we, yeah, price our independence in our own sales strategy. So whatever Encore or Altamasia have contracted into, that’s their prerogative. We get out 30% of production and we deal with it accordingly.

Daniel Roden, Analyst, Jefferies: Okay. Thanks, Ross.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from Francois Gocic from E and P. Please go ahead.

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy0: Good morning, guys. So expansion was previously discussed at Honeymoon getting towards that GBP 3,300,000.0 number. Should we be thinking about the Goulds Dam, Jason’s deposit to back fill instead just given the issues that have been released to market today or am I potentially thinking about this the wrong way?

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: Franco, I think thanks for your question. I think it’s just too early to tell at this stage. What we do know is that we’ve got some mineralized resource at the satellite deposits. We’re still quantifying what will be a mineable resource to feed into the plant. We know that honeymoon itself has got an export permit around 3,300,000 pounds.

There may be also additional resources coming from greenfield exploration or from projects encompassing our tenement boundaries. So, yeah, it’s a bit too early to tell. But, you know, at the moment, we’ve got as mentioned, we’ve got clear line of sight on this year’s production. We’ve got a healthy start into FY ’27. We’re flagging to the market that we need to do more work on continuity and firming up our numbers before we can give guidance in excess of one year in advance.

But, yeah, it’s too early to tell on that 3.2, 3.3.

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy0: Then a quick one perhaps for Matt, obviously, taking over the CEO role in the coming months. Just wanted to understand the strategic direction of the company from here under his leadership and whether M and A potentially becomes a bigger focus for the company just given some issues at Honeymoon.

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy: Yeah. Brian, I’ll talk a little bit more about that once once I come closer to that transition period.

Matt Ducey, COO (Incoming CEO), BOS Energy0: No worries. Thanks, Alex.

Conference Operator: Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I’ll now hand back to Mr. Grape for closing remarks.

Duncan Graft, Managing Director and CEO (Retiring), BOS Energy: No. Thank you very much for your attendance today. And please, we’ll handle any calls or queries that come through. But, yes, as it stands, Matt and I are heading to South Australia tomorrow and then up to the mine site, and we’ll get this body of work underway. But thank you for the call.

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

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.