PLS Group Stock

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the PLS FY '26 Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded.

I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Dale Henderson, Managing Director and CEO. Sir, please go ahead.

Thank you, Michelle. Good morning, and good evening, and thank you all for joining us today. I'll begin by acknowledging the traditional owners on the lands of which PLS operates, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation in Perth and the Nyamal and Kariyarra peoples in the Pilbara. We pay our respects to elders, past and present.

I'm joined today by Alex Willcocks, our Chief Financial Officer; and Sandra McInnes, our Chief People and Sustainability Officer. FY '26 was a record year for PLS and a strong demonstration of our through-the-cycle strategy in action. Today, we will take you through the operational, financial and sustainability performance for the year, our strategic progress and the outlook for PLS before we open the line for questions.

Turning now to Slide 2. At Pilgangoora, we delivered record production and sales, both up 17% on the prior year, and we achieved our FY '26 guidance, and we lifted Lithia to a new record of 76.5%. As market conditions strengthened, we're also able to respond quickly, approving and preparing for the restart of the Ngungaju facility and accelerating P2000, including the approval of approximately $175 million of pre-FID investment for P2000. We continue to progress Colina as our principal geographic diversification opportunity whilst maintaining a disciplined approach to chemicals, commencing commissioning of our midstream demonstration plant and operating our PPLS JV in batch mode to preserve capital. That strong operating performance, together with improved market conditions translated into a significant improvement in our financial results.

Turning now to Slide 3. Revenue increased by 152% to $1.9 billion, driven by stronger realized pricing and record sales volumes. Underlying EBITDA increased to $1.1 billion at a 59% margin, reflecting the operating leverage in the business and delivering net profit after tax of $526 million. We finished the year with $2.3 billion in cash, providing the capacity to invest selectively in growth whilst maintaining our balance sheet strength. And in accordance with our capital management framework, as a Board, we have determined a fully franked final dividend of $0.05 per share.

Turning now to Slide 4. Alongside our operational and financial performance, we continue to make progress across our sustainability priorities. Safety remains our most important priority. Our group TRIFR improved by 11% from the prior year to 2.77, but we remain focused on continuing to make improvements in this area. We also reduced absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 5%, and we recorded zero major environmental water or waste incidents. Sandra will cover our sustainability performance in more detail later in the presentation.

Turning now to Slide 5, which shows our through-the-cycle strategy and how this played out during FY '26. During the weaker market, we positioned the business defensively, protecting the balance sheet, reducing costs and preserving operating flexibility. As market conditions improved, we were able to respond quickly, approving the restart of the Ngungaju facility and moving back towards the P1000 operating model and accelerating our growth options. Our strategy was not dependent on predicting the market turn. It was about ensuring the business was positioned to act when the opportunity emerged. As I've said historically, we've been using the cycle as leverage, not a limitation. And as Slide 6 shows, that operational flexibility has translated very quickly into cash generation.

Turning to Slide 6 now. As pricing strengthened through FY '26, the operating leverage in our low-cost platform became increasingly evident. Quarterly cash margin from operations increased from $8 million in the September quarter through to $579 million in the June quarter. And with 100% ownership of Pilgangoora, our shareholders received the full benefit of the scale, the cost position and the operating leverage we have built. The strong cash generation, together with our balance sheet strength gives us capacity to invest selectively whilst maintaining financial strength.

Now one more call out from the slide, I draw your attention to the horizontal line that is $2,465 per tonne. This is Benchmark Minerals long-run expectations for pricing for the industry. Now that return that we see in the June quarter of $579 million, that was at a value less than the $2,465. So that quarter really does demonstrate the cash-generating potential of the platform. And it's exciting to think about the future depending on what price you want to pick. It's an incredible platform. We've got the scale, we've got the low-cost position. And here are the results, as you can see in these results we've announced today. Now with that, I'd now like to hand over to Alex to take us through the financials.

Thank you, Dale. Good morning, and good evening, everyone. Turning now to Slide 8. FY '26 delivered strong financial performance, underlying EBITDA of $1.1 billion, NPAT of $526 million and a closing cash balance of $2.3 billion. These results reflect disciplined execution, capitalizing on market recovery. Revenue of $1.9 billion was up 152%, driven by a 121% increase in realized price to USD 1,488 a tonne, combined with 17% volume growth, partially offset by some FX headwinds. Unit operating cost on an FOB basis improved 9% to $569 per tonne, reflecting volume leverage, ongoing operational improvements and our Cost Smart Future Ready program in action.

Underlying EBITDA of $1.1 billion reflects that revenue growth and operational efficiency. Net profit after tax of $526 million captures our strong earnings, partially offset by higher depreciation from an expanded asset base and tax expense as we return to profitability. Capital expenditure of $328 million was in line with guidance and comprised mine development CapEx of $146 million and infrastructure projects and sustaining CapEx of $182 million. These strong operational and financial results translated directly into substantial cash generation as shown in our cash flow bridge.

Now turning to Slide 9. Cash margin from operations of $1.36 billion underpinned the 135% increase in cash to $2.2 billion, supported by volume growth, cost discipline and strong pricing. The year-end cash included the USD 100 million prepayment associated with Canmax offtake agreement announced earlier in the year. We received a prior period tax refund of $74 million, which will normalize now that we have returned to profitability. Net financing cash flows of $353 million reflects net proceeds from the USD 600 million inaugural U.S. bond, partly offset by a $442 million RCF repayment as well as lease costs and interest expenses. The combination of these factors resulted in a further strengthening of our cash position to $2.29 billion, and we finished the year with $2.79 billion of liquidity.

Turning to the balance sheet on Slide 10. We have maintained a strong balance sheet while deploying capital for growth and retain capacity to fund future investments. Property, plant and equipment increased 6% to $2.86 billion with $445 million in mine properties and development additions, partly offset by $275 million in depreciation. Payables increased to $436 million, reflecting in part the contract liability for the remaining unutilized portion of the Canmax prepayment.

Borrowings increased to $853 million following the USD 600 million bond issuance, net of the RCF repayment with the remaining $500 million RCF facility undrawn. Lease liabilities increased 24% to $281 million, reflecting approximately $90 million invested in Heavy Mobile Equipment. And we expect to complete the last phase of the owner-operator transition as we progress through FY '27. The strength of our balance sheet positions us well as we consider future investments supporting long-term value creation for our shareholders.

Turning now to Slide 11. On the back of this strong financial position, the Board has determined a fully franked final dividend of $0.05 per share, representing a distribution of approximately $160 million to shareholders. This implies a payout ratio of 22% of FY '26 adjusted free cash flow, which is within our payout ratio range of 20% to 30%.

I'll now hand over to Sandra for an overview of sustainability performance.

Thanks, Alex. Good morning, and good evening, everyone. Turning now to Slide 13. Our 3 sustainability focus areas of valuing our people and communities, sustainable operations and responsible and ethical actions guide how we manage our impacts, engage with our people, communities and partners and make disciplined decisions that support responsible long-term value creation.

Turning now to Slide 14. Safety remains our first priority, and we're pleased to report our total recordable injury frequency rate improved by 11% from last year to 2.77. We also continue to invest in our people and culture. Our latest culture and engagement survey achieved a participation rate of 86% and an overall engagement score of 75%, which are above the Australian benchmark. These results show our workforce feel valued and connected to our vision. Female employment increased to 21.9%, demonstrating our continued progress towards our diversity and inclusion objectives.

Turning now to Slide 15. Through sustainable operations, we aim to reduce our impacts while identifying better ways to make a positive contribution and create value. Across our Australian operations, we achieved a 5% reduction on our Scope 1 and 2 emissions. We surveyed more than 45,000 hectares of flora and fauna, supporting responsible management of our environmental footprint. We also recorded no major incidents with zero major environmental, water-related or waste-related incidents during the year.

Turning now to Slide 16. We believe that long-term success is built on genuine partnerships with our communities and stakeholders. During FY '26, we directed 93% of our procurement spend to Australian businesses, supporting local economic value. We also invested $38 million in 20 First Nations businesses, strengthening indigenous economic participation. Our financial contribution extends across our stakeholder base. We paid $65 million in royalties to government, and we also increased our investment in communities, contributing $2.9 million across Australia and Brazil.

Turning now to Slide 17. We've published a comprehensive report covering our operations and sustainability performance for FY '26, which reflect our ongoing commitment to transparent disclosures. These reports are available in the sustainability section of our PLS website.

I'll now hand back to Dale to discuss strategy and capital allocation.

Thanks, Sandra. It's great to see the strong progress in the area of sustainability. And although sustainability is a full organizational focus, I want to thank you, Sandra, for your leadership and your team for the great progress we've made over this past year. Now I'd like to spend a few minutes on the strategy behind our overall results and why we believe it positions PLS well through the cycle. Pilgangoora is the foundation of PLS. It's a Tier 1 asset with an over 30-year mine life, of which we own 100%. That ownership gives us control over operating decisions and capital allocation, whilst our shareholders retain the full benefit of the upstream economics.

We have significant growth opportunities ahead of us at both Pilgangoora in Australia and Colina in Brazil as well as selective opportunities downstream. Our financial strength means we can progress these opportunities selectively and on our terms. This gives us resilience through weaker markets and the capacity to act when opportunities emerge. The next few slides show how that strategy has translated into operating performance, lower costs and balance sheet strength.

Turning to Slide 20. Over the past 3 years, Lithia recovery has steadily improved, moving from 67% through to just under 77%. Behind that improvement has been a consistent focus over a number of years. Test work, process improvements and plant enhancements, including the application of whole-ore sorting technology. The result is that ore processed has remained broadly stable, whilst production has increased to a record 880,000 tonnes in the year that we're speaking to today. That is a strong demonstration of the improvement we continue to make in the operating performance of Pilgangoora.

Slide 21 shows how these improvements have translated into higher production and lower unit costs over time. So turning to Slide 21 now. So over the same period, we've continued to build the scale and improve the cost position of Pilgangoora. The P680 and P1000 upgrades increased the capability of the operation, whilst the P850 operating model allowed us to phase production and protect the business when market conditions weakened. That is supporting an 11% compound annual increase in production over the past 5 years, whilst maintaining a strong focus on lowering our unit costs.

Operational changes, including our move to our owner-operated mining model and our Cost Smart Future Ready program have also improved the underlying cost base. Those operating outcomes have generated returns that allowed us to continue to invest through the cycle, which we'll turn to now on Slide 22. So lithium is a volatile market, and our strategy is designed to use that cycle to our advantage rather than as a limitation. Over the past 4 years, we have allocated $4.8 billion across the business, reinvesting $2.4 billion, returning $800 million to shareholders through dividends, excluding what we've announced today and increasing our cash balance by approximately $1.7 billion over the period. That has positioned us to continue to invest through the cycle without compromising the strength of the core business.

Turning now to Slide 23 to talk about what our next chapter looks like. P2000 is the most significant growth option at Pilgangoora with the potential to increase production capacity to around 2 million tonnes per annum. The feasibility study is progressing with outcomes expected in the December quarter of this year. We have approved $175 million of pre-FID investment to shorten the pathway to first ore if the Board elects to proceed. That investment is about readiness, not pre-committing FID. Any decision to proceed remains subject to the study outcomes and Board approval, as I mentioned.

Turning now to Colina, which is our principal geographic diversification opportunity. Moving to Slide 24. Colina is a 100% owned project in Brazil and provides us with a significant long-term diversification option outside Australia. The feasibility study is progressing with outcomes expected in the December quarter next year, and we continue to assess enabling infrastructure that could support future development. The approach remains staged with development timing dependent on the study outcomes, funding and support of market conditions. Following year-end, we also acquired neighboring tenements to expand our position in the district.

Turning now to our selective chemicals exposure on Slide 25. Our approach to chemicals remains selective and staged. We are maintaining exposure to downstream value creation through our PPLS joint venture, our midstream demonstration plant and our work together with Ganfeng, whilst limiting capital commitment until the economics are proven. That gives us the opportunity to build capability and preserve future pathways without compromising capital discipline.

Turning now to Slide 27 for our FY '27 priorities. So looking ahead for the year we're in, FY '27, the priority is execution. Firstly, it's about safely ramping up the Ngungaju facility and maximizing production cash generation from the Pilgangoora asset. Beyond that, we will continue to progress P2000, Colina and our selective chemicals pathways with capital deployed in a staged and disciplined way. The aim is simple: deliver from the core while continuing to advance highly accretive growth opportunities.

Turning now to Slide 28 for FY '27 guidance. That execution focus is reflected in our guidance for the year. Production is expected to increase between 1.03 million and 1.1 million tonnes as Ngungaju ramps up. FOB unit operating costs are guided in the range of $575 to $625 per tonne, modestly above FY '26 as the higher cost Ngungaju tonnes returned to the production mix. Capital expenditure is guided in the range of $620 million to $685 million, reflecting increased mine development, sustaining and infrastructure investment, together with the approved $175 million P2000 pre-FID. Any additional growth capital outside this guidance remains subject to further decisions.

Turning now to Slide 29, which details how we prioritize our capital. Our first priority is the capital required to safely sustain the operation and maintain the long-term performance of Pilgangoora. Beyond that, we are evaluating infrastructure investments that can enhance the capability of the operation and position it for further growth. Growth remains selective. The P2000 pre-FID program is approved, whilst P2000 FID and the Colina pre-FID remains subject to successful studies, market conditions and Board approval. The appendix in the back of the pack provides a detailed breakdown of what is included in FY '27 CapEx guidance and what remains outside of guidance and subject to future approval. This approach to capital deployment is prioritized, protecting the core, improving the platform and capturing growth opportunities without committing capital ahead of returns.

Now turning to Slide 31 for the market outlook. The long-term fundamentals underpinning electrification remain compelling. Battery costs have fallen by around 90% since 2010, making electrification increasingly competitive on economics rather than incentives alone. We are seeing that in electric vehicles, in June, more than 1 in 4 vehicles sold globally was electric with penetration reaching 27%. Energy storage is growing rapidly as well. Global battery energy storage investment was around $80 billion in 2025, and the IEA expects it to exceed USD 100 billion in '26. Behind both these sits a rapidly changing electricity system. Under the IEA's stated policy scenario, global electrification generation increases by more than 50% to 2040, with solar and wind alone reaching 46% of generation. As that share of intermittent generation increases, so does the need for energy storage. Those demand drivers are translating directly into lithium consumption.

Moving now to Slide 32. The growth in lithium demand is well established and has been building for years. What is changing now is the scale and breadth of that demand. Chinese battery production is up 66% year-to-date, whilst lithium chemical inventories have been -- have fallen to 57% over the past 12 months and now represent around 2.5 weeks of demand. Looking further ahead, Benchmark Minerals base case for lithium demand growth was around 8% per annum to 2040, reaching 5.1 million tonnes of LCE, roughly 3x the size of the market today.

China remains the largest demand center, but growth is broadening materially across other geographies. In June, Europe accounted for around 1 in 4 EVs sold globally. And in battery storage, year-to-date, year-on-year growth outside of China is even stronger. Europe up 96% and Asia, excluding China, is up a whopping 258% and the rest of the world up 93%, incredible stats from the prior year. Demand is also broadening by [ electrification ]. Electric vehicles remain the largest end use, but stationary storage is growing rapidly, supported by strong front of grid deployment and rising demand from data centers. The demand base is getting larger, more diversified and increasingly global. The question is whether supply can keep pace and increasingly, whether that supply can be delivered reliably.

Turning now to Slide 33. Meeting that demand is becoming harder, development time lines have lengthened materially with new projects increasingly complex, capital-intensive and slower to deliver. Benchmark estimates a potential supply gap of around 1.6 million tonnes of LCE by 2040. And to put that in perspective, that's the equivalent of approximately 12, in fact, more than 12 Pilgangooras, that gap, which is an incredible scale as you think about the 10-year delivery time frame it's taken us to bring the Pilgangoora assets to where we are today, which takes us to the point that mine development cycles have continued to extend to around 18 years, which you can see on the right-hand graph on the slide.

So in this environment, reliable, long-life supply becomes increasingly scarce and increasingly valuable. That is particularly relevant for PLS. Our platform provides customers with scale, consistent product quality and reliable supply from a long-life operation. We are seeing that value reflected directly in our commercial arrangements. Earlier this year, we executed an offtake agreement with a USD 1,000 per tonne floor price, no price ceiling, no discounts, volume flexibility and supported by USD 100 million prepayment. Post year-end, we have executed a further agreement on similar terms, same floor price, no price ceiling, no discounts, volume flexibility at PLS' election and a USD 80 million bank guarantee for security.

That structure provides downstream protection whilst preserving uncapped upside and flexibility over volumes and terms. Those terms are not offered lightly. They demonstrate the emerging premium that supply chain partners are prepared to provide for reliable supply and the value of PLS's ability to deliver. So with this, just a quick shout out to the PLS sales and marketing team led by Aaron and Mel, a fantastic set of outcomes in the year, which has been a credit to the team, to your leadership, but most importantly, the strong trusted partnerships you've continued to build on the years working with PLS.

Now turning to Slide 34 for my closing remarks. FY '26 was a record year for PLS and a strong demonstration of our through-the-cycle strategy in action. We improved the performance of Pilgangoora. We responded quickly as market conditions strengthened, and we converted that operating leverage into significant cash generation. That has left PLS with greater scale, a strong balance sheet and the capacity to invest through the cycle without compromising the strength of the core business. The long-term fundamentals for lithium remain compelling. Demand continues to grow, broaden and deepen, increasing the value of reliable long-life supply.

We enter FY '27 focused on safely ramping up Ngungaju, further improving the performance of the Pilgangoora asset and capturing the growth opportunities ahead. I want to thank our team across PLS for what they've delivered during FY '26, an incredible set of results. Thank you, team. And I also want to thank our shareholders for your continued support. I appreciate many of you remain resolute in the opportunity this incredible market presents and more than that, your faith in PLS and the team's ability to deliver. Thank you for your support. With the platform we have built and a clear focus on disciplined execution, PLS is well positioned to create long-term value for our shareholders. And with that, Alex and Sandra and I would be pleased to take your questions.

And I'll now hand back to Michelle to open the floor for those questions. Thank you, Michelle.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is going to come from the line of Austin Yun with Macquarie.

Solid results and strong beating dividends. So just keen to understand the shareholder return part. This is fully franked. And following this capital allocation framework, should we anticipate a constant return even when the company goes into the high-growth phase with P2000?

Yes, as you said, we're pleased to be able to announce the $0.05 fully franked dividend this year. It is at a 22% payout ratio. It sits within that 20% to 30% of adjusted free cash flow, which is consistent with the capital management framework. As we look forward, in normal course of business, we'll always continue to assess the capital management framework to ensure that it remains sort of relevant. And if there was to be any changes, we talk about them at that time. Obviously, the way that the dividend policy works, it does naturally flex through market cycles because it's tied to our free cash flow, and that's something that continues to make sense, given the nature of the market that we're in.

Yes. And I'd just add to Alex's outline there, Austin. As you know, it's all about price. We've seen a strong improvement in the year-to-date. June alone, cash operating margin of more than $500 million generated from the business, just incredible returns depending on what the headline price is. So depending on what price you want to pick for the outlook, ultimately depends how we think about capital distribution. As Alex sort of outlined, it's a ratio of free cash flow. So it naturally moderates as a function of the headline price that we're receiving.

Just on the point of flexibility, just a quick follow-up. As we get into the second half of this calendar year and the market is tightening and you highlight at the presentation, the operation delivered a strong recovery result. Should we anticipate more flexibility in the grade of the product you offer to the market, given that Ngungaju is coming up online to balance and to keep the recovery out there, continue the high level by slightly reducing the product grade? Do you see any scope of that?

So in terms of delivered product to market, there is no change in sort of our target product grade. What we've done with product grade is it's already optimized to sort of maximize yield, maximize recovery and sort of through that maximize returns. So no change there. With Ngungaju coming on, of course, it's another processing plant and it gives the team the opportunity to do some more blending effectively across the 2 operations. But as I say, no change to target product grade.

Our next question is going to come from the line of Hugo Nicolaci with Goldman Sachs.

Congrats on a strong FY '26. Look, it's good to see the Plant 3 or P2000 progressing and getting its own name now, which is great. Just looking at the footprint you've given us on Slide 23, and it looks like that's significantly larger than the P850 model you've got in the background. Am I correct in looking at that, firstly, at the layout, you're going to have to relocate some of the existing waste dump and maintenance works there? And then can you maybe talk to just given the spacing you've got on the plant set up, just the future optionality you're building into P2000 and what sort of potential future debottlenecking opportunities you might have?

Look, as you say, the P2000 expansions, it's significant. Obviously, it's doubling the capacity. What that means practically, it's essentially a new everything in terms of new ROM to tip from a new crush ore stockpile, a new sort of front-end dry plant, a new front-end wet plant. And that pictorial that you can see is essentially a 3D visualization of that. So it's a fairly sort of extensive build.

To the question of what's in its way, there are some sort of temporary facilities, I'd call it, which are being relocated. There's a small rework at the ROM, which has already been completed to sort of make way. But in the main, it's fairly clear area for the build of the plant, which is good.

And importantly, this makes in some ways for a more straightforward build, in that we get the benefit of a brownfield expansion in the sense that we've got existing camp and existing power, existing support infrastructure, but it's greenfields in the sense that are spatially dislocated from the P1000 plant, albeit there are some tie-ins in the main that's spatially separated. So that makes for a more straightforward build relatively. So we're in good standing there.

Great. And then maybe turning to Brazil, just subsequent to the year, I think you spent roughly $50 million buying some tenements off Lithium Ionic next to Colina. Should we think about that more as just an opportunistic bolt-on for future flexibility? Or is that likely to be incorporated into your stage 1 studies at the moment?

The intention is that will flow into the studies. Look, that particular tenure package butts up to the boundary of our existing tenure. Obviously, we were keen to have it. We're having commenced a transaction, and we look forward to factoring that in ultimately to a revised study outcome December quarter next year.

Our next question will come from the line of Glyn Lawcock with Barrenjoey.

Dale, just to follow up, firstly on the dividend policy. Can I just confirm, you were thinking about revisiting the 20% to 30% of free cash flow and maybe adopting a slightly different approach. Is that still something you're thinking about? Or are you right now the 20% to 30% of free cash flow, your definition remains your preferred?

Glyn, look, sort of as Alex touched on, we're applying capital management framework, as it stands, and that's what we've also announced today. As to the possibility of revisiting that, of course, there's always that possibility. We're not looking to make any changes in the very near term. However, we will consider this later in the year. For the reason that several things will come together. We will have provided clarity to market on some of these capital projects, in particular P2000.

Secondly, we will have had a few more months of operating within the market, and we'll see what headline pricing looks like and what the outlook looks like. Really, the sum of those things will come together, and we will continue to reassess it. Add all that, we're not saying we will change it, but it would be sensible to reassess later in the year or early next year. We'll see how we go. Alex, anything to add on that?

Great summary. I think it's something that we will naturally always consider. I think the other pieces that I'd add is, as we look forward through our upcoming investments phase, we're well-placed in terms of different funding options. We've been really pleased with how the bond has traded since the issue in April. That creates a really good benchmark for us as we go forward and so that, combined with broader market outlook.

The third piece I'd add is, as we've navigated through the last cycle, the strength of the balance sheet has definitely been a strategic asset for us, and that's something that we'll always consider as well in the broader context of capital management framework, ensuring that we've got some good, strong liquidity on the balance sheet to ensure that we can navigate through any conditions and make sure we're making those right long-term decisions for shareholders.

Great. Maybe just pushing that a little bit further. When you think about the change, what is it you think you may need to do? Is it move to a payout ratio approach as opposed to percentage of free cash flow, or is it just simply the amount? Can you give us any insight into your thinking?

I mean, I think as seen and with the dividends being announced within the framework and within the payout ratio, it works well for the organization that we're in. It naturally flexes based on market conditions. I think that's always important and relevant, particularly as we look to the chapter ahead and some really significant investment opportunities for us. So 20% to 30% feels like a reasonable balance and the right judgment. We'll continue to assess, but there's nothing that says that it's not suiting us well at the moment.

Okay. That's great. And then Dale, just one final question. Just the unapproved CapEx that you call out, sealing the road, the camp, the HME. I assume all of those need to go ahead regardless of your P2000 decision, and I'm surprised we haven't made those decisions yet. I thought we might have seen one or two of those announced today. What's the sort of timing when we get some insight into those spend? Will it come with the P2000 in Q4 or before?

Glyn, look, as we've flagged, the sort of three categories of spend, the base operation, the enhanced category, and then the outright growth category, the enhanced category, the second one, really speaks to that point around investments that you would do in all cases because it lowers the operating costs overall and makes for a more resilient operation. So we do have, in that category, as you say, some investments we plan to do over time in terms of roads, camp, et cetera. And we flagged this to market, I think it was May, so not that long ago. As to timing, well, we're in study modes. Some things are out for tender, that process is in motion. And when we're ready to advise the market, we'll update you. So just look out for that one, Glyn.

Our next question comes from the line of Rahul Anand with Morgan Stanley.

Alex, sorry to labor the point on the dividend. I know you've had a couple of questions on that. Just if we can perhaps revisit, if we're not changing the policy here, and if we just go back perhaps 2, 3 years when you were undergoing significant CapEx for P600, P1000, the thinking at that time was that you want to maintain a conservative balance sheet and net cash balance sheet. Obviously, the lithium markets were fairly different. If we do look forward now, I think what's changed really in the company is that you've got a really solid base of producing asset now, generating some really healthy cash flow, and perhaps you're much more protected from the lithium cycle in a way, in terms of the cash generation.

So I guess the question is, if you do undertake one or two projects at the same time, obviously, I'm talking about Colina here into next year or end of next year. At that time, you would assume that P2000 is still ongoing. Is there an element of conservatism that perhaps sneaks into that framework again, or is it purely the 20% to 30% payout and the leverage ratio that's been defined is the right way to think about the Board's thinking on the dividend from a go-forward perspective? That's the first one.

Rahul, I think you've articulated well all of the different factors that we consider. The first piece is, as we think around the broader balance sheet and capital management, the first pillar is a conservative balance sheet to ensure that the operations through any point in the cycle give us the ability to continue to invest in sensible projects rather than needing to make short-term decisions. So that's the first thing.

I think the second part that's changed as the business has naturally matured, and particularly as our funding options have matured, is we have different financing options as well that help complement what is the right amount of liquidity to keep within the business. So that's the second part that we think about.

The third piece is just naturally, we will always be operating in a sector that, with any commodities, will cycle. So a dividend policy that's linked to different cycles makes sense. But we're also aware that for a number of our shareholders, dividends are a feature.

Now, ultimately, we are a growth organization, and we believe that, that is the number one priority for us and where we can deliver the best long-term shareholder outcome, is really investing in those significant projects that we have in front of us. So that will be a priority. But at the moment, we see that there continues to be a balance amongst all of those different features that I've talked about. It doesn't need to be one or the other.

Sorry, I could probably just add, it does feel a bit of deja vu for us as a company. Back in the last cycle, we moved out of a low of $400 per tonne to a high of more than $8,000 per tonne. And as we look forward, we were embarking on the opportunity of doubling the capacity. Fast-forward to today, it's deja vu in the sense that, yes, it's been a slightly different cycle, rather than lows of $400, it's been lows of $600. As to where highs goes, well, you can pick the number there. As we look forward, we're essentially doubling the capacity again from this point. That's without thinking about the likes of Colina.

As we take that outlook view, it really is a case of modeling and understanding the balance of what's the price expectation for the future relative to the balance sheet we've built. This is really the thing we have to continue to triangulate on. As Alex has said, no changes slated at this time, but we'll continue to reassess in the future.

Got it. Dale, while I have you, perhaps the second one, you can help me on. It's more around the P1000, P2000 project. So if we look at the recoveries, they've obviously been quite strong and you've had a question on that earlier. From my perspective, one thing that also helps recoveries is the head grade that you put into the plant. So I do note that the head grade remains above the reserve grade.

So I guess my question is twofold. One is there an expectation here that it would revert to the reserve grade over the next 2 to 4 years? Or is the expectation that with P2000 coming on, you're probably going to have a better-defined reserve ore body, given your resource grade is higher than reserve at the moment? Which of those two directions should we be thinking along the lines of?

Sure. So probably the place to start is, the good problem that we've had is, over the years, the resource has continued to grow materially as we've drilled it. Things like the average head grade have continued to change favorably. Stronger head grades for longer is ultimately what's flowed through some of those resource and those reserve upgrades. So that's been one factor which has changed. So that just really relates to what we continue to find in the ground.

Separate to that is our tools and techniques to maximize resource capture, extraction, and concentration. The good news here is that we've continued to get better and better as an entity at mastering that. And the results we've announced today really speak to that, which is a multitude of new techniques and levers. We continue to talk about ore sorting, online analyzers. There's other things we do in the mine, which has enabled us to capture more resource and maximize lithium recovery.

As we look forward to, ultimately, the expansion, the mission remains the same. We're looking to maximize resource capture, maximize lithium recovery, and head grade will ebb and flow as a function of principally the mine plan. So no change to the mission. There's no sort of target head grade at the moment or anything like that. It's just a function of what's been optimized out of the mine plan. As we roll forward to P2000, when we come to market with that study outcome, we'll be able to provide a bit more visibility as to how we think about maximizing lithium recovery with the new processing plant.

Our next question is going to come from the line of David Feng with CICC.

My first question is regarding your contracted sales. We know that previously you have the Canmax agreement combined of floor price and prepayments. I'm just wondering, is that type of structure still attractive to other customers nowadays? And would you consider having more of this kind of contracts to protect your cash flows against potential volatility in the market, especially when you're potentially entering a new round of expansion CapEx? I'll come back with my second one.

The short answer is, yes, there's been strong interest and competition around offtake and the types of terms that we announced today. So that's great, and I think that speaks to the appeal of PLS as a reliable supplier. So that's good. As to PLS' objective, the answer to that is yes. We're, of course, wanting to always secure the strongest commercial terms we can and delighted with what the team's achieved here. It's another step forward on what we announced off the back of the Canmax offtake.

And as we move forward, we'll look to do what we can to continue to secure terms of this nature or even better, if we can. And of course, that's the name of the game, to try and protect our business from the downside, whilst also ensuring we've got exposure to the upside. So we'll continue to work hard at that.

And I just have a follow-up on just assuming that PPLS remains in its current operating model, could you remind us how your offtake sales to POSCO is exacted at this stage? What level of sustaining cost and expenses you would need to roughly bear in FY '27?

Sure. Let me talk to the offtake and then Alex might want to speak to the cost. So as it relates to the JV in South Korea, the supply is 100% dependent on the volume from Pilgangoora. How that works practically is on a year-on-year basis, we sort of book in the require volume in discussion with POSCO, JV partner, and that gets translated to the shipping schedule. So that's how we sort of manage it on a year-on-year basis, but 100% supply comes from Pilgangoora.

As to cost of production for the JV, it's been sort of a period of initially ramp up, then a moderated period and now we're moving back into essentially ramp up. So we've not yet had the opportunity to really demonstrate the JV unit cost in terms of what's possible with maximized throughput recovery, et cetera, et cetera. So we don't have much of a steer yes, but looking forward to and in due course being able to talk to that, Alex.

Thanks, Dale. Look, exactly as Dale said, I think the first piece, obviously as an 18% shareholder, we don't disclose broader forecast and cost information at a granular level in relation to PPLS. But exactly as Dale said, we have been pleased with the fact that there are good proof points for both trains in terms of full ramp rates and ability for that plant to be able to operate efficiently. At the moment, though, it is operating in batch mode, and so with any facility of that nature, obviously batch versus a full run rate will have a significant impact on just that cost rationalization.

Our next question will come from the line of James Redfern with RBC Capital Markets.

Thank you for the market comments out to 2040. I was just wondering if you have any sort of strong views on supply growth in, say, the next five years? And how you're thinking about the lithium market over that period with regards to the supply/demand imbalance for lithium? And then my second question is, has PLS ever disclosed its long-term price assumption using its forecasting?

Yes, as it relates to supply side, of course, we've continued to build an in-house view of that, and we factor in what we think are the more probable supply. For that, what we think is most probable are the various brownfields expansions, restarts. Of course, the Chinese mines are in that. When we load that all in with some quite conservative demand assumptions, the good news is that we see a more probable demand deficit occurring.

Then the question becomes, well, where to beyond that? And you have to turn your mind to the greenfields projects. And What we're observing there is there's few and far between have been approved to date, let alone getting on with the build and commissioning. I think what that sets up is essentially the potential for potentially a more elongated deficit period. Time will tell.

When you roll back the clock and you look in the rearview mirror, in the last price rally, what was appeared to be some of the more easier-to-start operations are now are all plugged in. The next wave of supply, I think it's probably going to be more challenging given that in most cases, these mines are more difficult locations or difficult domiciles. But time will tell.

But for PLS as a low-cost operator, it doesn't phase us. We continue to study where we sit on the cost curve, and given the strong balance sheet, the low-cost position, the strong offtakes that we continue to secure, we're incredibly well-placed for what we think to navigate probably every part of the cycle. And we keep focused on setting ourselves for as strong as we can be in that regard.

Moving to the question of, what is our long-term price assumptions? Now we haven't made a practice of disclosing this other than when we have done FID points, we've provided an assessment and some sensitivities around this. And typically, at those junctures, we've taken a consensus average at that moment in time. So we've done that historically.

As it relates to the in-house work, what we do, and as people would expect, is we model a range of scenarios to make sure that we can comfortably navigate, I guess, all parts of the cycle. And of course, within that, we're deeply focused on downside scenarios, of course, to make sure that we can comfortably navigate that part of the cycle if it was to eventuate.

Our next question is going to come from the line of Thiago Ojea with Citi.

My first question is regarding Colina, just on a follow-up from previous question. I understand that the area does not only add some resources to the project, but also would help you in design the pit. If you can comment exactly how this will change the pit design, if it will. And the second question, perhaps for Alex. I understand that we have a leverage policy. I just would like to understand if there is any M&A opportunity that comes up. I understand you have a lot of growth projects already in the pipeline. But if any kind of M&A opportunity comes up, would you have any kind of flexibility? And this would use your EBITDA through the cycle or EBITDA spots to make these decisions?

I will take the first one. Alex can speak to the second. So as it relates to the acquisition, it bumps up right against the boundary of the existing tenure package. So the benefit of that acquisition is, yes, there is an increase in resource. So, some more lithium units, we like that. As to what is the opportunity spatially, as to waste dumps, mine plans, and is there a different configuration.

We're really at the start of exploring that, and there is potential that this can help us, but we do not need it, and we did not need it in terms of going into this acquisition. But it is accretive, obviously, that is why we did the transaction. The team will really be working through the process of revised studies on the basis of this acquisition, and we look forward to updating more conclusively December quarter next year.

In relation to your other part of the question and M&A. As you would expect, we continue to be active and look at a whole range of opportunities. As I think we will always be part of PLS' DNA. Should any of those eventuate, I think the great position that we are in at the moment is we have a number of different options, depending on what form that could take, if at all it did present itself. In relation to our leverage target, yes, that is very much a through-the-cycle target.

So we would always look at it over a 2 to 3 to 4-year view. I think the other piece that we would be considering is should the board approve a P2000, then we would look forward as well to what expected EBITDA would be on an expanded operation as well when we make those considerations. So I think it's really -- we have got lots of optionality in front of us around should we choose a pathway of further inorganic growth, there is a number of different ways that could be funded.

Okay. Just to clarify, when you think on the leverage, if perhaps any kind of M&A opportunities arise, you would think the EBITDA in 2, 3 years from the decision time, right? That is correct?

Well, we've always said it's through the cycle. So what through the cycle means is that we would be comfortable exceeding for a short period of time as long as on a more normalized basis, that is what the target would look to.

Having said that, as you see in the balance sheet, whilst that target is there, PLS is historically, and as we've articulated again today, retain a good, strong, solid underlying balance sheet and strong liquidity continues to be important to us. So I'd just consider both of those statements as a collective, and we'll always look to find the right balance.

We are just running out on time. We will just take a few questions from the webcast in the last few minutes. So first question, what exactly are we looking for with the Ganfeng JV, a hydroxide plant or midstream in Australia, China or elsewhere?

Certainly the objective with the study with Ganfeng is to look at additional chemical processing outside of China somewhere. And we have been working together studying, globally, comparing, contrasting different industrial parks and as to what chemical type, we have been studying that too. But both Ganfeng and PLS were very open to full battery product manufacturing or potentially midstream. So that's a potential option. We are studying both together and we are very happy to be working together with Ganfeng because we have continued to learn a lot, which I think places both groups very well as this market continues to evolve rapidly.

Okay. Sandra, what was the reason behind the 5% reduction in emissions in FY '26?

Thanks, James. The reduction was primarily driven by improved operational and energy efficiency, including higher lithium recovery and our new fleet management system, MineStar, as well as fuel optimization. It also was aided by the Ngungaju Plant being in care and maintenance. But notably, our absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions fell by 5% even as we had increased production.

Next question, with spot pricing back above $2,000, is BMX too active? If not, why the shift towards floor price term deals such as Canmax instead of capturing spot upside by the platform?

Yes. So BMX is not active, but is PLS doing occasional spot sales? Yes. We've not chosen to bring BMX back online because we see the benefit as it being unlikely. And the reason is the market has changed. When we initiated BMX, back in 2021, 2022, it was an important evolution of the market to enable price discovery because price discovery was few and far between. So that was the principal reason for doing it, and it was very successful in enabling efficiency with price discovery. Fast-forward to today, there's much more price discovery happening. There is multiple entities doing their own forms of private competitive processes, of which PLS is doing the same.

But our observation would be price discovery is now working far more effectively in the market. So it's for these reasons we've not seen benefit in bringing that back because price discovery is working. We're doing spot sales. As to the question of why pursue these offtakes with floor prices? The answer there is we get the benefit of both worlds. We get the downside protection care of a price floor plus a form of security with uncapped upside. So as pricing moves in the market, which is fueled by spot sales and price discovery, et cetera, that flows through the indices. And ultimately, those indices flow through to our pricing mechanisms for these offtakes. So in that respect, we get the best of both in that regard.

Okay. Last question online. Can you please elaborate on the impact of data centers growth in Australia or globally on your business in the medium and near term?

Yes. So the data center growth is pretty extraordinary, of course, supporting AI and other needs. And speaking to others who are close to the sector, what they have explained to me is they call it the 99.999% of reliability, where these data centers require 99.999 -- 5 nines -- 99.999% reliability. So in order to achieve that, they are adding batteries. So that is fantastic. It is another demand set for lithium, and of course, that is being drawn. It is essentially a whole new demand vector along with ESS, EVs, e-mobility, and the rest. So we welcome it, more lithium. We like the sound of that.

All right. We are over time. Thank you all for dialing in today and for your questions. Thank you all, and thank you particularly for our shareholders for supporting PLS. The year which was -- the incredible year for PLS, record sales, record production, a 9% reduction in unit costs, all time with an inflection in the market, which has flowed through to strong lifts in revenues and NPAT. And here we are on top of a very strong balance sheet, eyes focused on making the most of this incredible market ahead of us. Thank you all for your time today.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating, and you may now disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the PLS June Quarterly Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, Dale Henderson, Managing Director and CEO of PLS Group. Please go ahead.

Thank you, [ Maggie ]. Good morning, and good evening, and thank you all for joining us today. I will begin by acknowledging the traditional owners on the lands in which PLS operates, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation here in Perth and the Nyamal and Kariyarra peoples in the Pilbara, where our Pilgangoora operation is based. We pay our respects to our elders, past and present. I'm joined today by Brett McFadgen, our Chief Operating Officer; and Alex Willcocks, our Chief Financial Officer.

Today, we are reporting a solid June quarter operating performance, which supported record quarter sales and some record full year outcomes. We will take you through the key operational, financial and strategic highlights before opening the line for questions.

Turning now to Slide 2. This slide highlights why PLS is well-positioned to create value through the cycle. There are 4 key reasons. First, our asset base and cost position. Pilgangoora is a high-quality, 100% owned Tier 1 asset with a competitive cost position that provides resilience during weaker markets and significant operating leverage as pricing improves. Importantly, because we own the asset outright, that value flows directly to our shareholders.

Second, our balance sheet. We finished the year with $2.2 billion of cash and approximately $2.8 billion of total liquidity. That gives us flexibility over the timing and funding of growth and allows us to act from a position of strength. Third, execution. FY '26 demonstrated the strength of our operating platform. We delivered record annual production in sales, exceeded production guidance and generated more than $1.36 billion of operating cash margin. Finally, disciplined growth. We have multiple opportunities to grow our business, but we will only progress those opportunities where they are supported by strong returns, financial discipline and, of course, market conditions. Together, these attributes position PLS to remain resilient through the cycle while capturing greater value as market conditions improve.

Turning to Slide 3. The June quarter delivered strong sales, improved pricing, and substantial cash generation. Record quarterly sales of approximately 250,000 tonnes, together with a 13% increase in realized pricing to USD 2,107 per tonne on a 5.2 basis drove a strong financial result. Revenue increased 31% to $743 million, while cash margin from operations increased to $579 million for the quarter. We finished the year with $2.29 billion in cash. For FY '26, production reached a record 880,000 tonnes produced, up 17% on the prior year, while sales reached a record 892,000 tonnes. Together with improved pricing and continued cost discipline, the generated cash margin from operations was $1.36 billion. At the same time, we continue to progress our growth options with Ngungaju restarting and work advancing across the P2000 project and the Colina project.

Turning to our FY '26 guidance on Slide 4. We delivered across each of our FY '26 guidance metrics, reinforcing the consistency of our operating performance. Production exceeded the top end of our guidance range, supported by strong operational execution and record production in the March quarter. FOB unit operating costs were near the lower end of our guidance range, reflecting higher production volumes and continued operational efficiencies delivered through our Cost Smart Future-Ready program. Importantly, this outcome was achieved while also absorbing mobilization and restart costs associated with the Ngungaju plant recommencement.

Capital expenditure was near the upper end of guidance -- excuse me, including early expenditure associated with the Ngungaju restart and increased mine development. Most importantly, we delivered what we said we would. That consistency gives us confidence as we move into FY '27 and to progress the next phase of our growth strategy. And I'd like to, at this point, just thank the team, a shout out to all our great people at PLS. It's been another year of challenges. And despite those challenges, you did it again. Thank you.

Thank you also to our contracting partners, our customers, and community stakeholders. You've been integral to our success, both past and what we've just achieved this financial year. Now with that, I'll hand to Brett to take us through an operations update.

Thank you, Dale. Moving to Slide 5. Safety is our highest priority and takes precedence over all operational outcomes. No level of production or business performance outweighs the well-being of our people. Any injury is unacceptable, and we remain committed to ensuring everyone goes home safe and healthy every day. Across the period, we recorded 2 injuries during the June quarter. However, our total recordable injury frequency rate improved to 2.77 down from 3.82 in the prior quarter. Our improvement reflects the work we have been doing on frontline leadership engagement and our continuation with our critical risk management framework.

Moving to Slide 6. The Pilgangoora operation delivered a solid quarter with total material mined increasing to 10.2 million tonnes and ore mined increasing to 1.7 million tonnes. This reflects improved operational efficiency and the planned ramp-up in waste stripping to support the Ngungaju restart that commenced on July 1. Plant reliability was solid. Lithium recovery reached 76.8%, consistently high and reflecting the capability embedded through the P1000 expansion. The ore sorter continued to perform well, providing operational flexibility.

On sales, record quarter volumes of just shy of 250,000 tonnes were achieved despite the congestion at Port Hedland. Ngungaju recommenced operations on 1 July, and the ramp-up is progressing on schedule. The plant is expected to reach normal production rates within 4 months. I will now hand back to Dale to cover growth and capital allocation.

Thanks, Brett, and well done to you and the team on another strong quarter. Moving to Slide 7. Our approach to growth remains disciplined. We progress opportunities in stages while preserving flexibility over the timing and scale of investment. P2000 is our primary growth option and has the potential to significantly increase Pilgangoora production capacity. As announced in June, the Board approved $175 million of pre-FID expenditure to progress long lead activities and preserve the opportunity to accelerate first ore should a final investment decision be made. We're exploring the additional benefits of potentially incorporating underground mining at Pilgangoora with the PFS underway to explore this. Importantly, this pre-FID expenditure that has been committed is not a decision to proceed with the full project. The feasibility study remains on track for outcomes in the December quarter.

Moving to Slide 8. The Colina project in Brazil provides PLS with diversification opportunity, and this project continues to progress through feasibility with study outcomes expected in the December quarter '27 next year. We are assessing investment in some early-stage enabling infrastructure, including access roads, water supply and power to support the project's future development readiness.

Turning now to our downstream activities on Slide 9. Our approach to chemicals remains staged and disciplined, providing exposure to downstream value creation without committing significant capital ahead of demonstrated returns. At P-PLS in South Korea, the facility operated on a batch basis during the June quarter using lower cost spodumene inventory from '25.

At our midstream demonstration plant, commissioning has commenced and first lithium phosphate product remains expected in the September quarter. Now with that, I'll now hand over to Alex to take us through the financial performance. Over to you, Alex.

Thank you, Dale, and good morning, everyone. Please turn to Slide 11 for a review of the key financial metrics for the period. The June quarter represented a solid finish to FY '26, demonstrating the underlying strength and cash-generating capacity of our operations. Revenue of $743 million, up 31%, reflects record sales volume and uplift in realized price despite FX headwinds. As we previously flagged, FOB unit cost increased to $616 per tonne from $520 in the March quarter. Ongoing benefits from operational efficiencies and Cost Smart Future-Ready initiatives were offset by costs associated with the Ngungaju restart as well as fuel price impacts experienced during the period. Importantly, the Ngungaju restart costs are one-off in nature and will normalize as production ramps up through FY '27.

Cash margin from operations was strong at $579 million, up 26%. Record sales and strong pricing underpins strong cash conversion. We finished the year with a cash balance of $2.29 billion, reflecting the combination of operational performance and the retained proceeds from our inaugural bond issuance in April this year.

Moving to Slide 12, where I'll step through the key cash drivers. The $835 million increase in cash this quarter was underpinned by 3 things: strong operating cash generation as discussed, planned capital investment, and strategic financing outcomes. On CapEx, we spent $162 million on a cash basis and $124 million on an accruals basis, comprising $53 million of mine development and $71 million in infrastructure and other sustaining. Net financing cash flows of $422 million reflects the USD 600 million bond proceeds, net of AUD 375 million RCF repayment, as well as lease repayments and interest expense. The result is a cash position of $2.3 billion with total liquidity of $2.8 billion, including our undrawn RCF. That positions us well to support strategic investment in FY '27.

Moving to full year performance on Slide 13. The full year result demonstrates PLS' strength and resilience through the cycle, generating $1.36 billion of cash margin, underpinned by production performance, disciplined cost management, and pricing recovery. Revenue increased 152% to $1.93 billion, driven by pricing recovery and higher sales volumes, partly offset by FX headwinds. SOB unit operating costs decreased 9% year-on-year to $569 per tonne despite Ngungaju restart costs and cost inflation, reflecting the ongoing impact of our Cost Smart Future-Ready program and the operational efficiencies we continue to embed.

On a CIF basis, unit operating cost of $739 per tonne increased 1%, with higher royalty expenses from stronger pricing, largely offset by FOB performance and lower shipping unit costs. Cash margin increased by $1.16 billion on the prior year and underpinned our $2.3 billion ending cash position.

Moving to Slide 14, which shows the full year cash flow bridge. The $1.36 billion cash margin from operations included the USD 100 million Canmax prepayment, reflecting counterparty confidence in our business. Capital expenditure totaled $344 million on a cash basis and $328 million on an accruals basis within our guidance range and comprised $146 million of mine development and $182 million in infrastructure and sustaining CapEx, including the Pilgangoora warehouse, tailings storage facility upgrades and Ngungaju capital works to support the restart.

Net financing cash flows of $354 million reflects net proceeds from the U.S. bond and RCF repayment, $442 million, partially offset by lease repayments and interest expense. This financial strength is continued evidence of disciplined operations in a challenging cycle and positions us well to execute with confidence in FY '27. I'll now hand back to Dale to walk through our strategic priorities and guidance for the year ahead.

Thanks, Alex. Moving to Slide 16. Turning to FY '27. Our immediate focus is to maximize value and cash generation from Pilgangoora while continuing to progress our growth portfolio in a disciplined manner. Under our operate strategic pillar, the priority is the safe and successful ramp-up of Ngungaju while maintaining strong performance across the broader Pilgangoora operation. Under growth, we will continue to progress P2000 through the feasibility study and the approved pre-FID work program. Any further investment will remain subject to study outcomes and Board approval.

Under our chemicals pillar, we will support the continued operational development of the P-PLS JV and progress commissioning of the midstream demonstration plant. Under diversify, we will advance the Colina project through its own feasibility study, targeting completion in the December quarter of next year. Together, these priorities balance near-term operational delivery with disciplined investment in the future growth of PLS.

These priorities are supported by a disciplined approach to capital allocation, which is set out on Slide 17, which we will turn to now. One of PLS' key strengths is our balance sheet, but equally important is how we deploy capital. Our approach is straightforward. First, sustain. We invest the capital required to safely operate Pilgangoora and sustain production over the long term. In FY '27, mine development expenditure increases as we progress a planned cutback to access future mining areas alongside our normal sustaining capital and operating infrastructure investment. Second, enhance. These are investments that improve the capability, efficiency, and performance of our long-life asset. This includes opportunities such as road infrastructure, accommodation, and mine services facilities.

Finally, grow. Growth capital is directed towards expanding the business through initiatives such as P2000 in Australia and Colina in Brazil. Importantly, these investments remain staged and subject to successful studies, disciplined capital allocation, and appropriate market conditions. Together, this framework ensures we continue to protect the strength of the existing business whilst investing in future growth in a disciplined way.

Turning to Slide 18. This slide sets out our guidance for FY '27. Production increases care of the Ngungaju ramp-up alongside continued strong and reliable performance from our Pilgang processing plant, with the 2 plants together forming the expanded Pilgangoora production platform. As it relates to FOB unit operating costs, this is expected to increase modestly on a blended basis, reflecting the relatively higher operating cost of Ngungaju and its ramp-up during the year. We will remain focused on productivity, reliability, and cost efficiency across both plants. As it pertains to base capital expenditure, this is principally weighted towards mine development, including a planned cutback that we progressed over 2 years to provide access to future mining areas.

Sustaining capital also increases, reflecting the operation of the 2 plants and the delivery of the suite of future-focused initiatives identified by our Cost Smart Future-Ready program. These minor one-off investments and operational efficiencies are expected to incrementally support Pilgangoora's low-cost operations into the future. As it relates to growth capital, included in guidance comprises the previously announced $175 million pre-FID for the P2000 project. Please note that expenditure relating to potential P2000 full financial investment decision and the broader Pilgangoora infrastructure investment and any Colina early works is not included in FY '27 guidance. These initiatives remain subject to further assessment and Board approval and will be announced separately as required.

Turning now to Slide 20. So moving to the market. Demand is becoming broader and more resilient, while meaningful new supply remains difficult to deliver at the pace required. These dynamics increasingly favor established low-cost lithium producers with the financial capacity to invest through the cycle. On demand, the important development is the ongoing diversification. Electric vehicles remain the primary driver, battery energy storage systems are scaling rapidly, and commercial vehicle electrification is becoming increasingly meaningful. Lithium demand is no longer reliant on one single application or geography.

Global EV sales were up 2.3% year-on-year to June with particularly strong growth outside of China. In Europe, it was up 27%. Asia, excluding China, up 78%, and the Rest-of-World category stepping up an enormous 122%. Europe is now accounting for more than 1/4 of global EV sales. This demonstrates that lithium demand is becoming increasingly diversified across regions rather than remaining dependent on any particular market. Within China, although vehicle sales have moderated, average battery pack sizes continue to increase. Battery electric vehicle pack sizes were up approximately 15% and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle pack sizes are up approximately 31% year-to-date. This means that lithium demand can continue to grow even when vehicle unit growth moderates because each vehicle requires more lithium.

These trends are also being reinforced by government policy. In China, China is targeting EVs to represent 30% of vehicles on its roads by 2030 and electric trucks to reach 40% penetration over the same period. This reinforces that electrification is extending beyond passenger vehicles into heavier transport applications. Battery energy storage remains an increasingly important demand driver. Global installed capacity increased 25% year-on-year, including a huge 96% growth in Europe. We see this as an important structural shift with energy storage increasingly becoming critical infrastructure supporting grid reliability, renewable integration, and energy security.

Another encouraging signal comes from the battery supply chain itself. In its recent interim results, CATL reported battery manufacturing capacity under construction is equivalent to around 1.5x its existing operating capacity. That level of investment reinforces our view that the industry's largest participants continue to see strong long-term demand growth. On another point, the U.S. Defense Logistics Agency has also recently gone to market to procure battery-grade lithium carbonate for the National Defense Stockpile. While the demand is modest, it represents another source of competition for lithium units and it highlights the increasing strategic importance of secure lithium supply for defense and national security purposes.

On the supply side, the industry is responding to improved pricing through the restart of idle capacity and the announcement of new projects. However, our experience tells us that announced tonnes should not be confused with delivered tonnes. Bringing meaningful new supply to market requires financing, permitting, construction, commissioning, customer qualification, and operational ramp-up, a process measured in years, not months. At the same time, sovereign and policy risks are increasing. Zimbabwe's reaffirmed ban on spodumene concentrate exports from '27 is one recent example, placing approximately 250,000 tonnes of LCE equivalent supply at risk. It demonstrates that future supply is increasingly exposed not only to project execution, but also to government policy.

Altogether, these demand and supply dynamics reinforce our view that the lithium market will continue to experience periods of tightness and pricing volatility. This is consistent with Benchmark Mineral Intelligence long-term outlook, which forecasts lithium demand growing at approximately 10% per annum through to 2040, ahead of forecast supply growth of approximately 8% per annum. For PLS, that environment plays to the strengths we have deliberately built, scale, cost competitiveness, financial strength, and control over timing of our growth.

Against that backdrop, let me close by summarizing what FY '26 demonstrated and the priorities that will define FY '27. In closing, FY '26 was a defining year for PLS. We delivered record production of 880,000 tonnes, record sales of 892,000 tonnes, and we finished the year with approximately $2.8 billion of total liquidity. Importantly, these outcomes were not simply the result of stronger lithium prices. They reflect the operating leverage we deliberately built through the down cycle and the disciplined execution of our team. In FY '27, our focus is clear: safe ramp-up of Ngungaju, maintained strong performance at Pilgang, and progressed P2000 towards a decision in the December quarter. We entered the year with strong momentum, financial flexibility, and confidence in the long-term outlook for PLS.

Thank you to our shareholders for your ongoing support and the belief in this incredible market. And thank you for your time this morning. Brett, Alex, and I will now be pleased to take your questions. And with that, I'll now pass to Maggie to open the line for those questions. Thank you, Maggie.

[Operator Instructions] First question comes from the line of Levi Spry from UBS.

Maybe just starting on recoveries, operational questions. So they've been pretty good in the last few quarters. How do we think about upside to the long-term assumptions there of sort of 75 and 67 across the 2 plants of Pilgang and Ngungaju?

Yes, obviously, with the return of the Ngungaju plant, that plant actually does have a lower recovery that we have been working on through the years. So when you think of the recoveries, think of them as a whole. We look at a multitude of factors such as head grade, plant stability, and levels of contamination. But we're working hard to improve those recoveries. I'd be thinking around the mid- to low 70s for the recoveries going forward, obviously, impacted by that the Ngungaju lower recovery of the ore that we do feed that plant.

And Levi, just to add -- look, it's a great question and one we're wrestling with because, yes, as you say, the team has done a fantastic job with lifting recoveries. So it's natural to say what does this mean for the long-term valuation of the asset. Over the coming months, we will be grappling with this question because, of course, we will -- we've got the P2000 study we're working on. So we'll have to take a view as part of that. And of course, we'll be looking at resource reserve modifying factors as well. So this will all come to a head in due course, but it's exciting to think about the potential adjustment to the valuation of our asset here of an improved long-term lithium recovery parameter.

Nice one. And just on the P2000. So I appreciate the FID is still 3 or 4 months away. But what could we expect then? Yes. How fast can you hit the ground? And part of what I'm thinking about is how much -- obviously, how to model it, but how we think about CapEx? Or is it largely an FY '28 sort of story?

Yes. So the -- yes, the P2000 as per previous disclosure and as part of the pre-FID that we announced, we flagged first ore in calendar year '29. And that assumes, essentially, we're moving as quickly as we can. As part of the full FID announcement, we'll provide a restatement of that time line, and we'll see how the team goes to see if we can bring things to the left. We're certainly pushing for that. But we'll see how we go. So we'll give a new statement on the time line for that one. And coupled with that, of course, will be the capital outlook for the project, which, yes, at this point, we can't give you any visibility until we've completed that study.

Okay. And could I just squeeze one in on the underground. So that was new news to me. So what are the drivers here to looking at that maybe early?

Sure. So as you know, Levi, we've got a burning focus on value creation for our shareholders. And as we think about that, we're looking at what we can do to maximize recovery, but also what can we do to maximize resource capture in the mine. And underground, we think, has potential but we're really at the start of exploring that. So we thought it's prudent to flag the market that we've got PFS underway. We'll see where that takes us. But given the scale of the Pilgangoora system, it's enormous. We're seeing it appears to grow at depth from some of the deeper drill holes we're seeing. So yes, it's a very interesting area for us to explore further. We'll see how we go.

Next, we have Rahul Anand from Morgan Stanley.

Look, I wanted to perhaps start with the base CapEx that [ I think ] is around $450 million to $510 million for next year. Just wanted to understand how should we be forecasting this going forward? Obviously, there's a bit of a step-up there, both in terms of sustaining and then capitalized waste movement there that's ongoing. I believe there's a part related to Ngungaju there as well. But if I look forward, are there components within this CapEx number that will drop out after this year or next year? Or are we just dragging right on this with an inflation component within it? That's the first one. I'll come back with the second.

Yes. Thanks, Rahul. I'll take the first part and then hand over to Alex. But certainly, in the sustaining capital, there's some one-off Cost Smart Future-Ready projects that the entirety of those or the majority of those will probably be done in FY '27. So it's a little bit inflated there, and then it will normalize going forward. So that's why it's probably a little bit higher than what we would normally have, but some of those are very value-adding projects across the operation in cost efficiencies and improving our overall outcomes for the shareholders.

Yes. Thanks, Brett. As Brett spoke around, so there's 3 different components to the base CapEx guidance for this year. The first is the mine development fees that reflects the significant increase in mining activity given the cutback work and that's just tied to the phasing of the mining activity. As you called out, sustaining capital has stepped up. That's a couple of different reasons.

First, the assumption that we're operating both plants now. So we've got that normal maintenance capital coming through on both Ngungaju asset as well as the Pilgang asset. We do have a number of future-ready initiatives that we'll be rolling out in the next year that should be completed within the year. Now, those are one-off investments targeting operational efficiencies and reliability improvements. So that will play a part as we move forward then into FY '28, and we'll obviously provide some further guidance as we get to that right point.

The other piece within the infrastructure space in FY '27, there are some, I guess, more significant programs of work in FY '27. We have the coarse ore stockpile dome activity underway. There's a number of mine water supply upgrades that we're working through and some works on the camp as well. And so those are, I guess, more significant projects that won't be repeated as we move into FY '28 as well.

Got it. So Alex, if I had to summarize that perhaps, then I guess the sustaining capital side in dollar million terms seems quite sticky in terms of future-looking proportions. And then if I look at the mine development, that's perhaps more concentrated this year and next, and then maybe steps down by some percentage, and then the infra piece is obviously going to be ad hoc. Is that the right way to think about it?

Yes. I think it's a fair interpretation. But Brett, do you want to talk around the mining?

Yes, certainly. In the mine stripping, as Dale mentioned, the next couple of years are heavily intensive on our cutback, then the mine development will step down and then normalize out a little bit more for the life of mine. So it is a little bit inflated for the next 2 years.

Got it. Okay. Perfect. And Brett, one -- second one is for you, mate. I'm just looking at next year's guidance, and I wanted to perhaps touch through some of the key points there. Levi talked about recovery, so I'll leave that one out. But can you maybe share if like maybe some of the back assumptions in terms of that guidance around grade strip ratio. I guess, what I'm trying to understand is, obviously, you finished the year at a cost number, which is already at the top end of your next year's guidance when Ngungaju is producing. I know there was a bit of work going on, on site this quarter, which impacted that cost number for this quarter.

But just wanted to understand some of the back-end assumptions in that number just for us to be able to run the physicals and arrive at that cost in our modeling as well and to understand sort of the pinch points, I guess, in terms of energy and some of the other variables around currency, et cetera, so that we can model it appropriately.

Yes. I'll take the physical aspect of that and then, Alex, chime in with some of the financial headwinds that we're seeing in FY '27. But in addition to the resale of Ngungaju, traditionally operating at a slightly higher operating cost compared to the Pilgang plant, the impact is exasperated through the restart and ramp-up period. We should see those elevated costs for the first few months, 4 months, as we ramp up and then they'll drop to a more sustainable level post hitting those production rates at Ngungaju.

The quantum of mine stripping this year is elevating up as we go into Stage 6, and we start to use some of the larger gear. We've already got the larger platform rigs, but it really starts to become a volume-based mining activity. So it is an extra 20 million tonnes. That strip ratio does go up from last year to about 5.9, but that is well below the life of mine strip ratio, the 7.7. So those impacts in FY '27 are certainly coming at us from a physical viewpoint. Obviously, a lot of our Cost Smart Future-Ready projects are aimed at those efficiencies and actually getting us down that cost curve. But I'll hand over to Alex for some of the other color on the financials.

Yes. Thanks, Brett. Rahul, you also asked around energy prices. Obviously, when we put the guidance together, it's been one of the key pieces on our minds. Just to sort of remind people in terms of energy, the main Pilgangoora processing plant is mainly powered by LNG and solar battery. So diesel is really used in our heavy mining equipment fleet, which provides the feed to the plant.

We have looked at a range of different diesel price assumptions, as you would expect as we've been pulling this together. To give you a feel, in FY '26, we ended up with diesel accounting for about 6% of our production cost. We're looking at that increasing to between 8% to 10% as we move into FY '27, and that's driven by 2 parts. First, we do have some increased consumption of fuel given the Ngungaju plant additional activity on site and also, as Brett has already spoken to, the step-up in mining activity. So there is a consumption component as part of that.

And then we've used sort of our best estimates on the outlook for diesel, really taking into account the forward curves and also an allowance for the uncertainty there. So you will see that playing through our guidance numbers as well. That, along with FX are clearly things that we can't control, but we feel that we've made a reasonable allowance within the guidance range that we provided.

Next, we have Austin Yun from Macquarie.

Just a question on the near-term production. Good to know that Ngungaju is going through the restarting phase. Just keen to understand how should we think about the near-term volume ramp-up? And would there be any potential tying activities that could result in lower near-term volume?

Thanks, Austin. No, the Ngungaju plant is quite separate. We -- it's a very well-known plant. We had it in care and maintenance. Obviously, brought it out of care and maintenance, did a lot of prep work to bring that online. So now it's just really doing those commissionings. What we are doing is taking a lot of the learnings that we've had from the Pilgang plant across to that plant and applying them there. So we get the benefits of those as well. So nothing untoward there. I think the schedule that we've got in the plan, we're looking pretty good for the first 4 weeks of that plan.

Second one, just on the P2000. In this update, you highlighted there are quite a few different work streams you're working through as part of pre-FID study. In the event that project is approved, I'm just keen to understand for each of those work streams, would be -- is it a sequence? And how should we think about the CapEx investment profile? Would that be fairly concentrated? Or would that be kind of spread across a few years with some happening even before -- even after the commissioning of the project?

The P2000, we'll provide some qualitative explanation for that as part of the study outcome. But to talk in general terms, the bulk of the capital typically arises when it moves to site execution. And the timing for that will give visibility with the study outcome. But I suspect that the bulk of that would occur something like 1 year after FID -- on the assumption FID occurs. So out of all that, I'd say, mid to back end would be the largest capital draw. But obviously, at the front end, there's -- you have things like earthworks, long lead equipment, steel procurement, et cetera, et cetera. But yes, I can't offer you much more than that description at this point.

Next, we have Lyndon Fagan from JPMorgan.

I was hoping for a bit of a rundown on the stockpile strategy, if that's okay. I can see, obviously, for quite some time, the ore mined is much higher than the ore processed. I'm just wondering, I guess, how big is the stockpile? How much do you need to, I guess, grow them into P2000, and I guess, what happens after P2000 with all of that?

Yes, look, the mining and stockpiling strategy is probably about where we would like it. So we've got a good amount of flexibility ahead of our processing plants, both at Ngungaju and at Pilgang. And the additional color in there is some of the contact ore that now comes up that we are actually blending in.

So some of the ore mined actually includes that contact ore as well. So at the moment, it goes through at about a 20% to 25% blend rate. And obviously, P2000 is what we're looking at to look after that contact ore going forward, but really does give us that flexibility and ensures that any sort of upsets in the mine or anything like that, weather impacts, allows us to make sure that we're not impacted at the plant side. But yes.

And Lyndon, just one to add there. Part of what Brett and the team have achieved over the years is to evolve the operation to be more bespokely attuned to different ore characteristics. So there's been quite an intentional strategy by Brett and his team to move to a different stockpile strategy for the purpose of maximizing lithium recoveries.

And this is part of the good -- the reason behind some of the good results that we're seeing. So we've moved to a more sophisticated feed strategy, which is flowing through to the bottom line care of those higher recoveries. So -- but as Brett said, not looking to increase those stockpiles at the level. The operating setup is appropriate for the processing capacity that we've got at this time.

And look, follow-up question. So Wesfarmers has obviously approved their project. The capital intensity there looks relatively high. I guess, if the Street is somewhere between $2 billion and $2.5 billion for you guys, there's quite a big difference there. Clearly, P2000 is a bigger project and benefits from some economies of scale. But wondering if you could maybe make any observations on the differences there or whether we need to actually reconsider sort of the all-in spend for you guys?

Yes. Look, I couldn't really make a useful comment on what Wesfarmers is up to. I wouldn't draw a line between what they're doing and what we're doing. And certainly, that's what I've impressed on Paul, our Project Director, not to get any ideas. We are, of course, very focused on making sure that we deliver efficient capital intensity, and we will be deploying every tool available to make sure that we deploy our shareholders' dollars and stretch them as far as we can. And as I said, I wouldn't draw a line between what Wesfarmers announced and where we're heading.

Next, we have Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs.

Brett, first one for you on processing performance in the quarter. The implied processing head grade continues to track a lot higher than the reported mine grade. Am I right to infer that your reported recovery is post ore sorting? And if so, what would your recovery have been versus the mine grade?

You're right. Our recovery is post ore sorting. And as we've talked about before, that stockpiling strategy and looking at how do we maximize the resource for the best benefit of those recoveries certainly comes into play. Look, I wouldn't go back and do all the numbers on the pre-sorting to look at the recovery. But we look at maximizing those ore sorters for the technology that they're actually doing, and they're actually doing a great job of injecting the contaminants and then allowing that processing plant to get a really good run at the ore.

So all about creating the best ability to get the best ore to the plant and get the maximum recovery out of it. So yes, it's a bit difficult depending on what sort of levels of content we're running and where that ore is coming from and the geometallurgical makeup of it as well.

Yes. I got it. I appreciate that's going to vary depending on the mix. But if you had to sort of ballpark it, would you say that recovery from the ore sorting piece is sort of 2% to 5% uplift on what it would be otherwise?

Yes. Certainly, what we're seeing is a better-than-expected outcome with our ore sorters. So we're actually working really well with TOMRA, and we're actually getting the value out of those ore sorters to remove those contaminants and get that upgrade. So I wouldn't put a figure on it right now, but what we are looking at is just everywhere we can improve through the use of that technology gives us that downstream benefit.

Got it. And then just another clarification on the processing. Just noting your mining is wet tonnes and your process is dry tonnes. Is that still running at about 5% moisture and maybe accounting some of the difference as well?

Yes, roughly around about there, Hugo, not too far off.

Great. And then if I can just turn to '27 guidance. Are you able to just provide roughly what you've assumed in terms of tonnes from Ngungaju in '27? And I presume that's going to be less than the 200,000 tonnes because you're in ramp-up. But then what you've also assumed ongoing for recoveries at the Pilgang plant, whether we should be taking the sort of mid-70s forward to achieve that average of the low 70s you talked to across the asset?

Yes. Look, we don't split the -- both circuits and talk to them individually. We really work it as a unit. So that as we said before, we're looking at the low 70s for the total recovery. Obviously, yes, the Ngungaju, we know that it's a lower recovery plant, but as a system, we leverage both plants to -- for the best outcome of the product and then the best recovery of both of them going forward.

Next, we have Glyn Lawcock from Barrenjoey.

Dale, I just noticed you've obviously said you've got the access road permanent village and the HME facility subject to Board approval. Just any idea -- can you help us understand what are we thinking about in terms of capital spend there? And are they likely to go to the Board this financial year '27, so we could see additional spend on those this year?

Glyn, thanks for sort of exploring this. In terms of potentially coming to the Board this year, yes, and it's why we sort of sought to really reinforce this with Slide 18 that we've got a couple of line items there, which are subject to Board approval. So yes, it could well be this year. Obviously, we've got works, we've got the P2000 slated for December quarter. And potentially, we'll look to do some of these other potential investments around the same time. We'll see how we go. We've got a lot under study at the moment.

To your question on what is the quantum, I can't give you a steer on that because we're deep into study mode. But what we have sought to do is at least give some sort of framing around what that might look like. And one of the previous releases, I think it was the Macquarie [ press ]. At the Slide 12 there, we've given the length of the access road of 24 km. We've given the size of the village, which is an 800-bed camp. which can then, as a base sort of size camp, with a view to potentially scaling that larger to support P2000 and a little bit about the mine services facility. So I appreciate it doesn't give you capital numbers, but it gives you a feeling for the scale. So, yes, unfortunately, I can't offer too much more until we get those studies complete.

Wait, $200 million scare you?

I'm not scared by much, Glyn. But yes, I can't give you a steer.

Okay. And then the next question I've got is around mine development, which you've explored. But I just want to make sure I understand how you think about P2000 and mine development. So not looking for quantum, but just you've already got the $1.2 billion number in the market for P2000, which will change. We all get that.

Was that just the plant and then we should be thinking that your mine development spend that you've talked about for the next 2 years, doesn't have anything in for P2000. So we should expect on top of the number for the plant, there will be an additional stripping required as well. So is that the right way to think about what we're going to get at the end of the year?

Yes. In terms of going back to the original study that we did in '24, I wouldn't lean too much on that because obviously, as you know, a lot has changed, not only in terms of cost inputs, but also the way we're thinking about the development. The processing technologies continue to evolve, the scale and the feed strategy has all continued to evolve, and partly because we continue to do more test work, but partly because well, we've learned a lot and getting great results through the ore sorting.

So of course, that factor flows into the new investment case. So the '24 study is not much of a guide in terms of what we go back to the market to, which you rightly called out. Thank you for that. As to what's the makeup of what's in and out, again, well, you'll have to wait for the study outcome. I'm sorry, Glyn. I know everyone is itching to get the details, but we'll lay it all out in the release.

Next, we have Thiago Ojea from Citi.

I think assuming that we continue to see this health market, your cash generation is quite strong. I'm just curious if there is any flexibility to perhaps bring forward Colina. I know that in the current environment, the IRR for this product should be super high. And related to that, how should we think in broad terms on capital allocation? How would you compare your organic growth opportunities with perhaps some M&A potential?

Yes. Thanks for the question. I'll start with that and then hand to Alex. And look, thank you for sort of highlighting the cash generation, which is a caring year because if you indulge me for a quick moment, it is just an incredible strength of this business. The $1.3 billion of cash margin through operations, incredible care of the scale, we've got leverage and scale with a low-cost position, that's all flowing through the bottom line. And of that cash margin, well, over 40% of it was generated in the last quarter. And when you think about ore, what's the headline realized pricing last quarter to this quarter is looking something similar.

So you take your own view of forward pricing when you sort of drag that to the right, it's pretty incredible what could be possible through this business. And of course, as 100% ownership, that flows directly through to our shareholders. We don't have any JV splits for any of that could sort of carry on. So a wonderful position to be in. Now turning to your question of bringing forward Colina. The short answer is we're doing what we can there anyways. But what that looks like in the first instance is we want to grow what's in the ground first. So we've got drilling dollars slated to look to grow that. And then we're looking to size the appropriate processing operation to do that. And we're focused on maximizing the value of the resource and then maximizing the value capture through the rightsized plant for all the right processing tools. So we're progressing that as quickly as possible. But December quarter next year is as quick as we can get in that regard. And with that, I'll hand to Alex on...

Thanks. In relation to your broader question on capital allocation, Thiago, we naturally and as you'd expect, we will look at all projects, whether they are organic or any inorganic opportunities through returns and a shareholder lens. We're in a very strong position that we've finished the year with $2.3 billion in cash on the balance sheet. That sets us up really well for an upcoming decision in relation to P2000.

And then as Dale said, the timing of the Colina is really study dependent to follow on 12 months after that. We'll continue to remain flexible and keep flexibility in the balance sheet so that if there are opportunities that we think are the right long-term investment opportunities for shareholders that we have the flexibility to be able to take action on those. But as you know, it's always dependent on what those opportunities are and where they come. So it's really -- we will continue to look at all aspects of growth, but really be returns led in those decisions.

Due to time, we will now pass on to webcast questions. I'll now pass to James.

Thanks, Maggie. Just some questions from the webcast. Could you please advise if we'll be looking at dividends and when they might be due?

So as to dividend, the Board will consider that as part of the full year results. And as to timing, if there is a dividend to be paid, that timing will be disclosed as part of that release.

Thanks, Dale. Next question, has PLS considered conducting offtake agreements with OEMs such as CATL, BYD, et cetera?

Yes, is the short answer. And we continue to engage broadly across all parts of the supply chain, including some very recent engagement. And the appetite is very strong for securing volume from PLS. So we're in an enviable position in that regard.

How do you measure the success of the midstream product strategy? What are you hoping to get from it?

Yes. This is a hard one to answer quickly. But essentially, it's a demonstration plant that we're looking to do a whole series of learnings through multiple dimensions. And it's all to serve one aim, how can we capture more margin and more value closer to the resource through these value-adding steps.

Ultimately, what we'll explore through that demonstration plant are things like different feed strategies, different set points within the processing flow, understanding the impact on quality impacts in terms of the product flowing at the back end. And critical to this will be different trials plus also working with supply chain partners, including the first offtake that we've signed up there.

What market conditions do you need to see to press the button on P2000?

Well, the good thing about where we think we're heading with the P2000, this will all be revealed as part of the study outcomes, is a scale project. And as per the first study released in '24, what that showed was a unit cost benefit care of that scale. So hopeful to continue that trend with the next study update. What that means is irrespective of market conditions, there's a case for investment given it makes us a stronger business, moves us to the left of the cost curve and displaces others in the market ultimately during down cycles. But that being said, the prevailing market price and market outlook will be a key feature of that decision, and we'll cross that bridge when the study is delivered.

Do you see sodium ion batteries as a challenge to PLS?

Look, we continue to study sodium ion along with other competing technologies out there. Sodium ion gets plenty of airplay from time to time. Our view aligns with what we are seeing and hearing from all the experts out there. Sodium-ion is a potential energy storage device. However, for certain use applications, fundamentally, it's much less energy dense, almost by half. What that means is it is applicable to other use cases, and it's yet to have the scale in the market and it fundamentally has higher cost for some aspects and the fact that it's double the size, you need double everything, if not larger, to cater for that tech. So [ that ] doesn't concern us. The experts put opine on this, see it as a small part of the future supply stack, and we align to that view.

Okay. Last question. Can you explain why the share price is so volatile?

Yes. Well, I wish we could give it a clear answer on this one. Look, the lithium -- at the highest level, the lithium industry is a young industry growing from a small base. The only consistent thing in the lithium industry has been that volatility. And you put that down to a young industry growing rapidly, and we suspect that, that trend will continue until such time the industry has got more scale and the supply chains are built out.

Until that time, well, it doesn't phase us at all. PLS, we've built to not only navigate the volatility, but capitalize on it. And it's exactly what you're seeing at this time. We invested countercyclically. We reduced our cost base. We've built scale. We've got more scale, a lower cost position. And here we are yielding the benefits of that. We've turned Ngungaju on. We've got that swing capacity coming online. We've just generated $579 million in operating cash margin for June quarter alone. Headline pricing is still somewhere similar. We are here to capitalize on that volatility and, obviously, for the benefit of our shareholders. So it's an exciting time for the company and an exciting market. Great question to finish on.

And with that, that's a wrap. Thank you all for dialing in for our June quarter results, a very strong quarter, capping off what's been a record-breaking year for volume and sales, a fantastic set of outcomes, and we look forward to talking again with the full year results in a couple of months' time.

Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect. Have a great day.

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the PLS March Quarterly Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded.

I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, Dale Henderson, Managing Director and CEO of PLS Group. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and good evening. Thank you for joining us today. I'll begin by acknowledging the traditional owners on the land on which PLS operates, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation here in Perth, and the Nyamal and Kariyarra peoples in the Pilbara. We pay our respects to elders past and present.

I'm joined today by Flavio Garofalo, our Interim CFO; and Brett McFadgen, our Chief Operating Officer. Today, we are reporting a record quarter and a step change in financial performance. We will take you through the quarter and then allow time for questions.

Now before turning to the results, I'd like to frame what is happening in the lithium market. Lithium remains a young capital-intensive industry that is still scaling rapidly. Demand can move quickly, supply response more slowly and capital is cyclical. That combination means volatility is structural. In that environment, value doesn't accrue evenly. It concentrates in operators with structural cost advantages, strong balance sheets and discipline to pace capital through the cycle. That is how we've built and manage PLS. Through the recent down cycle, our focus was to strengthen the operating platform, lower unit costs, preserve financial flexibility and maintain growth optionality.

This quarter shows that model working as designed. We delivered record production of 232,000 tonnes, materially stronger pricing and a significant increase in cash generation, closing the quarter with approximately $1.5 billion in cash. Importantly, this is not simply price leverage. The work undertaken through the cycle is now converting directly into margins, earnings and cash flow.

Please turn to Slide 2. Our strategy is consistent. To operate at scale, maintain low costs, preserve balance sheet strength and deploy capital in a disciplined way through the cycle. We manage the business as a system. Operational performance drives margins. Margins convert to cash, and that cash gives us flexibility to control the timing and sequencing of growth. Capital discipline is central to them. We invest only when returns are compelling through the cycle, not in response to short-term price movements.

Moving to Slide 3. PLS is positioned to create value through the cycle. First, our asset base and cost position, high-quality 100% owned Tier 1 assets with a cost structure that protects margins in weaker markets and expand them as pricing improves. Importantly, that ownership means our shareholders retain the full benefit of that operating leverage, a distinctive advantage amongst our peers. Second, the balance sheet. With approximately $1.5 billion in cash and approximately $2.1 billion of liquidity gives us control of the timing and ability to act from a position of strength. Third, execution. As you've heard today, record production lower unit costs and strong cash generation reflect a platform that is performing reliably and converting into financial outcomes. And finally, disciplined optionality, multiple pathways to grow, activate it selectively and only when returns are resilient through the cycle.

Turning to Slide 4. The March quarter demonstrates strength and operating leverage of the PLS platform. Production was a record of 232,000 tonnes, reflecting strong operating performance across the business. Pricing improved materially with realized prices up 61% quarter-on-quarter to $1,867 per tonne on an SC5.2 basis. That translated directly into financial cash outcomes with revenue lift to 52% to $567 million, cash margin from operations rose 178% to $461 million, and we closed the quarter with approximately $1.5 billion in cash.

On growth, the Ngungaju restart remains on track for July and the P2000 and the Colina Project studies continue to progress.

Now with that, I'll now hand over to Brett for an update on operations.

Thank you, Dale. Moving to Slide 5. Safety is our highest priority, and we never lose sight of that regardless of our operational performance. During the quarter, we recorded 3 injuries. A total recordable injury frequency rate increased slightly to 3.82. Each injury is a reminder that our work here is never finished.

What I do want to highlight is the lead indicator performance. Quality safety interactions reached 4.13 per 1,000 hours worked, well above our target of 1.6 and up from 3.8 in the prior quarter. That reflects continued delivery of our in-field leadership programs and deeper frontline engagement with our critical risk management framework. We remain focused on translating that engagement into improved outcomes.

Moving to Slide 6. The Pilgangoora operation delivered a record quarter, and I want to walk through the key drivers. On mining, total material mined increased to 9.9 million tonnes, up from 8.1 million tonnes in the December quarter. This reflects improved operational efficiency and the planned ramp-up in waste stripping to support the Ngungaju restart. Ore mined came in at 1.3 million tonnes, consistent with our mine plan. On processing, plant reliability was strong. Lithium recovery was consistently high at approximately 75%, a reflection of the capability embedded through the P1000 expansion. The ore sorter continued to perform well, providing operational flexibility despite elevated contact ore feed.

On costs, FOB unit operating cost of $520 per ton or USD 362 per tonne was 11% lower than the December quarter. That improvement reflects both higher production volumes and the benefit of our continued cost focus. On sales, volumes of 195,000 tonnes were on budget.

Moving to Slide 7. Fuel and supply chains, we're monitoring the global supply chain environment closely, particularly in the context of ongoing geopolitical tensions and their potential impact on energy markets and key inputs. Our energy mix at Pilgangoora is deliberately diversified. Our processing infrastructure and site facilities are powered primarily by locally sourced LNG supported by solar and battery systems. Heavy mining equipment runs on diesel. This diversified structure reduces our exposure to any single energy source and diesel represents only 4% to 5% of total historical production costs.

At this time, we do not expect any material fuel shortages or supply disruption, and we are working closely with our long-term contracted suppliers to stay ahead of any emerging risks. The same applies to our other key inputs, explosives and processing reagents, where we're currently seeing no supply constraints.

I'll now hand back to Dale to cover growth and chemicals.

Thank you, Brett, and well done to you and the full operating team for attracting set of results.

Moving to Slide 8. Our approach to growth remains disciplined and unchanged. Staged returns gated and supported by balance sheet strength. Having preserved operational capability and financial flexibility through the down cycle, we are now able to advance growth from a position of strength and timing control. Ngungaju is the near-term step with the restart on track for first draw in July and ramp up through the September quarter. Beyond that, P2000 and Colina continue to progress through their respective study phases, preserving longer-term growth optionality. Across the portfolio, capital will only be deployed when returns are resilient through the cycle. It is an option, not an obligation.

Moving now to Slide 9. Our approach in chemicals is consistent with our broader strategy, preserving optionality across the value chain while maintaining capital discipline. For the midstream project, we have materially advanced the project by completing the ownership restructure with Calix securing up to $38.1 million in ARENA grant funding care of the government and secured offtake with Ronbay, a leading cathode maker for LFP. Commissioning has now commenced with first product expected in the September quarter that meaningfully derisks the pathway.

At our JV with P-PLS, both trains have restarted and are producing battery-grade material. While downstream conversion margins remain challenging, we have retained the flexibility through an agreed extension with POSCO on our at-cost option to increase our ownership from 18% to 30%. We've moved this through to July '27. And P-PLS continues to engage with additional customers on sales.

Taken together, these initiatives provide PLS with staged downstream participation and the ability to scale exposure selectively as returns become compelling.

With that, I'll now hand over to Flavio for the financials.

Thanks, Dale, and good morning, everyone. Please turn to Slide 11 for a review of the key financial metrics for the quarter. March was a strong quarter, and the numbers reflect that clearly. Revenue of $567 million was up 52% on the December quarter, driven by a 61% increase in price, while sales were in line with our plan.

On costs, FOB operating costs came in at $520 per ton, down 11% quarter-on-quarter, driven by higher production volumes and the benefit of capitalized waste stripping flowing through the cost base. CIF unit costs moved slightly higher to $733 per tonne, up 2%, reflecting the impact of higher royalties on stronger pricing, which is a good problem to have. While unit costs are expected to increase in the June quarter with the restart of the Ngungaju in July, our full forecast remains within guidance underpinned by the discipline of our Cost Smart culture. The combination of stronger pricing and lower unit cost underpins the material uplift in operating cash margin this quarter at $461 million, up 178% on the prior quarter and I'll speak to the cash flow in detail on the next slide.

Moving to Slide 12. Slide 12 shows the cash flow bridge for the March quarter. The bridge shows approximately $500 million increase in cash for the quarter, closing at approximately $1.5 billion. This was driven by strong operational cash margin and the receipt of USD 100 million equivalent to AUD 141 million for the Canmax offtake prepayment secured earlier this year.

Moving to capital. Capital expenditure of $95 million on the accrual basis comprised of $52 million of mine development, $28 million of infrastructure and projects and $16 million of sustaining capital. Interest, leases and other financing cash flows were $26 million for the quarter. In total, financing activities, leasing and foreign exchange movements resulted in a net cash inflow of $125 million inclusive of the Canmax prepayment, closing the quarter with a cash balance of approximately $1.5 billion. Taken together, it's a quarter that reflects solid execution and strong operational cash conversion, disciplined capital deployment and a balance sheet that continues to strengthen.

Moving to Slide 13. Before I close, I want to highlight the bond transaction. As announced yesterday, PLS successfully completed its inaugural USD 600 million, 6.875% senior unsecured notes due in 2031. This is a meaningful milestone for PLS. The bond was competitively priced and extremely well supported by high-quality global credit investors, a clear validation of PLS' credit quality and business outlook. The debut offering is also strategically significant. It aligns our funding sources with the scale and long-term nature of our operations introducing long-tenor unsecured funding into our capital structure and adding genuine depth and flexibility to how we fund the business moving forward.

In terms of deployment, a portion of the net proceeds has been used to repay the $375 million drawn down facility of our revolving credit facility. Alongside the bond closing, we have also reduced our RCF from $1 billion to $500 million, maturing our overall funding framework. On a pro forma basis, incorporating the bond proceeds and RCF refinance, our total liquidity position would have increased from $2.1 billion to $2.4 billion as of the 31st of March. PLS' revised debt capital structure provides significant flexibility for future capital allocation decisions and positions us well for the next phase of growth, underpinned by discipline, flexibility and long-term funding certainty.

On a personal note, this is my last webcast as interim CFO and what a quarter to close on. I'm proud of the results we have achieved and the milestone the company has delivered with the bond offering. I look forward to supporting Alex as she steps into the role on the 1st of May.

And with that, I'll now hand back to Dale.

Thank you, Flavio, and certainly a great quarter. Moving now to Slide 15 to update on the market. Sorry, we are speaking to positioning for growth. This slide highlights the scale of the PLS production platform today and the staged pathways we have to grow it over time.

In calendar year '25, PLS produced approximately 100,000 tons on an LCE basis, positioning us among the top 3 primary lithium producers globally and that was with the Ngungaju processing plant in care and maintenance. With the restart of Ngungaju, we will restore P1000 installed capacity. Beyond that P2000 provides a clear brownfield expansion pathway while Colina adds longer-dated portfolio optionality. Importantly, these assets are 100% owned, which means we control the pace and sequencing of development and our shareholders retain the full benefit of future value creation. Because of that growth is staged rather than committed all at once, capital is also sequenced over time across sustaining enhancement and growth which we'll turn to now moving to Slide 16.

This is how we translate that into capital allocation framework across a long-life asset base. With more than 30 years mine life at Pilgangoora, it is appropriate to invest progressively over time, sustaining the operation, enhancing it and then growing production when returns justify. We think about capital in 3 categories: firstly, sustain. The capital required to maintain the existing operation, including mine development and sustaining CapEx. As flagged here, FY '27 capital will be more heavily weighted towards mine development.

Second, enhance targeted investment to improve the efficiency, reliability and long-term capability of the asset. Importantly, this does not increase production. It strengthens the existing platform at P1000 and positions the operation for future capacity growth. And third, grow, which is strictly production expansion, including P2000 and Colina and remains subject to study outcomes, FID and disciplined return thresholds. This framework ensures capital sequenced over time, sustaining the base, enhancing the asset and only then committing to growth when returns are compelling. We'll provide more further detail on FY '27 capital allocation alongside the June quarter update.

Moving now to the market. Turning to Slide 18. Lithium demand remains structurally strong and has continued to broaden across both geographies and applications. Electric vehicles remain the primary driver of global EV sales reaching around 21 million units in calendar year '25 and approximately 7x the level seen in 2020, 5 years ago. Demand is now diversifying across regions. Recent data for March showed global BEV sales up 8% year-on-year despite China being the largest market declining 12% over the same period. This highlights how growth is now being driven more broadly across regions.

Now as in China earlier this week meeting with customers, and that reinforce what we're seeing in the data, continued strengthening in EV demand, very strong growth in energy storage and the increasingly visible emergence of electric commercial vehicles. Trucks are a particularly interesting segment. In many respects, they are where energy storage was 3 to 4 years ago. Still relatively small in absolute terms but growing very quickly. Global electric heavy vehicle sales grew approximately 180% between '24 and '25 given the scale of the commercial vehicle market. The segment is developing rapidly.

Importantly, battery sizes and heavy-duty vehicles are materially larger, in some cases, around 7x those of a typical passenger vehicle, which increases the intensity of lithium demand. As we have seen with ESS, segments that start small can become a much more material part of the overall demand stack over time. The result is a demand profile that is growing and increasingly diversified. That broadening demand base is important but the market outlook is ultimately shaped by how the demand growth interacts with a much slower supply response.

Now moving to Slide 19. This slide brings demand and supply picture together. On the left, you can see that lithium demand is expected to broaden materially over time with both EVs and energy storage contributing meaningfully to the demand stack. Set against that, the middle chart shows the gap emerging between projected demand and high probability supply. And on the right, the reason becomes clear, new suppliers taking longer to bring online with mine development cycles extending further over time. That combination of broadening demand and slower supply response underpins a market where volatility and periods of tightness are likely to persist. In that environment, scale, cost competitiveness, balance sheet strength and staged brownfield growth pathways become structural advantages.

Importantly, value increasingly accrues to operators who are already in production and able to deliver tonnes rather than projects still subject to long development time lines and execution risk. The PLS -- that reinforces the strategy we have outlined today: sequencing growth deliberately, maintaining discipline through the cycle and allocating capital only where returns are compelling.

So to finish with some closing comments, the March quarter demonstrated the strength of the PLS platform more clearly than any quarter before. We delivered record production, strong margin expansion and a material increase in cash generation with a structurally stronger balance sheet. Importantly, this is not price leverage alone. The work undertaken through the down cycle is now converting into results. This is operating leverage built deliberately. PLS is a business producing at scale with a cost competitive position and strong balance sheet and growth we can sequence from a position of control and a volatile capital-intensive market, value does not accrue evenly. It concentrates in operators with cost discipline, financial strength and control over the pace of growth. PLS is built to do exactly that.

Finally, I want to acknowledge Flavio's contribution during his time as Interim CFO, including supporting our debut unsecured notes offering and stewardship of the finance function. As planned, Flavio will remain part of the senior leadership group within the finance team, ensuring continuity as we welcome Alex Willcocks as permanent CFO starting next Friday, May 1. And having worked closely with Flavio this last while, there's not many conversations that don't involve a quick analogy. So to that end, 5-year grade earnings, well done on hitting a 6 at the end it's literally a -- with a 6% coupon rate. I would note that debut bond is the first in the Australian high-yield market for metals and mining since 2019. So a cracking 6 to finish. So thank you, Flavio.

And thank you all for your time this morning. I'll now pass to Maggie to open the line for questions.

[Operator Instructions] First, we have Kaan Peker from RBC.

Good morning, Dale and team. First one is on Slide 27 spend. I know you've flagged assessing multi infrastructure upgrades. Maybe if you can talk through what quantum you're considering? And does that imply anything for FID for P2000?

Yes. So thanks, Kaan. We can't offer any numbers at this point. And really, the purpose of today is just to flag, we've got work underway on these particular projects. And as per the release, we will provide more detail with the FY '27 guidance.

Sure. And maybe the second one, on the POSCO JV, is there any additional funding requirements that may come through in sort of the next 3 to 6 months for that?

We're not anticipating anything through certainly this financial year. So we're all okay in that regard.

We have Ivy Spry (sic) [ Levi Spry ] from UBS.

Yes, I think that's Levi. Maybe if I can just push a little bit more on the Slide 16. Is there any reason why the sustaining and mine development would be any different from this year? And then I guess, on the enhanced piece, what have you said there before in terms of particularly those first 2 items, the road and the village?

So in terms of the sustaining CapEx, your mine plan is still being finalized. It will be -- I suspect broadly close to what we had last year, but I can't confirm that until we complete the process. As to the enhancement works. Those investments are abundantly sensible for the future of the mine. In the case of the access road, ultimately, what that unlocks is going from triples to quad, such as obviously a cost reduction. HME facilities is obviously about supporting the owner-operated fleet we brought on the last couple of years and part of the reason we're seeing the strong cost improvement and the permanent village is very much a necessity as we look to move from what's a combination of secondhand camps, which have grown over time, moving to something much more fit for purpose for a 30-plus year mine life.

And I should probably just sort of add that when you think back to the journey of Pilgangoora, it's come a long way, the progressive resource upgrades, particularly through 2019, the acquisition of Altura, we've significantly extended the resource. And with that, also significantly extended the tenement package. Now with that, it's abundantly sensible that we've got to move some of the infrastructure effectively to make way for the larger resource we get to develop. So this is what we've got lined up to do over time. And as I say, we'll provide more visibility with FY '27 guidance.

Next, we have Glyn Lawcock from Barrenjoey.

Just on the fuel side, firstly, could you just confirm you've secured the fuel for the Ngungaju restart? And then just when you talked about the diesel as a percent of cost base, 4% to 5% that looks like it's about $10 million per quarter or about $40 million per year you spend on diesel. What's been the cost has that gone up now? Has it gone up 50%, 100% when you look at your cost of diesel. And then I've got a second question.

Yes, Glyn, it's Brett here. Just on the -- I'll take the fuel for Ngungaju and then hand over to Flavio on the cost side. But we've been working with our suppliers for some time and highlighting our return as we announced with the Board for Ngungaju. So we've got that in the works, and we're working with them. Again, our main power is LNG sourced locally for our processing and support infrastructure. So the diesel is for the mining. So we've got to cover it and working closely with our suppliers.

Glyn, you're correct. In terms of the diesel percentage, it is around 4% to 5% of the production costs. In terms of liters, you're pretty close on the mark for that. The majority use obviously for the diesel is on our heavy mining equipment fleet, which provides feed to the plant.

Okay. So I just worked out $40 million per year as your diesel cost, has that gone up, what, 50% with where diesel prices have gone or not? Is it something different?

Yes. No, it's not that significant. As I mentioned, it's around 4% to 5% of the production cost, and it's not a really material amount. In terms of overall guidance for FY '26, we still expect to be within the $560 to $600 per tonne of FOB. So we don't really see it as a material impact.

Yes. And that was a great quarter on costs. And I mean, when I do the numbers Flavio and this is my last question. You take the last 3 quarters, C1 production volume, you've actually been very steady at $120 million per quarter spend from a C1 perspective. If you could call out diesel, you call out the Ngungaju costs that are going to enhance impact you in the June quarter without the volume. What does the $120 do? Does it go up 10%, 5%, but it's been pretty consistent. So congratulations on that front.

Yes. Look, I would probably turn towards the lower percentile quartile that we're in the 5% or less. But as I mentioned, we are very comfortable in terms of our guidance notwithstanding the impact that we're seeing with the increase in fuel costs, we're still very comfortable with our guidance for FY '26.

Glyn, just to round out, just to add a little bit of color. I think part of the success the team has had here is from a production standpoint, there's been some really fantastic progress around mining productivity rates have gone ahead of plan. Recoveries have been -- continued to be strong in a couple of percentage points higher. You might recall as we commenced the year is all about maximizing contact ore feed, that's gone better than expected. So some of that has certainly helped offset where we've seen some of the other cost pressures. So yes, great work by the team.

Next, we have Rahul Anand from Morgan Stanley.

Congratulations on a good result. Look, I had one question on the cost, which was around pre-stripping side. I believe you've got a credit in terms of pre-strip this period in terms of your cost base. Would you be able to quantify that or just give us a feel for movement in terms of quarter-on-quarter or otherwise and how we should think about it in the next few periods?

Yes, Rahul, it's Brett here. So look, our mining, as Dale pointed out to before, is on plan, but we're ahead of price position care of some of the earlier productivity uplift than we expected, getting it in there with a lot of the activities we've done, particularly owner-operator, getting a better efficiency. So the uptick in this quarter in mine movement was also weighted towards some pre-stripping for Ngungaju get ready for that. So it will continue on. We will -- we were starting to increase the pre-strip as we go ahead into cutback in Central Stage VI in the next year or so.

Got it. So I guess, in terms of the capitalization, was there an element that was capitalized and kind of helped you lower costs as a result? I believe Ngungaju, you were going to expense the cost, but is there any element there in terms of P1000?

Yes. Flavio here. Thanks for the question. In terms of Ngungaju, you're correct, the costs will be expensed through the P&L. In terms of some of the capitalized stripping that's reflected in the capital expenditure on the cash flow in that element is around $40 million of mine development contained with that $71 million of cash outflow for the quarter and after the majority of the relation to the stripping.

Got it. Okay. And look, I had a second, but I'll let you decide if you want to take it or you want me to queue back? Not sure how your queue is looking at the moment?

Don't worry, go.

Okay, brilliant. Look, you did talk about the positive demand factors, Dale, at the start on lithium, which is great. And I think obviously, demand surprised everyone positively this year, which is great. There is also a new development in terms of sodium ion batteries that have been released by CATL. And I guess, in the past, when people talked about sodium ion batteries, there was a, I guess, for lack of better words, people didn't take it that seriously because no major player was involved. But now we've had one of the biggest battery producers in the world put out a sodium ion battery, which is quite attuned to colder temperatures and also ESS. Any views or initial views on that or how you're thinking about it? Or any color you can provide, I guess, it might be hard from a market perspective, but anything -- any color would be great.

Sure. Yes, no problem. Yes. CATL is every now and then rebroadcasts sodium ion as a potential battery chemistry and have been doing that probably for at least 2 years. And they touted potential through the work we have done and what we have assessed, it is a battery solution. However, it's very heavy and it's less energy dense. And for those reasons, it doesn't appear to play well for e-mobility and that sort of seems to be the consensus view.

The other piece I'd add is to look at actions over words, CATL and other industry, you continue to invest heavily in the lithium-ion supply chain. And I think that speaks volumes as to directionally where they see the market going. So for us, we're not concerned about sodium ion as it ultimately becomes part of the energy storage set possibly but when we look at like the work of benchmark, notwithstanding it's predicted to be a very small component.

Next, we have Matthew Frydman from MST Financial.

Sure. Can I ask on the midstream work that you're doing? You put out a fairly detailed release here this morning. And I guess, specifically on the offtake agreement that you're talking about in terms of your agreement there with Ronbay. Obviously, understanding the volumes are small with the demo plant, but just wondering if you can discuss the pricing mechanism at all for that offtake. How do you determine a price for the lithium phosphate. And I guess, how might that compare to the price that you might have otherwise received for selling that spodumene into your other agreements?

Yes. Thanks, Matthew. Yes, we haven't disclosed that level of detail on -- it's commercially sensitive, so I cannot speak to that. But the -- what I can say is the pricing structure broadly works on the same principle as the way we think about spodumene in terms of utilizing headline chemical references and a proportion against that. We're very happy with the pricing, which will be printed against those, and we think it's appropriate and it is in line with the earlier work as we progressed to the midstream concept in terms of potential expectations around where we might be able to take pricing.

But ultimately, as you said, this is a very small volume. But what's more important to us is proving up the process flow and optimizing and getting some volumes out to market and really testing pricing in the market because that will be the true determinant and with no sort of headline lithium phosphate indices or price points out there, we're really going to get real product out there to test that. And delighted to be part of the production profile with Ronbay; they're one of the biggest LFP producers and they're looking to support us technically as we look to optimize this. So we look forward to progressing in time.

Got it. Thanks for the information there, Dale. I guess, ultimately, as a follow-up, I'm just trying to get a handle on whether you're expecting a higher or lower or broadly equivalent price for the spodumene that you're sending to that plant? And then also, you referenced in the release I guess, an intention to kind of get more exposure to the cathode end of the value chain. I'm just wondering, is that part of, I guess, a broader overall strategy in terms of potentially underpinning future offtakes like for example, P2000, if and when you push ahead with that, is that relevant for offtakes there?

Yes, sure. On the first part, so the -- once the plant is fully ramped up, we will acquire about 20,000 tonnes of spodumene concentrate over the course of the year. So really small volume by component of that total production base, and there will be market priced into that demand plan. Of course, we've got 100% ownership now of the plant care of the restructure with Calix, which obviously, we will optimize the economics appropriately.

As it relates to where does this ultimately head with the market and LFP and other cathode makers, well, this is the question we're seeking to try and answer. If you step back and you think about spodumene concentrate, it is an intermediate product on its way to achieve a battery-grade product. What we're really circling here is the better intermediate product. Now midstream may be lithium phosphate is the answer, maybe it's technical-grade lithium carbonate or lithium sulfide, et cetera, et cetera. This is really what we're working through to see if there's a superior economic outcome and a different intermediate product.

And so yes, we're paving the way there. We'll have to continue to develop it further, test the market, but lithium phosphate could potentially go well in terms of accessing a broader market, given that we see this as a potential product to not only serve the existing customer set who are making hydroxide and carbonate, but if we can also access directly the cathode market that essentially skips a step of the supply chain and access a whole bunch of other buyers. So time will tell, provided you get the right quality, there's a lot to work through, and we're really on a yearly basis of testing this out.

Next, we have Ben Lyons from Jarden Securities Limited.

I just want to take you back to the numbers briefly, if possible, please. And just looking at that differential between sales during the quarter versus production. Obviously aware that there was a tropical cyclone towards the end of March. So maybe that was an influence on the sales being significantly below production for the quarter, and I assume it's just a timing issue going forward, and you'll clear that inventory during the June quarter.

And then maybe the second part to it is just if I just multiply out that sales by realized price, again, there's a significant difference between that simple calculation and the revenue number. So just trying to track down whether that's a QP sort of influence or maybe it's about the realized pricing being struck at the 15th of April rather than at the close of the quarter. Just any comments you can provide on that.

Ben, it's Brett here. Yes. Just look, the sales and the production just unmatched was just the congestion around that cyclone at Port Hedland. Nothing else in there. We'll clear the inventory out with shipping through as we get through this quarter.

Ben, Flavio here. In terms of QP adjustments, we had the benefits from December in terms of higher pricing, which reflected through the March quarter. And we did pick up around $70 million worth of QP adjustments as part of those provisional pricing adjustments reflecting through that period.

Next, we have Mitch Ryan from Jefferies.

Just a quick question. As you ramp up the midstream product, can you just talk to any change in continual mix that you'll require? And do you have line of sight on that given the changes to the supply chain distribution we're seeing globally?

Sorry, that part didn't come through clearly. Can you repeat that?

Sorry, Dale. Yes, I was just asking if -- as you're ramping up the midstream product, what should we think about with regards to consumables? Do you have them on site? Is there any risk to those as given all the disruptions to the supply chain we're seeing globally?

Okay. Got it. Look, yes, I guess, bear in mind, this demonstration plant is quite small and in the scheme of business operations. As to consumables, at this early stage, we're not anticipating any issues in that regard.

Next, we have Andrew Harrington from Peter (sic) [ Petra ] Capital.

That will be Petra Capital. Congratulations on a great quarter. I took note of your comments, Dale, on the excellent sort of flywheel of your planning, production and revenue and now sitting on $1.5 billion in cash. I guess, the obvious question becomes shareholder returns, obviously important. What's the thinking on spending or distribution of that cash?

Yes. Thanks, Andrew. Flavio, do you want to take that?

Yes, Andrew, look, we have our capital management framework, which sort of clearly articulates how we allocate capital throughout the business. And we have a targeted dividend payment ratio of 20% to 30% of our free cash flow. And as you can see from today's results, we've got a very strong positive cash flow at current realized pricing. And as part of the distribution, we'll clearly look at this within the context of the capital management framework. And this is going to be clearly influenced by current pricing and operational performance through to now and the year-end. And on the assumption pricing continues at these levels. The Board will be well placed to consider dividend distributions along with the rest of the capital allocation within the framework for the financial year.

I might just add just a broader comment, Andrew, building on Flavio's outline, we're sort of 2 quarters into profitability post the downturn which was sort of circa 18 months. So we're early into -- back into sort of strongly positive financial territory. The question is where to from here. Now the wonderful sort of position PLS finds itself as we've got heaps of stock and the business now keeps a low-cost position, scale our production base. So -- and we're seeing really the start of that revenue generation and look, depending on your outlook for the market and pricing, we could go very well and be well positioned to not only fund projects, but support returns as per the capital management framework that Flavio mentioned. So this is really the key thing that management will be circling with the Board over the next while as we come into the end of the financial year.

That's all from the audio questions. I will now hand James for the webcast questions.

Thanks, May. We have a number of questions regarding dividends, which we just addressed. So we won't reread those ones. This question is, is the increased price of Tantalum making any considerable improvement to revenue or costs?

Yes, I can take that one. Tantalum is taken on as a byproduct to our FOB and it has increased considerably. It's not really that material in the context of things, but we'll take the benefits during the higher pricing environment.

Okay. Is there any talk of listing on the NASDAQ or any other exchange?

Not at this time. We don't see a benefit at this time.

Okay. Given the market cap and the growth of the company, do you even need the debt market? Is the plan to keep raising debt and paying down half year?

Yes, I can take that. The -- I guess, the evolution of the funding for PLS naturally has sort of moved us to that debt capital market with the overall U.S. bond that we took on. At the moment, given the strong cash flows that we have, we really are well placed moving forward to satisfy our capital growth within our capital management framework and more than sufficient at current pricing should they continue into the next financial year as well.

Okay. Thank you. Any plans to introduce electric mine trucks as happening at FMG?

So look, we love the idea of going electric. And of course, we're embracing that where we can. We've started in the base operation with lithium batteries and progressively increasing solar. Obviously, the midstream demonstration plant we spoke about today has an electric calciner of our partner, Calix, which by the way could make a very material impact in terms of carbon intensity for the supply chain. As to mining trucks, yes, love the idea. We're very much in the early phases of exploring that, principally because there's been limited development in terms of available trucks at this point. But of course, we're watching some of the big miners, and it's great to see the progress we're making. And we look forward to being hopefully a fast follower in due course.

Can you please outline what risks you are assessing in regards to disruptors to the lithium market and lithium-based battery usages?

Yes. So we -- in this regard, we keep of course, a close eye on competing technologies, and we study those with interest. And of course, within the industry itself, where we're obviously partnered with scale producers and operators who within themselves, of course, study this as well, and we triangulate with them. Out of all of that, we feel very comfortable about the trajectory of the lithium ion battery supply chain.

For a couple of reasons. One is the tech has just got better and better, both in safety, energy density and cost. Second is the scale of the industry is now. And those 2 sort of compound on each other. And what we're seeing is an almost an unassailable lead on competing tech at this point. That being said, it's horses for courses for energy storage and look, e-mobility for lithium ion seems to be a real sweet spot as it relates to mass in use cases. There's lots of other tech competing in that space and time will tell. But as I say, we feel very positive about the trajectory at this point.

Okay. Thank you. How long would it take to scale midstream as compounders demand product?

Great question. And we are yet to sort of do a deeper work on that, scaling it would, to a full extent, would essentially be building quite a large chemical plant to take hold of whole spodumene cost trade product flow. And how long would it take it would be -- no doubt, several years post design. So we're well on the way to assisting them.

Okay. A final question. How important is the low carbon products to our Chinese partners?

So what we've observed over the years is an increasing focus on sustainability outright. Now, of course, carbon intensity is part of it, but it's broader than that. And we've seen increasing interest and focus through our customers. And this is partly because what we see is at the end of the supply chain, it's been demanded through some of the carmakers and the levels of measurement are increasing. So it is definitely part of the consideration in a way that much more present than it has been historically.

Okay. One final question. How is the study with Ganfeng progressing?

Yes. So we're continuing to progress that study with Ganfeng. We revised the study dates for that study, but we're continuing to work together on that one.

Okay. With that, that completes March quarter results update. And again, congratulations to the team on delivering record production, a fantastic set of results. Incredibly proud of, and thank you very much to our shareholders for your continued support, and we look forward to updating you again in due course. Thank you for your time.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Thank you for standing by. Welcome to the PLS Fiscal Year 2026 Interim Results. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, today's program is being recorded. And now I'd like to introduce your host for today's program, Dale Henderson, Managing Director and CEO. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Jonathan. Good morning, good evening and thank you all for joining us. I'll begin by acknowledging the traditional owners on the land on which PLS operates. The Whadjuk people of the Noongar nation here in Perth and the Nyamal and Kariyarra peoples in the Pilbara. We pay our respects to elders past and present. I'm joined today on the call by Flavio Garofalo, our interim CFO, and members of our senior leadership team. This call will run for approximately an hour with time for questions.

Now before turning to the numbers, I'd like to briefly step back and reflect on the structural environment shaping the industry. The global energy system continues to electrify, and batteries are increasingly becoming a strategic infrastructure in that system. And recent international discussions, including remarks for senior -- including remarks -- sorry, from senior U.S. leadership at Critical Minerals Ministerial, governments have underscored the importance of securing diversified supply chains for materials that underpin advanced technologies and battery systems. As that happens, the critical mineral supply chains that support batteries, which, of course, includes lithium are becoming strategically important.

This remains a young capital-intensive industry. Demand can move quickly, supply responds slowly and capital allocation that's cyclical, making volatility inherent. In that environment, value transfers to operators with structural margins, balance sheet strength and staged growth optionality. PLS has been deliberately structured to capitalize on that reality. So against this backdrop, we have delivered a very strong first half, returning to profitability, materially improving earnings and improving the capital light restart of our Ngungaju processing facility that we announced today.

Revenue, EBITDA and NPAT increased significantly year-on-year. Unit costs reduced and our balance sheet remains strong. This reflects the operating leverage strengthened during the down cycle now converting into earnings. The Ngungaju processing plant restart is a staged activation of existing infrastructure, consistent with our disciplined capital framework.

Please turn to Slide 2. Our strategy remains consistent, to operate at scale, strengthen cost competitiveness and preserve balance sheet strength and pursue disciplined growth aligned with the market cycle. As market conditions improve, these pillars are increasingly working together with operational performance and cost discipline, converting into stronger earnings supported by financial resilience. Capital discipline remains the gatekeeper for any capital deployment, and we will invest only when returns are compelling and sustainable through the cycle. Importantly, execution of our strategy is anchored in balance sheet resilience and return generation, not short-term price movements.

Please turn to Slide 3. This slide highlights the attributes that differentiate PLS and why they matter as the cycle strengthens. We operate a high-quality 100% owned Tier 1 asset with a cost position designed to protect margins through volatility and expand them as pricing improves. The first half was a clear demonstration of that operating leverage in action. We maintain balance sheet strength with close to $1 billion in cash and approximately $1.6 billion of total liquidity, providing flexibility and control over our capital allocation decisions.

We have demonstrated execution capability, flexing production, managing costs and sequencing capital as conditions evolve. The approved restart of the Ngungaju processing plant is a current example of that discipline and practice. Finally, we have strategic exposure across the value chain beyond spodumene pricing through our partnerships and downstream initiatives, which we believe will become increasingly relevant over time.

Turning to Slide 4. This slide summarizes the core outcomes for the half, improved pricing translated directly into stronger earnings, expanded margins and a return to profitability. Sales volume increased 7%, realized pricing increased 40% and underlying EBITDA was $253 million, delivering a 41% margin. Net profit after tax was $33 million compared to a loss in the prior corresponding period. From a growth perspective, as well as the Ngungaju restart, we have provided an update on the study time lines for both the P2000 project and Colina project.

Now moving to Slide 5. Safety remains our highest priority. During the half, our total recordable injury frequency rate increased to 3.79, up from 3.1 in the prior period. That step back in performance is not acceptable. In response, we have intensified targeted safety initiatives and strengthened frontline leadership engagement across our operations. Encouragingly, quality safety interactions increased to 3.38 per 1,000 hours worked materially above our internal target, reinforcing proactive risk management behaviors. Beyond safety, we continue to support communities in which we operate with strong procurement levels from Australian and First Nations businesses. And with that, I'll now hand over to Flavio to take us through the financials for the half.

Thank you, Dale, and good morning to those on the call. Please turn to Slide 7 for a review of our key financial metrics for the half year ended 31 December 2025 or H1 FY '26. Our strong first half results reflect solid operational execution and cost discipline, combined with favorable pricing outcomes towards the end of the reporting period. Production increased 6%, while sales volume increased 7% to 446,000 tonnes. FOB unit operating cost decreased to $563 a tonne driven by operational efficiencies and the benefit of higher sales volume. Revenue of $624 million was up 47% compared to the prior corresponding half driven by a 40% improvement in realized pricing and higher sales.

These factors support an underlying EBITDA of $253 million for the first half with EBITDA margin increasing to 41%. The half year end saw a return to profit with net profit after tax of $33 million, a turnaround from a loss of $69 million in the prior corresponding half. Net profit after tax included $16 million in midstream demonstration plant project costs and $39 million of noncash impacts relating to P-PLS comprising a $16 million write-down in the group's call option and $23 million equity accounted share of P-PLS losses.

Moving now to Slide 8. Slide 8 shows the cash flow bridge for the half year ended 31 December 2025. Closing cash at the end of the half year remains strong at $954 million decreasing marginally by $20 million during the half, primarily due to working capital timing. The underlying cash generation of the business strengthened materially with cash margin from operations of $174 million and cash margin from operations, including mine development and sustaining capital of $111 million.

As mentioned in December quarter 2 results, this included the $32 million in customer refunds from lower final pricing on FY '25 shipments, which were cash settled in early H1 FY '26, while approximately $85 million in positive pricing adjustments on the December quarter shipments are expected in the March quarter of this financial year. When adjusted for these timing differences, underlying cash margin would be approximately $291 million or $228 million including mine development and sustaining capital. This reinforces strong cash generation of the business as market conditions improve.

Moving now to Slide 9. Our balance sheet remains robust, reflecting disciplined capital management and a continued focus on value creation. In addition to the group's cash balance of $954 million we have an undrawn debt capacity of $625 million under the group's revolving credit facility, providing over $1.6 billion in total liquidity for PLS. This positions us well to navigate the cycle and selectively deploy capital into value-accretive growth opportunities.

Turning to working capital. Inventory remained flat with increased ore stockpiles supporting ore supply security through the wet season, largely offset by lower spodumene inventory as sales volumes exceeded production. On the liability side, borrowings remain broadly unchanged, while lease liabilities increased, reflecting new finance leases under Phase 2 of the heavy mobile equipment strategy. Overall, the balance sheet remains in a strong position. As we review our growth options, we remain focused on preserving balance sheet strength and financial flexibility, deploying capital with discipline to fund value-accretive opportunities and maximize long-term shareholder returns.

I'll now hand back to Dale.

Thank you, Flavio. Now turning to Slide 10. And before turning to specific growth initiatives, I'd like to step back and consider the platform we have deliberately built through the cycle. In a strategic and volatile supply chain value accrues to operators with structural margins, balance sheet strength, staged growth optionality and trusted execution. That architecture is not built in a single period. It's developed through years of disciplined operating and capital decisions. The strength of this first half result reflects improvements in recovery, cost position, scale and financial resilience that were strengthened during the downturn, not short-term movements. The following slides demonstrate how that foundation allows us to activate growth with discipline, maintaining control over timing, preserving capital strength and sequencing expansion only when it turns resilient.

So turning to Slide 11. Over recent years, we have materially strengthened our operating platform. Recovery rates have improved, scale has increased and unit costs have reduced. These improvements were delivered during a period of pricing pressure, not during a price upswing. That structural work is now evident in the first half performance, where improved pricing translated efficiently into earnings expansion. This is not simply price leverage. Its operating leverage built deliberately through disciplined execution.

Importantly, our approach to growth has always been staged and disciplined. We have sequenced capital deployment carefully, expanded capacity only when returns are compelling and balance sheet strength was maintained. That track record matters. It demonstrates that the growth in PLS is not reactive to short-term price movements, but governed by return thresholds and capital discipline. This consistency underpins our credibility as we execute the next phase.

Moving to Slide 12. During the recent downturn, we deliberately prioritized preservation of strength. We moderated capital expenditure, retained liquidity and maintained optionality rather than stretching the balance sheet to pursue expansion at unfavorable economics. As a result, we exited the weaker part of the cycle with approximately $950 million in cash and it's that financial resilience that gives us control over timing and capital allocation. As it relates to the market, market conditions have improved relative to the low it has experienced early in the cycle. Realized pricing increased materially during the half supported by improving sentiment and contracting activity. While volatility remains inherent in the lithium market, current conditions allow us to reassess the timing of incremental capacity within our disciplined framework.

Moving to Slide 13. Against that backdrop, the Board has approved the restart of the Ngungaju processing plant with production scheduled to recommence in July '26. This is a tactical reactivation of existing infrastructure, not a greenfield expansion. Capital requirements are modest, execution risk is limited and operating costs remain within our broader cost guidance range. Ngungaju provides incremental capacity with a measured risk profile aligned to improving conditions supported by contracting arrangements with the market.

Now moving to Slide 14. Beyond Ngungaju, our large-scale growth initiatives, including P2000 and Colina remain carefully sequenced within our framework. P2000 is a brownfield expansion at Pilgangoora that would increase capacity to approximately 2 million tonnes per annum, subject to FID. The feasibility study is targeted for the December quarter this calendar year. It is more advanced of the 2 projects. And importantly, as future production remains unallocated preserving strategic flexibility.

Colina provides geographic diversification through a greenfield development in Brazil. Current work is focused on drilling, resource growth and optimization of the development pathway with the feasibility study targeted for the December quarter next year. Any final investment decision on either project will be driven by study outcomes, sustainable market conditions, return thresholds and balance sheet capacity. In both cases, growth remains an option, not an obligation.

Moving to Slide 15. This slide places our production platform and growth pipeline in the global context. On the left, PLS produced approximately 100,000 tonnes LCE for calendar year '25 with Ngungaju in care and maintenance, positioning us among the larger primary lithium producers globally. That reflects the scale and quality of Pilgangoora today. On the right, we illustrate the stage production profile, the base is P1000 installed capacity, including the improved restart of Ngungaju. P2000 represents a brownfield expansion that would lift capacity to approximately 2 million tonnes per annum, subject to study outcomes in FID and Colina provides long-term geographic diversification, adding growth potential also subject to stage development and market conditions. All assets are 100% owned, providing full control over timing and capital allocation. Importantly, the future capacity shown here is optional, not committed. We will only proceed when returns, funding capacity and sustainable market conditions are supportive of that investment.

Moving to Slide 16. In addition to our upstream expansion options, we retained measured exposure across the lithium value chain. Our approach to downstream and midstream participation is deliberate, structured to preserve capital discipline while maintaining long-term strategic optionality. As it relates to midstream, the midstream demonstration plant with construction complete in the December quarter, with commissioning updates expected in the coming months. We have also announced today that we've agreed a strategic restructure with Calix and we'll acquire full ownership of the demonstration plant.

This simplifies governance, strengthens operational control, secures a perpetual royalty-free license for the technology within our primary lithium operations. As it relates to our P-PLS joint venture with POSCO, our minority interest with the JV hydroxide facility remains strategically positioned. Both trains were idled in the December quarter to preserve capital and align with market conditions, consistent with our disciplined approach. As it relates to our study with Ganfeng, we have continued to assess longer-term downstream conversion opportunities through the study. Across all of these initiatives, the principle is consistent: maintain flexibility, preserve balance sheet strength and retain exposure to value chain upside without committing capital ahead of sustainable market signals.

Now moving to the market, turning to Slide 17. The lithium market remains cyclical. However, long-term fundamentals are being shaped by structural electrification trends and the pace at which new supply can respond. The following slides outline the demand backdrop and the constraints on supply and why we have pursued a disciplined through-cycle strategy.

Moving to Slide 18. Global electrification is accelerating, what the International Energy Agency describes as the age of electricity. Global power demand is forecast to grow at approximately 3.6% annually to 2030, around 1,100 terawatt hours of additional demand each year. This is roughly 50% faster than the prior decade. Importantly, electricity demand is now outpacing economic growth for the first time in decades. And by 2030 is expected to grow more than twice as fast as total energy demand. That reflects a structural shift towards electricity as the primary energy carrier. As grids become more renewable heavy, battery storage becomes essential to maintaining reliability, positioning the lithium-ion technology at the center of both mobility and stationary energy systems. So for lithium, this is not a cyclical trend, it is structural expansion of the demand base.

Moving to Slide 19. Against that electrification backdrop, lithium demand remains structurally strong and increasingly diversified. Electric vehicles continue to represent the largest single source of demand growth while battery energy storage is the fastest-growing segment. By 2030, EVs and energy storage combined are expected to account for more than 90% of lithium battery demand. As grids integrate higher shares of renewable generation, large-scale storage deployment is accelerating globally, adding a second major structural demand engine alongside mobility. Overall lithium demand by end user is forecast to grow at approximately 10% CAGR over the forecast period, reflecting this dual driver dynamic. Growth will not be linear. Periods of volatility and supply adjustment are inherent in commodity markets, but the underlying demand trajectory remains structurally upward.

Moving now to Slide 20. The key question is how will the supply base respond to that demand trajectory? The fundamental constraint is that new supply is slow and capital intensive to deliver. In many jurisdictions, the time line from discovery to first production now extends well beyond the decade, reflecting more complex approval processes, higher environmental and social standards and increasing capital intensity. As a result, meeting projected demand will require significant new greenfield investment across the industry and sustained pricing at levels that support that investment over time.

But while pricing has improved recently, this confidence in long-term price levels required to support new greenfield investment decisions remains critical to bringing on supply at the pace required. In that context, scale, cost competitive and balance sheet strength become structural advantages, particularly where producers can add capacity through stage brownfield options rather than relying on greenfield development. At PLS that means we can sequence growth deliberately, activating capacity when returns are attractive while maintaining discipline through volatility and protecting long-term value. I just offer a quick comment on the market today where we see it.

As you could tell from the pricing trends we've seen recently, the market, in our view, is short. Recent pricing today is approximately around $2,100 per tonne for spodumene. This is very strong in the context of Chinese New Year, which is at this time where typically we've seen a softness for this period. So we're seeing relative to strength on a seasonal basis. The price trends have, of course, been upwards over the last week, it's been upwards -- incremental improvement about 5%. Looking back over a 2-month period, it's been 50%. And on a 6-month look back, it's been 150%. And I'd also add that as an anecdote support, we continue to see strong inbounds seeking supply. So out of all of that, this is some of the reasons which gives us confidence with the Ngungaju restart that we've announced today and the possibility for us to capture the stronger margins we're seeing in the market today.

Now finally, just to finish with some closing comments. The first half of FY '26 demonstrated the strength of the PLS platform. The operating leverage strengthened during the down cycle is now translating into materially stronger earnings, reflecting a structurally more resilient business. This remains a volatile capital-intensive industry. That reality does not change, but our focus remains consistent, disciplined capital allocation, balance sheet strength and value creation through the cycle with a strong balance sheet, 100% ownership of Tier 1 assets and the restart of the Ngungaju processing plant ahead of us, we are sequencing growth from a position of control. Larger growth options remain gated by sustainable returns and capital discipline, Structural operating strengths, financial resilience and stage capital deployment define how we create long-term value and a strategic and evolving supply chain. Thank you all for your time this morning, and I'll now pass back to Jonathan to start questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question for today comes from the line of Mitch Ryan from Jefferies.

Just wanted to understand the key source of ore for Ngungaju, will that be the southern pit? And how do we think about the impact on fleet size, material movements, strip ratio over the next sort of 2 years?

Sure. Thanks, Mitch. So in terms of ore feed, that will come from the full mine. It's not restricted to any particular pit. And the way Brett and team optimize processing is through the full mine and through all available pits. So it's not described to a particular pit. That being said, depending where they're at the mine plans at different points in time, they will dedicate one source, depending where they're at in the mine, but that would be the strategy there. As it relates to fleet capacity, there is a small increase in fleet and bringing on some additional operators, but it's not material. As it relates to the key lift for the operation is principally for the processing team and the need to onboard processing operators for the plant.

And just sort of a follow-up or the other part of the question is, obviously, you've maintained CapEx guidance. I realize the CapEx to restate Ngungaju is not material, but what other parts of CapEx you have declined to allow you to maintain capital guidance? Or have you pushed some of that into FY '27. If you can give any color around what's happening within that CapEx, that would be appreciated.

Yes, Mitch, I can answer that. The majority of the costs in relation to the Ngungaju restart will actually be expensed. So what you'll find is essentially it will go through our P&L and hence the reason why we've set our FOB guidance will be towards the upper end of the scale from $560 to $600 a tonne.

And our next question comes from the line of Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs.

Always a lot to talk about, but maybe also just on the Ngungaju restart now it's been approved. Firstly, can we just confirm, would you be making that restart decision today without that recently secured offtake agreement you announced earlier. And as a follow-on, can you talk us through the process of arriving at that $1,000 a tonne price floor just given, Dale, your previous comments around like you didn't have to get a floor that you'd have to be giving something away on the upside.

Yes, sure, Hugo. As it relates to the NLO restart. Look, I suspect we would have step forward with the decision anyways with or without that particular offtake we announced because inbound inquiry has been so strong. And had we not awarded to Canmax the other day, it would have been another strong chemical -- because there was a bunch who were keen to contract with us. And as it relates to the floor pricing, this is a negotiation. So what the team did is, of course, reach out to market to see who would be interested in offtake and ran a competitive process. And of course, floor price is a key term that we tested the market on. And the combination of terms that we secured with Canmax was really the key draw cut plus the fact that we've had an established relationship with Canmax, we had for a long number of years. And we thought that this was the right step to extend that partnership further.

If I can just clarify that combination of terms. I mean is it higher spec or what is it sort of given them the confidence to offer your price for? And then maybe any color on why $1,000 a tonne and not $800 or $1,200?

So for clarity, no, there's nothing new or different in terms of product specs but that's all consistent with how we engage with our other customers. As it relates to price floor, as I said, that that's a function of the tender process and a key term we negotiate. Obviously, for a floor price, we wanted as high as possible. They wanted as low as possible. It's a negotiation. And I think where we landed is a sensible landing point. And I'd also add that I think part of the set of terms, in my view, demonstrates the premium of contracting with PLS. We're proud of the reputation as a reliable partner in this market. And we believe that's recognized and believe the set of terms we've agreed with Canmax in part reflects that.

And our next question comes from the line of Austin Yun from Macquarie.

Good results. Just a quick question on [ Ngungaju ] restart, hoping to get some color on the ramp-up profile supplying additional lithium to the strong market. And also, any ore sorting technology, so any learnings from the Pilgan that you can transfer [ Ngungaju ] to lift the nameplate capacity?

Yes, thanks for your question. In terms of ramp-up profile, we'll provide more visibility on that as part of our guidance for next year, which we are targeting to release that with the June quarter results. So sorry about that. We'll have to come back to you on that one. And yes, that will be a staged ramp-up that although the plant has been in care and maintenance, it's natural to expect not necessarily a rapid ramp up. But as I say, we will offer more color on that as part of next year's guidance.

As it relates to ore sorting, yes, of course, lots of learnings from the Pilgan operation, bringing that technology to life. And the team are considering whether in time to deploy that technology to Ngungaju. However, it's not a straightforward case in that the Ngungaju capacity is somewhat limited and the net benefits of that type of investment are not as strong as what we've achieved at the Pilgan unit, the relative scale differences. That being said, the numbers need to be worked through, and it is under consideration. But I suspect we wouldn't step down that path for quite some time if we were to go in that direction.

And our next question comes from the line of Levi Spry from UBS.

Maybe just on P2000. So I think Ngungaju is as expected. When it comes to the next step, we've got some numbers out there, they're 2 years old. That's kind of forever in lithium land, $1.2 billion in '24 per dollar. How can we think about scope that's being considered in the feasibility? And can you particularly thinking about the flow-sheet infrastructure? And can you give us any update on permitting and construction time lines?

There's a bit in that. And most of it, in fact, all of it will come in that study outcome in the December quarter. But to offer just a slight bit of color, and we have talked a little bit of this into the release today. This will, of course, be the third processing facility at Pilgangoora. So the team is optimizing that new facility to optimize the whole in consideration of the respective strengths of Pilgan and Ngajugar. This will be plant #3. And of course, the aim here is about maximizing global lithium recoveries from the operation. Now what flows from that, the team are narrowing in on a whole ore flotation circuit, but of course, adopting the best of the best and the processing tech that we've deployed on the other plants and where it's heading would be, in my view, sort of the next evolution of processing technology for our market.

So plenty of work underway around the processing thinking. To your point about capital costs, yes, it's a different environment for pricing the project from when we released that PFS in August '24. So yes, an update is definitely required there and that will come with the December study outcome. Then to the point around infrastructure, yes, we are thinking through what enabling infrastructure might make sense, potentially some pre-FID enabling infrastructure. Yes, we've got the work underway thinking through that, but yet too early to really describe what that is or any numbers. But plenty of work underway on the P2000 study.

Could I just follow up on the permitting front. I mean, there's a project just down the road, the gold line that's taken a bit longer than maybe the market thought. What sort of -- what would be the steps in front of you, given that yours as brownfields?

Yes. Sorry for missing that one. No, we've secured the permits required for that expansion.

And our next question comes from the line of Matthew Frydman from MST Financial.

Can I ask on the Canmax offtake in the Ngungaju restart. Obviously, you've got a $1,000 a tonne floor there. Is that enough to underpin a positive cash margin for Ngungaju or are you still taking some price risk there in your view, given the, I guess, the all-in cost structure of Ngungaju?

I'll give it to Flavio. Thanks, Matthew, for the question. The way we think about the operation is in aggregate. So the 2 operations combined. And for that reason, yes, very happy with the floor price of USD 1,000 per tonne.

Okay. Got it. And then secondly, I guess following on from some of Hugo's questions earlier, what dictated exactly the size of that offtake? I guess you said you had a bunch of inbounds, potentially could have done more from a volume perspective. Is that the case? And if not, -- why did you not elect to do more? And I suppose an extension of that is could you sign more floor contracts in the future to underpin other growth options like P2000?

Sure. Yes. So as it relates to the term, the volume and the various options we've built in the PLS' election, the makeup of those, of course, is very dependent on the counterparty. So the team went out to market although we had some sort of upper bounds of what we were prepared to commit in terms of this particular offtake award. We have flexibility depending on the needs of that counterparty. So it's very much an iteration in terms of understanding the counterparties' needs and then, again, negotiating and running several strong options in parallel as you do in competitive process.

To the question of could another offtake with another floor price be possible? Yes. I think is the short answer there, given what we saw through this process. And yes, interested to see what this offtake award means for the market more broadly. To our knowledge, this is a first of its kind for our market in terms of this combination of terms and maybe it's the first or more to come. Time will tell.

Our next question comes from the line of Kaan Peker from RBC.

Two for me. Just on Ngungaju, what does steady-state costs look like once Ngungaju is fully ramped? Are you still suggesting 20% to 25% higher cost versus Pilgan?

Kaan, you'll get high level of visibility when we do the guidance for next financial year. But just to preempt disappointment, we won't be breaking it out by operating plant. Apologies.

And secondly, just on P2000. If you got another floor pricing that covered commitments for P2000 at around that $1,000 a tonne floor price, would you sanction P2000 then?

Yes. Obviously, we want to see the study outcomes before we could take a view of that. But in terms of what we saw from the PFS, yes, I think would be -- we would go there. I think the -- from the PSF outcomes, the P2000 provided scale and provided a lower unit cost. At that moment in time, obviously, we need to recheck those with the new study. And that was at a cost base well below USD 1,000 per tonne. So look, let's wait for the study if it's something similar. And if the market is valuing that security of supply and we can secure floor price, I think that would be very attractive and very supportive to an FID decision.

And our next question comes from the line of Andrew Harrington from Petra Capital.

My question is with regard to downstream processing of WA spodumene. What do you see as the prospects for that to happen outside of China within the next 5 years or so?

Yes. Thanks for the question. Look, as it relates to downstream processing in Australia, Australia has some challenges as -- if you consider the lithium market to be a global market and the jury is out if it continues to be that way given some of the overtures around dedicated supply chains, but it's a global market today. Australia is high cost in terms of power, labor, capital, and there isn't a lithium-ion battery ecosystem here.

There's no consumers of the batteries in the main. There's no cathode makers, chemical makers. It's all missing. That adds to essentially -- or the absence of that makes you less competitive. So the stack of those things makes onshore processing in Australia more challenging relative to other jurisdictions, which have the opposite of all of those things, low-cost power, labor, capital and their own battery ecosystems, which, by the way, is part of the draw card for PLS to be working with POSCO in South Korea, where it has all of those things in combination. So Australia, there's some challenges to compete long term globally.

But of course, it's a noble ambition. And if onshore processing can be achieved in Australia and successfully long term, why not. But there is one variant of onshore processing, which might be a more sensible landing point, and that's midstream. And midstream for those who are not aware is the concept of doing several value-added processing steps at the mine site to produce chemical product, but chemical product, which is not battery grade ready, it's more of a lithium salt type product. We think that shows strong potential for Australia potentially. Hence, we're stepping down the path of our demonstration plant and looking forward in time to seeing how that goes. Maybe that variant will go well for Australia in time, we will see.

Okay. I guess the question wasn't specifically about downstream processing in Australia. I mean Korea and Japan stand out potentially to pick the ecosystem and other criteria you mentioned. Is that the only options? Or I'm thinking more in the sense of the world we're living in with geopolitical strategic concerns now rising very high in terms of the priorities versus just in time or lowest cost. How does that -- how do you square the circle if those concerns are priority?

Sure, sure. So a few layers to this. Look, the first is just -- and apologies for some of this a bit obvious, but the lithium industry is very young, growing rapidly. And the supply chains required for the future state of the industry are not yet built. Therefore, they need to be built. So the question is where will they be built. Now what we've got today is, of course, China, of course, is the battery ecosystem of the world. You've got a smaller version in Korea and a smaller version in Japan. And that basically is the full set of supply for the globe today. But of course, more needs to be built out and the question is where. And the driving forces of that are many.

So yes, it includes geopolitical collaboration. There's a lot of talk around that, but not a lot of action, at least not yet, in our opinion. And then you've got those sort of fundamental attributes of what makes a long-term competitive battery hub ecosystem. So the cost points that you mentioned or that I mentioned, et cetera. So a lot of that is yet to grow out. But this is an area of deep work that we've done in our study pathway with Ganfeng, has been looking at exactly this and sort of studying the globe in terms of what is available where and what do we think long term makes a potential successful hub. We're studying something like more than 900 industrial parks globally. So we've got a pretty rich picture of the landscape today. But yes, as I say, plenty of moving parts shaping the way this industry grows.

And our next question comes from the line of Glyn Lawcock from Barrenjoey.

I just wanted to sort of hear some of the thought process behind the dividend decision because, obviously, you're confident in the market you've restarted Ngungaju. So you've got the confidence for that, but -- and you've got a massive cash pile and lots of liquidity yet you didn't have the confidence to restart the dividends. Just your thought process behind that?

It's not a -- Glyn it's not a question of confidence, it's a question of applying a capital management framework, which -- and given the half was, as you can see from the numbers. Net positive only just -- given the inflection of the market has only just occurred that translated to essentially no dividend. But what we have flagged as stated in the release today is the positive expectation of the full year, subject to, of course, the positive pricing and market outlook that we're seeing so far.

All right. And then maybe just as a follow-up, just again, just thinking about the logic. It obviously now clearly looks like P2000 goes first, Colina second. Just was there anything that drove that specifically to push them one before the other in that order?

Yes, is the short answer. Firstly, it's good to sort of reflect on the 2 very different projects. In the case of P2000, it's a scale brownfield expansion and more mature in terms of the study work and quite a different profile in terms of capital and commensurate offtake. As it relates to the Colina project, it's greenfields, it's earlier and a study maturity. And it's early as it relates to resource development. And this is actually one of the key focuses for that asset is the want to prioritize more drilling to grow the resource. So very much sort of mining development 101 in terms of maximizing the asset that you have in the ground. So what we're seeking to do is to do more drilling, grow the resource.

And having done that, of course, then you go and size your processing plant accordingly, optimizing for value in terms of volume -- production volume versus mine life. Now outside of that, however, the enabling infrastructure works continue, and we have flagged in the release today potential pre-FID funding to support some of that enabling infrastructure. So both sets of initiatives in parallel. But what all that sort of translates to is a longer runway. We have to get more drilling done, redo the resource, do a reserve, fold that into an updated processing plant design and of course, have all that ticked and tied ready for a full FID, which is when you go back and compare that to P2000 yet there in lies -- it's different maturity levels of the 2 projects.

And our next question is a follow-up from the line of Mitch Ryan from Jefferies.

Dale, just on Colina, you sort of said you're assessing some of the early-stage infrastructure initiatives. Can you just help us think about the range and scope of the spend and the timing of that, please?

Yes. So yes, we'll give more guidance on that later. But the makeup of it includes a short road from the highway into site, some water infrastructure from the local dam, some power. It's of that nature. As to timing, we'll come back to you. I suspect this will come in with our guidance for next year. But I can't give you any numbers on that today.

Okay. And sorry, my last one is just -- can you just help us understand your rationale for collapsing the Calix JV?

Yes. So the rationale there was really about enabling PLS more flexibility under a JV structure. Of course, as JV partners, you have to enroll your partner in all decisions. This restructure with PLS taking 100% ownership, of course, gives us full autonomy to optimize that facility in the context of the broader Pilgangoora operation as we see fit. So it's really about our flexibility.

And I just want to reassure that in terms of Calix and PLS, we both remain as enthusiastic and as committed as ever to the potential of this project and long-term commercialization and Calix will be continuing to support us, including the commissioning activities and ultimately, the commercialization. We will do that jointly as set out in the release today.

And our next question comes from the line of Lyndon Fagan from JPMorgan.

Look, the first one is just on the P2000 study, are you actually considering any other scope i.e., P1500 or something above 2000? And I guess why 2000? Is there a governing factor to jump so high, I guess. And then just a follow-up is, I guess, if we're talking about Colina, we've moved the outcomes out for another year. It was originally coming in before P2000. I guess, when would you anticipate first production for that?

Yes, sure. Thanks for those questions. As it relates to P2000, the step-up there is driven by the -- really a practical reality of -- in order -- we've sort of maxed out our infrastructure at Pilgangoora. So to build any more processing capacity, it requires building a new crushed ore stockpile and ROM, the whole [indiscernible], if you will. So then the question becomes what's the optimal size for that. And larger essentially works better to achieve those economies of scale. So it is possible we could build a smaller version. However, we wouldn't enjoy the scale benefits and the capital efficiency benefits you get from that larger operation. So that's the principal reason.

And we've taken the view that when you consider the growth outlook for the market, P2000 is definitely needed, so is Colina and so it's a whole lot more. The question is not if, it's when. It's about timing it appropriately. So as for P2000, we will do exactly that. So we will time it appropriately. We want to make sure we're deploying our shareholders' capital as efficiently as possible, and we'll time that into market when that makes sense for the market. As it relates to Colina, sorry, what was your question on Colina?

Just when you would anticipate first production as a ballpark?

Yes. We haven't reset that outlook because it very much -- we very much have to step through the drilling and see where we can grow the resource to. That is the key determinant, which, of course, informs the design and ultimately, the delivery pathway. But what we'll seek to do is provide a bit more color on this in some future disclosures just to at least give a tentative outlook for what we're aiming to achieve there.

And is there any early findings relative to the study that's out there that you would want to call out? .

Not at this stage other than to reassure, we're very happy with everything we've seen. If anything, we -- things have proved up to the upside. So metallurgy, what we're seeing in the ground, the guys have done deeper levels of work of course in all manner in terms of infrastructure, ore body understanding, we've had all of our specialists over there working with the Brazilian team and been very delighted at the quality of the work done, the quality of the asset. So looking forward to providing more visibility in time, but it's all looking good so far.

Dave, we're going to move to some online questions from the webcast. Does the midstream processing plant just save transport costs due to concentration? Or does it offer other value adds to the product?

Yes, there's a number of benefits for the midstream product. First and foremost, the alumina silicate component of the spodumene concentrate that we ship today does not get shipped. It gets left at the mine site where it can get more readily handled. So that, of course, essentially solves for what is a waste product in many markets, albeit some markets put into cement, but leaves that at the mine site, that, of course, saves on transport. Then the actual lithium salt itself is materially concentrated. So there's another transport saving there. And then there's the carbon footprint.

So the key distinguishing feature of the demonstration plant and the midstream project that we're pursuing here is the use of Calix's electric calciner. And when you look at sort of the waterfall of carbon consumption for spodumene concentrate from ore body through to hydroxide gate, the biggest draw of carbon is the calciner. So this effectively solves that. So that would be a further benefit. And then there's just what is the cost of production and what additional margin can be realized. Now this is the bit that we're yet to validate and why we're building the demonstration plant. We want to see does the energy efficiency of the calciner, the combination of other cost inputs to produce this lithium salt relative to the sales price does it net a larger margin than shipping spodumene concentrate through the traditional pathway. So lots of benefits for pursuing this.

Okay. Another midstream question around the use of fine ore and coarse ore. So the question is around can we use coarse ore through the midstream plant as well as fines or can you produce more fines by grinding?

Yes. So as a function of the nature of the calciner being essentially a flash calciner for the spodumene concentrate to convert through alpha to beta phase, the particle size needs to be small. Therefore, fines is required. Now if it turns out that the economics make sense to grind our coarse or finer to a cheaper fines and then feed it through the calciner, well, that's a possible processing pathway. But we cannot feed coarse product through the calciner.

Okay. Thank you. We had a number of other questions, which we've already addressed. So that's the end of questions online.

Great. Well, thank you all for dialing today for our half year results. Looking forward to updating again in due course. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your participation in today's conference. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect. Good day.

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the PLS December quarter conference call.

[Operator Instructions]

Please be advised today's conference call is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, PLS Managing Director and CEO, Dale Henderson. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Maggie. Good morning, and good evening, and thank you all for joining us today. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the lands on which PLS operates. The Whadjuk people of the Noongar nation here in Perth and the Nyamal and Kariyarra peoples in the Pilgra.We pay our respects to their elders past present.

Joining me today is Flavio Garofalo, our Interim CFO; and Brett McFadgen, our Chief Operating Officer; and also members of our senior leadership team. This call will run for approximately an hour before opening the line for questions.

Over the past 18 months, the lithium market has been and what many have described as a lithium winter, a period of oversupply pricing pressure and heightened volatility. Since the trough spodumene pricing has more than tripled, signaling a material shift in market conditions. For PLS, the December quarter marked an inflection and validated the resilience and operating leverage of the PLS platform as pricing improved. 3 numbers catch this shift realized pricing increased 57% quarter-on-quarter. Cash margin from operations increased from $8 million to $166 million and cash increased by $102 million to $954 million with a further $85 million in provisional pricing adjustments expected to come through in the March quarter.

Importantly, we achieved this without changing our operating footprint or capital intensity, reinforcing that the business is structurally cash generative across a wide range of market conditions. That outcome reflects deliberate countercyclic decisions taken over the past 18 months, maintaining operating capability, controlling costs and preserving balance sheet strength while prices were challenged.

As a result, today, we have approximately $1.6 billion of liquidity, giving us the flexibility to choose timing and sequencing rather than being forced to act by the cycle. The December quarter demonstrates that approach working to demonstrate that approach working with strong cash margins, continued cost discipline and the option to selectively reengage growth options while maintaining discipline.

Turning to Slide 2. Our strategy has not changed. Our mission remains powering a sustainable energy future, and this is underpinned by our strategic pillars. What has changed is not our strategy, but the market context in which we are executing it. Improving market conditions are now allowing those pillars to work together with discipline remaining the gatekeeper for any capital deployment.

Importantly, strategy execution remains active to balance sheet resilience and return generation rather than short-term price signals.

Turning to Slide 3. This slide highlights why PLS is well positioned as conditions improve. We operate 100% owned assets and combined the Pilgangoora operation, a long-life Tier 1 asset with a scalable and flexible processing platform that provides direct leverage to pricing movements. Beyond Pilgangoora, we have deliberately preserved optionality, including downstream exposure via our joint venture with POSCO in South Korea, providing access to ex China battery supply chains. We have geographic diversification through the Colina project in Brazil, offering longer-dated growth optionality.

Finally, we have retained balance sheet strength, which allows us to choose timing and sequencing on how we respond to market conditions.

Turning to Slide 4. This slide captures the core December quarter story. Pricing improved materially and that improvement translated directly into a higher revenue and cash generation. Key outcomes include sales of 232,000 tonnes, up 8% quarter-on-quarter, a 50% increase in realized pricing. Revenue up 49% to $373 million, and cash margin from operations increased to $166 million, supporting a cash balance of $954 million, reflecting strong conversion of pricing into cash.

Production was in line with plan and FY '26 guidance reaffirmed across all metrics. Taken together, the quarter marks a shift from a period focused on protection and resilience to one of margin expansion, which enables value-accretive options to be reassessed with capital discipline unchanged.

Now with that, I'll now hand over to Brett for an update on the operations.

Thanks, Dale. Moving to Slide 5. Safety remains our first priority. During the quarter, we recorded 2 injuries with TRIFR increasing to 3.79% from 3.08% that outcome is just simply not acceptable. In response, we have implemented targeted safety campaigns and strengthened frontline leadership engagement.

Quality safety interactions increased to 3.8 per 1,000 hours worked well above our target of 1.6 in -- our focus is on embedding consistent behaviors and controls to sustainably reduce risk, not just responding to incidents. Every team member going home safe, healthy every day is nonnegotiable.

Turning to Slide 6. Operations delivered a solid quarter in which we continue to increase the proportion of contact ore feed. Total material mined increased to 8.1 million tonnes, reflecting continued progress in the transition to an owner-operator mining model supported by our additional haul truck deliveries.

Ore mine decreased to 1.5 million tonnes as planned as we deliberately prioritized waste stripping to position the operation for future production and improved sequencing. Processing produced 29,000 tonnes, which was in line with the plan. Lithium recovery of approximately 76% remained robust reflecting our strategy to increase contact ore and maximize our all sort of performance.

Despite the higher contact ore throughput, ore orders continued to perform strongly. However, the increased throughput resulted in elevated wear rates in the front end of our crushing circuit impacting on our average run time. To mitigate this, additional crushing capacity was mobilized to provide operational contingency and maintain adequate crushed ore buffers, supporting the plant utilization through periods of elevated wear.

Sales of 232,000 tonnes exceeded production, drawing down inventory to meet strong customer demand and supporting improved cash generation during the quarter. I'll now hand back to Dale

Thanks, Brett. Moving now to Slide 7. A brief update on Chemicals. This forms part of our long-term strategy to preserve growth optionality and strategic positioning across the lithium value chain. These initiatives are being progressed in a staged and disciplined way. As it relates to our midstream project, construction of the midstream demonstration plant was completed in December with an update on commissioning plans expected in the coming months.

As it relates to joint venture with POSCO, the P-PLS joint venture, the P-PLF, the Korean battery supply chain has experienced significant disruption following recent U.S. policy changes, resulting in order cancellations and deferrals from multiple certified customers.

In response to the JV strategically idled the facility to preserve capital, whilst PLS successfully reallocated Odum volumes to alternate customers at prevailing market prices. This demonstrates the flexibility of our portfolio and sales strategy when one pathway is temporarily in lead constrained, we can redirect volumes without sacrificing value.

During the quarter, we contributed $38 million to maintain our 18% interest in the JV, no further equity contributions are expected in FY '26 and we retain call and put options providing flexibility to maintain our current interest and increase our interest to 30% or exit in the investment over time if we so choose.

Strategically, PPS continues to provide PLS with exposure to lithium chemicals market ex China battery supply chains, whilst allowing us to manage capital deployment in line with market conditions. The technical capability of the facility has been demonstrated, and our approach ensures us optionality and diversification is preserved without placing pressure on the balance sheet.

Last Chemicals, Ganfeng study for a potential downstream partnership. That study continues with the sunset date extended through September 27, allowing additional time for site evaluation and market outlook clarity.

Moving now to Slide 8. As market conditions improve, our focus is on sequencing growth through the cycle rather than accelerating investment. The discipline we applied through the downturn, protecting operations, reducing costs and preserving balance sheet strength continues to guide how we reassess timing today. Ngungaju represents short-term cycle optionality. We are evaluating a potential restart of approximately 200,000 tonnes per annum with early works completed and customer engagement underway.

The board expects to consider this during the March quarter, and no decision has made has been made yet. And as it relates to that customer engagement, it have been pleasingly surprised by the the strength of those offers made from market, which, of course, underscores confidence in the upward trajectory we're observing at this time. As it relates to this is a larger, more capital-intensive option. However, it provides a strong rate of return.

The feasibility study continues with study timing under review and an update on timing expected in the March quarter. Colina provides longer-dated geographic diversification. Drilling and study optimization continue with study timing also under review and an expected update in the March quarter also. Taken together, these options provide flexibility across multiple time horizons and our focus remains on sequencing growth in a way that enhances value while preserving balance sheet resilience.

With that, I'll now hand over to Flavio to take us through the financials.

Thank you, Dale, and good morning to those on the call. Moving to Slide 10. I'm pleased to share the group's key financial metrics for the December quarter 2025. Revenue rose 49% to $373 million, driven by an increase in pricing and sales volumes.

On costs, FOB unit operating costs increased to $585 a tonne, primarily due to lower production volumes and spodumene inventory drawdown, with sales higher than production versus an inventory build in the September quarter. While unit costs move higher due to volume dynamics, our Cost Smart program continues to deliver, driving sustained cost discipline across the business.

This combination of improved pricing and continued cost discipline resulted in cash margins increasing significantly from $8 million in the prior quarter to $166 million in the current quarter. This reinforces our strategy to protect the business through the downturn and allow operational leverage to work as markets recover.

Moving now to Slide 11. Slide 11 shows a cash flow bridge for the December quarter 2025. Our cash balance increased $102 million to $954 million, supported by a strong cash margins of $166 million, disciplined cost management and the prior year income tax refund. An additional $85 million in positive pricing adjustments for the December quarter shipments is expected to be received in the March quarter of 2026.

Capital expenditure was $45 million on a cash basis, and we also made a $38 million equity contribution to the PPLS joint venture, maintaining PLS' 18% ownership. Financing activities and FX impacts resulted in cash outflows of $20 million. With a cash balance of $954 million and approximately $1.6 billion in total liquidity, we now enter improved market fundamentals from a strengthened position, providing capacity to selectively pursue growth options whilst maintaining cost discipline.

Moving to Slide 12. Looking at the half year performance. H1 FY '26 delivered strong pricing and volume growth, with revenue of $624 million, 47% higher than H1 FY '25. Unit costs improved compared to the prior corresponding half with FOB unit operating costs decreasing 8% to $563 a tonne driven by ongoing operational efficiencies and higher sales volume. Cash margin from operations increased to $174 million from $41 million in the prior corresponding half.

Moving now to Slide 13. Slide 13 shows the cash flow bridge for the half year ended 31 December 2025. While cash margin from operations increased to $174 million, closing cash for the half year decreased by $20 million, primarily due to working capital timing effects. This included $32 million in customer refunds from lower final pricing on FY '25 shipments which were settled in early H1 FY '26, while approximately $85 million in positive pricing adjustments on the December quarter shipments are expected to be received in the March quarter.

When adjusted for these timing effects, underlying cash margin would be approximately $291 million, reinforcing the strength of the business as pricing improves.

And with that, I'll hand it now back to Dale.

Thank you, Flavio. Moving to Slide 15. The December quarter marked a clear improvement in lithium market conditions following an extended period of destocking.

Inventory levels tightened materially with Chinese domestic carbonate inventories finishing December at around 2 to 3 weeks of consumption. That tightening alongside continued strength in EV sales and accelerating band from energy storage drove a meaningful recovery in pricing during the quarter.

To put that in context, spodumene spot pricing on an SC6 basis increased by approximately 80% through the quarter, recovering from unsustainably low levels earlier in the year. A combination of factors is supporting this recovery, including constructive policy settings in China, particularly around energy storage deployment and EV adoption as well as ongoing uncertainty on the supply side, including the timing and extent of potential restarts of higher-cost sources.

Importantly, while we have long held the view that pricing needed to recover from the mid-25 lows, we're not calling an end to volatility. The market remains sentiment driven with pricing continuing to respond sharply to policy signals and supply expectations. What this reinforces for us is the importance of disciplined capital allocation. Any investment in new or restarted supply must be resilient across a full range of market conditions, not just support of short-term pricing. With that context, I'll now walk you through the structural demand drivers that underpin our long-term conviction.

Moving to Slide 16. The 3 charts on this slide tell an important story. Since 2020, the industry has delivered sustained compounding growth with EV sales growing at 45% CAGR, battery energy storage installations at 96% CAGR and that translating to a 32% CAGR in total lithium demand. These are not projections. This is growth that has already occurred through a period that included significant volatility.

Looking at calendar '25 specifically, global EV sales reached 21.1 million units, up 20% year-on-year, with penetration increasing to 24% of total vehicle sales. Importantly, demand growth is becoming more geographically diversified. While China remains the largest market at 12.9 million units, growth outside of China is accelerating with Europe up 33% and Asia ex China, up 52% and the rest a World up 39%. That diversification strengthens long-term demand are resilience.

The other standout driver of battery energy storage Global BESS installations reached approximately 290 gigawatt hours, up 45% year-on-year. And are increasingly material as the second pillar of lithium demand alongside EVs. With significant policy support and large-scale deployment already underway, energy storage is emerging as a durable multiyear demand driver in its own right.

Moving to Slide 17. Turning to the long-term picture. The outlook for lithium demand remains structurally strong and increasingly diversified EVs and BESS energy storage are expected to account for more than 90% of lithium battery demand by 2030, reinforcing the long-term nature of demand growth. EV adoption continues to gather pace globally with Benchmark Minerals intelligence, forecasting penetration to increase to around 35% by 2030 and approaching 70% by 2040. By that point, EVs alone are expected to represent about 3/4 of total lithium demand.

Battery Energy Storage is the fastest-growing segment, having increased from a small share of lithium demand in 2020 to a material contributor today and is expected to continue growing strongly over the coming decades as grid scale storage is deployed globally. Taken together, these trends support sustained long-term growth in lithium demand.

But importantly, that growth will not be linear and will continue to be accompanied by periods of volatility as we've seen today. For PLS, this outlook reinforces the value of scale, flexibility and balance sheet strength allowing us to sequence growth decisions thoughtfully, navigate near-term volatility and capture long-term value without compromising discipline.

In closing, the December quarter demonstrated the cash-generating power of the PLS platform has pricing improved, validating the operating leverage we've built countercyclically through the down cycle and reinforcing that this is a structural cash generation from a more resilient operating base. While market conditions have improved, volatility remains a defining feature of the sector.

Our focus, therefore, remains on disciplined capital allocation, balance sheet resilience and value creation through the cycle with a strong balance sheet and a 100% owned asset base, we have the flexibility to reassess timing and sequencing from a position of control and any growth decisions will remain gated by confidence in market sustainability and returns. That combination, structural cash generation, balance sheet resilience and disciplined capital deployment underpins our approach to manage long-term shareholder value.

Thank you very much for your time. And with that, I'll now pass back to Maggie for questions.

[Operator Instructions]

First question comes from Levi Spry from UBS.

Dale and team. I guess just a question on the growth as you sharpen the pencil on all these projects, specifically on P200. So you did the PFS nearly 2 years ago, a new 5 million tonne per annum plant, $1.2 billion CapEx and then ramping up to 2 million tonnes for 2029. How should we think about time lines and scope as you sharpen the pencil what potentially could have changed? Or can we simply inflate numbers and delayed for 2 years?

Yes, it's a bit early to guide you on that one, Levi. The review, which we're working through at the moment, we'll be particularly focused around study time lines. And the production of that study will be the key point to inform the market on the broader trajectory. So unfortunately, I can't really shed much slide at this point on that one.

Next, we have Glyn Lawcock from Barrenjoey.

Dale. Just a couple of quick ones, if I could. Just with the restart of Naga, are you looking for price floors or something like that? Or are you still happy to take the market. Just wondering sort of how the discussions go along the lines of what you'd want to restart Ngungaju from that perspective? And then just any comments you might make on shareholder returns now that pricing is back?

Yes. Happy new year, Glyn. As it relates to the restore we've reached out to market, engaging with market for offers. And within that, yes, we are considering our price floors. But of course, there's always other terms often come with these offers. So we're we're carefully thinking through potential offtake and we'll see how we go. But as I mentioned in my commentary, we're feeling very buoyed by that market engagement.

So looking forward to updating the market in due course. As it relates to shareholder returns, obviously, yes, our capital management framework that sets out contemplates dividends based on certain thresholds. So that sits there ready to go if the market continues to perform strongly, well, of course, we'll be of applying distribution proceeds in accordance with that framework. Does that answer your question, Glyn.

Yes. I guess it's really a decision for the Board next month if pricing stays where it is. It's a potential to recommence dividends, but it won't know till then.

That's right. You got it.

Next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs.

Both pricing but also your fleet productivity and operational performance. First 1 on contracting. You've outlined that you've executed to offtake agreements during the quarter. I think you've previously had the option to elect across 3 offtakes for 2026. So as you might not get into specifics of which of those you've gone with, but can you maybe give us a little bit more color in terms of the magnitude of volumes and the outline price premium in those offtakes?

Yes, sure. As it relates to those 2 new offtakes they're not material in the sense of the volumes involved. From memory, it was sort of circa 50,000 tonnes in both cases. And within those offtakes, we have designed on a few options at PLS' discretion to extend and push per the tonnes in their direction if we so choose to. Of course, that speaks to the strength of the market and PLS as a preferred supplier.

So really happy about that. Yes. And as I say, not material by volume since we didn't disclose. We didn't do a market disclosure around each of those offtake awards.

Yes. No, that's helpful. So fair to assume that the other 3 options that you had for 2026, you let expire?

From memory, we still have options available to us, and we've just taken the decision to integrate more options. So those 2 new offtakes to include bringing a new customer, building out the POS customers stable even further.

Great. Got it. And then if I can just pick up a little bit from Levi's question. Obviously, refreshing the timing of growth options potentially with the Fed results on that one. But just looking at the language around for those projects and your comments around sensing -- is it fair to say then that 2000 is now comfortably the priority just given that you've got studies and a number of approvals already in hand there. And in that study was previously due to sort of the end of calendar '26. Is there actually that much scope to bring it forward in terms of timing?

Look all will be revealed once we've completed the reviews. But just by sort of additional context in the case of the cleaner project, Well, of course, we got the keys in March last year. So we've been -- had the opportunity to do more work, do more drilling and consider how can we maximize value further. So that, of course, informs potentially a new outlook for that project. And then as it relates to P2000 as per the original study was always a compelling investment. -- albeit a larger ticket price in terms of CapEx.

The returns are very strong. So it's not necessarily a case of acceleration. It's more a case of sequencing -- and just thinking through what's the right next step as we think about growing with the market. So we'll provide more color on that. in due course as we flagged, we'll update in the March quarter.

. Next, we have Mitch Ryan from Jefferies.

The first one is just -- you talked about elevated crusher wear rates during the quarter and the utilization of contractors. Can you put some more color around that? What are you seeing in the operations? Will you have to expand some of the capacity going forward -- can you just help understand what that number.

Yes, Mitch, it's Brett here. Yes, look, we did see -- it's really the front end of the crushing circuit where it does all the heavy lifting. We just started to see a little bit of higher accelerated wear rates as we increase some of our contact ore. And right towards the end of the quarter, we mobilized a small mobile crushing circuit just to give us a bit of flexibility there so that we could keep up some oil stocks rather than trying to have any type of plant outage or or slowdown. So it was really just a risk mitigation in that one.

So you're planning to sort of keep processing an increasing amount of contact or will you need to keep that crushing capacity on site?

That gives us the flexibility if we do start to push up the contact ore. We're probably -- we've got the flexibility now to actually flex that up and down. And but we'll just try to take those decisions to make sure that we can make sure that the business is robust and it's a good risk mitigation, we'll do that.

But we are developing some additional work through that front end of the crusher as you do with liner wear and some of those packages. So it's too early to tell at this stage, but not a big issue by any means.

Okay. And then my last question just relates to strip ratio stepped up in the quarter. I thought they've been guided to sort of step down over the course of the remainder of the the financial year. Is that just a function of where you own the mine plan? Can you just give us a bit of commentary about what's having the top ratios going forward?

Yes, a bit of where we are in the mine plan and just an opportunity to undertake some of the next cutback as well, whilst we've got good ore stocks, and we're using some of the stockpile contact door. We just take an opportunity with our efficiencies that we're getting through the mine owner mining transition as well, just to take a bit of an opportunistic look at getting ahead of ourselves in one other CapEx.

Next we have Rahul Anand from Morgan Stanley.

Thanks for the call, Dale and team. Look, a lot of the operational questions have been asked. I wanted to come back to the pricing. Obviously, a very strong quarter for you. Can you perhaps dissect that performance into the 3 parts that contribute to it? Obviously, spot sales being 1 provisional pricing and then also the shipment timing, if you had to kind of help us understand which one of the sort of key drivers for that very strong result, especially versus your peers?

And that might help us kind of thinking about the future pricing, and I'll come back with a follow-up.

Sure. So I can obviously expect to this in general terms. But the -- in terms of the quarter, which was there was some spot sales by proportion, pretty small. And the pricing and the realized prices in GPS through offtake sales very much as the majority as to what is the makeup of that pricing.

And again, I'll talk in general terms. It's broadly or spodumene indexed connected -- and the timing is broadly as calculated close to the time of shipment or shortly thereafter, depending which of -- so you might recall that as we're working through a sort of a price decline environment that was a disadvantage to us in certain quarters, we were 1 or 2 percentage points below some of our competitors, depending how they're going.

Well, at this part of the cycle where the trend is reversed. This structure works in our favor as pricing rises to have pricing essentially finalize in the future works through advantage in a rising market. So that's principally, I think the main cause of the delta between us and the competition, of course, not knowing what our competition is up to, I'm presuming here.

Got it. Okay. And just for the follow-up, just coming back to the original question around Ngungaju restart. So obviously, you're having conversations with your downstream partners about floor pricing, et cetera. But given where the price is currently for spot you mean, it's moved up very rapidly and created a genuinely large margin for you there. Is it fair to think along the lines that there is opportunities here to restart, even if you don't get those commitments? Or is that absolutely going to be the deal breaker if you if you're thinking about that restart and you don't get that floor pricing agreement in place?

Yes. Good question, Rahul. I don't think it's a deal breaker. -- the presence of floor prices in the industry is few and far between in terms of what we've been able to observe. And historically, we haven't placed reliance on full prices. but we'll see how we go. So the short answer is no. I don't think the restart decision will necessarily be contingent on that requirement. But ultimately, yes. Yes.

Next, we have Austin Yun from Macquarie.

Most of the questions being asked. Just a quick 1 on your comments about the upstream growth portfolio. given you're doing the revaluation, can please confirm, are you referring to the internal opportunities you're having already? Or this is more kind of outside of the Kumina in an inorganic way to further boost beef up upstream portfolio?

Austin. The comments around Australia about organic growth profile of Tugngora. Nothing, nothing about an organic.

Next, we have Matthew Frydman from MST Financials.

Sure. team. Can I please extend Rahul's question on the potential Ngungaju restart -- we're just wondering your thoughts on whether the resilience of Ngungaju through the cycle has changed with the improvements you've made to the asset or could make to the asset.

You mentioned the crusher upgrade and you've talked previously other improvements you could make before turning it on, I guess, but also what you've done across the site in terms of owner operations or mineralogy understanding and adjusting the mine plan collectively, are all of those things enough to ensure that if you do turn Ngungaju back on, you can be confident that it's going to underpin a return and you don't need to turn it off again through the cycle even if you don't have a price war in your offtake or is it always going to be a bit of a swing asset and the Board is really going to have to take a view on, I guess, the market and the timing of bringing that asset back into the current market?

Yes, sure. Thanks, Matthew. To address that, I might go big picture and then later down a little bit. So as we think about the overall Pilgangoora operation on a multiyear horizon, We've, of course, been working hard to drive down the cost structurally, and you're pleased to report this last -- the quarter results we released today sort of speak to that disciplined investment over time.

So obviously, all the owner-operated mining or the efficiencies there, the ore sorting at Pilar progressive power installations the trend to more owner operate across the board, et cetera, et cetera, all of that sort of impounded into the lower cost we're enjoying. But then as we step down to the processing plant level, as it relates to Ngungaju, that too has been on a journey of investment and driving costs down.

But in the main, I think we're pretty much at the back of the optimization curve -- you might recall that over the years, we will be a full sort of build-out of a new float sir, a bunch of refurbishment, adding in a whole bunch of other tech, but we're basically maxed out that asset and the main -- given the the bones of it or they were in terms of what Ultra built. So what that all means is the Ngungaju asset on a processing basis is higher cost than the Pilgangoora processing plant.

So a bit of a long answer, but that's why we turned it off. So we went to the P50 model as there was a chance to preserve cash in a particularly low priced environment.

Now to your question of what's the probability that it's turned on and sustained on is, of course, a function of market pricing. Now when you look in the rearview mirror and as we've discussed historically, pricing can sometimes be irrational and disconnect from fundamentals for the lithium market. That was certainly our view as we look back as recent 6 months, where we saw pricing down around the high 5 sort of 600, that was deep into the cost curve. And most of the industry was losing money. That didn't make sense.

So as we look forward to that environment occur again, who knows would be the answer. If the lithium market remains volatile and hence, we continue to remind the market of that picture. But volatility is not always that and it cuts both ways. And this is really where the flexibility of our operating platform comes to bear. And yes, we like the idea of potentially bring that on, making sunshines and the look of that sustained well that will be fantastic for PLS and our shareholders. We'll see what happens.

Okay. Detailed answer. So obviously, a pretty complex question -- can I maybe just quickly one for maybe for Flavio and happy to take it off line if it's easier. But if I just look at the revenue reported in the December quarter and $373 million, and I take you sales volume, your reported realized price and the exchange rate for the quarter, I guess to more like $410 million. So can you explain the difference? I suspect it's to do with how you recognize revenue for some of those pay adjustments. But yes, there's a short answer. So that's appreciated.

Yes. Matthew, is spot on. It's also due to timing differences and movements within debtors. But we can take that offline. I can walk you through that in detail.

Next, we have Kaan Peker from RBC.

Just continuing on the Ngungaju sort of understand how the assets evolved over the course of the last couple of years. But is there a question around pricing stability? Or is there a requirement around pricing stability or offtake commitments that need to be seen before a restart, just potentially avoiding adding supply into a policy-driven market.

And then secondly, I'll circle back with the assets.

I think I got most of that. In terms of pricing stability, yes, that's sort of central to so the sort of the various dimensions we need to weigh up around the restart decision. And that's, of course, what we're thinking through deeply at this time. And -- and ultimately, we'll be recommending a path with the Board.

So we're still very much working through that thinking. But central to that is what do we think the strength of the market is of course, with current pricing today. That asset, the net asset will make a very, very strong margins. I think we're all very comfortable with that. The question is, yes, to what sort of strength of confidence do we see it persisting in the future. So we're weighing that up. But I have to say, in terms of all of the indicators I've got access to, we are very positively disposed to the short-term outlook.

Everything is looking very, very strong on sort of a 6- to 9-month basis. Obviously, the fair that you look out, it's harder to take a view. But in terms of what I'm seeing to the computations I'm having across our customer set and including some of the major chemicals groups who've met face-to-face with as recent as the weekend.

The near-term outlook is looking very positive, but we'll see how we go.

Just maybe also adding on to that some of the softer elements sort of hiring and when remobilizing, -- how is that being considered?

Yes, Kaan, Brett here. It's a great question. When we decided to put the Ngungaju asset into care and maintenance, we returned quite a number of our key staff so that we would -- we redeployed them into the P1000 operation into various roles over there. So we we've got some key people that we can place back straight into that asset if we do get the go ahead to restart. So that's a great ability to have that experience there.

And then we would refill the rest of the remaining roles with just industry and go out to recruitment. And yes, we have a good training program at side as well. So yes, I think the timing of that would be part of the -- as we've said in the 4 months ramp up.

We're not in -- sorry, I can't do that. We're not anticipating any issues in that regard in terms of total personnel to recruits the bonds are not that high. And just to Freeport turnover rates are at our lowest level ever in history of the company.

So we like to think that speaks to the company we've got and the culture we've got and we think we have a work in progress, but we think we've built a good reputation for ourselves, and we're not expecting any challenges as we go for recruitment drive.

Understood. And second one on Tulgan. Just understand that more contact was being fed. Do you have a better sense on sort of the upper bounds on using contact or now before recoveries and costs start to degradate meaningfully. It sounds like possibly happening now given the added maintenance around where in Terrence contract crushing. Is that fair to assume?

Yes. A lot of the work that we've done through the optimization of our ore sorting has been around what are our limits. We understand the ore mineralogy really well. So now it's really just getting that balance right of making sure that our costs are in the mining and the processing are giving us the best outcome financially and also the recovery is 1 of the variables is contactor, but I would say that the work that we've done with P1000 and our operating teams on site just gives us that robustness around that recovery improvement.

And really understanding where we go with our contact volume percentage as well. And that's built on the years of test work that we've done to understand the mineralogy and the plant performance. So I think it really kind of reinforces that life of mine recovery assumptions as well.

Next, we have David Feng from CICC.

I have some follow-up questions on the restart Ngungaju just wish to have some color on the restart costs if possible? Like should we expect any kind of extra CapEx to be involved?

Yes. David, there is -- we've done our refurbishment work, which was fairly minor and included in our capital outlook. So there's not a large capital outlay to restart Ngungaju. It's mainly in the cost curve, as we talked to before, in recruitment and ramp-up and some maintenance getting ready out of care and maintenance. But yes, nothing much in the capital front.

Before being put on care and maintenance, it should be around like 20% to 25% higher than Tigran -- so shall we expect this cost number to be subject to any potential changes? Like how would the recovery be affected?

Yes, in terms of outputs from Ngungaju, the best guy would be to go back to prior to -- when we put in care of maintenance. So that issue has been such the recoveries, volumes and you take a view of unit costs at the aggregate level. And -- but we don't split it out -- we don't report plant by plant, but I'd point you to that to get a guide -- as we think about our confidence around being able to produce those outputs again, my view is very high. We've got complete confidence in Brett and the team as such you probably learning for. Brett on that?

Yes. Yes, absolutely. And 1000 and the ore mineralogy work that we've been doing with is directly applicable over to Ngungaju as well. So have confidence, as I said before, we've got key players from that operation within our operation to go back in there. and we're advancing as we go.

So I've got confidence that we'll -- if we get the go ahead and have all the indicators are there to give us the confidence then we'll bring that plant on and continue on from where we were.

There's no further questions from the audio side. I will now pass to James Fuller.

Just a few questions from the webcast. Dale, based on your leadership and the disciplined approach to capital allocation, where do you see less in 10 years time?

That's a great question. I think for PLS and the vision that we -- the team is really behind us, our aim is to be a material player -- in this industry, we want to be a mainstay of the industry, and that is absolutely within our graft care of the organic growth opportunities.

We have by a reckoning of 2000 was built today, we would be the largest lithium producer globally. But further, of course, we've got the cleaner asset plus downstream initiatives. And on a 10-year horizon, you'd have to expect Peerless to carry on and do more leveraging the next skill sets. Now supply chain relationships were built.

So we've got a very motivated Energy team. We're very focused on making the most of this incredible growth market. So I think 10 years from today, PLS will be an impressive company. We're set up to get there.

Any comments about gaining share sales the other day.

So I have spoken to Ganfeng. They explained to me it's cash management is what they've chosen to do there. I understand they sold of their holding, which must make them about 4% or thereabouts by reckoning.

So certainly, no concerns at all with that share sale and as it relates to our relationship, the various partnering activities we're doing together to and the relationship and fantastic standing. So certainly no concerns there.

Thank you, Dale. Operational productivity gains and cost savings from the use of AI?

Brett, do you want to...

Yes. Yes, early days as we go into the AI, but the AI is giving us some optionality to mine through a lot of the data and look for some of the trends. So we're certainly on that journey. And yes, some of the technology we put in with P1000 will give us some good insights once we can get the AI to look at that on a deeper level, but early days as it is with a number of operations.

Do you see the growth in best connected to increasing energy demand of new technologies, including AI and quantum?

Short answer is yes. I mean, the best growth rates have been very impressive. But the reasons behind that growth rate are many, and it does include data centers and, of course, data centers being built for AI and the necessity for energy stability. That's a key sub growth segment of BSS.

But separate to that, is it just makes sense to -- for grid stability and lower cost energy, in particular, when it's interconnected with solar and other renewables and solar growth rates continue to be phenomenal. -- globally. So adding depth to those systems is abundantly sensible. So this is all part of what's fueling best growth rates go.

Okay. How is the midstream demonstration plant being received within the sector? Is there any interest from other producers to use the technology?

So as it relates to the demonstration fine concept in terms of a midstream product, yes, we get plenty of inbound interest around that concept. And we are engaging with market around potential buyers of the product from the downstream plant if and when we're going to the next phase of that project as it relates to the actual processing technology itself.

The short answer is yes. There's other competitors who are variance and the tech and that would be wise to be interested and we're open for that. Our JV with Calix contemplates the option of allowing others ultimately in combination with Calix will be a benefit of the proliferation of that tech, if that's where it ends up and that could potentially be a future revenue stream.

If you were to go ahead with P2000 and Colin, are you concerned about bringing on excess supply that will affect the process pledging answer is no. As you consider the expected growth rates of demand for the industry if we project that for you need P2000 you need cleaner and you need more assets to come online to serve that growth demand.

So ultimately, we see both those assets being built in serving the market as to the probability they both happen at the same time. I think that's pretty low. And the reason they have been more driven around what's the optimum development pathway for each of those assets, respectively, to maximize value potentially for Brazil, we might look to do some more drilling and grow the asset over time, but we'll see. We'll come back and provide more color on this later.

What does the million in other investment activities include.

Yes, that includes the equity contribution to the POSCO joint venture, as outlined in the call earlier.

Okay. Another one, will there be a dividend declared in the foreseeable future?

I can take that. So again, that was covered by Glyn's question. It's a matter obviously for the Board, and it's something that we'll review in the second half of the financial year.

Okay. Final question from my line. Tesla appeared to have eliminated a couple of processes towards batch manufacturing, this Tesla development alter PLS' investment plans for value-add products.

Quite clear. Put it clear on that.

Okay. We're not clear on what that refers to. So we'll leave that one. That's it for online questions.

Great. Thank you, James. Thank you, everyone, for dialing in for our December quarterly results call. We look forward to coming back to you with the half year in a couple of weeks. Thank you all for your time.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Everybody to the 2025 Annual General Meeting of Pilbara Minerals Limited. My name is Kathleen Conlon, and I'm the Chair of Pilbara Minerals. Before we commence the presentations and the formal business of the meeting, for those of you in the room, please refer to the visual on the screen for evacuation procedures should there be an evacuation event. I would now like to invite Nick Abraham to provide a welcome to country.

Thank you, Kathleen. [Foreign Language] Hello, and welcome. I'm happy to see you all this afternoon. Also happy to be speaking with you this afternoon. As mentioned, my name is Nick Abraham and my family connections are Abraham, [ Benno, Humphrey, Hume, Mipi, Aletal Harris. ] And we're connected to many parts of our country, Whadjuk, which is a wood we're sitting and standing on here today, but also Yued, which is to the north of Whadjuk, also connected to Balarang, which is to the east of Whadjuk; to Wilman, which is to the southeast of Whadjuk; [indiscernible] which is to the south of Whadjuk and Wandi, which is to the south of [ Vingerup ].

I must also take this opportunity to acknowledge my [indiscernible], my wife [indiscernible], Boltons and Woods, and they're also connected into Wilman, which is southeast of Whadjuk; [indiscernible], which is south of Wilman; Balarang, which is southeast of [ Kang and Menang, ] which is south of [indiscernible], which goes all the way down to Albany.

I must also take this opportunity just to acknowledge the other parts of the Noongar nation, Amangu, which is just north of Yued; [indiscernible], which is east of Balarang; [ Wadi, ] which is east of Wilman; Nunga, which is south, southeast of [ Golring, ] which goes all the way down towards [ Espan and Bilbman, ] which is further down south.

However, [ Bibbman ] is a flow throughout [ Nuna ] country, and you may hear young people talking interchangeably between [indiscernible]. That's because of the ancient and still current connection. [Foreign Language] Just acknowledging the ancient land and the ancient language, but also my oldest past, present and emerging, but also acknowledging each and every one of you here today and online.

So just to give a bit of an opportunity for me to tell you a bit of history of this country that you may or may not be aware of. And the story I'm going to tell you that goes back at least 650 plus thousand years. But Kathleen has only given me about 5 minutes to tell you that story. So hopefully, you would walk with me on this journey.

And the story I'm telling you about is not about blame. It is not about shame. It's about understanding of this country we're sitting on today. And to do that, I've got to bring you into this space. I've got to bring you into this space by asking you 3 personal questions. Now because there are personal questions, nobody else needs to know the answer other than Buddha, country and overall the sky. So when you answer these questions, you answer them as loud as you can in your head. Buddha will hear you and we will hear, but nobody else.

Do we understand? Lovely. First question, as loud as you can in your head. Just let the Buddha and world know your name. Are we all good with that one? Lovely. Next question, just let the Buddha and the world know who's your family and where you're from. You may have connections here, you may have connections to other parts of WA, other parts of Australia or even other parts of the world. Just let the Buddha and the world know who's your mob and where you're from. And depending how much you know your extended family, that may take a while, so I'm going to leave you with that.

Now the third question. The answer to the third question can only come from your core, your heart and only you can answer that question. And that question is what's important to you? And I'm going to leave you with that. I want to take you on this journey.

[Foreign Language] So when young people are given our knowledge through the oral tradition as passed down from our grandmothers, grandfathers, and moms and dads and younger bosses from long, long ago. And when they're telling us these ancient stories, they're telling us in a very simplistic form. And that very simplistic form takes us all the way through our life. And basically, what they're telling us is [Foreign Language], use your eyes to see, [Foreign Language], use your ears to listen, [Foreign Language] use your head, your eye to understand, understand these stories we're telling you about your country, your culture, people, values, responsibilities and purpose.

And they've broken it up in a couple of key little elements that hopefully will help you understand. The very first thing they teach us about is our moral. [Foreign Language] is your family, mom dad, aunt, uncle, aunties, brothers, sisters, all the extended families and different levels of relationships and responsibilities to each and every one of those, including the [Foreign Language], the wife and in-laws because they are a very important part of our social fabric. But that was also one of our laws, one of our laws of who we could and couldn't marry. We couldn't marry close blood lines. We had to keep our genetics strong. And we still have a system today, still functioning. We still maintain our strong genetics.

Next follows taught us about our culture. What is culture? I want to give you a couple of definitions what I think culture is. You may agree and you may even have your own. For me, culture is about values. Culture is also about language. And through that language, you can see your identity, your belonging, your beliefs and your spirituality.

Next follows taught us about our cartigen. Now cartigen is our knowledge system where the role people understood and knew the relationship between the sun, the stars, the moon, the plants and the animals, the waterways and the seasons and how we live sustainably in those environments.

Next follows taught us about our [Foreign Language] bringing together, it's our well-being, and the old people taught us about our foods, our medicines, our sites, our ceremonies, our social interaction responsibilities and purpose. And they knew we were out of balance, physically and emotionally out of connecting with all those different elements to bring us back in balance. And that was a health system.

And the old people taught us that these key elements are connected to our Buddha, our land because they knew if we look after country, country would look after us. And this one represents our [Foreign Language], our elders because it was our responsibility on the system, making sure that our laws and our customs are never broken. And that system was functioning for many thousands of generations where the sun would always rise in the east and set in the west.

The moon would eventually rise in the East and set in the West. And when our people pass and they leave this place, they go to the next part of the dreaming, a place called [Foreign Language], just over the west with the sunsets. And any time that ever returns in our dreams and some conscious to give us guidance and support of maintaining our laws and customs. So in this part of country, which is the Mural country, which is sort of north of the river and all the Mural people live around here. And at that time, [ Yellowbongga ] was a leader. In some strangers came too down to [ Durbalurgen, ] and they come to the Mural people around about here.

And when they came, the Mural people in [ Yellowapunga ] couldn't make sense of who they were because they were pale, they look different, they spoke different and they behave differently, but they came from that way. So [ Yellowongur' ] people, only conclusion if they came from that way and they are pale, they must be a younger ancestor spirits people returning. What did we do? They had no template in how to deal with them.

I can understand when they come in our dreams in some cautious way, here they were in physical form. So [ Yellowongura ] people done the only thing that they thought was humanly possible for them. If these are our younger ancestor's spirits people returning, they look tide, they look water, and they look with -- for the long journey. So we must look after them. So what the Mural people done is given up their camps all the way along here, and they moved to another camp that we know now is Lake Monger, which was originally Galup. And they left the younger ancestor spirits people here to rest recover and return. They rested, they recovered. Did they return? No, they stayed. They stayed and they saw this system and they ignore the system.

And they imposed new laws and [indiscernible] on this land. And immediately, everything that wasn't important to us, all of a sudden was illegal and devalued. And immediately, we had disruptions to our and the elders in our government system. We had disruptions to our [indiscernible] and our families. We had disruption to our culture and our language. We had disruption to our knowledge system the way we looked after this land.

All of a sudden, we had no say in how our land has been died. And we had disruption to our health system. Of course we couldn't have access to our sites for our foods, our medicine, our ceremonies because all of a sudden, we were passing on crown land and property. And these key things disconnected us from Buddha.

And that's where my community today, picking up the pieces of the disconnection and the disruption. Now I just want to acknowledge that this disconnection and disruption happened in many parts of the world long before it arrived here and long after it arrived here. In fact, it's happening in the world today. And you need to look at the morning and evening, you can see where this disruption and disconnection is happening in many parts of the world today. I can only talk about impacts is disconnection disruption out of my country, culture, people, values, responsibilities and purpose [Foreign Language].

So despite all this recent disruption, my people's spirits are still here. Despite all this recent disruption, our spirit stories are still here. Despite all this disruption, we are still here. Throughout this disruption, many others have come. And my ancestors will be angry with me if I did not tell the real history of this country that many Western Australians may not be aware of.

I just want to say [Foreign Language]. Just let the good spirits look after us and keep us safe while were here and having this meeting and see us safely back home. But also they help us to open our eyes, our ears are head and heart to understand and appreciate what was, what is, but my people are still living in hope of what could be. And what could be is dependent by the responsibility that each and every one of us have. because we've been challenged no matter where we come from.

We've been challenged politically, economically, socially, today is technically and environmentally. But we all have one commonality that we all share. We all share the commonality of humanity and its survival. And hopefully, we can walk on a journey together, and we look forward to walking with you on that journey into the future for future generations. Again, [Foreign Language] the good can keep you safe and have a beautiful meeting here today, get business that you need to be done, done and [Foreign Language]. I look forward to seeing you in the future. Thank you.

Thank you, Nick, for the welcome to country. I acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we meet, Whadjuk Noongar people and pay respect to the elders past and present. And I appreciate your history lesson and the thoughtfulness with which you gave it to us. We also acknowledge the owners of the land on which the Pilgangoora operation is located in Nyamal and the [ Garyeri ] people. So welcome to the PLS 2025 Annual General Meeting.

It's so wonderful to see so many of you here in Perth. And for those joining us online, thank you for being part of today's meeting. I acknowledge my fellow nonexecutive directors here with me, Sally-Anne Layman, Nick Cernotta, Steve Scudamore, Miriam Stanborough and our Managing Director and CEO, Dale Henderson; and our Company Secretary, Danielle Webber.

I'd also like to acknowledge the PLS executive leadership team led by Dale and here with us today; chief Operating Officer, Brett McFadgen; Chief People and Sustainability Officer, Sandra McInnes; Chief Development Officer, John Stanning; Project Developer, Director, Paul Laybourne; and Interim Chief Executive Officer, Flavio Garofalo. They will all be available to take any questions because I know a lot of our shareholders have very detailed questions at the end of the meeting.

To our shareholders, thank you. Your continued support is greatly appreciated and is recognized as the strength of our business. Many of our shareholders have been on the journey with us since the early days, and we thank you for your support in the good and in the challenging times, all of which can happen in the course of a few months.

I will now deliver a brief address, which will be followed by a presentation by Dale. And finally, we'll move to the formal business of the meeting and provide an opportunity for questions. It's a privilege to deliver my second address to shareholders as the Chairman of PLS.

When I joined the company in early 2024, I was drawn to its long-term potential, disciplined approach to growth and its reputation for delivering on its commitments. What I've seen since has only deepened my confidence in the business, the leadership team and the strategic direction we're pursuing. Just last month, the Board visited Pilgangoora once again, witnessing the exceptional scale and quality of the operation. I remain impressed with the professionalism, talent and adaptability of our people.

Our site visits are more than symbolic. They give us a direct insight into how our strategy, culture and most importantly, safety is being lived day-to-day. These opportunities are invaluable, and we see this as a key part of our governing role. As part of the FY '25 highlights, our safety first value continued to guide everything that we did in FY '25. It helped us navigate major expansion projects safely and meet our safety targets. But of course, safety means more than just physical safety. It's about mental and emotional well-being, which is why we launched our safe and respectful behaviors portal and rolled out our mentally healthy workplace strategy, reinforcing our commitment to psychosocial safety.

Our strategy remains very much focused on long-term value creation, underpinned by disciplined capital allocation and proactive risk management. The Board maintains a strong ethos of creating value through optionality, allowing us to respond rapidly when necessary, especially important in a market where lithium prices can shift and the landscape is rapidly evolving. The past year continued to bring periods of volatility as expected in a developing industry.

Our response was both strategic and pragmatic. The decision to consolidate Pilgangoora to the P850 operating model by placing the Ngungaju Plant into care and maintenance reflected thoughtful operational judgment and disciplined capital stewardship. Importantly, our investment program remained on track. We delivered 2 major expansion projects at Pilgangoora, the P680 and the P1000 on time and within budget, significantly increasing our nameplate capacity and operational efficiency.

Despite the need to reduce our cost base and conserve capital, we continue to make sensible investments in growth projects to ensure that we can move quickly as the market shifts to capture additional value for our shareholders. FY '25 also marked a step change in our international footprint. The acquisition of Latin Resources and the Colina project in Brazil was a strategic move that aligns with our long-term goals to diversify our revenue base, broaden market access and secure high-quality lithium assets. We also made meaningful progress with our chemical strategy.

Our joint venture with POSCO in South Korea has now commenced commercial production, and we continue a joint feasibility study with Ganfeng for another potential downstream lithium conversion facility. We also progressed our midstream demonstration plant with all construction works remaining on track for completion this quarter. I'm pleased to share that we made significant progress in our sustainability journey in FY '25.

We achieved a major milestone of the completion of Stage 1 of our Pilgangoora power strategy, and this is now delivering lower emissions, lower cost energy to our operations, a real tangible step towards our goal of net Scope 1 -- net zero Scope 1 and 2 emissions in the decade commencing 2040. As PLS continues to grow and mature, we stay focused on creating value, shared value with the communities we operate. In FY '25, we increased our community investment to $2.2 million in Australia, reflecting our commitment to leaving a positive legacy.

In Brazil, we supported our first community development program. And even before regulation required it, our team began with a free and prior informed consent process with the local key Lamba community and achieved 100% approval. We understand that we need to make -- ensure that the community has a voice, not just at the start of the project, but through the entire life cycle. Looking ahead, the long-term outlook for electrical vehicles and battery storage remains incredibly strong with other uses of lithium developing as well.

Lithium will continue to play a vital role in enabling the world's energy transition, and PLS is well positioned to be part of that future. We are confident in our ability to continue to navigate current market conditions and respond to customer needs as the market evolves. Our strong financial position and disciplined capital management ensure we remain resilient and ready to invest in growth when the time is right. I'd like to take this opportunity to acknowledge our fellow Director, Steve Scudamore, who has indicated that he plans to retire from the Board before the 2026 AGM.

As the inaugural Chairman of our Audit and Risk Committee, Steve has brought exceptional expertise in finance, accounting, compliance and risk management, guiding us through our first decade with clarity and assurance. His strong and steady leadership has helped the Board shape our strategy, capital management and confidence. PLS is stronger for his contribution, and I sincerely thank him for his tireless commitment and service. We are well advanced on our succession plan. And as a Board, we will continue to consider Board skill and renewal requirements.

On behalf of the Board, I want to thank our people for their commitment, resilience and to our shareholders for their continued support. Together, we're building a business that's not only delivering for today, but helping shape a sustainable energy future. Thank you for your belief in our long-term vision. I will shortly invite Dale Henderson to deliver his presentation.

While we will not address questions on the presentation or general business matters until the formal part of the business, for those attending virtually, you may submit your questions at any time. To submit a written question online, select the Q&A icon at the top of the Computershare virtual platform, type your question into the box select the topic to which your question relates and send. To submit a verbal question or comment, please follow the instructions written below the broadcast. For further instructions, please look at the online meeting guide available on the website or as an attachment on the meeting platform.

Please note that while you can submit online questions from now on, I will not address them until the relevant time in the meeting. Please also note that your questions may be moderated or if we get more than one question on the topic, amalgamated. If your question relates to one of the resolutions during the formal portion of the business, please reference the formal meeting item it relates to, and it will be addressed at the relevant time. For those in the room, I ask that you hold your question until then.

Before Dale addresses the meeting, please refer to the screen for a short video.

[Presentation]

Great video. I don't need to do my speech now, I think. Look, thank you, Kathleen, for your introductions, and good afternoon, everyone, and a big thank you to Nick for his a very warm welcome to Country. In our industry, the cycle doesn't define success. It's the decisions you make inside it and the discipline with which you deliver them.

The recent cycle revealed very different decisions and very different deliveries across the sector, and the impact of that divergence was clear in FY '25. FY '25 was a transformational year for PLS. It was one that tested the sector, but also demonstrated our resilience, discipline and capability. Despite softer pricing, we delivered major growth projects, materially lowered our cost base, strengthened our balance sheet and expanded internationally with the Colina acquisition, all the while much of the sector was contracting.

We turned the down cycle into an advantage, not a limitation. Because of that discipline, we now hold one of the strongest balance sheets, lowest cost hard rock operating positions in the global lithium industry. Combined with our scale, flexibility and 100% independence, this gives PLS a structural advantage. As pricing normalizes, our margins are set to expand faster than our peers.

Now as we move through FY '25 -- sorry, as we move through FY '26, our priorities are clear: operational excellence, disciplined cost control and capital efficiency. We are leveraging the platform we've built to drive stronger margins and sustainable long-term returns for our shareholders. In short, we've laid the foundations, strengthened our resilience, and we are well positioned for the opportunities ahead.

Now today, I want to speak to 3 key things. The first is how we delivered through one of the toughest pricing cycles in recent years. The second is how we advanced our strategy across operations, growth, chemicals and diversification. And lastly, why PLS is positioned for the long-term opportunity ahead. So as many of you will be aware here, PLS is the world's largest independent hard rock lithium producer. And that independence is one of our greatest strengths. It gives us the agility to navigate a fast-moving market on our terms and pursue value with discipline. Our foundation asset is, of course, the long-life Tier 1 Pilgangoora operation. And through the P680 and P1000 expansions, we've built a leading low-cost processing platform that delivers greater scale, higher efficiency and operational flexibility, positioning PLS competitively on the global cost curve.

But our ambition extends beyond Pilgangoora. We are building a diversified growth platform. Through downstream exposure with our POSCO joint venture in Korea and international optionality via the Colina project in Brazil, these assets broaden our footprint, deepen our participation in the value chain and strengthen our long-term growth profile.

And we're doing this from a position of financial strength with $852 million in cash and $625 million undrawn credit facilities as at the end of the September quarter. This gives us the flexibility to invest and grow and lead through the cycle. All of this reflects disciplined, consistent execution on our long-term strategy, and it's a strategy anchored in 4 enduring pillars, which I'll outline next. So FY '25 marked a major step change in executing this strategy. With the investment cycle now largely complete and our operating base strengthened, it's the right time to reaffirm the 4 pillars that guide PLS.

First is our operating excellence, delivering reliability, efficiency and safety across the business. The second is around unlocking the full potential of our asset base, led by, of course, our Pilgangoora operation, but also supported by the international opportunity that we have in Brazil with the Colina project.

Third, creating additional value through the battery material supply chain, including the POSCO joint venture, I mentioned a moment ago, our midstream demonstration plant and our study pathway with Gunfeng and shout out to the Gunfeng team who are here today.

Our fourth pillar is diversifying our revenue base beyond Pilgangoora, building a broader, more resilient business with multiple future growth pathways ahead of us. These pillars have shaped every major decision we've made, and they underpin the discipline, optionality and resilience that you see across the business we've built today. Now our strategy is delivering exactly what it was designed to deliver.

Scale, efficiency and a structurally stronger operating base. In FY '26, that showed up in the midpoint of our published guidance, and you can see the trends here as it relates to CapEx down to around $315 million as we move from construction to optimization. Unit costs down to approximately $580 per tonne, reflecting the structural efficiencies we've embedded through our P850 operating model, our Cost Smart program and our expansions being the P680 and P1000.

And then the production itself, up to about 845,000 tonnes, supported by a more efficient processing platform and improved recoveries. So in short, lower CapEx, lower costs, higher output. And I have to say this is my favorite slide in the deck. This is the operating leverage we've set out to build.

We're strengthening our margins, improving our cash generation and giving us the resilience today with meaningful upside as market conditions improve. And of course, it reflects the discipline that has guided us through the cycle and positioned us for long-term advantage. Now that discipline has been central to how we've navigated the cycle, ensuring that we protect, of course, that strong balance sheet, strengthen cash flow and maintaining the flexibility to invest when conditions support them.

Over the past 3 years, these actions have delivered meaningful results, including around $230 million in cash flow improvements in FY '25 alone. This reflects a whole of business effort. This includes the structural gains from our P850 operating model, the establishment of our $1 billion revolving credit facility, our targeted workforce and corporate cost reductions and our continued delivery of the Cost Smart initiative, which is our cost-out program, embedding lasting cost discipline, and our earlier decision to withhold dividends to preserve cash during the downturn.

Together, these measures ensured PLS remains one of the best capitalized companies in the sector with the resilience and flexibility to advance growth and respond decisively as the cycle recovers. Now that same discipline also guided how we used the cash generated during the last pricing peak, where we converted short-term returns into long-term structural advantage.

Across FY '22 and FY '23, PLS generated $3.1 billion in cash. It was a beautiful period. But we put it to good use and we allocated it deliberately. We put approximately 2/3 or $1.9 billion back into the base operation, funding our P680 and P1000 expansions and other projects that have transformed the Pilgangoora operating base into a large-scale, efficient Tier 1 asset and large -- and arguably second to none in terms of its processing capability that we've established. We also invested about another 1/4 of that $3 billion plus or $800 million, giving it back to shareholders, which some of you here in the audience, I know remember.

So of course, wonderful to be giving back to many of you who are here today for having faith in the company and riding that part of the cycle. And lastly, the balance that we retain to protect the business and ensure resilience through the low part of the cycle. In short, we use the cycle strategically, building structural advantages that will deliver value for years to come. Now moving now to FY '25 highlights. FY '25 tested the resilience of the entire sector, but it also showed PLS at our best.

Operationally, FY '25 was a standout year. We delivered record production of 755,000 tonnes. We implemented the P850 operating model to prioritize value over volume, and we commissioned the world's largest lithium ore sorter as part of the P680 project, enabling whole of ore processing and improving resource utilization. We also completed the P1000 expansion, providing capacity to scale efficiently as the market recovers.

Now I'd be remiss to not mention we were on time and under budget, and you can talk to Paul Laybourne, our Project Director later on how we managed that. And we've got Brett in the front row that Kathleen introduced to lead our operations. So a fantastic set of outcomes. I have to say, highly uncommon in any major project ramp-up ever, but delivered by the full team, an incredible set of outcomes, and that is what's been behind some of the fantastic success we are starting to realize this financial year.

But lastly, for FY '25 highlights, well, we went international. We completed our first international acquisition that Kathleen touched on being the Colina project in Brazil. So together, these achievements reflect disciplined execution and strategic foresight, positioning PLS strongly for the next phase of growth as and when the market supports.

Moving to financial highlights. While FY '25 was undeniably challenging from a pricing standpoint, yet our financial performance highlights the underlying resilience of the business and the discipline with which we have navigated the cycle. With revenue of $769 million, that reflected a 43% decline in the average realized price of USD 672 per tonne. Even so, we delivered positive underlying EBITDA of $97 million, demonstrating the strength of our operating platform. We also achieved a reduction in unit operating costs during the period, down to $627 per tonne FOB even as we completed the major ramp-up activities that I mentioned a moment ago.

So lower costs, a stronger operating base and a robust balance sheet provide the resilience through the current cycle and position PLS to capture significantly stronger margins as the market conditions improve. Now it's that combination of disciplined execution, strategic investment, well, that also now extends to how we think about sustainability and our broader role in the energy transition, which I'll turn to now.

Sustainability remains central to how we create long-term value. And within FY '25, we delivered meaningful progress across all dimensions, including safety, carbon emissions reductions and community partnerships.

So just touching on safety briefly. We achieved TRIFR of 2.79 beating our target and performing below the peer average, a clear reflection of the strength of our safety culture and operational leadership. Second, reduction in emissions, where we reduced our Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 7.1%, and we lowered power-related emissions intensity by 20%, enabled by the completion of our Stage 1 of our power strategy.

These gains improve both our environmental footprint and our long-term cost position. Thirdly, as it relates to our community and supply chain partnerships, where we spent in total $1.2 billion with Australian businesses, including $30.5 million with First Nations enterprises, working with 16 indigenous owned suppliers across the Pilbara, which we're very proud of.

So together, these outcomes show how we've advanced safety, efficiency and decarbonization in line with our mission of powering a sustainable energy future. And we continue to create shared value for our people, our partners, communities and of course, our shareholders. And it is the same disciplined long-term focus is reflected clearly at Pilgangoora, where our multiyear investment cycle is now delivering a step change in capability.

Pilgangoora's latest investment cycle is now complete, and the site has been fundamentally reshaped into a Tier 1 large-scale, long-life operation with lower cost and a far more flexible operating platform. The P680 and P1000 projects have delivered a step change in capability, including new crushing and ore sorting facility that enables whole of ore processing and greater scale and efficiency.

In parallel, while we transitioned to the P850 operating model, this is supported by turning off the Ngungaju facility, and that has created a simpler and more efficient structure, reflecting a disciplined value over volume approach designed to maximize cash flow in the current market environment.

With construction now complete, our focus has shifted firmly to optimization, lifting throughput, improving recoveries and embedding further cost efficiencies across the asset. A key driver of that progress is our Cost Smart program. Cost Smart is delivering sustained structural reductions in operating costs across both mining and processing and more broadly across the business.

These initiatives are embedding a culture of continuous cost discipline, maximizing value through the cycle and reinforcing Pilgangoora's position at the lower end of the global cost curve. I have to say, Flavio, our interim CFO, has done an excellent job leading the charge on this front.

Now this is this disciplined foundation around cost out that supports our ability to advance growth options in a measured and strategic way. I'll now turn to the outlook for the business. So as it relates to FY '26, our focus is clear. It's about operations excellence, disciplined cost control and capital efficiency, strengthening margins and ensuring resilient returns.

Our priorities align with the 4 pillars of our strategy: operate, grow, chemicals and diversification. Together, these priorities reflect a focused and disciplined approach to FY '26, positioning PLS to capture value as the cycle turns.

As it relates to our approach to growth, while this remains measured and disciplined, growing in lockstep with the market and advancing options that strengthen diversification, flexibility and future scale, which I have to say are all fully within our control.

As it relates to Ngungaju, we retain the optionality to bring Ngungaju back online. This is latent capacity, enabling rapid additional tonnes when pricing supports higher output. Now of course, this is without long lead times or major capital.

As it relates to P2000, our next expansion at Pilgangoora, while the feasibility study assessing potential expansion of this, which would increase production to more than 2 million tonnes per annum, that feasibility study is due in FY '27. And of course, any development decision relating to that study depends upon funding pathways and, of course, taking a view of the pricing environment at that time.

So to avoid any doubt, this is a growth option that we have to bring to market when it makes sense for the market. It is not a commitment. In the same vein, we also have the Colina project in Brazil. Now drilling and study optimization continue with outcomes due in the June quarter of this year -- next year, I should say.

Now the Colina project is a high-quality, 100% owned project that broadens our footprint into the Atlantic markets. So collectively, these initiatives form a disciplined suite of growth options, strengthening scale, geographic diversification and long-term strategic positioning, all set to be deployed as the cycle recovers. As it relates to our downstream strategy, well, this also provides important growth optionality and our joint venture with POSCO in South Korea is a key part of that.

Our 18% interest in the facility gives us exposure to one of the world's most advanced battery and EV hubs and provides meaningful foothold for further down the battery material supply chain. This facility has a 43,000 tonne hydroxide facility. Both trains 1 and 2 have successfully produced battery-grade material, demonstrating the capability of the operation and customer certification is well progressed across both trains.

Overall, PPLS provides valuable downstream optionality, positioning PLS within an established battery ecosystem and supporting our strategy to create value across the battery material supply chain. Now alongside PPLS, we are advancing additional downstream pathways selectively and with discipline, as it relates to the midstream demonstration plant, construction is progressing well and remains on schedule for completion next month.

The facility will demonstrate our ability to produce high-purity intermediate products through lower emissions processing pathway. As it relates to our study with our partners, Ganfeng, where we have assessed more than 1,000 potential sites globally together. And through that process, we have identified several preferred locations. Both parties have extended the sunset date for our potential joint venture to December 27, ensuring that we can time that investment decision with the market in the right location and of course, making sure it is a compelling investment case.

So together, these initiatives broaden our downstream optionality, providing multiple well-sequenced pathways to participate more deeply in the battery material supply chain as the market evolves. Now with those pathways in place, it's worth briefly reflecting on the broader market backdrop.

So before I step through the market in more detail, I wanted to frame the context briefly. We continue to see short-term volatility, but the long-term fundamentals remain incredibly strong, driven by EVs, energy storage and the rapid build-out of AI and data center infrastructure.

What matters in this environment is cost position, product quality, balance sheet strength and the ability to stay disciplined through the cycle. Now turning to pricing. The lithium market remains fast moving, reflecting shifting supply responses, emerging demand segments and evolving policy settings across China, the U.S. and Europe.

Now despite this near-term noise, the fundamental outlook remains intact. Inventory levels are normalizing. In fact, of late, they've been decreasing. Downstream activity is stabilizing and policy momentum continues to emphasize the importance of secure high-quality supply. We're also seeing increasing government focus on critical minerals resilience and PLS is actively engaged in these discussions, including -- we recently went on an AUSTrade delegation to the U.S. that Sandra here in the front row attended. We're also engaged in the strategic reserve discussions for Australia, and we have direct engagement with the policymakers in Canberra.

Separate to that, where we've also been involved offshore, including the recent APEC Summit in South Korea. And just the other week, we attended COP30 in Brazil. Again, all government related and the common thread through all of it was critical mineral security. Now in recent months, pricing has improved from earlier lows. And as the market matures, well differentiation between producers is becoming clearer and clearer.

Cost position, operational reliability and balance sheet strength matter today more than ever. And in that environment, PLS is exceptionally well positioned with a long-life Tier 1 asset, a structurally low-cost operating base and the financial strength to remain agile as conditions evolve.

Now the rapid growth we're seeing across the electric vehicles and battery energy storage continues to reinforce the strength of long-term lithium demand. Together, these remain the 2 largest and fastest-growing drivers of the market. Global EV sales are expanding strongly, up about 24% year-to-date, with global penetration reaching approximately 30% and more than half of all new vehicles in China are now electric. This growth is being supported by falling battery costs, broader model availability and tightening emission standards across our major markets.

As it relates to battery energy storage, well, it's growing even faster. It's up around 40% year-on-year. China's rapid build-out of renewable energy, particularly solar, is driving the need for large-scale storage solutions to stabilize grids, sorry, and firm up supply. Now while there's been some short-term noise around U.S. tax credits and tariffs, these developments do not change the long-term trajectory. Electrification continues to deepen and storage is becoming a fundamental component of every modern energy system. These are structural, not cyclical drivers, and they continue to strengthen.

And with 100% ownership model, scale growth pipeline and a strong balance sheet, we, PLS are well positioned to capture the full value of this demand as market conditions recover. Now electrification is now moving well beyond passenger vehicles into a much broader range of mobility segments. And these emerging markets bring significantly higher battery intensity.

As it relates to electric truck sales, well, they grew more than 140% in the first half of this calendar year alone, driven largely by China's tighter efficiency standards and the rapid build-out of charging infrastructure. As it relates to rail, well, it's beginning to adopt battery electric locomotives, including Australia's first units now operating here in the Pilbara.

In Marine Transport, Tasmania's ICA has delivered the world's largest fully electric vehicle and aerospace is taking early steps with successful test flights of next-generation electric aircraft. Even motorsport is transitioning with Formula 1 adopting larger hybrid electric systems from '26. So apologies to the petrol heads out there. Formula 1 is going electric and go on. And you might have seen in the video, the flying drone. That was either myself or James Fuller. We got to ride in that in Guangzhou a couple of months back.

So these things are real. That wasn't AI, I can assure you. And how we got that through our life insurance, I'm not sure. We won't go to that. But it's incredible to see how the world is changing, and it was absolutely thrill for all the right reasons to ride in that eVTOL a few months back. So across these e-mobility segments, well, they actually require larger battery systems and passenger vehicles, amplifying their impact on future lithium demand. but the awakening giant.

Beyond mobility, one of the most significant accelerations in lithium demand is coming from battery energy storage and the rapid build-out of AI and data center infrastructure. These are becoming major structural demand engines in their own right. Battery energy storage is the fastest-growing segment of the market. China alone is targeting 180 gigawatts of new storage capacity by the end of '27. That's more than 140% increase from today's level, representing a USD 30 billion of new investment.

Globally, as renewable energy penetration grows, particularly solar, storage is increasingly required to stabilize grids and support reliability. At the same time, AI and data centers are emerging as the second major driver. These facilities require large-scale instantaneous power support, making grid-connected BES essential for digital reliability.

And in 2025, this year, more than USD 580 billion is expected to be invested in data centers alone. So together, China's storage build-out and the explosive growth in digital infrastructure are accelerating lithium demand, reinforcing the long-term opportunity for scale producers like PLS. So stepping back, the fundamentals underpinning long-term lithium demand continue to strengthen.

EV adoption is rising globally, energy storage is scaling rapidly and the expansion of AI and data center infrastructure is creating significant new source of demand. China's policy momentum, combined with growing renewable penetration worldwide is accelerating the build-out of large-scale storage. While emerging mobility segments and digital infrastructure add depth and diversification to future demand. These are structural forces, broad-based, global and long term.

And with a Tier 1 asset, a structurally low-cost position, a strong balance sheet and further growth options, PLS is exceptionally well placed to capture this growth as the cycle evolves. So against that backdrop of strengthening long-term demand, I want to bring together the themes that have defined PLS over the past year and the qualities that position us for the opportunities ahead.

Let me return to the theme that frame today's discussion. In our industry, the cycle doesn't define success. It's the decisions you make inside it and the discipline with which you deliver them. The recent cycle revealed very different decisions and very different deliveries across the sector, and the results were clear in FY '25. PLS turned the down cycle into an advantage. We delivered major growth projects, lowered costs, maintained a strong balance sheet and expanded our portfolio while much of the sector was contracting. Because of those decisions and the discipline with which we've delivered them, we now stand with a Tier 1 asset operating at scale, a structurally lower cost base and one of the strongest balance sheets in the lithium industry.

Combined with our scale, flexibility and 100% independence gives PLS a structural advantage. As pricing normalizes, our margins are set to expand faster than our peers. Our growth options across chemicals, international expansion and downstream technologies are sequenced, flexible and fully in our control. But our confidence is anchored in what we control, disciplined decisions, disciplined delivery, operational excellence and strategic agility. These are the hallmarks that define PLS and our role as a partner of choice in the global supply chains.

Now before I close, I want to acknowledge our long-term shareholders. Many of you and many of you in the room today have held firms through the tough parts of the cycle, staying committed when sentiment weakened. It's your conviction that help position PLS where it stands today. We are stronger than ever and ready for the opportunities ahead.

So let me finish with where we began. The cycle may shift, but disciplined decisions and disciplined deliveries are what sets us apart. PLS is well positioned for the next chapter. Thank you to our great people of PLS, our partners, our community partners, my fellow directors and all our shareholders for your continued support.

I'll now hand back to Kathleen for formal proceedings. Thank you very much.

Thank you for that. So I'll briefly explain the meeting procedures before we move to the formal business of today's meeting. All voting will be conducted by way of poll on all resolutions, which I will declare open shortly. If you are eligible to vote, there are 2 ways you may cast your vote in person or via the online platform.

Voting shareholders who have joined us in person should have received a white attendance card at registration. If you did not receive a white attendance card and believe you should have, please raise your hand now and Computershare representative will assist you. Once voting is open, shareholders in the room can scan the QR code on the white attendance card using the camera function on your smartphone. This will open the voting app. You will need to accept the terms and conditions. You can then vote by selecting either for, against or abstain. If you need assistance voting, please raise your hand at any time and a Computershare representative will assist you.

For the virtual attendees eligible to vote in the meeting, a vote icon will appear on the virtual platform. Select the icon will bring up the list of resolutions and present you with voting options. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. There's no need to hit submit or enter button as the vote is automatically recorded. You can change your vote up until the time I declare voting closed. If you require assistance during the meeting, please refer to the online meeting guide.

With regard to proxies, these numbers will be displayed on the screen for each resolution. Please note that a number of open proxies has been received for the Chairman's discretion, and I advise that I, as Chairman, will be directing these in favor of each relevant resolution. Ladies and gentlemen, I now turn to the formal matters to be considered today and declare the voting open on all items of business. I will give you a warning before I close voting.

Rod Soms from Computershare has agreed to be the returning officer today. And following confirmation by Computershare, final results will be announced to the ASX later today. The questions process for those attending virtually has been explained. For those in the room, if you wish to ask a question, please raise your hand and wait for a microphone before stating your name for the record. In the interest of time and to allow all attendees the opportunity to ask a question, you may be limited to one question and one follow-up question.

I will now move to the business of the meeting. The company has released its notice of meeting for today's meeting, which can be viewed in the ASX and the PLS websites as well as on the company's Computershare meeting platform. I propose that the notice of meeting is taken as read. If there are no objections, I will record that the motion is carried.

The first item of business is to receive and table for consideration the annual report, which includes the financial report, the sustainability report, the directors' report and the auditor's report for the financial year ending 30 June 2025. Members should note that the reports are not tabled for approval, but simply for discussion.

Mr. Derek Meats from the company's auditor, KPMG, is available to answer questions from members in relationship to the conduct of the audit. I will now pause to allow shareholders to comment or ask questions on the financial report, reports of the directors or auditors or any other general questions of the company following Dale's presentation. We can address those now. So are there any questions in the room?

My name is Aaron Wood. I would like to ask a question regarding capital allocation and especially, I guess, employee share plans. And I guess, try to understand if there is any consideration for these being placed on market instead of being a dilutionary impact to existing shareholders moving forward.

Thank you for your question. It's something that we -- in terms of buying shares online on market versus allocating them. And the issue for us has been whilst we continue to be potentially capital constrained, then it tends to make sense to issue the shares. As we become a more mature company, then we will definitely look at buying those shares on market.

And given the volatility in the market, our balance sheet and the cash that we've had on hand has held us in very good stead. So it is something we absolutely consider and we'll continue to do so. Other questions in the room? Please ask a question about Dale's presentation, yes.

I'm Karen [indiscernible]. I note that you're talking a lot about sustainable energy, and I think that's a great thing. In Dale's presentation, he talked about now at Pilgangoora having the largest lithium ore sorter and in Korea, the joint venture plant.

Could you give us some more details on exactly how much of both of those items and Brazil, if you have the information, is -- how much of the energy that you use in those locations is sustainably generated and what your short, midterm goals are to improve the sustainability of the energy that you use, for example, at Pilgangoora. I haven't seen any wind farm wind turbines or solar panels in any of the photos, but that could be just because they were out of the photo.

I'll let you answer that, Dale.

Thank you very much for your question. So I'll speak to the strategies as much as we have defined for each of those 3 regions. So starting with Australia, we have a 3-phase approach for our energy transition. in Australia, and we've completed Phase 1. So we've moved from what was actually remote diesel generators, which is very carbon-intensive to a combination of solar plus batteries plus LNG. And by the way, this was actually one of the things delivered this past year. I didn't add it on the list.

We did so many things, but we've done the first phase of that 3-phase strategy. Then the second phase is essentially an extension of that, more solar, more batteries and scaling that up. And then the third phase, hopefully, we'll look to do a network power solution in the region. And there's a couple of different models being floated. And the idea there would be to network into a larger infrastructure network where we're all part of the same network. But the aim is to continue to pursue carbon out whilst also getting cost out. So that's Australia. As it relates to Brazil.

So in Australia, what percentage today is sustainable energy? What percentage are you using? Is it...

Sandra, do we have that number off the hand? 6 megawatts of solar power. How much? We've had a 20% reduction in power emissions. We can follow up after we have disclosed this to market. on Australia. But just to round out on Brazil. The good news there is they actually lead the G8 as it relates to lowest carbon power as a country, largely hydropower power. And we will be looking to network into that. So this is a very low carbon power source. And of course, one of the attractions of the region and further, a very low-cost supply of power.

As it relates to Korea, they have a combined source of power. It includes some nuclear and some carbon. I don't have the stats off hand unless Sandra, do you have any of that? Sorry. We'll have to come back to you on Korea. But certainly, Korea, like the other countries, all other countries is pursuing carbon out strategy. Does that answer your question?

Not really. I'd like to know, is it 20%, 30%, 1%, 99% in each of the 3 areas.

So Brazil is 100% carbon out already, clear of the hydropower. South Korea, I don't have that number off hand. We'll have to come back to you. And as it relates to Australia, we've disclosed this already. I don't have that number on hand, but we can give that to you after the meeting.

Okay. Any additional questions in the room? Do we have any online questions?

Yes. I have received a couple of questions online. The first one is from Mr. Stephen Mayne in regard to financial statements and reports. PLS has 12% of total shares currently sold short, down from 20% a few weeks ago. We have also had Australian Super lift its stake from 11.5% to 17.5% in the last few months. The stock has also doubled in that time. What is going on? Is any of this connected? And do you know if Australian Super has a policy of making any of its $2.2 billion stake in our company available to short sellers?

So thank you, Stephen Mayne. is a very supportive shareholder. They strongly believe in the energy transition are putting a lot of money into the sector, not just in our company. We have been told they do not have a policy of providing those shares to short. And as you know, our stock gets shorted as a proxy for lithium price.

So when an announcement comes out or there's some speculation about what's happening in the capacity and whether capacity is coming online or offline, that often results in speculation and shorting in the marketplace as a proxy for the lithium price. Do we have any other questions?

Yes. Another general business question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. I have moderated this one slightly as I did the previous one. PLS is one of the 20 most popular stocks on the ASX with retail shareholders, however, less than 2% bothered to vote at AGMs. This makes the relative influence of institutional shareholders such as Australian Super, greater at AGMs than it should be when it comes to contested resolutions put to vote. Who do we deal with Australian Super? And what would we say to them if they requested a Board seat?

So I'll answer the first question, which is retail shareholders voting. We make an effort to provide the opportunity for retail shareholders by having a hybrid meeting. We always make sure that our Investor Relations contact details are on the material that goes out. And in my experience, when retail investors are unhappy with what the company is doing, they show up and they vote. So that doesn't concern me because I think we give them ample opportunity, and we take their feedback very seriously.

In terms of Australia Super, as I said before, they're very supportive. We work with their investment team. We also have multiple interactions with their ESG and stewardship teams. They spend time with us talking about governance. And frankly, I'm not going to engage in a speculation as to whether or not they're going to ask for a Board seat. Any other questions online?

No more questions on those resolutions.

Any other questions in the room? Excellent. If there's any questions we haven't had time to address, please take the time to either talk to James or anybody else. And further on sustainability, we have Sandra in the room as well. So if there are no further questions, I'll proceed to the specific resolutions in the Notice of Meeting for shareholder consideration.

We have a number of remuneration resolutions to consider today. So I thought I would have Nick come and explain our philosophy and strategy with executive remuneration. So I'd like to invite Nick Cernotta, the Chairman of our People and Culture Committee, to say a few words.

Thank you, Kathleen, and good afternoon, shareholders. I'd like to address resolutions 6 through to 10 relating to equity grants for our Managing Director and CEO, Dale and executive remuneration framework more broadly. The resolutions before you today reflect the Board's simple but powerful philosophy.

Executives should think, act and be rewarded like owners. When our executive hold meaningful equity in PLS, their interests become aligned and inseparable from yours. They share in the upside when we create value, and they feel the pain when share price declines. This alignment drives the right behaviors, long-term thinking, disciplined capital allocation and a relentless focus on sustainable shareholder returns.

Our strategy is to embed this owner's mindset as early as possible by way of 3 key mechanisms: existing long-term incentive framework being performance rights worth in Dale's case, 150% of his fixed remuneration and vesting over 3 years, subject to meeting defined performance conditions. The recently introduced mandatory 20% deferred equity component of each executive's short-term incentive with an option -- an optional election to up that to 50% in deferred equity rather than taking the cash. Pleasingly, that election has been taken up by Dale and all the other executives. Thirdly, extending the salary sacrifice scheme to the executives, similar to what has been in place for the nonexecutive directors for the past 2 years.

Both the LTI and STI equity components carry performance conditions for safety, production, costs, relative shareholder returns and delivery of strategic objectives. If PLS doesn't perform the vesting of the awards, cash and equity is impacted. We've also proposed an executive loan share plan, which has been designed to accelerate shareholder alignment through what is a once-only escrowed equity allocation to incentivize for both share price appreciation and 4-year executive retention during what continues to be a period of sustained volatility in the lithium market.

The Board is acutely aware of the heightened risk of executive turnover. Maintaining a stable and committed executive team over the next 4 to 5 years is considered critical to ensuring the company can successfully navigate current market conditions and be positioned to capitalize on the future growth opportunities. The Board considers the loan share plan to be a necessary supplement to the existing LTI and STI plans at this specific point in the cycle. Importantly, the performance linkage is built into the offer as any upside to participants only materializes if there is share price appreciation over the 4-year vesting period.

This provides strong alignment with shareholder outcomes, while the additional equity exposure accelerates the alignment of executives' interest with those of you, our shareholders. We want executives who don't just want to work for PLS, but we want executives who have an owner's mindset. This approach drives better long-term performance, stronger governance and greater strategic discipline. So the Board unanimously recommends you vote in favor of all the remuneration resolutions. Thank you.

With that, we'll move to Resolution 1, which relates to the remuneration report, which is included as part of the directors' report that can be found on 102 of the company's 2025 annual report. Voting on the adoption of the remuneration report is for advisory purposes only. The resolution and proxy votes received on this resolution are displayed on the screen.

I now invite the shareholders to comment or ask questions that they may have on Resolution 1, and Danny will let me know of any online questions. Are there any questions in this room related to this resolution? No. Danny, are there any questions online?

Yes, we've received one question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Did any of the proxy advisers recommend against this remuneration report item or any other item of business today? And did this translate into any material against votes? Can the Chair please share what engagement occurred with proxy advisers and major institutional investors before today's AGM?

Thank you, Stephen. Having conversations with investors and proxy holders ahead of the AGM is an important part of the work we do. Sally-Anne as Chair of the Sustainability and myself, we meet with a number of the stewardship and investment teams at major shareholders, and we meet with all the major proxy holders and attempt to answer all the questions.

The proxy adviser reports are confidential and they're the ownership of the proxy advisers. So I'm not going to provide information on that. I will point out that there was some negativity in the rem report and in the share loan grant with some concern about whether there was an appropriate mechanism. But in fact, most shareholders supported it. Are there any other questions on the rem report? Okay.

So if there are no other questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't done so, please now cast your vote on this item. I will now move to the next item of the business. I refer you to Resolution 2 of the Notice of Meeting, which relates to the reelection of Mr. Nicholas Cernotta as Director.

Nick retires by rotation and offers himself to you for reelection. His details are set out in the explanatory memorandum and annual report. The resolutions and proxy votes are displayed on the screen. I now invite Nick to say a few more words.

Thanks again, Kathleen. Firstly, let me say that it really does remain a privilege and an honor to stand here before you to seek your support in my reelection to the Pilbara Minerals Board. When I first joined in 2017, I committed to bringing my operational experience strategic insight and responsible stewardship to protect and enhance shareholder value. I'd like to believe my contribution to the Board so far has helped deliver against those objectives.

With over 40 years in the mining industry and the colors in the explanatory memorandum, if you want to, after cutting my teeth in the gold fields and then broadening my responsibilities across many bulk, precious and base metal commodities, I don't think there's much that would surprise me today in terms of operating challenges, social, cultural and environmental considerations and geopolitical and economic turmoil, and there's been no shortage of that lately as we know.

I've enjoyed senior executive positions with several very accomplished resource and mining service companies where knowledge and insights to safe and efficient mining and processing applications were matured along with gaining empathy, which is required to support the executive in the execution of business strategies.

I currently also serve as an independent Nonexecutive Director across a portfolio of ASX-listed companies where I chair and participate in various Board subcommittees, giving me a deep and current appreciation for best practices in corporate governance, strategic oversight, business and corporate risk management, social and environmental stewardship and all keeping a pulse check on culture and operational execution. This broader ASX company exposure brings informed and new perspectives to our strategic boardroom considerations, ultimately supporting more responsible shareholder wealth creation.

I take seriously the trust that you place in me and my independence, which allows me to challenge constructively so that decisions are made in the best long-term interest of all our shareholders and our stakeholders. On that note, I respectfully ask for your continued confidence and trust and for your support in my reelection to the Board. I look forward to continuing to serve you and to work in the best interest of this uniquely positioned and amazing company.

Nick has the full support of the Board, and he's an incredibly good contributor. So I'll now invite shareholders to comment or ask any questions they may have on the resolution to reelect Mr. Chad. If there are no questions in the room, Danny, do we have any online?

Yes, we do. We have one question online from Mr. Stephen Mayne. There was a 9.7% protest vote on the proxies against Nicholas Cernotta's reelection. Was there an issue? Could Nicholas confirm that this will be his last 3-year term, and he won't be seeking a fourth term in November 2028 when he will have served almost 12 years?

Thank you, Stephen. As many people know that there's an increasing alignment with shareholders' votes when they have an issue either with the auditor or with the rem report to also have a protest vote against the individual who's been elected. So we weren't actually given any reason or any feedback from our investors about any issues they might have with Nick.

And in terms of Nick's standing for reelection, as I said earlier, we have a succession plan that we're putting in place at the moment to make sure that we have an orderly transition of directors over time. So if there are no more questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote on this item. I'll now move to the next item of the business. I refer you to Resolution 3 of the Notice of Meeting, which is a special resolution and relates to the proposal to change the company's name to PLS Group Limited.

The resolution and proxy votes received are displayed on the screen. I'll now ask shareholders to comment or ask any questions they may have on this resolution. Danny, are there any questions online?

Yes, I have a question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Well done for holding on to the company's ASX code of PLS with this name change to PLS Group. Were you influenced by others doing this recently?

So the logic for the name change was that when we acquired Latin Resources and also the fact that we have operations now in Korea, we thought it was appropriate to take a name that was not tied to one region, and that's why we went from Pilbara. And luckily, PLS is -- was our ticker, so that worked out quite well for us.

Okay. So if there are no more questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please cast your vote on this item. The next item of the business is Resolution 4, which relates to the approval of the employee share purchase plan to enable PLS to issue equity to eligible employees under the plan without accounting towards the company's placement capacity under ASX Listing Rule 7.1.

As Nick outlined, this allows us to get -- to have eligible employees contribute amount of their pretax remuneration for a specific period to receive equity interest. The resolution and proxy votes received are on the screen. I now invite any shareholders to ask questions. No questions in the room. Danny, do we have any online questions?

No online questions.

Okay. Thank you. If there are no more questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. And if you haven't done so, please cast your vote. The next item of the meeting is Resolution 5, which relates to the approval of the loan share plan.

As explained by Nick, the loan share plan is designed to provide long-term equity position as quickly as possible to the executives to get the owner mentality and align the interest with those shareholders. Are there any questions on this resolution? Please?

I take it that the loan share plan...

Excuse me, sorry, just wait for the microphone to run online can hear you.

Sorry. Aaron Wood again. I would just like to clarify that the loan share plan is effectively free carried at a 0% interest rate and that, that is covered by the company.

Yes. However, it does not -- I mean, we considered options, which were providing shares, which -- or share rights, which is something that's done. The problem with providing share rights is that is an automatic benefit no matter what happens with the share price.

We looked at options and the issue with options is you end up with a discount to options, and we wanted something that was face value. So we felt that this mechanism gave us the best alignment without significant cost to the shareholders where on a 4-year term, which means they only benefit in the upside, but they don't get the free position at the downside. So there's no benefit if the share price does not improve.

Sorry. So just to clarify, so I believe there's up to $6 million worth of loan proceeds available, and these are provided essentially free carried by the company with that cost covered by the company. So there is an underlying cost.

Yes. But for the shares -- for the executive to get benefit, the share price has to be above the issue price or there's no benefit at the end of the scheme for executives.

For the executives. However, just to clarify, there is still a cost to the...

Yes, absolutely.

Do we have any ballpark figure around the cost of capital? I said loan.

I might turn it over to Nick.

I'm going to actually ask Flavio working at cost of capital is effectively percentage-wise.

It's minimal.

Minimal. It's not significant.

Are there any other questions in the room? Danny, do we have any questions online?

No questions on this resolution.

Okay. If there are no more questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. Please cast your vote if you haven't done so. The next item of the meeting, I'll pull together for questions, and that's resolutions 6, 7, 8 and 9 in the Notice of Meeting, which relate to proposed issue equity to Mr. Dale Henderson. These resolutions -- given that they're all in equity, I'll pull them together. Resolution 6 in the Notice of Meeting relates to the issue of FY '26 LTI performance rights to Mr. Dale Henderson. Resolution -- the performance rights for the LTI are subject to the performance conditions, which include the shareholder return as well as some specific strategic initiatives.

There's also a service condition where Mr. Henderson remains employed with the company for 3 years. So the resolution of proxies are displayed on the screen. I'll now move to Resolution 7, which is the approval of the issue of FY '26 STI performance rights to Mr. Dale Henderson under the employee award plan. The Board made a change to the STI framework for executives for FY '26 with the incorporation of mandatory deferred equity component with an option to take a further portion of their STI opportunity in deferred equity.

For FY '26, Dale has elected to receive an STI entitlement as 50% cash and 50% deferred equity. Accordingly, shareholder approval is required for the issue of the deferred equity. As the actual number of performance rights to be issued cannot be determined until the conclusion of the FY '26 STI performance approval period, shareholder approval is sought for the maximum number of STI performance rights, which may be received. Full details of this is set out in the explanatory memorandum, and that includes a 12-month deferral.

So at the end of this year, when the STI is issued, it will be another 12 months of deferral beyond that. The resolution and proxy votes are displayed on the screen. The next resolution is the issue of loan shares to Dale. Resolution 8 relates to the approval to grant the loan and issue the loan shares to Mr. Dale Henderson. I've explained earlier the loan share plan and full details of the proposed loan grant and issue of shares are in the explanatory memorandum.

The resolution and proxy votes are displayed on the screen. The final resolution, I've got a lot of these, Resolution 9 in the notice of meeting is the approval of the issue of share rights to Mr. Dale Henderson elected to be received in lieu of 40% of his annual fixed remuneration for the period ending 30 November 2026.

In addition to the Board's decision to make certain changes to the remuneration structure for executive management in regard to the STI deferred equity, which we addressed earlier, the Board resolved subject to shareholder approval to allow executives to sacrifice a portion of their annual fixed remuneration and be issued with share rights under the employee -- company employee awards plan.

The scheme is designed to replicate the one that the net salary sacrifice scheme, which has been on foot for a number of years. Full details of the issue of rights set out in the memorandum. The resolution and proxy votes are displayed on the screen. So I'll now ask shareholders if they have any questions about that group of resolutions to please ask them now. Okay. Do we have any questions online, Danny?

No questions online on those resolutions.

Okay. If there are no more questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote on the item. We'll now move on to Resolution 10. As this resolution relates to me, I will hand over the Chair to Mr. Steve Scudamore.

Good afternoon. Resolution 10 of the Notice of Meeting relates to the approval to issue share rights to Ms. Kathleen Conlon elected to be received in lieu of up to 40% of our annual director fee for the period ending 30 of November 2026 in accordance with the company's Nonexecutive Director salary sacrifice scheme.

Full details of the proposed issue of share rights are set out in the explanatory memorandum. The resolution and proxy votes are displayed on the screen. And I now invite shareholders to comment on or ask any questions they may have on Resolution 10, and Danny will let me know of any online questions. So are there any questions in the room? Danny, are there any questions?

No online questions on that resolution.

Okay. If there are no questions, I put the resolution to the meeting. And if you haven't already done so, please now cast your vote on these items. Thank you, and I'll pass you back to the Chair.

We're on the home stretch. I refer you to the final item of business, Resolution 11 of the Notice of Meeting, which relates to the renewal of the proportional takeover provisions in Clause 19 of the PLS constitution for a period of 3 years. The resolution and proxy votes received are displayed on the screen. I now invite shareholders to comment or ask questions. If there are no questions in the room, Danny, do we have any questions online?

No questions on that resolution.

Okay. If there are no questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting. If you haven't already done so, please cast your vote on this item. Are there any remaining questions? Ladies and gentlemen, if there are no more questions, that concludes all the resolutions put to the meeting. I ask that all shareholders complete their voting before I close the poll. For those online, please ensure that you have completed your voting on all resolutions.

I will add a pause for that to occur.

[Voting]

I now take it that all shareholders have voted and declare the poll closed. Computershare will now proceed with the counting of the poll and collating results. Details of the results of the meeting will be posted on both the company's website and on the ASX company announcement platform as soon as practical. I'd formally like to thank all of you for attending and your participation in the meeting. As that concludes the business of the meeting, I declare the meeting closed. For those of you in the room, please join us for some refreshments in the foyer.

And as mentioned earlier, we have the management team here who would be delighted to answer any further questions that you have. Thank you very much.

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to PLS September 2025 Quarterly Activities Report. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded.

I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, PLS Managing Director and CEO, Dale Henderson. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Maggie. Good morning, and good evening. Thank you for joining us today. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners on the land in which PLS operates here and birth. We acknowledge the logo people of the Nunga nation. And we also recognize the NemlandGariara Peoples on who land our Australian operation is located in the Pilbra regions. We pay our respects to their elders past and present.

Joining me today is Flavio Garofalo, our Interim CFO; and Brett McFadgen, our Chief Operating Officer. We are also joined by other members of our senior team. This call will run for approximately an hour. We'll begin with the presentation on our September quarter performance, then move through market commentary before finishing with Q&A. We'll address questions submitted via the webcast at the end of the session.

Now starting with some opening commentary. The September quarter delivered a strong start to FY '26, demonstrating the benefits of our expanded operating platform and our contact or focused operating strategy. We've continued to build on the momentum from a transformational FY '25, demonstrating resilience and operating discipline through stable production of just under 225,000 tonnes of spodumene concentrate, improvement in lithium recovery to deliver a record quarterly average of 78% with lithium, and a 13% reduction in unit costs to $540 per ton FOB. These results highlight the continued optimization of the P850 operating model and the benefits of our deliberate strategy to increase contact or feed to maximize unit cost reductions.

They also affirmed that the Pilgan Plant is now operating in steady state, delivering the scale, efficiency and cost performance we envisaged when we embarked on our expansion journey. Pricing conditions improved materially with a 20% uplift on the prior quarter, contributing to a 30% increase in revenue to $251 million. As the largest 100% owned and operated hardware lithium producer, every price improvement flows directly to PLS' bottom line, providing strong leverage to any recovery in lithium pricing and reinforcing our position as a sector's pure-play leader.

Underlying operating cash flow remained positive after adjusting for customer set timing, and we closed the quarter with $852 million in cash, maintaining a strong balance sheet and significant flexibility to invest through the cycle.

Now let's please turn to Slide 2. Beginning with a reminder of our strategy. Our strategy is underpinned by a clear vision to create sustainable value for our shareholders, while strengthening PLS' position as a leading long-life and low-cost producer in the global lithium supply chain.

Turning to Slide 3. PLS is world's largest independent hard rock lithium producer. That independence remains 1 of our greatest strengths, giving us agility and responsiveness needed in a fast-changing global market. Our foundation asset is a high-quality, long-life Pilgangoora operation in Western Australia. Through our P680 and P1000 expansions, we've established a leading low-cost processing platform that delivers greater scale, efficiency and operational flexibility, firmly positioning PLS at the lower end of the global cost curve. Beyond Pilgangoora, we are continuing to build a truly diversified growth platform with downstream exposure through our POSCO joint venture in South Korea and early-stage international optionalities through the cleaner project in Brazil. Importantly, our balance sheet remains exceptionally strong with $852 million in cash and $625 million in undrawn cash facilities, providing the flexibility and confidence to invest, grow and lead through all stages of the lithium cycle.

Now turning to Slide 4. Some of the key highlights for the quarter include production of 224.8 tonnes, up 2% quarter-on-quarter, reflecting strong operational recovery and consistent plant performance as we operate the expanded Pilgan Plant at steady state. Unit operating costs, as mentioned, a 13% reduction to $540 per tonne FOB, delivering clear cost leadership and highlighting the operational leverage of our optimized production platform.

As it relates to pricing, a 20% uplift in realized pricing and a 30% increase in revenue resulting in positive cash margin even as we continue to make modest investment in our growth and improvement programs. Importantly, this performance marks a disciplined and confident start to FY '26, validating our strategy of building scale, efficiency and flexibility to capture margin through the cycle.

Now with that, I'll now hand over to Brett to take a deeper look at the operation.

Thank you, Dale. If we move to Slide 5. Starting with safety. Our 12-month roll in TRIFR was 3.8 at the end of the September quarter. We also achieved 2.95 quality safety interactions completed per 1,000 hours worked, well above our target of 1.6, demonstrating strong leadership engagement in promoting a positive safety culture. This outcome reflects the ongoing work we're doing to build and strengthen our safety culture across the site. While this improvement is encouraging, we recognize there's always more work to do to ensure every team member goes home safe and well after every swing.

Moving to Slide 6. The September quarter delivered strong disciplined operational outcomes across mining, processing, cost and sales performance. Total material moved increased due to improved operational efficiencies, the transition to our mining fleet to the owner-operator model is ongoing, supporting greater cost control and flexibility. Processing lithium recovery of approximately 78% demonstrates the sustained benefits of the P1000 expansion and the reliability of our processing platform. Our operating strategy of maximizing contact or fed through effective utilization of the ore-sorting capability is delivering expected unit cost benefits. The proportion of contact or processed will be progressively increased over the remainder of FY '26 to leverage our all sorting capability and maximize unit cost reductions. Together, these initiatives across mining and processing continued to unlock more capital efficiencies and lower unit operating costs. Our unit op cost of $540 a tonne or USD 353 a tonne delivered a 13% reduction on the June quarter, a significant improvement driven by scale, efficiency and our optimized operating model.

While the Pilgan Plant now operating in steady state, we've delivered on our vision of a larger, more efficient and lower cost operation. The expanded platform provides us with a greater operational flexibility, improved resource utilization and the ability to adapt to changing market conditions. Most importantly, this transformation positions us to capture margin through the cycle, enabled by industry-leading are touting technology, improved efficiency and a strong cost discipline. Thank you. I'll now hand back to Dale.

Thanks, Brett. Moving now to Slide 7. PLS has built a portfolio of strategic growth options designed to drive long-term shareholder value through flexibility, diversification and market responsiveness. The Nocoju processing plant remains in care and maintenance '26, providing immediate low capital restart capability when market conditions improve. This is a unique source of latent capacity and optionality within our portfolio. Our P2000 feasibility study is progressing well, assessing the potential to expand Pilgangoora's production capacity to more than 2 million tonnes per annum. Study outcomes are expected in FY '27 with the development timing dependent on successful technical results, funding readiness and of course, a sustained improvement in lithium pricing.

In Brazil, drilling continues and study optimization work is advancing with outcomes targeted for the June quarter '26. This program will help define the development pathway for the cleaner project, and strengthen our presence in 1 of the world's most prospective emerging lithium provinces. Together, these initiatives demonstrate a balanced portfolio-based approach to growth, leveraging Tier 1 assets, global reach and disciplined capital allocation to create value and optionality through the cycle.

Moving now to Slide 8. Our chemical strategy continues to advance providing exposure to value-added lithium chemical products and enhance supply chain diversification. As it relates to P-PLF, our joint venture continues to make steady progress with customer certifications. Production has temporarily moderated to batch processing reflecting near-term softness in the South Korean battery sector following reduced U.S. EV incentives and higher tariffs during the quarter. Encouragingly, P-PLF, a joint venture is receiving interest from a number of new customers across existing and additional geographic regions, particularly those seeking to diversify lithium chemical and battery supply chains outside of China for EV mobility and energy storage applications over the medium term.

Moving to midstream. Construction of our midstream demonstration plant remains on schedule with completion target for the December quarter this year. This project will provide valuable technical data and commercial insight to inform future midstream participation opportunities.

Lastly, relating to our Ganfeng partnership, work on the joint downstream partnering study with Ganfeng has progressed during the quarter. More than 1,000 industrial sites have now been assessed with detailed evaluation continuing on a select few. We are in discussion with Ganfeng to extend the agreements sunset date to December 27, providing additional time to assess market conditions, short-list sites and the overall investment case. Together, these initiatives demonstrate a measured capital discipline approach to downstream integration, building capability and partnerships today that will position PLS for greater diversification and value capture across lithium supply chain in the future.

Now with that, I'll now hand over to Flavio for an overview of our financial performance.

Thank you, Dale. Good morning, and good evening to everyone joining us today. Please turn to Slide 10 for a summary of the group's key financial metrics for the quarter ended 30th September 2025. The September quarter delivered strong financial results, demonstrating the operational leverage of our optimized Pilgan Plant across all key metrics. Group revenue of $251 million was 30% higher quarter-on-quarter, driven by a 24% increase in average realized price to USD 742 per tonne for SC 5.3, and stable sales volumes. This demonstrates our ability to capture improved market pricing while maintaining operational consistency.

On the cost side, FOB unit operating costs decreased 13% to $540 per tonne, with CIF unit costs also down 11% to $645 per tonne. This improvement reflects the benefits of higher production volume and scale efficiencies delivered through our expanded platform along with ongoing optimization initiatives.

Our cost reduction focus is now embedded in the culture at PLS and is driving strong performance across all areas. We closed the quarter with a cash balance of $852 million, providing financial flexibility for strategic opportunities and maintaining our balance sheet resilience.

Turning to Slide 11. Slide 11 shows a cash flow bridge for the September quarter. During the September quarter, our cash balance declined by $122 million from $974 million to $852 million. This reduction was primarily driven by capital expenditure of $78 million and working capital time effects.

Working capital movements included approximately $50 million in customer receipts due in the early December quarter and $32 million in final pricing adjustments on the June quarter shipments.

Cash margin from operations of $8 million was supported by improved pricing but impacted by these timing effects. Cash margin from operations less mine development costs and sustaining CapEx was negative $19 million.

The capital expenditure was $78 million on a cash basis and $55 million on an accrual basis, comprising infrastructure and projects of approximately $28 million, mine development of $20 million, and sustaining capital of $7 million. Despite these working capital impacts, our balance sheet remains robust with total liquidity of $1.5 billion, positioning us well to navigate the current market conditions and invest strategically through the cycle.

I'll now hand back to Dale.

Thank you, Flavio. Turning to Slide 13. Global geopolitical dynamics continue to highlight the strategic importance of secure and resilient critical mineral supply chains. PLS is actively contributing to the policy discussions, from recent participation in the Astra critical minerals delegation trip to the U.S. to consultations on the proposed strategic reserve and through direct engagement with Polysomegason Canberra. Next week, I'll represent PLS at the APEC CEO Summit in South Korea. This is another opportunity to help position Australia as a reliable low-cost supply of critical minerals to global markets.

We welcome the Commonwealth government's continued commitment to developing Australia's critical minerals sector and will contribute to -- and we will continue to contribute to the policy discussions shaping its long-term success.

Australia has an incredible opportunity to expand its role in the global lithium and energy transition supply chain. But the rates for market share is well underway. Other jurisdictions are moving fast with coordinated policy and public investment to attract capital and downstream manufacturing. To remain competitive, Australia must match that ambition through targeted investment and shared infrastructure that lowers the cost for all across the industry and help secure our position in this global race.

Turning to pricing. Conditions remain volatile, but improved from the prior quarter, with both spodumene and lithium carbonate spot prices recording double-digit gains. During my recent visit to China last month, every 1 of our customers reiterated confidence in the long-term outlook and express a strong interest in securing additional supply from PLS. That continued demand and engagement underscore confidence in the sector's fundamentals and the prospectivity of our product supply.

Moving to Slide 14. Now turning to demand, lithium fundamentals remain robust. Global EV sales continue to expand, up around 9% quarter-on-quarter and 26% year-to-date with penetration now approaching 30% globally and more than half of all new vehicles in China being EVs. Battery energy storage installations are also accelerating, up nearly 40% year-on-year, strongly supported by China's rapid renewable energy buildout.

From a policy perspective, China's supportive regulatory framework continues to underpin domestic storage growth. While recent U.S. tax credit changes may create short-term noise, this doesn't alter the long-term global demand trajectory. In short, the demand story remains intact and PLS with its 100% ownership model and strong balance sheet is positioned to capture full benefit as markets recover.

Moving to Slide 15. Battery Energy Storage is now the fastest-growing segment and lithium demand rising just 3% of total consumption in 2020 at around 17% today according to BMI. BMI's latest forecast projects about 323 gigawatts of new BSS installations and calendar year '25, 50% growth year-on-year, if achieves an extraordinary growth rate. China remains the main catalyst. In September, the National Development and Reform Commission released a major action plan targeting 180 gigawatts of a new type of energy storage by '27. This represents more than USD 30 billion in new investment and a 140% increase from China's installed base at the end of calendar year '26.

At the same time, a second demand driver is emerging the rapid build-out of AI and data center infrastructure. These facilities require large-scale instantaneous power support, making grid-connected BESS a critical enabler of reliable infrastructure. Recent announcements from Google and WIDIA and Meta illustrate this trend with each committing tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to new AI-driven data center capacity. McKinsey & Company recently projected that global data center investment origin nearly USD 7 trillion by 2030, with more than USD 4 trillion allocated to community hardware. That level of capacity -- sorry, that level of capital intensity underscores how central data center resilience and therefore, dependable power and storage is becoming to the global economy.

Together, policy-driven renewable storage expansion and the digital infrastructure burn are expected to contribute significantly to continued growth in lithium demand, a dynamic that reinforces PLS' long-term opportunity to supply and partner across the global energy storage value chain.

In summary, BESS or BFS demand is being driven by 2 significant emerging drivers: one, aggressive renewable energy storage policy, particularly in China, and two, the rapid expansion of digital infrastructure. Together, these forces are reshaping the energy and technology landscape, underpinned by strong long-term fundamentals for sustained lithium demand.

The broader lithium market continues to demonstrate resilience and depth with total demand growing at around 30% CAGR since 2020. This, of course, is driven by accelerating electrification across mobility, energy storage and emerging technology sectors. While regional policy changes may create short-term noise, the global trajectory remains firmly positive. For PLS, this environment reinforces the strength of our strategic positioning and customer relationships across key markets, giving us the agility and confidence to navigate near-term volatility while capturing long-term value as the industry expands.

Lastly, for my closing comments. I'd like to leave you with a few key reflections. The September quarter marked a strong and disciplined start to FY '26, confirming that the expanded Pilgan Plant is operating in steady state with improved efficiency, lower cost and consistent performance. Financially, the business remains robust. Underlying operating cash flow was positive after adjusting for sales timing impacts, demonstrating our ability to generate cash even in a volatile pricing environment. We remain on track to deliver our FY '26 guidance, reflecting the strength and resilience of the platform we've built.

Near-term pricing remains volatile, but the long-term fundamentals are unchanged. Structural growth drivers from electric vehicles to stationary energy storage continue to strengthen in current prices and not -- and current lithium prices, I should say, are not incentivizing new supply, which suggests tighter markets ahead.

With a scalable technology-enabled operating base, a strong balance sheet and a globally diversified growth portfolio, PLS is well positioned to lead through the cycle and capture value as market conditions improve. It's the largest 100% owned and operated hard rock lithium producer, every price improvement flows directly to our bottom line, providing strong leverage to any recovery lithium pricing.

Our confidence is anchored in what we can control, disciplined execution, operational excellence and strategic agility, the hallmark that define PLS and make us a partner of choice in global supply chains.

Now with that, I'll hand back to Maggie to open the floor for questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Jon Sharp from CLSA.

First question is just on the uplift in recoveries. You averaged in FY '25, the average this quarter. We saw a quarter uplift to 78%. You've recently commissioned the ore sorter. Can you just quantify how much of that improvement was directly attributed to the ore sorters versus anything else? And do you expect recoveries to continue to rise potentially into the '80s as you sort of iron out any issues with these all sort of...

Thanks. It's Brett here to answer that question. And yes, the recoveries have been attributed to the work that we did with the P1000 and the P680. So all sort in place a tremendous part of that. But it's not limited just to the oil port. That's been the big lever, but the site team and the corporate technical team have been working on a range of initiatives through the rest of the circuit there that are working in combination with the ore sorting -- what we will be doing though in the next quarter and in the next half is increasing our contact ore ratio and really leveraging the ore sorting circuit just to try to flex that cost in the mine right through to the mill and get those cost efficiencies. So recoveries are always a big focus of us, but it wouldn't be expected them to get into the 80s in we are getting closer. And certainly, with our GM Metallurgy work, we are well on track to make the most of our recovery circuit.

Just second question, I know you've answered this before, just on Novero. And I know you've said you expected to remain a maintenance in FY '26. Can you just remind us of what price signal or duration of price strength would figure a restart there?

Yes, Jon, thanks for that one. So we haven't given a price guidance around that. But really, the way we -- what we need to see is obviously a consumable lift from common pricing probably something north of USD 1,200 per tonne. But more importantly, we want to make sure that that's sustained. But as I say, we haven't picked threshold value on that.

Next question comes from Hayden Bairstow from Argonaut.

Operating result. I just wanted to touch on the ore order a bit more. Is -- can you just give us some rough metrics when you run 1 million tonnes through that. You're getting a modest grade uplift as well into the process plant. So what does that what is the 1 million tonnes for or sort of provide you with seed for the actual mill?

Yes. Thanks, Hayden. That's -- yes, that's quite a cold banks question that I could sort of say depending on what we're feeding it. But that is a large part of the work that we're doing with the GM metallurgy to make sure that we're getting that blend right so we're maximizing those are orders and we're getting the cleanest feed that we can through to the plant. And so -- it's not always a strict percentage, but what we're doing is really looking at what's coming out of the mine plan, how do we optimize that through the aloe to make the best feed for the plan.

Okay, brilliant. And then just on the -- I mean, the product grades moving around a bit, just keen to sort of understand who's taking all the product at the moment. I presume there's a little bit of spot sales going on. But is the movements in the grade reflecting who you're selling it to each quarter? Or is it just more what's coming out of the back end of the plant?

Yes, more the latter. It's not related to customer requirements. And as it relates to where the flow of sales going to. At this moment in time, it's is largely offtake. Well, we had a little bit of spot but not a lot. But yes, the grade fluctuations are not driven by our customer requirements.

Next, we have Rahul Anand from Morgan Stanley.

All I've got 2 questions. Look, the first 1 is on POSCO and your PPL JV. Obviously, you've pared back some of the volumes going into that contract, 150 million this year. just given the ramp-up in demand for hydroxide as you've mentioned in the release. That contract sits at over 300 going into future periods 315 to be precise. So -- just wanted to understand the makeup of that contract. Is that take-or-pay? Is there flexibility within that? And I mean, how are you thinking about that option that you have coming up to buy into that plant? That's the first one. I'll come back with a second.

Yes. Thanks, Rahul. So as it relates to the offtake requirements, we -- and across all of our offtakes, we finalized sort of the year ahead and advance the year we're heading into. So we do that across the board, including with our joint venture partner, PLS. So as sort of outlined in the release, so we've adjusted those volumes for the year ahead. And of course, bearing in mind there's sort of 2 things at play. This is about bringing online and introducing a whole new chemical facility in a new market. So as per release, there's been a lot of development around qualifications, which a lot of that is sort of serving into new growth markets, in particular, the U.S. That's part of it.

The other part, which is less of the bearing is obviously ramp-up progress, which we're quite comfortable with. But it's really those 2 things, which are guiding volumes. The team is in the stack of the planning process right now for the budgets and outlook for next year. So there could be some further adjustment to come.

As it relates to the equity election option that we have coming up to go from 18% to 30%. The timing of that is not due until July next year, which in the lithium industry is a very long time away. So between now and then, we'll continue to monitor the market, and take a view of what we want to do closer to the time.

Got it. Okay. Look, and just on the second one, I wanted to touch a bit more on the recoveries I guess the missing piece of the puzzle here is obviously the head grade that went into the plant for ore processing. And I think that at Hayden was alluding to as well in terms of this question. Are you able to give a bit of color perhaps on how that plant grade changed given the elevated recoveries because Obviously, just trying to figure out sort of how the recovery performance goes for the rest of the year. You flagged that recoveries will reduce. So just wanted to kind of square that circle, if that's possible.

Yes, sure. The head grade, we weren't high grading, just to make that clear that there was not an intentional high-grading of the mill feed. Mill feed was no different to it has been and also just part of the mine plan. The recoveries will take a slight impact, but mainly for the more of the contact or that we're intending to feed over the next quarter. We really need to maximize those all orders to take as much of the contact or around the main ore body as we go through our mine rather than stockpiling it and rehandling it later. So that's the bigger impact to the recoveries.

Most of it -- add to Brad's commentary in this space, obviously an absolutely cracking lithium recovery result. And as mentioned, a record for us. And as to how that got achieved, there eventually multiple processing levers, which have been worked on simultaneously by Brett's team. And across several we've heard a fantastic progress. That's a real credit to Brett's team, the operating team and the project team. And just to rattle off a few as it relates to the processing plant the ore sorting, of course, gets a lot of focus, but it's not just that there's a series of online analyzers at the front of the circuit, the back of the circuit.

Separate to that, the team has been working on different reagent regimes. There's also different monitoring systems in the float circuit, some optical time gear, which has been deployed -- there's been further work around tying mineral variation, in particular crystal size and grind size and the circuit and a new level of sophistication has entered the operating strategy. So the sum of all of these things is contributing to the improved results that you see. And if I'd just circle back to the idea of -- to what extent did you scale up contact or not. That answer is complicated, and it depends where you're at in the mine plan. It also depends what stockpiles are available or not available. So in short, it's a complex equation with a lot of subcomponents summing through to the results that you see. So I appreciate that's a longer explanation. But -- this is the art and the science that the team have been working on for years.

Next, we have Austin Yun from Macquarie.

Really good operational results against the backdrop of the tightening lithium market. Just a follow-up question on the Natura. In update, you expect the point to maintain the maintenance in financial year '22. So I'm just going to understand the rationale and thinking that it. Does that mean you don't believe the product is going to go high up and fast enough in the next 9 months. So the base case is care and maintenance or it's actually because you believe you can squeeze a bit more from the current Pilgan Plant given the good performance and also things working really well. I'll come back with the second.

Sure. Thanks, Austin. Thanks for your question. And the short answer is no, I wouldn't read through that that's our view of the market outlook. Alston as you know, lithium market has got an ability to surprise as what we've seen historically. Given these incredible growth rates, we could well see a pull-through and a rapid turn. All of that's possible. We've seen it before. In which case, we will respond accordingly. So if the market turns rapidly and we think it's going on. Well, of course, we'll flick the switch or bring Nova back to life and shareholders will enjoy the benefit of that. So yes, so don't take a read through in terms of that type of guidance.

The second one, just a quick one. It seems like lithium is a hot topic and part of the critical minerals discussion. And the U.S. Premios expect any support funding or other forms from the U.S.? Or anything you could share from your relationship to warehouse?

Yes, as it relates to our engagement and as a mentioned in our notes, we have been contributing -- inputting into a number of processes and we'll continue to do that to support the government's thinking, but it's too early to take any view of where that all heads. A number of the avenues, federal government is exploring, I think is still really at the early stages of working through what type of support they would like to deploy. But certainly, PLS is at the table and contributing to that. And as Brett noted, we're at pains to reinforce the need for shared infrastructure. We think this is solely critical for Australia to become more competitive as a shared infrastructure. It's about shared port facilities, share by all to lower the cost or it's about shared power, network power to lower the cost all, putting in place these types of infrastructure. That's the role of government. That's what we need to do. So that's top of the list as we advocate to government about the right types of support.

Next, we have Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs.

Thanks for the update. Obviously, great to see some of the early efficiencies of the mine coming through. I won't belabor the point on the feed grade, I assume that's just going to average down with the mine grade and contact door strategy. But if I can pick up the PPLS points, what are you now budgeting in terms of FY '26 hydroxide production relative to that offtake revision? Is it sort of 40% to 50% utilization going forward?

We'll be able to give you a clear answer on that next quarterly update because the refinement of the calendar year plan for next year, the teams and the thick of it, but you can take an assumption based on what we've committed in the release of the 55,000 tonnes.

Got it. So in terms of any further losses in the JV or further contributions into it to consider that's probably something for next quarter as well?

Yes, correct. That will flow from the budget process. And look, as it relates to the medium- to long-term outlook, we are very happy about the strategic rationale and our sort of positioning with that hydroxide facility. And you can appreciate, particularly given the rise of almost desperation for critical mineral security, we think our joint venture with POSCO puts us in a very, very unique position. So in terms of where we're at today, we're very comfortable about our strategic positioning. And of course, we've got some good runway just to see how the next 6 to 9 months ago. So very happy with our involvement there with PLS.

Yes. Makes sense. And then maybe just 1 on getting the price volatility in the quarter. How should we think about any provisional pricing impacts that come through this quarter?

Do you want to take that?

Yes, I'll take that. Yes, in terms of -- we've obviously seen an uplift in pricing in that September quarter. we will expect to see some gains, which will flow through to the December quarter, which will obviously will benefit from -- during the September quarter, as mentioned, we took $32 million hit, which was provided for in the June accounts. So we have that number there. So moving forward, I think we'll 1 see some benefits coming through.

Got it. So in terms of just the timing of when that price peak, you don't have some unwind of that going forward?

No. We'll expect to see some of that come through in the December quarter. But yes, essentially, most of that will crystallize in the early part.

Next, we have Levi Spry from UBS.

I just explore these many discussions you're having with government bodies and things like that on strategic reserves and potential government support. What role, if any, do you think floor pricing could play in it? Obviously, the context is MP and that obviously seems to be getting a bit more airtime. But in your discussions, what role you think could play.

Yes. Can I leave -- so at this stage, we've just been inputting our ideas to go with it, in particular the group test was thinking through the strategic reserves. So they're very much an input mode. And of course, they're taking views around full pricing. And what could that mean in the pros and cons. And as to the idea around full pricing devil's in the detail. And I think if we deploy the right way, there could be positive, but equally, there could be add unintended consequences if not rolled out the right way. And I appreciate that other than the market have been vocal about that. And of course, that's all going into the thinking part as government considers what support they'd like to deploy. But as I say, for us, we've been very much advocating for the shared infrastructure aspect we think that's a very clear cut sensible investment case and hard to dispute.

Yes. Okay. And maybe I should know this, but what's the timing of all this coming to a head.

That's in the government's hands. They haven't provided publicly and outlined as to their timing. So we'll wait and see. We're not in...

And just the last one, just to come all the way back to recoveries Previously, you've said mid-70s haven't used. So isn't this a material step up? How should we consider think about the long-term number in our models? Should I be tweaking it up a couple of points.

Life of mine recoveries the levies are in the mid-70s. With this quarter, corresponding quarter in FY '25 is also in -- so we're always going to be trying to push the recoveries. It's the best lever that we have at the moment with all of the good work that we've done that Dale touched on, and we're continuing to lever the contact ore. That's the main variable that is going to change for the next quarter and half year.

And I think just to add, look, maximizing letting recovery, this is what the team is here to do. And I love the idea that if we could pick up that long-term average expectation, that would be obviously incredible in terms of value lift, and we'll be able to reset the reserve and a whole bunch of flow-ons would flow from that. So that, of course, remains the central line. But what we need to do is we're early into the process of really starting to sweat and leverage the full power of this new platform we've built. And yes, early signs are really positive type, we're really going to get more runs on the board and get more data processed. And yes, it will be fantastic as we've got more runs on the board to look at resetting those long-run expectations, but too early to do that.

Next, we have Glyn Lawcock from Barrenjoey.

Two questions. Just maybe just on offtake in price floors. What about industry discussions? Is there any probability of price floors or with industry participants rather than government? And we've seen that in the past in the lithium industry, just if they want new supply in non-China. Is that an alternative?

But to date, I haven't heard much about around that in terms of coming together for a shared approach. Obviously, any of those discussions would have to be handled, obviously, with a great year given there any competition laws depending where in the world those groups or domicile, but not aware of any of those types of discussions. But I'd also add that -- in terms of the structure of the market, today, there is very much a global market. You've got some supply from all continents in different forms. I think the probability of alignment across that supply is pretty unlikely, but you never know.

So you don't think you could see a price floor to get nugget you restarted with a car manufacturer or a battery manufacturer. That's not something you contemplate.

No, we would. The door is open for that. But yes, if a buyer would like to do that. And there has been overtures of that. But or believe it when I see it, but the door is open.

Okay. And then maybe just staying on Ngungaju, with all the benefits you've now seen through ore sorting, contact or everything for Pilgan, how much of that can you translate through to Ngungaju, like would it be a bit of capital you need to spend? Or can what you've got benefit. I get when you do finally come to turn it on? Just trying to think about all your learnings that you've got now, how we could do a lot better with the Nagaland get the cost down, volume up.

Your great question. Let me start, and then Brett might want to follow in on this one. Yes, the short answer is, yes, we're considering what knowledge transfer we could go from the -- plant. And we have been sort of waiting to sort of ramp up the fill gram and start to sort of sweat the asset for the purpose of really keeping able to have confidence in what the benefit delta is. And so we're increasingly moving to a position where we can start to do the evaluation on the investment case Ngungaju. But given those units and the materials handling complexity, it's not straightforward to augment that into an existing circuit. But there's a lot to sort of work through. So it's complex and there's capital intensity involved. So there's a fair bit to work through to work out. Is it worth the investment?

Yes. Is there a time line.

Yes. time line at the moment. But the other thing, Glyn, is a lot of the downstream benefits that we're seeing with the ore mineralogy and the flotation chemistry is directly applicable to Ngungaju. So we can transfer that knowledge trade in there and obtain the benefits. And that's the beauty about having the 2 plants side by side is that we can leverage what we learn and 1 take directly into the other. And yes, we certainly -- there'll be some significant benefits that we can directly transfer from the Pilgan expansion.

Our next question comes from the line of Daniel Rodden from Jefferies.

Just wanted to, I guess, come back to, I guess, the recoveries. And I think everyone gets -- I just wanted to have the point clarify that the recovery that you're reporting doesn't account for the ore sorting losses or rejects? And I guess, how should we be thinking about accounting for this. So if I look at your numbers, if I'm just taking your reported mines and your reported mills, you forecast that out and take your numbers into over into perpetuity would there be a disconnect there? And I just see my, I guess, Ramstockpiles builds because it's not accounting for, I guess, the people sorting losses. And so I guess what I'm trying to get at is or sort of what's the reject recovery factor that we need to be? What are the guide rails that we need to be assuming there?

Yes. Thanks, Andrew. The -- I guess, those guide rails are kind of changing at the moment as we're leveraging up the contactor. So the level of projection is highly dependent on what level of that contact ore that we put in the front end of the ore sources. That material actually goes back to -- into the mine. So it's prior to the crore stockpile. So feed grade that we report there is from the crusher feed grade forward. So it's pretty hard to kind of give a number at the moment, particularly since we're ramping up the contact ore. So it's -- yes, it's a bit of work in progress at the moment.

Yes. So just to clarify. So there's -- from a financial modeling perspective, the lithium recovery is what we've been able to recover from the mine of what's in situ -- now the fact that we've added are sorting or various other process levers does not change that methodology. And the whole idea of ore sorting, it's really the 2 ones, just enable more extraction and enable more concentration to maximize lithium recoveries. So yes, is there some additional exit trends? Yes. But, this is all for 1 aim is actually to improve that value. So you don't need to allow for any additional complexity in terms of how the mine was modeled pre or of the clarify.

No, it definitely does. It's just -- I think I'm just conscious that we're not on a forecasting perspective over accounting for on stock builds is kind of where I'm coming from. But maybe just bring it back to -- you kind of mentioned that, I guess, from next quarter, you're going to start increasing that contact or feed. How should we think about that in terms of, I guess, fresh ore mining volumes? Are you going to be leveraging your stockpiles a bit more in decreasing, I guess, mining activity from next quarter? Or is that more contact from the fresh or feed that you're going to leverage on.

Yes, it's more of the contact or from the fresh feet around the peripheries. So as we get further down in the central pit over in our East pit, we start to get more of our contact or -- so rather than stockpiling it, we're intending to use it, which will allow us to get the economies through the mining fleet as well.

Okay. Perfect. And if I can, just 1 more for me. But with regards to the PLS. What's the utilization being there? And I guess if you run it at full noise, like how close to nameplate would you be running.

So from memory, Dan, on that one, the first trend they brought up iron has been up close to full utilization, and where it's the second train that belly moderating it as a function of the sales changes. So I have to double check on this, but I'm pretty sure both in terms of the sort of throughput rate of been run up to full throughput. But I would say, the utilization levels are just different at the moment.

Last question from the audio before we move on to the webcast. We have Matthew Frydman from MST Financials.

Can I ask a question on the cash burn during the quarter. Obviously, you ran ahead of guidance in the quarter, but you're highlighting that you're expecting upward unit cost pressure from here. And obviously, the cash position went backwards. So just wondering if there's any further step change necessary in your view to spend that cash burn outside of waiting for prices to improve, whether that maybe looks like a further change to the P850 operating model, whether there's any sort of discretionary CapEx you can take out across the various project streams, or are you happy to operate at kind of steady state as you've outlined and use your cash balance and your debt liquidity as required to continue funding operations.

Matthew, thanks for your question. Look, the cash burn for the period was really a function of cash flow timing. As I pointed out, we had some provisional pricing adjustments, which we actually booked $40 million for in the year-end accounts. We crystallized $32 million of that in the September quarter. And then we had high receivables at the end, which didn't come through of $50 million. So it was purely a timing impact for the period of the September quarter. Moving forward, we don't expect any material changes. So it's just purely a function of timing between the quarters.

Yes. Okay. I mean your cash margin from operations was negative understanding that there were some receivables, but you're going to get receivable movements from quarter-to-quarter. And obviously, there was growth capital spend, interest and leases and other spend, which obviously weighed on that cash balance to bring it down by $122 million quarter-on-quarter. So it's not necessarily a problem that isn't going to repeat in future quarters outside of price. So just wondering if you guys are happy for that situation in terms of continuing to lean on your existing balance sheet and liquidity or whether there's any other further step changes operationally to deliver.

Yes. I think just to add to that, obviously, as part of our Cost Smart measures will have further cost discipline and cost reductions moving forward. And we'll be very disciplined in terms of managing our cash balance as part of maintaining our strong balance sheet moving forward. And there are some other opportunities in terms of timing from capital perspective that we will look at. And we'll obviously look at this through the lens of the lithium price as we move forward through to the December quarter as well.

And Matt, probably just to add on if you point a good 1 number, although there's some these returns to the sector of late, at the end of the day, the price appreciation we've seen is still well below the long-run requirements for the industry. And -- so depending on which analysts you choose that ranges from USD 1,000 per tonne to USD 1,500 per tonne at an average of about 300, 1,300 or so on, of course, the prevailing prices well below that at this time. So for PLS, what we've done is we've set the business up for this low-cost environment. So to your question, we're comfortable was the way we've configured the business. We've optimized for lowest cash burn here maximizing contact or we've got a very strong balance sheet, et cetera, et cetera. We are set up to last a longer storm if that is to eventuate. However, of course, given the strong growth signals, et cetera, et cetera where the tightness coming and that's what really sets up what these things are a big opportunity for our shareholders.

Now I'll pass to James for webcast questions.

Okay. Thank you. Dale, some questions online here. us collaborating with Ganfeng for the study on downstream processing roll out of the U.S. as a possible site for projects.

The short answer is no. It's a large operator with an incredible unallocated profile ahead across our Australian asset in Brazil asset. We're able to do multiple downstream collaboration to if that's what makes sense to our shareholders. And we're not ruling out any jurisdiction or counterparty.

Dave, what is your response to Trump's Critical Minerals deal with -- could it help sustain Australia's position long term as the world's largest with input -- or are there still challenges to that.

Look, I think the announcements that we're seeing between the President and our Prime Minister are incredibly encouraging. At the end of the day, the lithium industry is still young, it needs to grow significantly to support the growth needs globally. And therefore, multiple supply chains need to be built out to serve the world. So this type of government to government collaboration is fantastic to see, and we need more of it to not only usher other key critical minerals.

Dave, what do you mean by targeted investment is needed by government? How would you like that investment to be targeted? I think that's referencing infrastructure.

That's right targeted. Is not polite way of saying, don't flow money on the wrong things. So for us, it's about investing in shared infrastructure to lower the cost for oil, which makes Team Australia more competitive on the global stage.

Okay. In regards to the game thing, JV, what possible countries that we're looking at and any idea on both capacity.

So as it relates to what possible countries, of course, we've got a view around what's near the top of the pile. And within that, there are some Asian countries, the Middle East. But I would also say that Other parts of the world may well come into the picture depending on whether the government comes through with larger support or not. So for this reason, we've been deliberately not guiding 1 area over another because as you've seen in the media, it's a bit of a moving feast, different support regimes are coming in, and that could really tip the scales from 1 prospect to another.

Okay. Great. With consistent requests from customers to secure additional supply and a strong demand going forward, is PLS considering more sales on a spot market?

Yes, in terms of our realized price -- in terms of the market structure today, I think we're achieving the best of both worlds. And the off-tax of course, provide long-term security but the pricing that's used to derive those sales actually comes essentially from the spot market. But we also sell spot sales. And the reason we do that is that supports price discovery. So one supports the other effectively. And we've taken a portfolio approach there. We're largely weighted to offtake, which gives us security with the strongest in the supply chain, whilst also doing a little bit of spot for price discovery.

Okay. Is there any serious threat from African supply?

The jury is not on that. Look, there's a big game being talk from certain areas. In terms of the work we've done understanding that area, the low cost operations a few and far between would be our view that further, there is an overlay of risk, depending which country you're speaking to. And we've seen time and time again, different impediments arise, which debilitate those operations and really jeopardize some of those investments and continuity of those operations. And for these reasons, we're not sought to look in that direction in terms of our own growth profile -- but bringing you back to home. But at the end of the day, we view this market as a globally competitive market what we keep focused on is making sure we continue to improve such that we move to the left of the cost curve and position ourselves as 1 of the best in the business.

Okay. Thank you, Dave. That's the last of the questions. Just a reminder that the presentation is available on our website, and the webcast recording will be available via our website within a few hours.

Great. Well, thank you, everyone, for dialing in today. The September quarter was an incredibly strong start to this financial year, building on the FY '25 year, which was obviously a transformational year for the business. We look forward to updating you again next quarter. Thank you for your time.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.