CODA MINERALS LTD - Capital/Financing Update 2021

==> picture [596 x 134] intentionally omitted <==

ASX RELEASE 28 July 2021

Assay Results Validate IOCG Mineralisation at Emmie Bluff Deeps

ASX Code: COD

Assays confirm significant copper gold mineralisation and provide a vector for ongoing drilling; indicate proximity to mineralising structure.

Highlights

Assays from first hole provide strong confirmation of IOCG-style copper-gold mineralisation at Emmie Bluff Deeps, with multiple zones intersected in exploration hole DD21EB0018, including:
4.69m at 1.01% Cu, 0.17g/t Au and 3.6g/t Ag from 797.45m down-hole
28.14m at 1.21% Cu, 0.37g/t Au and 2.3g/t Ag from 810.79m down-hole, including
- 4.83m at 2.16% Cu, 0.63g/t Au and 4.3g/t Ag from 816.8m
2.57m at 2.11% Cu, 0.30g/t Au and 13.2g/t Ag from 842.03m down-hole, including
- 1.45m at 3.44% Cu, 0.42g/t Au and 22.1g/t Ag from 842.77m
In aggregate, DD21EB0018 intersected more than 35m of mineralisation grading in excess of 1 percent copper, with peak grades of 5.39% Cu within the higher-grade bornite zones and 1.19 g/t Au in the main chalcopyrite zone.
Assay data, together with logging of recently drilled wedge holes, supports Coda’s exploration model and provides a vector for increasing intensity of mineralisation to the east.
Accelerated and aggressive follow-up drilling continuing with four diamond rigs on site including two rigs at Emmie Bluff Deeps and two at Emmie Bluff.
Drilling of a third wedge from DD21EB0018 and a second surface step-out hole, DD21EBD0001, advancing well with visual results expected in coming weeks.
Coda’s strong cash balance of ~$21 million will allow for extensive follow-up exploration.

Coda Minerals Limited (ASX: COD, “Coda”, or “the Company”), in conjunction with joint venture partner Torrens Mining Limited (ASX: TRN), a listed gold and copper company (“Torrens”), is pleased to advise that it has received assays from drill-hole DD21EB0018, the first hole in its deep IOCG drill programme at Emmie Bluff Deeps announced on 9 June 2021.

This hole was drilled to test the Emmie Bluff Deeps IOCG target, which forms part of the Company’s broader Elizabeth Creek Project in the heart of the Olympic Copper Province in South Australia (see Figure 5). Coda is the operator and majority owner of the Elizabeth Creek Project, holding a 70% interest. Torrens holds the remaining 30% interest.

==> picture [77 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street E: [email protected] West Perth Western Australia, 6005 ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Summary of Results

The hole encountered copper-gold mineralisation broadly consistent with the previously released logging (see ASX release of 9 June 2021). A summary image is included as Figure 1 and the best intersections were as follows:

4.69m at 1.01% Cu, 0.17g/t Au and 3.6g/t Ag from 797.45m down-hole
28.14m at 1.21% Cu, 0.37g/t Au and 2.3g/t Ag from 810.79m down-hole, including
4.83m at 2.16% Cu, 0.63g/t Au and 4.3g/t Ag from 816.8m
2.57m at 2.11% Cu, 0.30g/t Au and 13.2g/t Ag from 842.03m down-hole, including
1.45m at 3.44% Cu, 0.42g/t Au and 22.1g/t Ag from 842.77m

These results confirm the identification by field geologists of potentially economic copper-bearing sulphides including chalcopyrite, bornite and chalcocite at Emmie Bluff Deeps, while also supporting the definition of an upper chalcocite bornite zone, a middle chalcopyrite zone, and a lower bornite zone.

By combining the recently received assay data with geologists’ field logs and hand-held XRF results, Coda has undertaken minor validation work and QA/QC on recent logging of drill-holes. The results are summarised below as Figure 2 but. in simple terms, Coda’s technical team believe that these results:

a) Validate the company’s exploration strategy and prospect-scale understanding of Emmie Bluff Deeps; and
b) Reinforce the Company’s confidence in its recently announced hypothesis that the mineralisation source is located close by and to the east of hole DD21EB0018.

Commenting on the assays, Coda’s CEO Chris Stevens said: “These results provide the first quantitative evidence of IOCG copper-gold mineralisation at Emmie Bluff Deeps. These assays are consistent with what we would expect from chalcopyrite zones within a broader IOCG system. They also represent the best intersections yet known from the Emmie Bluff Deeps prospect, including across many years of exploration by earlier companies. Together, they significantly increase our confidence in the project and further de-risk the potential opportunity from Emmie Bluff Deeps.

“In terms of grade and thickness, the assays have come in well within the range that we were expecting based on our visual observations. The chalcocite and bornite zones have yielded strong grades, and we expect to see more of this sort of highergrade mineralisation in the wedge holes to the east. Together with visual observations of the recently drilled wedge holes, this represents further validation of our exploration model and our interpretation of the local geology.

“Our interpretation suggests that this hole was drilled immediately to the west of a major mineralising structure and has most likely intersected a broad and relatively flat-lying ‘apron’ of mineralisation which surrounds it. An accelerated and aggressive exploration program is underway, focused on the area of highest prospectivity to the east and north-east of DD21EB0018 and, all going well, will confirm our hypothesis with results expected in the weeks ahead.”

Results in Detail

The assay results correspond very closely to the previously announced mineralised zones (see Figure 1). Preliminary analysis suggests that copper and gold are well correlated, with gold anomalism tending to extend slightly above and below copper anomalism. While gold is elevated throughout the mineralised zone, the core of the chalcopyrite zone hosts the majority of the higher grade material, with 13 of the 26 samples recording about 0.5 g/t Au being located between 816.8 and 819m, including the peak grade of 0.33m at 1.19 g/t from 821.3. Gold is also reasonably well correlated with silver, though the peak silver grade of 0.5m at 40.2 g/t Ag was encountered in the lower bornite zone from 843.3m.

Radionuclides at Emmie Bluff to date are low compared to other regional IOCG’s, with peak uranium and thorium grades of 506 ppm[1] and 58.6ppm respectively, and average grades of 52.6 and 11.4 ppm respectively through the mineralised chalcopyrite zone. Despite uranium production being achieved from geologically similar deposits in the region (i.e. Olympic

1 This is considered a significant outlier, with the next highest grade (271 ppm) being nearly half the concentration. Moreover, this sample was located in the internal dilution zone between the upper chalcocite bornite zone and the chalcopyrite zone, and does not make up part of a mineralised horizon.

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Dam), Coda does not currently consider Emmie Bluff Deeps to be a uranium prospect; in fact, the low levels of radionuclides are considered to be a net positive, given the challenges faced by copper producers in dealing with these elements during mineral processing.

Molybdenum (Mo) was identified as anomalous by portable XRF during initial logging, and assays have identified areas of elevated Mo. While at the current early stage of exploration Coda does not believe it has encountered materially relevant grades in DD21EB0018 from an economic perspective, the Company will monitor Mo grades in future drilling and remains optimistic about the potential for further exploration for molybdenum.

Planned and Ongoing Work

Coda has planned a comprehensive programme of follow-up drilling to test its exploration model (as outlined last week in its announcement of 22 July 2021). This work has already begun, with a second diamond hole from surface, DD21EBD0001, commencing on the 12[th] of July following mobilisation of an additional drill rig. This drill hole was collared at 703,590,mN, 65,55,925mE, at an azimuth of 150[o] , with an inclination at the collar of -80[o] .

As at the date of this announcement, the hole is approximately one-third of the way to its planned end depth of 1,100m. Coda anticipates drilling at least one wedge hole from this hole, with additional wedges to be potentially undertaken depending on results.

A third wedge hole from DD21EBD0018 has also commenced and is being drilled to the east-northeast. Following completion of this wedge hole, it is anticipated that a third surface step-out drill-hole will be collared approximately halfway between DD21EB0018 and historical hole MGD55. This hole is expected to commence drilling within the next few weeks. Collar locations and approximate hole traces in plan view for commenced drill-holes can be seen in Figure 3.

These holes have been designed to test the area to the east, and northeast of wedge hole 2, which encountered significant thicknesses of bornite at equivalent depths to the parent hole (see announcement 22 July 2021) as well as a second strongly mineralised zone dominated by bornite from 902m. Coda’s technical team believes that these results, combined with the increase in intensity and tenor of mineralisation from west to east, indicate the presence of a mineralising structure to the east of DD21EB0018, which will be tested by this planned programme of surface and wedge (daughter) holes over the coming weeks. Please see Figure 2 for more details.

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [654 x 394] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1 Visual summary of intersected mineralisation (right) and previously released logs (left).

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005 ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [690 x 400] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2 Simplified (cartoon) showing Emmie Bluff Deeps assay results in context with recently released wedge holes.

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005 ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [506 x 348] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3 Emmie Bluff Deeps drillholes >600m, showing hole traces for Coda’s planned or completed holes/wedges.

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [686 x 387] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4 Emmie Bluff Deeps interpreted cross section, as released to the market on 22 July 2021. Assays released today broadly corroborate the Copper Sulphide Zones detailed on this section. Additional drilling is required to confirm the interpreted fault in the red outlined area of interest. Identification of Hiltaba suite granite is preliminary and may be subject to change following dating work currently underway.

6 Altona Street E: [email protected] West Perth Western Australia, 6005 ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [440 x 532] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 5 The Elizabeth Creek Copper-Cobalt Project in South Australia

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 2: Assay Results

Assays are presented in the below table using a 0.3% Cu cut-off grade, which was determined based on comparison with nearby geologically comparable deposits and after considering current commodity prices. Given the strong correlation between copper and gold, and the lack of metallurgical testwork undertaken on the deposit, no attempt has been made to calculate a copper equivalent grade.

All elements which Coda believes have the potential to be economically relevant are included in the table below. Aggregated results may include internal dilution of no more than 1m of contiguous material below the 0.3% Cu cut-off grade.

Table 1 Material assays from drillhole DD21EB0018.

From	To	Interval	Cu%	Au g/t	Ag g/t	Mo ppm
794.00	794.80	0.80	0.31	0.02	0.8	9
797.45	802.14	4.69	1.01	0.17	3.6	786
806.50	807.05	0.55	0.42	0.14	1.7	45
809.3	810.12	0.72	0.31	0.1	3.8	21
810.79	838.93	28.14	1.21	0.37	2.3	305
Including:
816.80	821.63	4.83	2.16	0.63	4.8	148
841.05	841.15	0.1	0.60	0.21	1.4	9
842.03	844.6	2.57	2.11	0.30	13.2	15
Including:
842.77	844.22	1.45	3.44	0.42	22.1	22
856	856.65	0.65	0.46	0.02	<0.2	1.5

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

—

This announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of Coda Minerals Ltd

Further Information:

Chris Stevens Steve Shedden Chief Executive Officer Managing Director Coda Minerals Limited Torrens Mining Limited [email protected] [email protected]

Media:

Nicholas Read Read Corporate [email protected]

About Coda Minerals

Coda Minerals Limited (ASX: COD) is a minerals exploration company focused on the discovery, and development of base metals, precious metals, and battery minerals.

Coda is primed to unlock the value of its highly prospective Elizabeth Creek Copper Project, which is located in the heart of the Olympic Copper, Province Australia’s most productive copper belt.

The Elizabeth Creek Copper Project is centred 100km south of BHP’s Olympic Dam mine 15km from BHP’s Oak Dam West Project and 50 km west of OZ Minerals’ Carrapateena copper-gold project. The project includes JORC 2012-compliant Indicated Mineral Resources at the Windabout and MG14 deposits, which together host a combined 159,000 tonnes of contained copper and 9,500 tonnes of contained cobalt. The project also includes Coda’s Emmie Bluff prospect, which has a JORC compliant Zambian-style copper-cobalt Exploration Target, and demonstrated IOCG potential.

Coda has already commenced extensive exploration activities at Elizabeth Creek, which has earned the Company a majority interest in the project (70%). Coda holds the rights and interests to earn up to 75% interest in the project in Joint Venture with Torrens Mining Limited (ASX:TRN).

Coda has a dual strategy for success at Elizabeth Creek. Firstly, it is working to further define and extend known Zambianstyle copper-cobalt resources across multiple prospects, including Emmie Bluff, Powerline, MG14 North and Hannibal. Secondly, it is implementing a substantial drill programme at Emmie Bluff Deeps to rapidly and efficiently evaluate the potential for a Tier-1 IOCG system following a major mineralised intercept in June 2021.

The company listed on the ASX in October 2020 after a successful, heavily oversubscribed IPO which is funding an aggressive exploration campaign across the Elizabeth Creek project tenure. Further information may be found at www.codaminerals.com

About Torrens Mining Limited

Torrens Mining Limited (ASX: TRN) is an Australian company exploring for gold, copper and cobalt and other metals. Torrens is positioned for value growth through its diversified portfolio of prime gold exploration assets in the Victorian Goldfields, its 30% stake in the advanced and active Elizabeth Creek Copper-Cobalt and IOCG Project in South Australia in joint venture with Coda Minerals Limited and, pending the grant of exploration licences, at the formerly producing high-grade copper-gold Laloki Project in Papua New Guinea (PNG). Further information may be found at www.torrensmining.com

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Forward Looking Statements

This announcement contains ‘forward-looking information’ that is based on the Company’s expectations, estimates and projections as of the date on which the statements were made. This forward-looking information includes, among other things, statements with respect to the Company’s business strategy, plans, development, objectives, performance, outlook, growth, cash flow, projections, targets and expectations, mineral reserves and resources, results of exploration and related expenses. Generally, this forward-looking information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as ‘outlook’, ‘anticipate’, ‘project’, ‘target’, ‘potential’, ‘likely’, ‘believe’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘intend’, ‘may’, ‘would’, ‘could’, ‘should’, ‘scheduled’, ‘will’, ‘plan’, ‘forecast’, ‘evolve’ and similar expressions. Persons reading this announcement are cautioned that such statements are only predictions, and that the Company’s actual future results or performance may be materially different. Forward-looking information is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company’s actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information.

Competent Person’s Statement

The information in this report which relates to exploration results is based on information compiled by Mr. Matthew Weber, who is an employee of the company. Mr Weber is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and has sufficient relevant experience to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activities undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Weber consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on the information compiled by him, in the form and context in which it appears.

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [595 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix 3: Detailed Technical Information and JORC Table 1

Table 2 Completed and ongoing drillholes at Emmie Bluff Deeps at the time of publication.

HoleID	Easting	Northing	PQ	HQ3	NQ	Dip	Azi	EOH(DD)	Comments
DD21EB0018	703590	6555464	160	501	1041.6	-90	000	1041.6	Results received
DD21EB0018W1	703590	6555464		501	945.6	-82	277	945.6	Results Pending
DD21EB0018W2	703590	6555464		495	983.9	-74	120	983.9	Results Pending
DD21EB0018W3	703590	6555464		487.6				Ongoing
DD21EBD0001	703590	6555925	154.5			-80	150	Ongoing

Table 3 Referenced Historic drillholes at Emmie Bluff Deeps

HoleID	Easting	Northing	Dip	EOH
IHAD2	705450	6557500	-90	1158.8
IHAD5	705119	6557882	-90	1152.8
IHAD6	704806	6558260	-90	1116.7
MGD 55	704100	6555500	-90	1107.3
MGD 57	705350	6556700	-90	1242.9
MGD 68	705002	6554502	-90	1043.6
MGD 69	703012	6556018	-90	1076.1
SAE 1	701879	6554852	-90	818
SAE 3	704379	6555352	-90	1221
SAE 4	704179	6556172	-90	1172.5
SAE 5	706029	6557322	-90	914.4
SAE 6	705029	6556222	-90	1200
SAE 7	701779	6554402	-90	1221.7

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

	Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	Sampling	•	Nature and quality of sampling	•	Core was logged in the field and rough metal content was measured at regular intervals with a
	techniques		(eg cut channels, random chips,		portable XRF device at measurement intervals of between 1 and 0.5m. Sampling intervals were
			or specific specialised industry		selected by field geologist based on logging and XRF results.
			standard measurement tools	•	Understanding of the mineralising system was based on historical drilling and the XRF results
			appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc).	•	allowed large parts of the holes to remain unsampled. Typically, sampling is restricted to areas of strong hydrothermal alteration, particularly haematisation. Handheld XRF instruments are extremely susceptible to sampling location bias, which can introduce considerable error. For this reason, Coda treats the results from the handheld XRF as indicative of the presence of metals only and has chosen not to release the results as they are not considered
			These examples should not be		sufficiently accurate and may mislead as to the true nature of the intersected material.
			taken as limiting the broad	•	Coda’s field personnel prepared the core from DD21EB0018 for transport to Adelaide, where it was
			meaning of sampling.		cut and sampled for assay by Challenger Geological Services.
		•	Include reference to measures	•	Portable XRF readings were taken in the field using an Olympus Vanta M tool applied directly to the
			taken to ensure sample		core at either single or half metre intervals, depending on prior results or visual identification of
			representivity and the		potential grade by the field geologist. The sample was not prepared except by standard cleaning of
			appropriate calibration of any		core by drill offsiders. Readings were taken at ambient winter daytime temperature for Woomera
			measurement tools or systems		in South Australia, between 10 and 25 degrees Celcius.
			used.	•	The device was used in 3-beam mode, scanning for a total of 30, 30 and 20 seconds for the two 40
		•	Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material		KV beams and the final 50KV beam respectively. The device is designed to minimise drift over time, and is less than 12 months old, and so has not been calibrated since leaving the factory. The results have not been corrected or otherwise adjusted.
			to the Public Report.	•	Minor QA/QC is performed during reading, including duplicates and a series of standards and blanks
		•	In cases where ‘industry		taken at the start of each recording cycle.
			standard’ work has been done
			this would be relatively simple
			(eg ‘reverse circulation drilling
			was used to obtain 1 m samples
			from which 3 kg was pulverised
			to produce a 30 g charge for fire
6	Altona Street		E: [email protected]
West Perth
Western Australia, 6005			ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		assay’). In other cases more
		explanation may be required,
		such as where there is coarse
		gold that has inherent sampling
		problems. Unusual
		commodities or mineralisation
		types (eg submarine nodules)
		may warrant disclosure of
		detailed information.
Drilling	•	Drill type (eg core, reverse	•	DD21EB0018 was drilled from surface to 160m using PQ diamond bits, reducing to HQ3 to 501m,
techniques		circulation, open-hole hammer,		and continued to end of hole using NQ.
		rotary air blast, auger, Bangka,	•	Core orientations are not considered relevant due to the vertical nature of the hole.
		sonic, etc) and details (eg core
		diameter, triple or standard
		tube, depth of diamond tails,
		face-sampling bit or other type,
		whether core is oriented and if
		so, by what method, etc).

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

	Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	Drill sample	•	Method of recording and	•	Recovery of diamond tails while coring was consistently excellent, with minimal core loss.
	recovery		assessing core and chip sample	•	No relationship is believed to exist between sample recovery and grade.
			recoveries and results assessed.
		•	Measures taken to maximise
			sample recovery and ensure
			representative nature of the
			samples.
		•	Whether a relationship exists
			between sample recovery and
			grade and whether sample bias
			may have occurred due to
			preferential loss/gain of
			fine/coarse material.
	Logging	•	Whether core and chip samples	•	Detailed qualitative geological logging has been carried out by appropriately trained and
			have been geologically and		experienced field geologists on all diamond core. Quantitative logging by means of portable XRF has
			geotechnically logged to a level		been undertaken on an as needed basis in areas of prospectivity, typically utilising a 1m interval
			of detail to support appropriate		with interval reduction down to 0.5m in areas of suspected mineralisation.
			Mineral Resource estimation,	•	For the purposes of describing mineral (particularly sulphide) abundance, the following descriptors
			mining studies and metallurgical		have been used:
			studies.		Trace:Logged occasionally by field geologists within the logged interval, but not sufficient to
		•	Whether logging is qualitative		estimate a percentage. Typically, <0.5% mineral abundance.
			or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.		Minor:Logged regularly by field geologists but does not make up a significant amount of the rock volume. Typically <5% mineral abundance. Moderate:Easily noted and logged by field geologists, makes up a significant amount of rock volume but is not a dominant component. Estimated to fall within a range of 5-15% mineral
		•	The total length and percentage		abundance.
			of the relevant intersections		Intense:Very easily noted by field geologists, makes up a significant percentage of the rock
			logged.		volume and is a dominant component (15 – 50% mineral abundance).
					Volumes beyond 50% would be better represented as massive or near-total replacement of host
					rock rather than expressed as an intensityof alteration or sulphidation.
6	Altona Street		E: [email protected]
West Perth
Western Australia, 6005			ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Sub- sampling techniques and sample preparation • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. • For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. • Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. • Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. • Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581	• Sample intervals were defined by field geologists based on portable XRF results and detailed geological logging. • Core was then transported by road to Challenger Geological Services in Adelaide where the core was cut by means of an Almonte core saw (where competent enough to do so), or by brick saw where it was not. • DD21EB0018 has been cut and sampled. A total of 318 samples were taken, including field duplicates and standards, which were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (15 field duplicates, 31 standards), leaving a total of 272 samples. • Core was cut on a sample-by-sample basis according to need in the following manner: `o` Where a field duplicatewas not required:½ core for assay, ½ core for retention by Coda onsite for future review. `o` Where a field duplicatewas required:¼ core for assay, ¼ core for duplicate assay, ½ core retention by Coda on site for future review. • Samples varied in length from 0.09m to 1m, with an average of 0.72m per sample. • Field duplicates were taken based on sample numbers ensuring random selection of mineralised and unmineralised material. Hole ID SampleID From To Interval Cu Co Au Ag Mo DD21EB0018 D21G0019 683 684 1 314 64 <0.01 0.8 7.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0021 683 684 1 292 68 <0.01 1 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0039 700 701 1 838 53 <0.01 0.8 16.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0041 700 701 1 882 52 0.01 0.8 34.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0059 717 718 1 428 35 <0.01 0.6 64 DD21EB0018 D21G0061 717 718 1 404 36 <0.01 0.6 67.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0079 734 735 1 638 21 <0.01 0.6 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0081 734 735 1 706 23 <0.01 0.6 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0099 751 752 1 94 40 <0.01 <0.2 1 DD21EB0018 D21G0101 751 752 1 128 46 0.01 <0.2 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0119 768 769 1 28 48 <0.01 <0.2 1.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0121 768 769 1 64 50 <0.01 0.4 4.5 DD21EB0018 D21G0139 785 786 1 12 61 <0.01 <0.2 4 DD21EB0018 D21G0141 785 786 1 160 72 <0.01 <0.2 8 DD21EB0018 D21G0159 799.83 800.01 0.18 20500 29 0.48 7.8 1850 DD21EB0018 D21G0161 799.83 800.01 0.18 26100 35 0.2 11 1250 DD21EB0018 D21G0179 807.05 807.5 0.45 840 32 0.06 0.6 581
	Hole ID	SampleID	From	To	Interval	Cu	Co	Au	Ag	Mo
	DD21EB0018	D21G0019	683	684	1	314	64	<0.01	0.8	7.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0021	683	684	1	292	68	<0.01	1	8
	DD21EB0018	D21G0039	700	701	1	838	53	<0.01	0.8	16.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0041	700	701	1	882	52	0.01	0.8	34.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0059	717	718	1	428	35	<0.01	0.6	64
	DD21EB0018	D21G0061	717	718	1	404	36	<0.01	0.6	67.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0079	734	735	1	638	21	<0.01	0.6	1.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0081	734	735	1	706	23	<0.01	0.6	4
	DD21EB0018	D21G0099	751	752	1	94	40	<0.01	<0.2	1
	DD21EB0018	D21G0101	751	752	1	128	46	0.01	<0.2	4.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0119	768	769	1	28	48	<0.01	<0.2	1.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0121	768	769	1	64	50	<0.01	0.4	4.5
	DD21EB0018	D21G0139	785	786	1	12	61	<0.01	<0.2	4
	DD21EB0018	D21G0141	785	786	1	160	72	<0.01	<0.2	8
	DD21EB0018	D21G0159	799.83	800.01	0.18	20500	29	0.48	7.8	1850
	DD21EB0018	D21G0161	799.83	800.01	0.18	26100	35	0.2	11	1250
	DD21EB0018	D21G0179	807.05	807.5	0.45	840	32	0.06	0.6	581
6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005 E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
DD21EB0018	D21G0181	807.05	807.5	0.45	786	36	0.08	3.2	492
DD21EB0018	D21G0199	815	815.44	0.44	12100	24	0.37	2	17
DD21EB0018	D21G0201	815	815.44	0.44	10600	26	0.37	2.2	15
DD21EB0018	D21G0219	823	823.5	0.5	14000	14	0.48	2.2	264
DD21EB0018	D21G0221	823	823.5	0.5	13600	19	0.71	2.4	213
DD21EB0018	D21G0239	830.9	831.3	0.4	6780	154	0.23	0.8	114
DD21EB0018	D21G0241	830.9	831.3	0.4	7450	173	0.24	0.6	150
DD21EB0018	D21G0259	838.93	839.54	0.61	2300	110	0.19	0.8	46.5
DD21EB0018	D21G0261	838.93	839.54	0.61	2100	107	0.26	2.4	26
DD21EB0018	D21G0279	845.6	846.1	0.5	1790	27	0.05	1.6	11
DD21EB0018	D21G0281	845.6	846.1	0.5	634	40	0.02	0.8	13
DD21EB0018	D21G0299	854	854.44	0.44	134	67	0.05	0.2	8
DD21EB0018	D21G0301	854	854.44	0.44	146	92	0.04	0.2	15

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Quality of assay data and laboratory tests • The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. • Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376	• Assays of drill core from hole DD21EB0018 were undertaken by Bureau Veritas in Adelaide SA. • Halved core was crushed, split and pulverised before being digested and refluxed with a mixture of nitric, perchloric, hydrofluoric and hydrochloric acids. This extended digest approximates a total digest in most samples. • Al, As, Cu, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, P, and S were determined by ICP-OES, Ag, Ba, Bi, Cd, Ce, Co, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Hf, Ho, La, Lu, Mo, Nd, Pb, Pr, Sb, Se, Sm, Tb, Te, Th, Tl, Tm, U, W, Y, Yb, Zn, and Zr were determined by ICP-MS. • These techniques were determined in consultation with the assay laboratory and are consider appropriate for the deposit type. • Field duplicates and standards were inserted at a 1:20 and a 1:10 ratio respectively (31 standards, 15 field duplicates over 318 total samples). • Average absolute error for target elements was 253.5 ppm Cu, 13.4 ppm Co, 0.016 ppm Au, 0.12 ppm Ag, and 6.3 ppm Mo. Insufficient sample (I.S.) was available to provide sufficient analyte for the laboratory to analyse for gold. Cu % Measured Cu % Expected Co ppm Measured Co ppm Expected Au ppm Measured Au ppm Expected Ag ppm Measured Ag ppm Expected Mo ppm Measured Mo ppm Expected 0.293 0.293 197 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 59 65 0.291 0.293 216 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 67.5 65 0.295 0.293 206 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69 65 0.296 0.293 195 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 69.5 65 0.289 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66 65 0.297 0.293 210 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64 65 0.289 0.293 208 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 64.5 65 0.295 0.293 201 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65.5 65 0.292 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 63.5 65 0.297 0.293 209 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 65 65 0.290 0.293 200 203 I.S. 0.176 0.4 0.45 66.5 65 2.58 2.53 722 728 1.52 1.54 4 4.04 381 376 2.48 2.53 723 728 1.53 1.54 4 4.04 388 376 2.49 2.53 726 728 1.5 1.54 4 4.04 389 376 2.53 2.53 739 728 1.52 1.54 3.8 4.04 380 376 2.48 2.53 702 728 1.57 1.54 4 4.04 367 376 2.56 2.53 744 728 1.54 1.54 4 4.04 373 376 2.55 2.53 717 728 1.51 1.54 4 4.04 381 376
	Cu % Measured	Cu % Expected	Co ppm Measured	Co ppm Expected	Au ppm Measured	Au ppm Expected	Ag ppm Measured	Ag ppm Expected	Mo ppm Measured	Mo ppm Expected
	0.293	0.293	197	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	59	65
	0.291	0.293	216	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	67.5	65
	0.295	0.293	206	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	69	65
	0.296	0.293	195	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	69.5	65
	0.289	0.293	200	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	66	65
	0.297	0.293	210	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	64	65
	0.289	0.293	208	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	64.5	65
	0.295	0.293	201	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	65.5	65
	0.292	0.293	200	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	63.5	65
	0.297	0.293	209	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	65	65
	0.290	0.293	200	203	I.S.	0.176	0.4	0.45	66.5	65
	2.58	2.53	722	728	1.52	1.54	4	4.04	381	376
	2.48	2.53	723	728	1.53	1.54	4	4.04	388	376
	2.49	2.53	726	728	1.5	1.54	4	4.04	389	376
	2.53	2.53	739	728	1.52	1.54	3.8	4.04	380	376
	2.48	2.53	702	728	1.57	1.54	4	4.04	367	376
	2.56	2.53	744	728	1.54	1.54	4	4.04	373	376
	2.55	2.53	717	728	1.51	1.54	4	4.04	381	376
6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005 E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary	Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
	2.55	2.53	710	728	1.5	1.54	4	4.04	368	376
	1.43	1.47	872	899	0.8	0.801	-	-	299	310
	1.46	1.47	898	899	0.78	0.801	-	-	293	310
	1.42	1.47	955	899	0.81	0.801	-	-	314	310
	1.48	1.47	941	899	0.8	0.801	-	-	293	310
	1.47	1.47	914	899	0.79	0.801	-	-	287	310
	1.47	1.47	953	899	0.8	0.801	-	-	287	310
	1.48	1.47	917	899	0.8	0.801	-	-	290	310
	1.44	1.47	960	899	0.78	0.801	-	-	309	310
	3.98	3.93	47	49.9	-	-	11.6	11.5	2	0.5
	3.96	3.93	47	49.9	-	-	11.2	11.5	2	0.5
	3.87	3.93	49	49.9	-	-	11.8	11.5	2	0.5
	3.88	3.93	48	49.9	-	-	11.8	11.5	1	0.5
Verification of sampling and assaying • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. • Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	• Significant intersections have been verified against geological logging, portable XRF results, and have been distributed to field geologists for further review. • Hole DD21EB0018 has not strictly speaking been twinned, but two wedge holes have been drilled to date and a third is currently in progress. The variation in visual appearance of alteration and mineralisation thickness and intensity between the three holes means that the wedges cannot be used for verification purposes, except of gross stratigraphy. • Primary drill data was collected digitally by the field geologist using logging templates in Excel, before being transferred a master Excel database. • No adjustments have been made to assay data except to composite for simplicity in this release.

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005 ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Location of	•	Accuracy and quality of surveys	•	Drill collar locations (including RL) have been located using handheld GPS, MGA 94 Zone 53.
data points		used to locate drill holes (collar	•	Historical drillhole locations have been extracted from the South Australian Resources Information
		and down-hole surveys),		Gateway (SARIG).
		trenches, mine workings and	•	Precise locations of drillholes will be determined by an independent surveyor at the completion of
		other locations used in Mineral		the overall drill programme.
		Resource estimation.
	•	Specification of the grid system
		used.
	•	Quality and adequacy of
		topographic control.
Data spacing	•	Data spacing for reporting of	•	To date, Coda has completed a single vertical drillhole at Emmie Bluff Deeps, and two angled
and		Exploration Results.		wedge holes off the parent drillhole. An additional angled drillhole (DD21EBD0001) has been
distribution	•	Whether the data spacing and		commenced, as well as a third angled wedge hole off the parent drillhole DD21EB0018, both these
		distribution is sufficient to		holes have not yet reached relevant depths for mineralisation.
		establish the degree of	•	Historical drillholes believed most relevant to the mineralising system include MGD 55, SAE 3 and
		geological and grade continuity		SAE 4, located approximately 500m due east, 800m ESE and 920m NE respectively.
		appropriate for the Mineral	•	Coda does not believe that sufficient information exists to estimate a Mineral Resource and has not
		Resource and Ore Reserve		attempted to do so.
		estimation procedure(s) and
		classifications applied.
	•	Whether sample compositing
		has been applied.

6 Altona Street E: [email protected] West Perth Western Australia, 6005 ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Orientation	•	Whether the orientation of	•	To date, Coda does not believe that it has sufficient data to comment on the orientation of major
of data in		sampling achieves unbiased		structures or the overall trend of the mineralisation at Emmie Bluff Deeps, nor the relationship
relation to geological structure		sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is	•	between those features and the orientation of its drill holes. It is anticipated that further drilling will assist in clarifying these questions and will allow Coda to
		known, considering the deposit		comment on their materiality.
		type.
	•	If the relationship between the
		drilling orientation and the
		orientation of key mineralised
		structures is considered to have
		introduced a sampling bias, this
		should be assessed and
		reported if material.
Sample	•	The measures taken to ensure	•	Samples were taken by representatives of Coda Minerals or Challenger Geological Services from the
security		sample security.		field to a core cutting facility in Adelaide, and then on to the assay lab. No third party other than
				Challenger Geological Services had access to the samples between the field and the assay lab.
Audits or	•	The results of any audits or	•	No audits, umpire assays or reviews have yet been undertaken.
reviews		reviews of sampling techniques
		and data.

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Mineral	•	Type, reference name/number, location and	•	All drilling took place on EL 6265.
tenement and		ownership including agreements or material issues	•	EL 6265 is owned in a 70:30 unincorporated Joint Venture by Coda Minerals
land tenure status		with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title		Ltd and Terrace Mining Pty Ltd (a wholly owned subsidiary of Torrens Mining Limited).
		interests, historical sites, wilderness or national	•	The tenure is in good standing and is considered secure at the time of this
		park and environmental settings.		release. No other impediments are known at this time.
	•	The security of the tenure held at the time of
		reporting along with any known impediments to
		obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
Exploration	•	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by	•	Historical exploration of the Emmie Bluff prospect has been undertaken by
done by other		other parties.		(among others) Mt Isa Mines, Gunson Resources, Torrens Mining and
parties				Gindalbie Metals (Coda’s predecessor company).
			•	With the exception of data from Gindalbie Metals, all historical results used to
				guide Coda’s exploration has been obtained from the Geological Survey of
				South Australia via the South Australian Resources Information Gateway
				(SARIG).
Geology	•	Deposit type, geological setting and style of	•	The Elizabeth Creek project, of which Emmie Bluff Deeps is a part, sits in the
		mineralisation.		Stuart Shelf within the broader Olympic Copper Province in South Australia.
			•	Emmie Bluff Deeps mineralisation appears to be hosted in metasiltstones and
				sandstones of the Palaeoproterozoic Wandearah Formation, and appears to
				be closely associated with intruded Hiltaba suite granites. Mineralisation
				consists of copper sulphides precipitated into these sedimentary units as part
				of a complex hydrothermal fluid dominated by iron in the form of haematite.
			•	Emmie Bluff Deeps mineralisation appears to closely resemble Iron Oxide
				Copper Gold mineralisation known from several deposits in the immediate
				area such as Olympic Dam and Carrapateena.

6 Altona Street E: [email protected] West Perth Western Australia, 6005 ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Drill hole	•	A summary of all information material to the	•	See Table 2 and Table 3 in body of announcement.
Information		understanding of the exploration results including
		a tabulation of the following information for all
		Material drill holes:
		`o` easting and northing of the drill hole collar
		`o` elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation
		above sea level in metres) of the drill hole
		collar
		`o` dip and azimuth of the hole
		`o` down hole length and interception depth
		`o` hole length.
	•	If the exclusion of this information is justified on
		the basis that the information is not Material and
		this exclusion does not detract from the
		understanding of the report, the Competent
		Person should clearly explain why this is the case.

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Data • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting • Significant intercepts are reported using a 0.3% Cu cut-off grade. Calculations of these aggregation averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum intervals take the length weighted average of the assay results using a 0.3% Cu lower methods grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grade and allowing no more than 1m of contiguous material of below the 0.3% Cu cut-off grade as internal dilution.
cut-off grades are usually Material and should be • Where <1m of unmineralized (sub-0.3% Cu) material separates <1m of mineralised (i.e.
stated.

•	•	Significant intercepts are reported using a 0.3% Cu cut-off grade. Calculations of these
		intervals take the length weighted average of the assay results using a 0.3% Cu lower
		cut-off grade and allowing no more than 1m of contiguous material of below the 0.3%
•		Cu cut-off grade as internal dilution. Where <1m of unmineralized (sub-0.3% Cu) material separates <1m of mineralised (i.e.
		> 0.3% Cu) material at the top or bottom of a larger mineralised intercept, this material is excluded from aggregation and is reported separately.
•		Selection of the 0.3% Cu value as a cut-off grade was determined based on comparison
		with nearby geologically comparable deposits and after considering current
		commodity prices. Given the strong correlation between copper and gold, and the lack
		of metallurgical testwork undertaken on the deposit, no attempt has been made to
		calculate a copper equivalent grade.
•		Typical example of an aggregate intercept is included below:
		DD21EB0018:4.83m @ 2.16% Cu, 0.64g/t Au, 4.35g/t Ag and 0.04% Mo
	From To Length Cu ppm Co ppm Au ppm Ag ppm Mo pppm
	816.8 817.2 0.4 20200 62 0.7 2.8 131
	817.2 817.95 0.75 23800 56 0.61 3.2 126
	817.95 818.5 0.55 18000 66 0.47 2.8 132
	818.5 819 0.5 19600 70 0.61 3.2 769
	819 819.5 0.5 17900 24 0.48 10.4 511
	819.5 820 0.5 18100 44 0.63 3.6 574
	820 820.5 0.5 23600 69 0.74 4.4 858
	820.5 821 0.5 27500 52 0.59 5.6 354
	821 821.3 0.3 20500 52 0.58 3.4 347
	821.3 821.63 0.33 27500 75 1.19 4 77.5

Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.
The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.

E: [email protected]

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

ABN 49 625 763 957

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Relationship	•	These relationships are particularly important in	•	To date, Coda does not believe that it has sufficient data to comment on the
between		the reporting of Exploration Results.		orientation of major structures or the overall trend of the mineralisation at
mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	•	If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.		Emmie Bluff Deeps, nor the relationship between those features and the orientation of drilling to date, beyond the hypotheses put forward in graphics and text in the body of the announcement, which remain speculative until
	•	If it is not known and only the down hole lengths		further drilling can be completed.
		are reported, there should be a clear statement to	•	It is anticipated that further drilling will assist in clarifying these questions and
		this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not		will allow Coda to comment on their materiality.
		known’).
Diagrams	•	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and	•	See map, sections and tables in main body of announcement.
		tabulations of intercepts should be included for
		any significant discovery being reported These
		should include, but not be limited to a plan view of
		drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional
		views.
Balanced	•	Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration	•	Coda has provided a detailed description of the material encountered and,
reporting		Results is not practicable, representative reporting		where available, provided representative photographs of relevant
		of both low and high grades and/or widths should		mineralisation.
		be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of	•	All assays >0.3% Cu are reported in this announcement. Intersects not
		Exploration Results.		specifically reported on in this announcement can be assumed to be <0.3% Cu.
			•	Coda believes that this announcement represents an accurate and balanced
				reporting of the information it has to date. More information will be made
				available to the market as soon as practical upon its receipt by the company.

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected] ABN 49 625 763 957

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

==> picture [842 x 84] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC	Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Other	•	Other exploration data, if meaningful and material,	•	No other substantive exploration results are considered relevant to this
substantive		should be reported including (but not limited to):		release.
exploration data		geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples –	•	The Exploration Target referred to in diagrams in this announcement refers to the Emmie Bluff Exploration Target, which covers the Zambian-style
		size and method of treatment; metallurgical test		mineralisation overlying the IOCG style mineralisation encountered at Emmie
		results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical		Bluff Deeps. Information regarding this Exploration Target is extracted from
		and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or		the report entitled Confirmation of Exploration Target and Mineral Resource
		contaminating substances.		and Ore Reserve Statement, created on 23 October 2020 and is available to
				view at:
				https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20201026/pdf/44p31fmg5k2579.pdf.
			•	The company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that
				materially affects the information included in the original market
				announcement and that all material assumptions and technical parameters
				underpinning the estimates in the relevant market announcement continue to
				apply and have not materially changed. The company confirms that the form
				and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not
				been materially modified from the original market announcement.
Further work	•	The nature and scale of planned further work (eg	•	Figure 3 and Figure 4, in the body of the announcement represents Coda’s best
		tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or		current understanding of the area of greatest prospectivity at Emmie Bluff
		large-scale step-out drilling).		Deeps, being the area which exhibits an anomalous gravity response but lacks
	•	Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible		an anomalous magnetic response in airborne geophysics.
		extensions, including the main geological	•	Ongoing and planned work in the short term is detailed in the body of the
		interpretations and future drilling areas, provided		announcement. Longer term, Coda has approvals in place for an additional six
		this information is not commercially sensitive.		drill pads (including those already built for Drillholes EBD0001 and EBD0002)
				within that area of high prospectivity, and will undertake additional drilling as
				is appropriate based on ongoing drill results.
			•	Coda currently anticipates a programme of approximately 5 parent drillholes
				from surface and 10 associated wedge holes, with potential for significant
				additional drilling if warranted by results.

==> picture [78 x 78] intentionally omitted <==

E: [email protected]

6 Altona Street West Perth Western Australia, 6005

ABN 49 625 763 957

AI assistant

CODA MINERALS LTD Capital/Financing Update 2021

64682_rns_2021-07-27_165915ea-d290-4c13-b55b-a0428e465796.pdf

Assay Results Validate IOCG Mineralisation at Emmie Bluff Deeps

Highlights

Summary of Results

Results in Detail

Planned and Ongoing Work

Appendix 2: Assay Results

Further Information:

Media:

About Coda Minerals

About Torrens Mining Limited

Forward Looking Statements

Competent Person’s Statement

Appendix 3: Detailed Technical Information and JORC Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

AI assistant

CODA MINERALS LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2021

64682_rns_2021-07-27_165915ea-d290-4c13-b55b-a0428e465796.pdf

Assay Results Validate IOCG Mineralisation at Emmie Bluff Deeps

Highlights

Summary of Results

Results in Detail

Planned and Ongoing Work

Appendix 2: Assay Results

Further Information:

Media:

About Coda Minerals

About Torrens Mining Limited

Forward Looking Statements

Competent Person’s Statement

Appendix 3: Detailed Technical Information and JORC Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

More from CODA MINERALS LTD

CODA MINERALS LTD Capital/Financing Update 2021